Re: submerging subs

@Cernel said in Revised Submerge/Withdraw Order:

This simple different wording would have probably made all crystal clear, and saved this whole (and other!) discussions, as well as my question.

I suppose that those dicussions lead to a clearer wording in LHTR and are one reason why submerging submarines had been moved to another step during ‘Conduct Combat’ starting from and including the Anniversary ruleset.

The attacker retreats before the defender submerges, in both OOB and LHTR.

This is clearly spelled out in the LHTR rules.  However, since the sequence is never specifically stated in the OOB rules, the general principle that the attacker acts first must be applied.

BTW, that submarine does not become useless once the Germans lose the ability to win against the Allied navy/navies.

I like to send it to Southern Africa to ‘persuade’ Japan not to make a Brazil run, at least, force Japan to commit more to a Brazil run then what is normal and optimal.  It also keeps Japan honest by not leaving transports out there undefended.

And, finally, I’ve had a situation where Japan FORGOT the Russian submarine was down there by Madagascar and been able to attack his battleship and 3 transports with 3 fighters and a submarine. Odds are, he only gets one hit, you get 2, that’s a good trade!  Japanese transport which is useful for Russian submarine which is not so useful. (I actually got 3 hits to his 1 that time, but I was lucky.)

That is correct.

Many thanks. I thought that seemed a bit too potent ; )

Octo, we always play a sneak shot kills a battle ship (scapa flow)

Well, I’ll be brief here because I’ve been lengthy elsewhere.

1. Yahoo provides a lot of great content for no cost.  They have been an excellent company the whole time I have used their services (about 10 years), so don’t let the registration hold you back.  (Full disclosure: I own no Yahoo stock, but I really wish I did)

2. We have Beginner Strategy Guides at Caspian Sub.  The guides for Germany and the UK both recommend buying carriers.  Carriers are fine basic moves; they are easy to manage and fairly strong.  But the transports are far more flexible, and 2tra are better than 1car on offense in a reasonably sized attack.

3. I don’t like building capital ships with the UK.  I’d rather buy transports, ground troops, or planes.  It is a much more effective use of the US/UK strengths to let the US drop the German boats.  This is covered in Policy Paper 14: Baltic Part III.

4. If I was a German player, I would be salivating if the UK built a carrier in Z06 (see N. Witch’s earlier post).  It’s about the worst move the Allies could do, short of abandoning London.  That means I pound down 2 Allied capital ships, 2ftrs, and 2 UK transports without losing a grey plane.  So if that is the ‘counter’ to a German invasion of London, then please counter me all day long.

5. If I was playing as the UK and for some reason I DID want a carrier, in almost no circumstance would I build it on the first round.  It’s crummy on offense so you’re buying it to defend, not attack (and there is no real way for the US to leverage it as a landing spot on R1 in a way that is significant).  It is much better to build your UK transports in Z02 on round 1 so that the Germans have to worry about a landing force.  Then, if you need the carrier for extra defense, move the fleets to drop gear in Europe and build the carrier in the sea zone where your transports are.  That’s much more efficient.

Peace

Subs always can only hit naval units. It doesn’t actually make a difference in which step they fire when an enemy destroyer is present, as long as you can keep track. I prefer to roll black die for subs, white die for fighters, and in this manner get 2 types of units rolled hopefully in one toss of the die.