Coastal Guns

@axis_roll said in Simplified Bombers, Flak Guns, and Submarines:

I can see a mega Allied effort to reduce German income:
UK subs, USA planes (mostly bombers and ftrs)
There will be many AAA guns and ftrs for Germany… look out for the Russian steamroller coming to (help) bleed Germany dry with stacks of men willing(?) to be thrown to the wolves

Heh. Yeah, fair point. If the economic warfare becomes too powerful for your taste, you could always add some or all of the following rules:

intercepting fighters score hits on rolls of 3 or less (4 or less?) submarine raids are capped at half the value of a territory submarine raids are capped at one less than the value of a territory bombing raids are capped at half the value of a territory bombers only attack at 2, making them less of a dual-use unit and therefore less valuable each nation can only send one bomber to bomb each territory each turn

I edited in my last post that there is one round of dogfighting so the AAA plane hits may have to go to 2.

Treat it like a BB, bombardment from 1 territory into another territory under attack.  A4 D1 M1 C12

What about the old AA guns as light AA, 1 die roll, and the new ones as heavies, 2 die rolls?

I think now that the no subs vs subs combat is not necessary at all.

Explaining: subs are considered a separate group inside the navy.
Allowing subs to attack subs still be as OOB rules.
For example, 2 subs can decide to attack another 3 subs with 2 DDs and 2 TTs in a same sea-zone.
If attacker target subs, then the defender had only to decide whether or not his 3 subs will submerge or combat.
Many will prefer to submerge, so there will be no combat.
If defender choose to fight, then it will be 2 subs@2 vs 3 subs@1, as per OOB rule.
So sometimes, but seldom, subs can sink subs as history reveal.

It wasn’t a “contest” of any kind.

I simply don’t see that this rule is necesary, especially with the new units now being produced.

To each his own, though. Have FUN should always be our #1 rule. Enjoy.

“Tall Paul”

I am gonna post a new version of mine using KISS. I think it is too complicated.

but i will do that in a new thread :-D

Aircraft Carriers can be outfitted with technology to have AA Guns that fire just like ground based AA Guns.  Only one per sea zone may fire, but it may fire at each attacking enemy aircraft.

CV was a poor defender for anti-aircraft. They relied on CAP to intercept incoming planes at lower altitude to intercept these and drive them away from the fleet. The Carrier created an umbrella of air cover to protect in this manner. It could not stand up to much of a fight and was the weakest in terms of AA capabilities in WW2.

IN modern times this changed but not in ww2. At midway 3 Japanese carriers were sitting ducks because the air cover was lost fighting off waves of incoming torpedo-bombers, and the carriers had the best Japanese equipment money could buy and it didn’t mean a thing because they were unescorted by cruisers and enough supporting ships.

A BB was a slower moving ship and was meant not to engage fighters but to engage surface ships and having the slower speed could only hope to surprise the enemy from nowhere or fight on equal terms against other battleships. Cruisers were some of the fastest ships and much better suited to fight airplanes by escorting fast carriers that were vulnerable.

The only thing the BB should have is a first strike attack against other surface warships.

Cruisers should move 3 with carriers and have a AA gun at planes hitting at 1 on the first round.