You’re right that this rule is ambigious in this rule book. But to me the intention of the game makers is very clear. That shows not from this rule book, but from all rule books after this version. For example in the rule book from 1943 2nd, They state specifically that all strategic bombing raids take place first. This resolves any argument about who pays the IPC’s to the bank, the attacker or the defender! Since they solved this in the next rule book, i think it is quite obvious what they intended and tried to correct.
LHTR Kaiten Torpedoes murkiness
-
Hi gang,
The Kaiten Torpedoes National Advantage for Japan in LHTR3 states these three facts:
1) Kaiten Torpedoes are declared and indicated at the start of a sea combat and may be invoked by the Japanese player whether defending or attacking.
2) Subs indicated to be Kaitens “fire” (suicide-attack) during the opening-fire step of combat.
3) Kaitens may never be selected as casualties of an enemy hit.So far so good. Elsewhere in the manual, we learn that the attacking player’s opening-fire attacks happen before the defending player’s opening-fire attacks, should both sides bring eligible units to the combat. Crystal clear.
Now, let’s say we have a combat that consists of a mixed US navy including subs vs some Japanese subs, and the US player is the attacker. The Japanese player declares that the Japanese subs are Kaitens.
The US player, as attacker, should get his subs’ opening-fire attack to kill some of those Kaitens before they are launched, but since they are Kaitens (and the declaration of such occurs at the start of the combat), they are not selectable as targets. Therefore, the US player has nothing to fire at and must “pass”, while the Japanese player merrily steers his Kaitens towards the boats of his choice.
Is that right? It seems to violate the “attacker’s opening-fire occurs first” rule.
What do you think?
~Josh
-
doesnt attacker roll first? and they are both subs, so I guess No. Anyways noone plays with NA because the axis loses 99% of the time.
-
Think Kaitens roll first, then attacker subs then defender subs then attacker then defender.
IMHO, Kaitens are lame. Dug-In Defenders are much better, but they’ve been nerfed in LHTR to be BB’s that hit at 5 or less.
-
In that rare scenario, where the only Japan naval units present are SUBs, then yes, the US SUBs would not ahve targets and would be along just as “cannon fodder”, and yes the Kaitens would have their choice of targets as per their description.
This is the ONE case where Kaitens could be truly devastating. Of course if the US player know that Japan has this NA, they would NEVER allow such a battle to come about (they would not attack a sub-only fleet except with air, which is ALWAYS a good idea anyway).
And besides, when was the last time you say a SUB only fleet for Japan?
:mrgreen:
-
@ncscswitch:
And besides, when was the last time you say a SUB only fleet for Japan?
Why, in my last game, smart guy. :-D That’s why I asked the question.
I had a US landing-fleet ready to attack Tokyo from Alaska, and the Japanese player pulled all of his ships out of the way (into the SZ between Japan and Manchuria) except for a stack of subs. My fleet would have been enough to wipe his out decisively, had it remained. He unleashed the Kaitens on me when I moved in, sinking several loaded transports and allowing him to hold onto the capital, plus some valuable watercraft.
We argued about whether my US subs should get a shot at his Kaitens first, but decided (as you advise) that the Kaiten’s become non-targetable once they are declared.
You say that the US player would never allow a battle against Japanese subs-only to come about, and that is part of the additional value of the Kaiten NA. If you force the US player to spend a round sending planes after sub-only fleets (which they may not even wipe out in a single round due to the submerge ability), that’s a round of breathing-room for the Japanese player to strengthen his defense.
I like the National Advantages. They are fun and refreshing and force players to come up with new strategies, tactics, and spending-patterns.
-
“The US player, as attacker, should get his subs’ opening-fire attack to kill some of those Kaitens before they are launched, but since they are Kaitens (and the declaration of such occurs at the start of the combat), they are not selectable as targets. Therefore, the US player has nothing to fire at and must “pass”, while the Japanese player merrily steers his Kaitens towards the boats of his choice.”
No. That is not what should happen.
Kaitens are suicide subs. They cannot be taken as casualties. The problem with Kaitens is that they are going to die no matter what. If you attack with just a few Kaitens as part of a larger naval fleet, it will probably WEAKEN your attack since you can no longer take subs as fodder.
Besides that, subs always get opening fire, attackers and defenders. I do not believe that Kaitens are an exception.
IF you leave your navy in range of kaiten torpedoes, and you have a weak navy that’s easy to take down, you deserve what you get.
–
And NAs are unbalancing. I usually leave room for personal interpretation and preference, but there is just no other way to view things like Lend-Lease.
Larry Harris Tournament Rules helped fix some of the NAs, but the ones out of the box are completely and ridiculously in favor of the Allies.
-
Kaitens are defense only. According to the OOB rules.
LHTR did change it so they are also for attack purposes, but LHTR made a lot of changes I’m not very happy with.
I don’t like the change to Dive Bombers, especially in conjunction with submarine interdiction. I think they’re too powerful that way. Leave them as added SBR damage, but to allow a first round hit on a 5 or less when Germany starts with 6 of the bloody things is insane. Maybe if it was scaled to 4 or less so they’d be equivalent to bombers. But it neuters Russia drastically to give Germany that strong an attack.
I don’t like the change to Lend-Lease. It’s hard enough to get units into Russia to start with to convert, especially seeings as they have to be ground units, not air power. That should have been left alone or made a cap of 6 units divided as the Russian player saw fit.
Kaitens I actually like.
Non-Aggression treaty should be reciprical. If Russia attacks first, Japan should get 2 infantry (they’re already more powerful then Russia, so give them half what Russia gets.)
Wolf packs should apply regardless of number of submarines. Just make them like Super Subs and then let them roll for SS tech to get att/def at 4 or less. That should put the fear of Hitler into the Limeys! Especially with the U-Boat interdiction!
And what’s up with Superfortresses!?! A normal AA Gun has a 1 in 6 chance to hit. An AA gun firing at a superfortress now has a 3 in 12 chance??? It’s 9% more likely to kill something flying out of range then it is something flying IN range? That’s retarded. I’m sorry, I don’t normally say things about rules like that, but common. How about we make it more realistic. You have to roll a 1 to hit and then roll another 1 afterwards to bring it down instead of just damage it. (Damage is 2 IPC to America.) That gives you a 3% chance to shoot it down, a 16% chance to do reciprocal damage to America. (and heck, the Americans have a 16% chance then to do less damage to you then they sustain!)
-
And what’s up with Superfortresses!?! A normal AA Gun has a 1 in 6 chance to hit. An AA gun firing at a superfortress now has a 3 in 12 chance??? It’s 9% more likely to kill something flying out of range then it is something flying IN range?Â
There is only a 1 in 12 chance to roll 3 or less on 2 dice. This means that Superfortresses are half as likely to be shot down as regular bombers.
~Josh
-
Besides that, subs always get opening fire, attackers and defenders. I do not believe that Kaitens are an exception.
Well, that’s the sticky point. Jap subs are declared to be Kaitens at the start of the combat, _before opening fire happens._ And, in the exact wording of the LHTR rules: "Kaitens cannot be hit by enemy units!" Therefore they don’t get fired upon, even when they are defending against attacking subs that should get their opening-fire attack.
IF you leave your navy in range of kaiten torpedoes, and you have a weak navy that’s easy to take down, you deserve what you get.
And that’s the other thing. Your navy strength doesn’t matter at all against Kaitens. If Japan attacks your navy - any size navy - with subs only, then he can declare them Kaitens and target specific ships, and you don’t get any casualty shots because the Kaitens are destroyed in the process. That’s what they’re for. Allied navies be warned. Attacking Kaitens don’t present an issue though, since their special nature in that case doesn’t conflict with the combat phase order. It’s only on defense that the issue emerges.Â
Taken literally from the rules, I do believe that Kaitens are invulnerable to attack once declared. To solve the issue, the declaration of Kaitens could be moved from “at the start of a sea-combat” to “at the start of the Japanese player’s opening-fire step in the first cycle of a sea-combat.”
–And NAs are unbalancing. I usually leave room for personal interpretation and preference, but there is just no other way to view things like Lend-Lease.
Larry Harris Tournament Rules helped fix some of the NAs, but the ones out of the box are completely and ridiculously in favor of the Allies.
Well, yeah. Lend-lease OOB is just insane. American and UK can do nothing but ship units to Russia and still win the game.
-
And what’s up with Superfortresses!?! A normal AA Gun has a 1 in 6 chance to hit. An AA gun firing at a superfortress now has a 3 in 12 chance??? It’s 9% more likely to kill something flying out of range then it is something flying IN range?
There is only a 1 in 12 chance to roll 3 or less on 2 dice. This means that Superfortresses are half as likely to be shot down as regular bombers.
~Josh
Two dice:
1 and 1
1 and 2
2 and 1Right? That’s 3 in 12, not 1 in 12. That’s a 25% chance to shoot down a superfortress. Not 8% chance.
LHTR:
The defender rolls two antiaircraft guns for each superfortress. The total of 2 die must add to 3 or less to shoot the superfortress down in the opening fire step.I’d say it’s more appropriate to be roll snake eyes on two dice or you miss, as you described. However, LHTR does not say that.
-
Two dice:
1 and 1
1 and 2
2 and 1Right? That’s 3 in 12, not 1 in 12. That’s a 25% chance to shoot down a superfortress. Not 8% chance.
There are 36 possible outcomes with 2 dice.
1~1 1~2 1~3 1~4 1~5 1~6
2~1 2~2 2~3 2~4 2~5 2~6
3~1 3~2 3~3 3~4 3~5 3~6
4~1 4~2 4~3 4~4 4~5 4~6
5~1 5~2 5~3 5~4 5~5 5~6
6~1 6~2 6~3 6~4 6~5 6~6And you can roll 3 or less only 3 different ways, as you described.
3 out of 36 = 1 in 12.
Therefore, you have a 1-in-12 (roughly 8%) chance of shooting down a Superfortress, compared to a 1-in-6 (roughly 17%) chance of shooting down a normal bomber.
~Josh
-
I dont like the kaitens because:
- its too complicated in general
- it has marginal impact
- its impact is measured in a specific strategy set that is employed
- its historical relevance is totally overblown. Kaitens were totally futile as a credible weapon.
-
I want to like the Kaitens, I really do.
Last night in a FTF session my opponent (as part of a major fleet-to-fleet combat) declared of his subs as Kaitens in an attack. He designated 3 each to hit 2 battleships, then promptly rolled 6-4-4 and 2-5-4.
Kaitens hit on 3.
6 subs wasted, one battleship dinged. If he had saved the subs as normal subs, he would have still scored just one hit with them, which still would have resulted in one battleship dinged, BUT he would have had the subs to use as fodder against my return fire. I’m sure Kaitens can be useful in their place and that was certainly an unlikely roll, but I doubt he’ll select the Kaitens NA any time soon again!
~Josh
PS - I would not have aimed those Kaitens at Battleships anyway… I would have sent 2 apiece after 2 Aircraft Carriers and my single Destroyer - take out the Destroyer and the rest of the (non-kaiten) subs get a sudden boost in power.
Suggested Topics
