Fixing Submarines in AA50

[Jennifer]

First, I don’t care if YOU think submarines are fine.  This is a discussion for the rest of us who KNOW they are bogus!

Okay, now that those who like submarines the way they are, are gone, the rest of us who have experienced how bad they really are can get down to business.

Here’s my thoughts.

We need wolfpacks for submarines.  If you attack with 3 or more submarines from 3 different sea zones, then your submarines regain the sneak shot ability even if a destroyer is present. (Sonar isn’t almighty, you can’t see EVERYWHERE!)

Furthermore, sneak shots on the first round should be called shots.  None of this “I have my submarine take the hit.” crap.  Submarine commanders lurking in the water didn’t say “Oh look, it’s the USS Hornet and some unknown Light Cruiser…let’s kill the light cruiser and run away!”  BS.  They took their shot at the Hornet and hoped to hit it!  This ability alone would make the submarine useful again, even if no other changes were made!

Submarines should be immune to other submarines.  Torpedoes are faster than enemy ships, but not fast enough to get to an enemy submarine before it can dive beneath the waves, and that’s assuming you even see the enemy submarine to begin with! (Remember these things were targeted by using math and tables and charts, they didn’t exactly have the ability to fire at things they could not see through the scopes!)

Lastly, Super Submarines.  Let’s just kill it outright.  If we need a submarine tech, it should be redefined:

Super Submarines (enhanced): Your submarines are now stealthy.  Enemy destroyers must roll an attack roll to find your submarines, otherwise, your submarines may chose to disengage before the battle.  Note:  Each attacking or defending destroyer in the sea zone gets to roll and if one destroyer finds you, then all your submarines are detected.

[tin_snips]

personally i think it should be one destroyer can only stop one submarine from sneak-shotting and submerging. i mean, a destroyer can only chase one submarine at a time

and i think that you should be allowed to take hits from aircraft on your submarines if you so wish it. aircraft did attack subs after all, and the subs definitely shot back. i’m not against the ‘submarines can submerge before aircraft fire’ rule, but if you want them to stay surfaced to take hits and defend during a major battle, then it should be your choice

[TG Moses VI]

Great words and all, Jennifer, but doesn’t this discussion belong in the House Rules section?   :?

[P-Unit]

Regular subs are weak when only one DD can thwart them. Super Subs (tech) are BRUTAL, but are purely offensive units. Agreed. For 2 attack, I think a 1 DD to 1 sub rule makes them useable without Super Subs tech.

[TG Moses VI]

Submarines are one of my favorite units.  Not just in Axis and Allies, but as a ship of war.  So with that said,

We need wolfpacks for submarines.  If you attack with 3 or more submarines from 3 different sea zones, then your submarines regain the sneak shot ability even if a destroyer is present. (Sonar isn’t almighty, you can’t see EVERYWHERE!)

Good idea, but honestly… how often does this happen?  It’s rare for any attack to come from three directions, let alone with subs.  How do wolf pack tactics work in the Mediterranean?

Simply, if the player attacks with 3 Subs PERIOD, they should regain the sub shot ability.

Furthermore, sneak shots on the first round should be called shots.  None of this “I have my submarine take the hit.” crap.  Submarine commanders lurking in the water didn’t say “Oh look, it’s the USS Hornet and some unknown Light Cruiser…let’s kill the light cruiser and run away!”  BS.  They took their shot at the Hornet and hoped to hit it!  This ability alone would make the submarine useful again, even if no other changes were made!

It’s a neat ability for subs to have, but I find your reasoning perplexing.  Based on this logic, shouldn’t aircraft have specific “targets” as well?  Fighters went after higher-valued targets (carriers) first.  Destroyer and cruiser screens were generally avoided.

Same with other naval units.  Battleships didn’t blindly fire salvos into the water, they chose specific targets and engagements often occurred miles away from each other.

Lastly, Super Submarines.  Let’s just kill it outright.  If we need a submarine tech, it should be redefined:

Super Submarines (enhanced): Your submarines are now stealthy.  Enemy destroyers must roll an attack roll to find your submarines, otherwise, your submarines may chose to disengage before the battle.  Note:  Each attacking or defending destroyer in the sea zone gets to roll and if one destroyer finds you, then all your submarines are detected.

Why don’t you just simplify everything by saying Sub Abilities are no longer affected by destroyers?  That should make subs powerful enough.

If not you can throw in the normal super sub ability as well (+1 attack).

[Joe41]

I would think if you’d want to fix the role of submarines, then fixes should be directed to possibly to biggest impact subs had on the war - attacking shipping and supply lines.

How about a “SBR-type” rule for subs in key sea zones?  Maybe against shipments to UK and Japan only since they were most dependent on outside resources?  Destroyers protecting these sea zones get a “AA” type role to defend so that subs have a chance to live and there is incentive to build subs?  I would think that this could open up the Atlantic and Pacific a little more for something more than just sea unit stacking.

Just a thought.

[losttribe04]

Joe +1 karma for thinking outside the box.

As for a wolf pack I agree with TG Moses 3 Subs period make a pack

In ref. to destroyers vs. subs.  I think that if 3 or more destroyers are present that they would work like a doplar system.  They would triangulate (sp) that SZ and have a good idea of what was going on underwater.

LT

[tekkyy]

@Cmdr:

First, I don’t care if YOU think submarines are fine.  This is a discussion for the rest of us who KNOW they are bogus!

the change in AA50 from AAR is reduced cost to $6 and reduced defense to 1 right?
your sugguestions doesn’t seem to be about that though

If you attack with 3 or more submarines from 3 different sea zones, then your submarines regain the sneak shot ability even if a destroyer is present. (Sonar isn’t almighty, you can’t see EVERYWHERE!)

attacking from 3 SZs is rare, I wouldn’t make that a requirement

regarding how you said sonor isn’t almightly
well, any unlimited ability dulls the game (eg. unlimited fire of AA gun)
I would go “1 DD to 1 sub rule” like someone said

Furthermore, sneak shots on the first round should be called shots.  None of this “I have my submarine take the hit.” crap.

yeah its a nice and simple rule
“submarines can’t hit submarines”
just like how submarines can’t hit air units in AAR (or was that for classic too?)

Super Submarines (enhanced): Your submarines are now stealthy.  Enemy destroyers must roll an attack roll to find your submarines, otherwise, your submarines may chose to disengage before the battle.  Note:  Each attacking or defending destroyer in the sea zone gets to roll and if one destroyer finds you, then all your submarines are detected.

and you should add you took that from AARe hehe

to me super submarines is about whole new performance levels in speed and noise
so I would make it destroyers can’t cancel super submarine’s sneak attack and ability to move through hostile sea zone

[Jennifer]

TG:

In anniversary, the only way to have a submarine threat is to have your submarines scattered about.  So far it has been my experience that usually you are attacking from at least two different sea zones, this would encourage you to attack from three or more to get the wolfpack bonus.

---

Let me clarify my reasoning on why submarines should get to chose targets.

1)  This rule already exists in enhanced in regards to Kaiten torpedoes, so it’s not something brand new.

2)  I think this rule should only apply when only submarines exist in the attacking forces.

3)  Submarine captains spent long times lining up shots in the security of knowing they were not seen and had plenty of time.  They could be choosier.

---

I don’t think we need a 1 DD to 1 SS ratio.

1. it gets too heavy in DDs just to counter submarines.

2. Enhanced already has detection rules in place and they seem to work, this is just a derivation of that principle, but only applied if someone has super submarines.

3. It makes it worthwhile to get super submarines since now your defending submarines at least have the chance to shut down all systems and float to maximum depth to avoid the enemy.

4)  Your chances of detecting the enemy go up or down based on the number of destroyers you have.  So it’s player driven, vs 1 to 1 basis.

---

Joe:

That’s a rule from enhanced.  I could see its impact on AA50 though.

For those unfamiliar with enhanced convoy raids (Convoy Raid Damage = CRD)

1 Submarine adjacent to an enemy complex does 2 IPC damage

1 Submarine a sea zone away from an enemy complex does 1 IPC damage.

---

Tekkyy

I understand that attacking from 3 sea zones is rare.  You’re getting a magnificent gift for setting it up correctly, the ability to negate a destroyer’s automatic detection of your normal submarines and the ability to fire all your submarines simultaniously at the enemy battleship or carrier. (Remember, you cannot target transports until all enemy ships are sunk)

And yes, submarines in Classic could not hit aircraft either.  You could retreat 1 sea zone however.

[tekkyy]

I don’t think we need a 1 DD to 1 SS ratio.

1. it gets too heavy in DDs just to counter submarines.

well both principles (1. a ratio whatever it is 2. each destroyer roll one die) encourages players to build more destroyers
the actual numbers can be tuned

I like ratio better because it doesn’t add to the combat sequence
its also something players are used to (from placing infantry on 1 or 2 on the battle board)

3)  Submarine captains spent long times lining up shots in the security of knowing they were not seen and had plenty of time.  They could be choosier.

yeah it definitely has a place in the heavier house rules
but otherwise “defender assign hits” is a centre concept of axis and allies
it would be a bit out of place to change just submarines

@Cmdr:

In anniversary, the only way to have a submarine threat is to have your submarines scattered about.

yeah AA50 submarine is weird
(I probably should check out harrisdesign to see what the idea behind AA50 submarine rules)

defending at 1 they are very much like bombers
get wiped unless hiding in a stack

add the new reduced cost of $6
we have a unit of cannon fodder
so AA50 removes AAR’s subject of complaint the naval cannon fodder (transport)
but only to replace it with a new cannon fodder

[TG Moses VI]

Cmdr,

TG:

In anniversary, the only way to have a submarine threat is to have your submarines scattered about.  So far it has been my experience that usually you are attacking from at least two different sea zones, this would encourage you to attack from three or more to get the wolfpack bonus.

I disagree.  One of the best reasons to buy subs is that they’re cheap and can take hits during a naval battle.  If you’re subs are scattered in different sea zones, you negate this fodder ability in a defensive battle.

Secondly, I’m all about simplicity.  Forcing the player to attack from 3 Different Sea Zones adds an unnecessary complexity to the game.

Weren’t we trying to make subs A LOT better, as you claim they are “Bogus?”

3)  Submarine captains spent long times lining up shots in the security of knowing they were not seen and had plenty of time.  They could be choosier.

Okay, you clarified it for me.

tekkyy,

well both principles (1. a ratio whatever it is 2. each destroyer roll one die) encourages players to build more destroyers
the actual numbers can be tuned

I like ratio better because it doesn’t add to the combat sequence
its also something players are used to (from placing infantry on 1 or 2 on the battle board)

Agreed.

Joe,

I would think if you’d want to fix the role of submarines, then fixes should be directed to possibly to biggest impact subs had on the war - attacking shipping and supply lines.

How about a “SBR-type” rule for subs in key sea zones?  Maybe against shipments to UK and Japan only since they were most dependent on outside resources?  Destroyers protecting these sea zones get a “AA” type role to defend so that subs have a chance to live and there is incentive to build subs?  I would think that this could open up the Atlantic and Pacific a little more for something more than just sea unit stacking.

Seconded.  +1 for an inventive idea.