Sub combat question

UK cannot land there because they did not own it at the beginning of their turn. US comes after them in the order.
You found the relevant rule and quoted it.

Even a lone transport can

In AA50, enemy subs and transports can be completely ignored, as long as you don’t engage any of them.

(If you attack a sub/transport combo with a fighter and also try to land there amphibiously, the sub can sink your transport.  You can’t pick and choose what to ignore within a single zone)

Ok, thanks for the answers, it removes any doubts :)

These answers are correct.

It depends on whether or not the defending subs get a Surprise Strike.  If the do, they will still fire if they’re hit by the attacker’s Surprise Strike.  If they don’t, they’ll be removed before they can fire.

This is a change from Revised.  In Revised, subs always fired at the same point in the combat sequence.  The difference the presence of enemy destroyers made was when the casualties were removed.  In Anniversary, subs actually fire at different points in the combat sequence depending on whether or not there are enemy destroyers.

I agree.  The use of subs with aircraft is a gret combo for naval combat  (even better if you have super subs).  You can even make it cheaper if you have long range aircraft and jet fighter, transforming your fighters in better weapon than the original bomber.

I’m sorry to disagree, but long range aircraft benefits bombers so much it would be a waste to switch to fighters. Although saving 2 IPC per unit is nice, being able to bombard any territory or sea zone on the map at will is much too good to give up on - and thats what long range bombers do!

@AxisOfEvil:

@Romulus:

Krieghund already explained that it is a problem of wording, the word selected “attack” should have been “surprise strike” or “surprise firing”, if I am not making a mistake.

I am not english born but I am considering that “surprise attack” has been not used to indicate the “attack” but the roll of the dice trying to hit the enemy. I do not see the need for a specification for the sub being in defense being able to perform a surprise strike. It is a sub ability to stay hidden and strike by surprise. It do not depend by the role in the battle, the sub is  aiming to hit the enemy in both case, attack and defense, acting in the same way: lurking below the surface, hidden and dangerous.

given this logic, which I am not disputing, why then do subs defend at 1 and attack at 2?  :)

same reason why fighters attack at 3 and defend at 4  :wink:

I think subs are underestimated…
I like them a lot more than the Cruiser for instance. The extra cost of 6 IPC’s doesn’t make up for the shore bombardment and extra punch.
Now, let’s take a look at their advantages:
-subs are CHEAP! 6 IPC’s for a naval hit is dirt cheap!
-subs are invulnerable to lone enemy aircraft => this allows them to swim around Europe/Pacific avoiding those German/Japanese ftrs.
-subs can’t attack airplanes, and apart from DD’s, other sea units are more expensive than airplanes. As a result, if a fleet has got only 1 DD, it won’t stand a sub attack, because the expensive carriers, cruisers, and battleships will be the first to get hit. This is often underestimated!
-subs have a greater mobility than other fleet units because they can’t be attacked without an enemy DD.

disadvantages:
-1 defense is little, even for 6 IPC’s. Don’t count on subs to stand tall against an organized attack.
-subs can’t hit air, but air with DD can hit subs
-subs don’t like a lot of DD’s (a single DD is seldom a problem)

To summarize: I like subs a lot the way they are implemented now. And I think Germany building a sole sub fleet is a viable strategy. If you just don’t let the British navy too close, the subs+air will keep the baltic.