what Hobbes is saying is 100% true. But, where tanks become a real problem for the allies is on Persia. Stack 8+ there and use German force to open Kazhak. Even if the Allies know to look for it, the mere threat of it is often enough for them to give up the Caucausus complex.
Rule Clarification (Sub vs. BB)
-
I am playing the role as a devil’s advocate. I understand and accept how the rules work, however I am seeing the battleship have extra survivability as a function of combat order, and not as a function of the unit’s attributes. The idea was to demonstrate how the submarine’s sneak attack against a battleship was denied due to the combat order and not because of a special ability of the battleship. The game makers have designed the submarine to be effective only against transports (which don’t shoot back well) and carriers. Battleships not only take two hits, but are near immune to submarines. Destroyers eliminate the first strike completely.
I suppose the battleship will always get a shot to fire back. Only under the most unusual conditions will multiple submarines be able to encounter a battleship sans destroyer escort.
I just find this wierd to make a unit so weak (does anyone purchase submarines?) in contrast to several other game changes designed to promote those units (armor, fighters, artillery).
To let you know, I agree with your ruling on this, it just seems like a flaw in the game that has been announced as a “feature”.
Thanks for your insights. I am certain this will not be the last time I ask something wild.
Octopus
-
I suppose the battleship will always get a shot to fire back. Only under the most unusual conditions will multiple submarines be able to encounter a battleship sans destroyer escort.
It does not matter if the subs have a destroyer escort or not; as Trihero pointed out there are the different firing stages that make the difference. If you attack a BB with 2 subs and they BOTH score hits, the BB is sunk without any return fire. It does not matter if you take 4 CVs and 8 destroyers with you into battle, because the subs fire on their own schedule and before anything else. It’s like an amphib assault: the opening BB shot comes before anything else fires and either hits or misses and after that everyone gets to fire and return fire.
-
Subs are the most efficient anti-navy unit per IPC. 3 subs will win out against 2 destroyers, or 1 battleship. They offer decent enough attack/defense and are cheap so you can mass a lot for fodder. They are very scary if there are no destroyers present since you will lose units before they can attack back. You can roll a tech for them that improves their attack/defense by 1, which makes a big stack of subs that much scarier.
You don’t see subs being built because you don’t see people going after Japan very often. Otherwise you would/should see them a lot for people who do the math.
-
Kyrial,
I was making reference to the battleship having or not having a destroyer escort to nullify the sub attack, not a destroyer in the attacking group. As you pointed out, having a destroyer on the attacking side does not inferere with the sub’s sneak attacks.
Shadow and Tril,
I do understand your points of view. I just think that one piece was made useful at the expense of making another less useful. The net result is one unit is never purchased in play. In this game, it is the submarine.
Octo
-
I purchase subs… Some Strats requiring Ranged Pacific Operations need submarines as first shot insurance against American or Japanese aggression… granted I don’t play that strat often but they come in…
GG
-
Octopus: I reasoned the same way like you about subs for quite some time (ie - I never bought them). However, subs are the most cost-effective navy-killing unit out there (provided they bring a CV for air cover). Plus they are good fodders…
Now, the only theatre of operation where you regularly actually NEED a navy-killing units is the Pac…
And in many games the Pac sees no or very little action. In those games you never see subs…Then OCCASSIONALY I have seen Germany purchase 1 or 2 subs in the Baltic, around G3 or G4. In these cases Germany also have bought an AC in Baltic on G1, and now wishes to protect that Baltic navy from extinction from a potential allied attack…
The UK or Russia should never - and I mean NEVER - buy subs…
UK should be able to sink any potential German fleet in the Baltic w/o subs. If it is NOT able to sink a German fleet in the Baltic, it can only be due to the German spending so much IPC on fleet builds, that Germany will lose the game to the Russian anyway. :-) -
I don’t see anyone building battleships, destroyers, or bombers, so I don’t see why you’d pick on subs as the unused unit. Subs are the unit of choice if you’re going navy; I would be hard pressed to choose battleships or destroyers over subs. The improvement to battleships just makes the existing ones scarier and tends to help the Axis because they start with more of them.
-
DST’s are actually a COMMON build, especially by the US. They make great screenign ships for “minor” threats to tranny fleets in the Atlantic.
Bombers… I have a Classic strategy (that I have never had a chance to try to update and use for Revised) where the US buys almost exclusively Bombers…
BB’s… truly rare.
Subs… Common to the Pacific, rare elsewhere.
-
i played a game wher the usa player bought bb the first three rounds then set sail into the pacific and totally wrecked japans navy right outside tokyo, then started the ak to sfe flow. i thought the guy was nuts (still do!) but those four bb’s along with the rest of the fleet was quite a sight to behold.
-
But easilly countered by just 2 builds of SUBs, and finish off with an AC and moving the land based FIG’s to the THREE Japan AC’s as the American’s arrive…
-
that was my suggestion, but they decided to split their fleet and keep the pressure on asia. natural consequences and part of the learning curve i suppose
-
They don;t ahve to split the fleet,. just put it in SZ60 and drop your Japan forces bound for Asia to Bury…
-
that is what i am saying i suggested, but THEY decided to split their fleet and it cost us (i was germany) the game. i was not saying that three straight bb builds by the usa is a great strategy, just that it was interesting and different
-
I play Japan alot, and well after the transports our up and running and asia is under control, I like to build BB’s and Destroyers, just for the psyce value.
-
Octo, we always play a sneak shot kills a battle ship (scapa flow)
Suggested Topics
