AARHE: Phase 2: Naval Combat


  • 1. so what did they feel about the automatic detect of submarines that fired before?

    ++++OK we scrapped that rule… ships that qualify for ASW have to keep rolling for detection… no more automatics… problem was easily fixed… or subs are gonners.

    2. was wolf pack too powerful? did they sugguest it should be based on relative size of submarine to enemy ships?

    ++++No it worked very well with +1 in groups it gave germany a chance, plus we gave germans 6 dollar u boats and they were able to do damage against uk’s economy. it was another path (as opposed to building a fleet) to basically stop the allied franch invasion.

    3. sure they found sending 1 BB the same effect (in bombardment) as 4 BBs with an amphibious invasion of 4 INF a little odd?
    or sending 4 BBs the same effect (in both bomardment and first cycle bonus) as 16 BBs  odd?

    +++++HUH?  this is not the correct interpretation of the rule:  1 bb shot for 4 inf on the first round (preemtive) plus each ship (BB, CA, DD moving along with the invasion boosts one infantry +1 for the first round at a 1/1 basis. These were actually less effective than in OOB rules which is what were going after.

    what didnt look right was the idea that we took all our planes and got a major kill zone against unsupported defending infantry ( all preemtive and he didnt have any planes in range for DAS missions) That was done in norway. we killed many infantry this way.


  • OK we scrapped that rule… ships that qualify for ASW have to keep rolling for detection… no more automatics… problem was easily fixed… or subs are gonners.

    so now how does OOB submarine’s ability to submerge and end combat for itself…fit into all this?
    I reckon it shouldn’t be removed from combat for good…it should be allowed to surface again and fight later…while submerged (thus not shooting) it should be very difficult to detect it…maybe ASW search rolls detecting on 1 for those particular submarines.

    No it worked very well with +1 in groups it gave germany a chance, plus we gave germans 6 dollar u boats and they were able to do damage against uk’s economy. it was another path (as opposed to building a fleet) to basically stop the allied franch invasion.

    Yeah. But I saying maybe the bonus should also require number of SS to be significant with respect to number of enemy ships.

    HUH?  this is not the correct interpretation of the rule

    I read agian. No I don’t think its incorrect interpretation.
    Anyway I am just again pushing you to change from number of “preemptive shots” to “preemptive damage”, per 4 attacking INF.
    Its pretty much the same, maybe a tiny bit stronger.
    I just don’t like the idea of stopping the other BBs from firing. My rule lets additional BBs should increase your chance of hitting, while not increasing the max. damage capable.

    what didnt look right was the idea that we took all our planes and got a major kill zone against unsupported defending infantry ( all preemtive and he didnt have any planes in range for DAS missions) That was done in norway. we killed many infantry this way.

    I don’t see whats wrong with that.
    Air units easily killing unprotected land units. Thats alright.


  • OK we scrapped that rule… ships that qualify for ASW have to keep rolling for detection… no more automatics… problem was easily fixed… or subs are gonners.
    so now how does OOB submarine’s ability to submerge and end combat for itself…fit into all this?
    I reckon it shouldn’t be removed from combat for good…it should be allowed to surface again and fight later…while submerged (thus not shooting) it should be very difficult to detect it…maybe ASW search rolls detecting on 1 for those particular submarines.

    ++++++After any round subs can submerge or retreat. this ends combat. If this was done after round one, then naval units can continue movement. that way no sub stall problems unless you want to waste 2-3 subs as blocking units… which can be expensive. ASW is at 2 and latter it moves to 3 (after tech moves up). This could work whether your going after subs or they are going after you. If we modify this to a one… in the case if your trying to kill subs… i feel subs will totally cripple the UK economy with attacks on its income and never get defeated… perhaps at the start of the war it can be a one, then two and finally 3 to simulate the two “happy times” of the german Kreigmarine.

    Quote
    No it worked very well with +1 in groups it gave germany a chance, plus we gave germans 6 dollar u boats and they were able to do damage against uk’s economy. it was another path (as opposed to building a fleet) to basically stop the allied franch invasion.
    Yeah. But I saying maybe the bonus should also require number of SS to be significant with respect to number of enemy ships.

    +++++++++++ each sub is about 30 subs so 60 subs is quite a wolfpack…

    Quote
    HUH?  this is not the correct interpretation of the rule
    I read agian. No I don’t think its incorrect interpretation.
    Anyway I am just again pushing you to change from number of “preemptive shots” to “preemptive damage”, per 4 attacking INF.
    Its pretty much the same, maybe a tiny bit stronger.
    I just don’t like the idea of stopping the other BBs from firing. My rule lets additional BBs should increase your chance of hitting, while not increasing the max. damage capable.

    +++++  they are not stopped from firing… instead they boost infantry at 1/1 basis +1 first round… this is also shorebombardment, only less effective.

    Quote
    what didnt look right was the idea that we took all our planes and got a major kill zone against unsupported defending infantry ( all preemtive and he didnt have any planes in range for DAS missions) That was done in norway. we killed many infantry this way.
    I don’t see whats wrong with that.
    Air units easily killing unprotected land units. Thats alright.

    +++++ yes true but it didnt feel too good to the other player. i guess its correct… BTW he did have alot of air ( 10 planes)


  • @Imperious:

    each sub is about 30 subs so 60 subs is quite a wolfpack…

    This comes to what is wolf pack about anyway?
    In what way did the submarines fight more effectively?
    I was thinking if the submarine number is insignficant compared to the enemy fleet it wouldn’t make a difference.
    Say 10 subs or 20 subs attack 100 destroyers?

    they are not stopped from firing… instead they boost infantry at 1/1 basis +1 first round… this is also shorebombardment, only less effective.

    Yeah I know. But they are stopped from firing for shore bombardment.
    I don’t understand why additional BBs don’t help during bombardment.
    With my rule we have good chance (66.7%) of killing one defending land unit when sending 4 attacking INF…but 88.9% for one more BB, or 96.3% if you bring yet one more, and 98.8% if you bring 4 BBs in total.

    I guess its not a big thing but anyway.

    yes true but it didnt feel too good to the other player. i guess its correct… BTW he did have alot of air ( 10 planes)

    Its fine. In fact he could have done that (the killing part by the planes) with a purely air attack.


  • each sub is about 30 subs so 60 subs is quite a wolfpack…
    This comes to what is wolf pack about anyway?
    In what way did the submarines fight more effectively?
    I was thinking if the submarine number is insignficant compared to the enemy fleet it wouldn’t make a difference.
    Say 10 subs or 20 subs attack 100 destroyers?

    Yes you have a point… the wolfpack idea is only something to help germany conduct and compete with UK since they have 6 IPC subs and now another goody with +1 with 2 + subs modifier. So what do you propose? a wolfpack is a good idea to simulate the tactics of submarine warfare w/o getting too tactical.

    Quote
    they are not stopped from firing… instead they boost infantry at 1/1 basis +1 first round… this is also shorebombardment, only less effective.
    Yeah I know. But they are stopped from firing for shore bombardment.
    I don’t understand why additional BBs don’t help during bombardment.
    With my rule we have good chance (66.7%) of killing one defending land unit when sending 4 attacking INF…but 88.9% for one more BB, or 96.3% if you bring yet one more, and 98.8% if you bring 4 BBs in total.

    +++OK what exactly is this rule? post it please.

    I guess its not a big thing but anyway.

    Quote
    yes true but it didnt feel too good to the other player. i guess its correct… BTW he did have alot of air ( 10 planes)
    Its fine. In fact he could have done that (the killing part by the planes) with a purely air attack.


  • @Imperious:

    So what do you propose? a wolfpack is a good idea to simulate the tactics of submarine warfare w/o getting too tactical.

    I proposed earlier it could be relative to number of friendly SS to enemy DD+CA.
    How about 2 more SS than DD+CA ?
    2 SS attack 1 CV –—> wolfpack bonus
    2 SS attack 1 CV + 1 DD -----> no bonus
    3 SS attack 1 CV + 1 DD -----> wolfpack bonus

    OK what exactly is this rule? post it please.

    Unchanged from what I also proposed this earlier.
    All BBs perform shore bombardment. But limited to 1 casualty every 4 attacking INF.
    All BBs support infantry with +1 bonus, on 1-to-1 basis.


  • OK both of these look fine… well wait for dukes take on this. for now it stands as it is.


  • Was playtesting today

    The screening or protecting ability of DD seemed weird.
    The BB and CV can absorb two hits.
    So you have to like not get your DDs to protect your BB sand CVs in 1st cycle it, and then protect them in the second.

    The ASW seems weak.
    Searching on 2 or less, and then hitting on 2 or less…

    When 2 SS attack 2 DD…the SS is likely to kill both DD without getting hurt.

    Is that the intentional?


  • The screening or protecting ability of DD seemed weird.
    The BB and CV can absorb two hits.
    So you have to like not get your DDs to protect your BB sand CVs in 1st cycle it, and then protect them in the second.

    +++++ not a good idea. after one combat round you may retreat so when you pair off your ships you may want to “look” at the bigger picture of only sustaining one rounds worth of hits by subs. also i dont know how many subs were attacking. but say they had 3 subs. Id protect the CV with one ship and the BB with the other ship. Say the subs are placed as follows: all three on the CV… hoping to hit three times! they only get 2 hits ( not preemtive due to DD being around) . the destroyer is hit and the CV takes one hit. Now the 2 DD roll for search… they locate the subs on the last roll. Now all three ( 2 DD and BB) each get one roll and score 1 hit. The DD is removed from play and one sub is gone. At this point the subs submerge and play is over in this case.

    The ASW seems weak.
    Searching on 2 or less, and then hitting on 2 or less…

    +++++ it reflects a balance of what the subs themselves add to the game. If ships can kill at 3+ or only 1, then subs will have little effect , or ships will have little effect against subs.

    When 2 SS attack 2 DD…the SS is likely to kill both DD without getting hurt.

    ++++ this is not correct interpretation… The DD STOPS the preemtive attack of subs… the dd still gets to roll for search and if succesful again rolls for attacks.


  • Submarine Combat
          This form of combat is always performed separately from normal naval combat. During the active players phase, submarines can make attacks on naval units and/or economic attacks on an enemy’s convoy box. When used against naval units they can be moved or simply activated from an enemy occupied sea zone and select a target of their choosing roll and hitting on a two or less. This shot is targeted by the submarine and is preemptive so all hits are removed before the defender has a chance to roll for surviving naval units. Exceptions: the preemptive targeted submarine shot is negated by the presence of at least one Cruiser or Destroyer unit. Secondly, each Cruiser or Destroyer unit can “screen out” one ship of their choosing at a 1/1 basis so that the targeted submarine hit goes against these or other unscreened units instead. Only when the “screening” ship(s) are sunk can the “protected” ship be targeted. Otherwise if any ships remain then a search roll may then be performed. Hits on ships that are performing this duty cannot assign their hits to other units in order to make loses “cheaper”.

    Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)
    The presence of defending Cruisers and/or Destroyers negates attacking submarines’ 1st shot preemptive attack. They are also possessing special capabilities of attacking submarines with ASW warfare and tactics.
          First each defending Cruiser or Destroyer unit is then assigned one roll to perform a search of enemy submarine that are attacking with success on any roll of two or less. If they fail to locate the submarine(s), then the sub can then end combat and remain in the sea zone, or it can conduct another round of combat. If it tries to make a second attack the defending ships receive a new search roll each round until they successfully locate the submarine. Once submarines have been located Cruisers, Destroyers and now Battleships can all defend with a new roll of two or less against the submarine(s). This is known as Anti- Submarine Warfare (ASW). No other types of ships can perform ASW rolls. Note: the ASW search roll is always separate from the roll that represents the ability to attack submarines in ASW.

    After specific turns advancements in naval radar and sonar technology USA and UK can modify the ability for ASW as follows:

    1. When Aerial ASW technology #2  is achieved then  USA and UK Land or Carrier based planes can be involved in attacking submarines.
    2. When naval sonar technology is achieved the USA and UK player can modify a successful location roll and or hit to any roll of three or less.
    3. When you have Aerial tech #1 Planes from USA and UK can begin to participate in Naval search for submarines.

    Each roll is now done separately until the submarine is sighted. Once the submarines are sighted each Cruiser, Destroyer and now Battleships can then each receive one new roll against attacking the submarines hitting on a two or less. If the submarine is not sighted then another round of combat occurs until either all ships are sunk or either side withdraws from further combat (subs can remain in the sea zone (submerge) while either side can also retreat to another sea zones).

    Movement thru zones occupied by enemy submarines:
          When the active player moves naval units into a sea zone and an enemy submarine decides not to attack, then those units can continue to move into other zones. No combat occurs in this case. If the enemy submarine is placed “on station” it can attempt to engage those surface ships in combat. In this case movement must stop and those ships will now be engaged by the passive player’s submarine(s). In this case your ships can continue to move into other sea zones (up to their full movement allowance) providing naval combat does not take more than one round.
      When as the active player you decide you want to attack enemy submarines with ASW warfare, each Cruiser or Destroyer can each participate in a similar manner to above under ASW rules. If these units fail to find the submarine, the enemy submarine and your ships simply remain in the sea zone till the following turn.

    Summary of Submarine Combat:

    1. Your submarines move into positions occupied by enemy surface ships or they can declare they are “on station” when enemy warships pass thru sea zones occupied by your submarines leading to combat.
    2. The owner of the surface ships now allocates any Cruisers or Destroyers to screen out any other ships of his fleet.
    3. You allocate your subs to groups in ships paired under item #2
    4. You rolls for each submarine hitting on a two or less ( if you have two or more subs you gain a +1 combat modifier)
    5. If the sub is attacking any ship(s) that does not contain a Cruiser or Destroyer your sub hits are preemptive and losses are taken on the targeted ship.
    6. If the targeted ship contains a “screening” Cruiser or Destroyer any hits are applied to them instead and are not preemptive.
    7. Any remaining surface ships now roll for search with a successful location detected of all submarines occurring on a roll of two or less. Each Cruiser and Destroyer (and Latter UK / USA planes) gets one roll.
    8. If success is received each aforementioned ship (and now including Battleships) can now receive one roll hitting the submarine on a roll of two or less.
    9. All loses are allocated and either player can retreat partially or in full. Submarines have a further option of submerging and remaining in the sea zone.

    Summary of ASW Naval Combat:

    1. You’re Cruisers and Destroyers (and latter UK and USA planes) each move into sea zones containing enemy submarines with the intention of attacking them.
    2. Each receives one ASW rolls searching/hitting on a two or less (modified to three for UK/USA on turn 13).
    3. If you fail to locate the enemy submarine those participating units end their turn.
    4. If you succeed and locate the submarine each of the aforementioned ships (and now Battleships) gets a second roll again hitting on a two or less (or three on turn 13).
    5. Enemy subs can defend but the roll is not preemptive.
    6. All loses are allocated and either player can retreat partially or in full. Submarines have a further option of submerging and remaining in the sea zone.

    Shore Bombardment and Infantry Support
    During Ground Combat, for amphibious assaults, all surface warships with a primary combat value of two or higher have one preemptive “shore bombardment” attack. In order to support landings you must land four Land units to receive one shore bombardment shot. Defenders losses do not fire back. In addition, each warship (whether supporting or not) improves one attacking infantry unit with an attack die roll modifier of +1 on the first round only. So if you only land 3 Infantry, you still get each of them with a +1 modifier provided you have at least three warships with an attack value of two. Warships that participate in Naval Combat may not shore bombard or provide infantry support for amphibious assaults.

    Defending Artillery fire in Amphibious Assault
    Following shore bombardment attacks, any defending artillery units present then receive one round of preemptive fire upon invading enemy units. Hits are taken first (chosen by the attacker) and removed from play. Land combat then follows in the normal manner starting with section #2.

    First Round land combat restrictions
    The attacker’s first land combat phase is restricted to Infantry only (including Airborne).

    So to summarize invasions:
    4) Shore bombardment (preemptive).
    5) Defender artillery fire support (preemptive).
    6) Tactical Air Command missions against defending air units/ land units (preemptive if only land units are defending).
    7) Attacking Infantry can attack on round one; all other land units can attack on round two or latter.
    8) Defender rolls for all land units (except Artillery which fired).
    9) Continue combat rounds until one side is destroyed or retreats from battle.


  • @Imperious:

    Say the subs are placed as follows: all three on the CV… hoping to hit three times!

    Oh yeah. How can I forgot about that. Submarines can “focus fire”.

    it reflects a balance of what the subs themselves add to the game. If ships can kill at 3+ or only 1, then subs will have little effect , or ships will have little effect against subs.

    Thats alright then. I don’t know the historic information about sumbarine combat.
    Like who should do better when a destroyer combats with a submarine?

    When 2 SS attack 2 DD…the SS is likely to kill both DD without getting hurt.
    ++++ this is not correct interpretation… The DD STOPS the preemtive attack of subs… the dd still gets to roll for search and if succesful again rolls for attacks.

    But I am talking about the odds of hitting. 33% for submarines. 11% for destroyers.
    Again this could be ok…I don’t know historically how well destroyers fights submarines.


  • Thats alright then. I don’t know the historic information about sumbarine combat.
    Like who should do better when a destroyer combats with a submarine?

    ++++ ok say one sub went after a DD… The DD has to jump thru more hoops because it need to roll twice at 1-2 to sink the sub, while the sub only has one roll. The Sub automatically locates the DD, while the DD has to search first. plus if the sub is near any sea zone off you nation it can perform an economic attack costing you money. The sub however cant attack planes and it cant be involved in surface combat with other ships. thats done seperately. I belive each has something to offer, plus after sufficient tech occurs the DD has a better roll on the subs, while in the case of german type XX1 uboats (a tech letter in the war) Germany can turn the tide once more.

    Quote
    When 2 SS attack 2 DD…the SS is likely to kill both DD without getting hurt.
    ++++ this is not correct interpretation… The DD STOPS the preemtive attack of subs… the dd still gets to roll for search and if succesful again rolls for attacks.
    But I am talking about the odds of hitting. 33% for submarines. 11% for destroyers.
    Again this could be ok…I don’t know historically how well destroyers fights submarines.

    ++++ As stated before its true that a DD has to roll twice at 1-2 to sink a sub. this is historical. Its much harder to sink subs then it is to send torpedos while in stealth underwater.Latter with technology… this begins to change


  • How does air units fit in the naval hit allocation system?

    Group1: BB CV
    Group2: DD
    Group3: TR
    Group4: FTR and BMR

    I am thinking of making TR hits can only be allocated against TR.


  • That system is only ship to ship combat. air units should target like subs the ships they want… except each DD and CA again screens out one capital ship 1/1 basis. also each ship fires first at some modified aa value and hits are preemtive. so any planes left over get to fire at which ships they want. CA is a aa gun platform so id make them the strongest against planes. next should be the bb and last carriers and DD. Transports have no defense at all.

    idea:

    CA roll 1-4
    BB rolls 1-3
    CA rolls 1-2
    DD rolls 1

    each ship only gets one roll preemtive EACH ROUND.


  • Ships protecting other ships from air attacks?
    Its realistic right?

    So for land combat statistically about 10% of fighters were downed by antiaircraft.
    What were the figures for naval combat?

    Air units fighting without carriers

    For land combat we decided, for now, to make air units without supporting land units fire for one cycle and then retreat.
    For naval combat, we would have something like this?

    “At the end of a combat cycle you must retreat air units excess to your carrier capacity.”

    This happens to stop air units from land performing multiple combat cycle against enemy ships.


  • Ships protecting other ships from air attacks?
    Its realistic right?

    ++++ thats totally realistic… the entire reason why specific ships sail together the escort ships form a ring around the carrier or battleship, sometimes the battleships are in the lead but mostly that was in ww1 because naval tactics of the day were regulated to crossing the “T”… a holdover tactic from Napoleonic times

    So for land combat statistically about 10% of fighters were downed by antiaircraft.
    What were the figures for naval combat?

    ++++very good question: i dont have an answer. However i know Cruisers were built in ww2 as anti aircraft platforms and served as fleet escort to protect carriers and battleships. OF course BB had sufficient AA protection as a general rule.

    Air units fighting without carriers

    For land combat we decided, for now, to make air units without supporting land units fire for one cycle and then retreat.
    For naval combat, we would have something like this?

    ++++++NO entirely different. The only yoke is the parent carrier… one idea i was tinkering was to install some uber tactical idea of planes spending one turn to attack and another turn to refuel and rearm. that way like at Midway the carrier can be caught with its pants down and sunk with its planes?

    “At the end of a combat cycle you must retreat air units excess to your carrier capacity.”

    This happens to stop air units from land performing multiple combat cycle against enemy ships.

    ++++ OH that … yes land and carrier based planes must be seperate. the scale is very abstracted but truely its totally unrealistic to continue this process from OOB… Planes attacking from carriers and landing on land for use on the players following turn is horrible.


  • ++++ thats totally realistic… the entire reason why specific ships sail together the escort ships form a ring around the carrier or battleship

    Ok we’ll reword and include it under screening/protecting or a better word.

    What were the figures for naval combat?
    ++++very good question: i dont have an answer.

    We’ll have to grab some stats before we can tune the numbers.

    ++++++NO entirely different. The only yoke is the parent carrier…

    So something like this instead…

    “At the end of a combat cycle you must retreat air units whose parent carrier is lost or retreating.”

    We’ll have to formalise the “ownership” of planes to carriers.

    Then again its quite restrictive…and we’ll have to allow for cases where group A lost its carrier and group B lost its fighters…we’ll have to let them regroup…so in the end maybe we’ll just use the carrier capacity rule eh?  :-D

    one idea i was tinkering was to install some uber tactical idea of planes spending one turn to attack and another turn to refuel and rearm. that way like at Midway the carrier can be caught with its pants down and sunk with its planes?

    Refuel and rearm….that would be like my equivalent sugguest for land combat.
    We can argue this is not neccessary as planes fly really fast and can refuel/rearm during the one cycle.
    Remember you said its about one month per combat cycle.

    This happens to stop air units from land performing multiple combat cycle against enemy ships.
    ++++ OH that … yes land and carrier based planes must be seperate. the scale is very abstracted but truely its totally unrealistic to continue this process from OOB… Planes attacking from carriers and landing on land for use on the players following turn is horrible.

    Some land planes simply can’t be upgraded to work as a carrier plane.

    “Air units taken off a territory must land on a territory.”

    “After the first cycle of combat, air units taken off a territory must retreat.”

    However little reason why a carrier plane cannot land on land.

    Optionally rule is new piece/unit, separating land and sea fighters.

    Standard rule is sea planes becomes land planes once they land on a territory.


  • Refuel and rearm….that would be like my equivalent sugguest for land combat.
    We can argue this is not neccessary as planes fly really fast and can refuel/rearm during the one cycle.
    Remember you said its about one month per combat cycle.

    +++++++  yep your correct it was just an idea… nothing major.

    Quote
    This happens to stop air units from land performing multiple combat cycle against enemy ships.
    ++++ OH that … yes land and carrier based planes must be seperate. the scale is very abstracted but truely its totally unrealistic to continue this process from OOB… Planes attacking from carriers and landing on land for use on the players following turn is horrible.

    Some land planes simply can’t be upgraded to work as a carrier plane.

    “Air units taken off a territory must land on a territory.”

    “After the first cycle of combat, air units taken off a territory must retreat.”

    However little reason why a carrier plane cannot land on land.

    Optionally rule is new piece/unit, separating land and sea fighters.

    Standard rule is sea planes becomes land planes once they land on a territory.

    ++++ yes i think we need a naval fighter unit under those older new units thread… and not allow land based planes to integrate with carriers anymore.


  • so any comments for modelling carrier planes “belonging” to their mother carrier?

    @Imperious:

    ++++ yes i think we need a naval fighter unit under those older new units thread… and not allow land based planes to integrate with carriers anymore.

    What about the case with no new units?
    How about just not land air units land on carrier,
    and make naval air units “convert” to land air units when landing on land and not able to convert back to naval air units?


  • 1 US DD at SZ 11.
    1 US CV at SZ 17.
    1 German SS at SZ 12.

    US declares DD at SZ 11 move into SZ 13 through SZ 12.
    Before US (or other Allies powers) finishes declaring their movement, (which could involve US CV move from SZ 17 to SZ 13) Germany must declare whether to submerge SS?

    1 US BMR at Gibraltar.
    1 US CV at SZ 11.
    1 German SS at SZ 12.

    However, here US can’t do the same trick, the BMR is not gonna help open the path for the CV to go from SZ 11 to SZ 13.

    All this is due to abstraction of time in OOB?

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 5
  • 9
  • 15
  • 20
  • 6
  • 16
  • 115
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

28

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts