If I correctly understand, the DD A2 D2 depth charge attack phase,
each DD should attack @2,
Fighter should attack @3,
to be similar to first round attack against subs from DD+Fighter.
If Subs stay in combat against DDs, does fighter remains able to hit Subs in the regular combat phase?
@Baron
Using your first examples
@Baron:
First, if 2 Subs A2 D1 are attacking 1 DD A2 D2, 1 Fg A3 D4 and 1 TP, what happen?
1- First step: depth charge defense (may include Fighter if option selected), subs’ casualty removed (only attacking sub)
2- Subs attack, defender’s casualty removed (warships, then TP)
3- Defender’s rolls (including Fighter?), sub’s casualties removedWhat happen if 1 DD A2 D2, 1 Fg A3 D4, 1 TP are attacking 2 Subs A2 D1?
1- First step, no depth charge? since DD is on attack?
2- Subs still get a first strike @1, DD presence have no effect (in this triple A, mechanic)
3- DDs attack @2, Fg can @3 (no need DD presence)Please help me understand.
You are correct in the first grouping of 1,2,3
Second grouping:
When the option allowing planes to hit subs is activated, the plane will always get to fire if attacked. If they attack the subs, the subs would get to submerge before the ftr fires. The DD has no impact on the plane and sub interaction.
So if 2 subs attacked a DD, CV w/1 ftr the DD would fire his depthcharge, any surviving subs would fire their first strike, first strike hits would be removed, DD, CV and ftr would then fire.
DD and ftr attack 2 subs, the DD would fire Dchrg, any survivng subs could then submerge. The ftr can’t hit subs on attack unless they don’t submerge. Or unless they are given Dchrg ability like DDs.
@Baron:
When a DD is present, the sub undergoes a first strike AA/depth charge attack. Right now it’s set to hit at 2 and you get one shot. This can be modified for different attack factor, number of shots. When the DD misses then the sub gets to use it’s 1st strike against the DD. When it hits the DD, or other naval target if other ships are present, immediately takes a hit (transports are still chosen last). When it misses the other ships, DD included, return fire.
DD still hits/defends at 2.So you can hunt subs with DDs who get 1 crack at them and then the sub can choose to submerge. I would recommend allowing planes to hit them if attacked. However from Barons post above their could still be a problem.
Do you imply that under this triple A mechanics, DDs cannot block Sub from submerge, but Depth charge comes first before sub submerge?
Can you adjust DD to @1 depth charge and Fg depth charge phase to A3 on offence and D4 on defense?
Depth charges works like AA? 5 Subs vs 1 DDs, then all 5 Subs are depth charged, right?
So you can hunt subs with DDs who get 1 crack at them and then the sub can choose to submerge. I would recommend allowing planes to hit them if attacked.
1- DD can attack a Sub infested SZ, there is a 1 combat round, depth charge.
2- Then, on Surprise strike phase, Sub may retaliate or Submerge.
If it retaliate, it is @1 first strike; so DD casualties removed.
3- Then DD can roll regular combat attack. …
Correct DDs can’t block subs from submerge and the Dchrg comes first.
Yes attack value can be adjusted for each unit. I believe both offense and defense.
Right now I have DDs with only 1 Dchrg attack ( could only shoot at 1 sub not all 5) for 1st rd of combat only that hits at 2. All numbers could be modified. You could give DD 3 shots (or more and shoot at all 5 ) at up to 3 subs like aaguns, you can have them hit at 1-6 with offense and defense being a different number. You can have them fire more than 1 rd up to every rd if you like.
I’ll explain some more in another post.
edit: DDs don’t block subs at all. Subs can pass through DD same as any other ship now.
Ok. Here is an example:
If I try to work the anti-sub single combat round attack.
Giving DD A2 and Fg A3, both needs Depth Charge attack 1 A2 per DD and Fg depth Charge 1 @3 per Fg.
That way, it would be like a single combat round against Sub.
Usually Sub will submerge if not killed by depth charge.
Anti-sub Depth Charge combat round on defense
Can give @0 per DD, and Fg@0
That way, Submarines strike first A2
Then all units can defend against Subs as usual, including defending Fg D4
Can this work?
yes it can
yes it can
Thanks.
I need to think about.
Still possible to player enforce that to attack Subs with planes in anti-sub mission, it requires a Destroyer.
Black_Elk
Do you totally abandon : DD6 CA9 CV12 BB15 Cost structure?
This answer will help know where are limits below and above compared to Sub: warships cost ratio and DD: other warships cost ratio.
Barney, what you have found is really a game changer for Subs IMO. Bravo!!! :-o
:-)
Thanks Baron
I’m pretty stoked too. pyt o torp at triplea gets a big atta boy !
Also in case it’s needed I just tested the DD firing depthcharges every combat rd in case it needs a little buff. A solo sub would probably submerge after 1 rd, but if there was a pile of them they may think twice before accepting battle.
Being able to submerge after 1 rd could be somewhat problematic, especially in blockade zones. Overall I think it makes it more realistic. Even if a plane gets 1 free shot with no DD present it could just be them catching them on the surface recharging. If its at night will say it was a night fighter : )
Sounds killer.
So for the cost aspect, is the fact that the unit can no longer be blocked/held by destroyers enough to justify an increase to the Classic cost of 8 ipcs?
If not would M3 be overpowered at 8 ipcs? My concern at M3 is that defensive subs would just be glued to cruisers at all times, as fodder to protect transports hehe. But one thing I don’t particularly like at M2, is that once a sub dives in a sz occupied by a destroyer, it can never really escape the destroyer. In the OOB game, this is like what happens when the Allies purchase a new DD and drop it in a sea zone where there is a German sub. The German sub is kinda screwed at that point, since it just gets chased down by the DD the next turn or every turn thereafter. I suppose here, even at M2 at least the destroyer might miss, giving the sub another round of action. It would be a harder for them to avoid aircraft though, if no DD is necessary for air to hit subs.
I just want to make sure I understand it correctly, the air vs subs interaction. Under this system could a lone fighter attack a lone sub? Or are we just taking about carrier based air defending when they get attacked by a sub?
I suppose for the cost much depends on whether the sub has some standard form of economic attack, or if it is purely for combat, like in 1942.2 OOB. If it has an economic attack then this offsets the initial cost considerably, since it can make good on the investment with raids.
One thing I do like about a rule allowing air to make an independant attack (unless I’m confused) is that it’s hard to lock down a sea zone completely with just subs. For example Germany/Italy would have a way to respond to a sub blockade in G40, by using aircraft, which is something they can’t do currently, once the option to place a DD in the sz is off the table (which is what happens soon as UK has a bunch of subs in position.) So this would make it somewhat more challenging to completely raid Italy out of the game for example. I just want to make sure we don’t go too far, such that the subs becomes an unattractive purchase relative to the destroyer, or too vulnerable to enemy air, making safe placement next to impossible. But again, not sure if I’m 100% clear on how the air vs sub thing is working.
To the last Q Baron, I would not say I’ve abandoned it. I think you know I prefer cheaper ships all around haha. My only concern is that up until now I have been thinking about these new naval abilities in terms of the OOB cost structure. The costs you just mentioned, would mean shipyards tech is essentially obsolete. Not that tech is a huge priority at this point, just thinking of the ramifications. I also worry a little about about flooding the board with cheaper naval units (potential battleship spams and the like), though if I’m being honest, I can’t see a serious downside to more naval action in these games. It would mean a more complex revision to the unit charts though, so somewhat less elegant for a plug and play, than keeping the costs at OOB.
I don’t know, I guess I just want to make sure that a power which gets kicked off the water, still has some means to defend itself (now that the strat B is gone.) So I don’t want to make it so easy to spam fleets that land based fighters have no way to ever match them. If that makes sense?
To clarify a little more Elk. The sub, when attacking naval with air present, would face counter fire from the plane after it fired it’s first strike regardless if it hits. When Air is attacking the sub, air would get 1 depthcharge attack, if sub survives it can dive.
That’s why I was thinking of a lower hit on the attack and limit it to ftrs only. If a ftr only had a 1/6 chance to wack a sub I don’t think they’d be too powerful. They only get 1 crack at them on offense. Even if you go 2/6 or 3/6 the ftr is still unable to fly a different mission that turn. Also they’ll retain their oob D4.
Just have to play around with the numbers on some playtests I think. Subs can’t be blocked at all now, so Idk about M3.
Also if subs attack or don’t submerge you’re getting another regular hit that rd as well.
Oh yea if they park a DD over them subs get a normal first strike on offense (DD is sunk before it can fire). Although with ftrs at an AB survival would be low. But if you’re in a blockade zone go deep and last as long as you can :)
Thanks Baron
I’m pretty stoked too. pyt o torp at triplea gets a big atta boy !
Also in case it’s needed I just tested the DD firing depthcharges every combat rd in case it needs a little buff. A solo sub would probably submerge after 1 rd, but if there was a pile of them they may think twice before accepting battle.
Being able to submerge after 1 rd could be somewhat problematic, especially in blockade zones. Overall I think it makes it more realistic. Even if a plane gets 1 free shot with no DD present it could just be them catching them on the surface recharging. If its at night will say it was a night fighter : )
I was considering that Sub can still defend @1 first strike after.
Maybe allowing multiple DepthCharge round could provides some options but I doubt it will work because
such Depth Charge first strike before sub surprise phase makes virtually double attack values in more complex naval combat. For instance, DDs, Fgs, Cvs, Subs against DDs, CVs, Subs, Fgs.
FGs and DDs could attack twice each combat round. Killer!!
I’m pretty sure there is a cost ratio between Sub and DD which can assume both A2 D1 surprise strike.
Of course, don’t know yet, but 5 IPCs DD vs 6 IPCs Subs or C6 DD vs C6 Sub or C6 DD vs C8 Sub.
Combat values and specific mechanic need to be think deeper.
Maybe people can conceive that cheaper DD compensate for costlier sub having always surprise.
Or that the Depth Charge (long range Patrol) phase is enough to simulate that you have a chance to find out subs. But Subs still have a chance to surprise you before you retaliate.
On letting planes alone attacking Subs, the issue is the same than revised and classic.
Subs were sitting duck, enough planes rolling 3 or 4 was easy to get 1 or 2 hits and clean up a SZ.
If such things is allowed, I would give @2 to TcB only then. Not allowing Fg to be able to depth charge.
Or simply reduced both Fg and TcB to @1. To have an advantage of launching DDs at sea.
Another possibility is to give a one shot anti-sub air patrol @1 both Attack and defense.
Other question Barney, do you know if assuming Subs are treated like aircraft by Triple A in this config, you can forbid sub to hit sub? Just asking to be sure about this new opening.
One thing I do like about a rule allowing air to make an independant attack (unless I’m confused) is that it**'s hard to lock down a sea zone completely with just subs. For example Germany/Italy would have a way to respond to a sub blockade in G40, by using aircraft, which is something they can’t do currently, once the option to place a DD in the sz is off the table (which is what happens soon as UK has a bunch of subs in position.) So this would make it somewhat more challenging to completely raid Italy out of the game for example.** I just want to make sure we don’t go too far, such that the subs becomes an unattractive purchase relative to the destroyer, or too vulnerable to enemy air, making safe placement next to impossible. But again, not sure if I’m 100% clear on how the air vs sub thing is working.
That is an issue we can keep in mind.
That way there will be a cost to stay in Convoy Sz for Subs.
M3 is probably off table due to fodder for TP.
But, if I understand Barney, Subs can pass through enemy SZ without notice, so from NB, M2 Sub can sail 2 SZ in occupied SZ and stop on an empty third one, right?
I’ll explain some more in another post.
edit: DDs don’t block subs at all. Subs can pass through DD same as any other ship now.
I’m still brain zapped by all options and doubts.
I’ll explain some more in another post.
edit: DDs don’t block subs at all. Subs can pass through DD same as any other ship now.
I’m still brain zapped by all options and doubts.
yea I figured that was a big pile of data for ya. :)
Ya want me to keep subs and DDs the same A D M C and give DDs A2 depthcharge Tacs and ftrs A1 for starters ? Maybe get some playtest info to help why you crunch ?
To clarify a little more Elk. The sub, when attacking naval with air present, would face counter fire from the plane after it fired it’s first strike regardless if it hits. When Air is attacking the sub, air would get 1 depthcharge attack, if sub survives it can dive.
That’s why I was thinking of a lower hit on the attack and limit it to ftrs only. If a ftr only had a 1/6 chance to wack a sub I don’t think they’d be too powerful. They only get 1 crack at them on offense. Even if you go 2/6 or 3/6 the ftr is still unable to fly a different mission that turn. Also they’ll retain their oob D4.
Just have to play around with the numbers on some playtests I think. Subs can’t be blocked at all now, so Idk about M3.
Also if subs attack or don’t submerge you’re getting another regular hit that rd as well.
Oh yea if they park a DD over them subs get a normal first strike on offense (DD is sunk before it can fire). Although with ftrs at an AB survival would be low. But if you’re in a blockade zone go deep and last as long as you can :)
Ok that makes more sense to me now.
One advantage of a depth charge hitting at 1, is that it’s simpler to draw on an analogy with aafire/escort.
This submarine sounds pretty interesting. It’s interaction with the other units isn’t exactly ‘simple’ but the complex relationship tracking doesn’t strike me as any more onerous than the OOB system. Some things are simplified, others slightly more involved (with the depth charge.) But at least the resulting gameplay potential is new. A naval unit that runs past blockers strikes me as pretty innovative. It’s powerful even at M2, and it might be interesting how this unit ends up being used to create a more layered approach to naval movement, when combined with the M3 Transport and Cruiser. Certainly carriers will remain critical here, whatever the cost of the DD ends up being, so that unit would still have preeminence on the water for defense and fighter mobility.
Got to thinking on it some more. If DDs and planes only have offense Dchrg and subs get first strike as well, fleets would be too powerful on the attack. So I ran it through triplea with DDs A2 D2 Planes A1 D1 and OOB was 52%win and 77% for offense only.
With defense added was 46%. With DD only 45%. Granted the makeup of forces makes a big difference, but giving them both 10 SS 10 DD 5 CV 5 TB 5 Ftr 2 CA 1 BB is what they scored.
62% with DDs D1 on Dchrg
The triplea calc can make big swings with just 1 or 2 unit diff so Idk. Anyway looks as if they need some defense Dchrg ability. Maybe DD only and/or Tacs @D1
2 subs 2 DDs vs 2 subs 2 DDs is 59% OOB to 57% SFR. Throw in a ftr and Tac it’s 54% to 50%. That’s with DDs A2 D2 Planes A1 D1
Anyway maybe this will help a little Baron
Got to thinking on it some more. If DDs and planes only have offense Dchrg and subs get first strike as well, fleets would be too powerful on the attack. So I ran it through triplea with DDs A2 D2 Planes A1 D1 and OOB was 52%win and 77% for offense only.
With defense added was 46%. With DD only 45%. Granted the makeup of forces makes a big difference, but giving them both 10 SS 10 DD 5 CV 5 TB 5 Ftr 2 CA 1 BB is what they scored.
62% with DDs D1 on Dchrg
The triplea calc can make big swings with just 1 or 2 unit diff so Idk. Anyway looks as if they need some defense Dchrg ability. Maybe DD only and/or Tacs @D1
2 subs 2 DDs vs 2 subs 2 DDs is 59% OOB to 57% SFR. Throw in a ftr and Tac it’s 54% to 50%. That’s with DDs A2 D2 Planes A1 D1
Anyway maybe this will help a little Baron
Thanks Barney,
can you try and report some…
DD A1 D2 C6 vs Sub A2 D1 C6 with only attack DC @1 like:
6 DDs vs 6 Subs and
12 DD vs 12 Subs
DD A1 D1 C5 vs Sub A2 D1 C6 with attack DC @1 and defense DC @1
6 DDs vs 5 Subs and
12 DDs vs 10 Subs
Then, DD A2 D2 C6 vs Sub A2 D1 C5 with attack DC @2 and defense DC @2
5 DDs vs 6 Subs and
10 DDs vs 12 Subs
Thanks,
While we wait on the numbers…
:-D
I think the main appeal of this approach to the unit, is that it just “feels” more like a submarine.
I never really liked how a single destroyer could completely negate so many of the sub’s interesting abilities OOB and hold it frozen in place. This type of system, which preserves the first strike, and allows subs to move “under” blockers, makes for a much more unique naval unit all around. You still need destroyers and aircraft to effectively disrupt enemy subs with the depth charge, but the sub now has the freedom of movement and surprise advantage at all times, which allows it to operate more independently. I think it should prove a lot more engaging for the sub commanders, with some interesting choices to be made on both sides, whether you’re waging an unrestricted sub warfare campaign yourself, or conducting an ASW campaign in response. It gives a nation like Germany a way to remain competitive on the water, so you can have a battle of the Atlantic that doesn’t hinge on Germany being able to launch carriers or create a massive surface fleet. Instead they can use subs, like they actually did in the war, to harass the Allies.
The one element that is slightly more challenging, is finding a simple way to introduce the sub’s raiding aspect into 1942.2, (so the unit can be consistent across both maps). I think this will be the key to determining the appropriate cost and attrition rate for subs, because it changes their value and replacement cost over time. The longer a sub survives, the more chances it has to “pay for itself” with raids. A sub that can raid is much more attractive as a purchase option, and much less likely to serve as fodder or for fleet padding, because it would have something else to do.
With the sub change included, I think the San Francisco Rules can be broadly interpreted as a naval and economic warfare overhaul for A&A. Each of these rules we’ve proposed build off of one another in the furtherance of that aim, culminating in a ruleset that offers a somewhat more realistic and nuanced play pattern.
@Baron
SFR OOB
Group 1 DD A1 D2 ADC1 vs SS A2 D1
6 DD vs 6 SS
60-62% DD win 88-90% DD win
12 DD vs 12 SS
66-67% DD win 95-97% DD win
Group 2 DD A1 D1 ADC1 DDC1 vs SS A2 D1
6 DD vs 5 SS
77-79% DD win 99-100% DD win
12 DD vs 10 SS
84-87% DD win 96-97% DD win
Group 3 DD A2 D2 ADC2 DDC2 vs SS A2 D1
5 DD vs 6 SS
82-84% DD win 71-73% DD win
10 DD vs 12 SS
91-92% DD win 78-80% DD win
Ran each battle 5 times. Idk if triplea takes into account first strike or maybe some other stuff such as OOL. I also swapped sides which I can send you as well. I’m gonna check some League games and run some big fleet battles.
@Black Elk
Yea it does “feel” more like it. :) They get a chance to get away. I’m not familiar with 42.2 raiding. I get some time I’ll look into it.
I also swapped sides which I can send you as well.
Yes please. :-D
If you want to put OOB comparison for same IPCs basis on each side…
Group 1 (6DD A1 D2 C6 vs 6SS A2 D1 C6)
Group 2 (6DD A1 D1 C5 vs 5SS A2 D1 C6)
Group 3 (5DD A2 D2 C6 vs 5SS A2 D1 C5) it would be:
6 DD A2 D2 C8 vs 8SS A2 D1 C6, it will be: 60% DD win
12 DD A2 D2 C8 vs 16SS A2 D1 C6, it will be: 63% DD win
8SS A2 D1 C6 vs 6DD A2 D2 C8, it will be: 88% Sub win
16SS A2 D1 C6 vs 12DD A2 D2 C8, it will be: 95% Sub win
So the nearest “Destroyer on offense” configuration is actually:
Group 1 DD A1 D2 C6 ADC1 vs SS A2 D1 C6
6 DD vs 6 SS
60-62% DD win
12 DD vs 12 SS
66-67% DD win
Group 1 SFR OOB
6 SS C6 vs 6 DD C6 72-74% SS win 46-48% SS win12 SS C6 vs 12 DD C6 79-81% SS win 48-51% SS win
Group 2
5 SS C6 vs 6 DD C5 61-64% SS win 16-20% SS win10 SS C6 vs 12 DD C5 66-68% SS win 24-25% SS win
Group 3
6SS C5 vs 5 DD C6 50-53% SS win 73-77% SS win12 SS C5 vs 10 DD C6 52-53% SS win 82-84% SS win
Thanks Barney. :-)
So the nearest “Destroyer on defense” configuration is actually:
Group 1 Destroyer A1 D2 C6 ADC1
6 SS A2 D1 C6 vs 6 DD A1 D2 C6 72-74% SS win
12 SS A2 D1 C6 vs 12 DD A1 D2 C6 79-81% SS win
8SS A2 D1 C6 vs 6DD A2 D2 C8, it will be: 88% Sub win
16SS A2 D1 C6 vs 12DD A2 D2 C8, it will be: 95% Sub win
The nearest odds OOB “Destroyer on offense” configuration is actually:
Group 1 DD A1 D2 C6 Attack Depth Charge 1,
61% DD win compared to 60% OOB
The nearest odds OOB “Destroyer on defense” configuration is actually:
Group 1 DD A1 D2 C6 Attack Depth Charge 1,
73% Sub win compared to 88% OOB
This seems interesting but it is only relative to Subs vs DDs
Even with same cost and similar combat values,
Subs A2fs D1fs M2 C6 are now more powerful than OOB Subs due to always first strike and not blocked by Destroyer.
So this new Sub is a bit more powerful than Cruiser, Carrier and Battleship. But it is not the main issue.
Above of all, because it is same cost than Destroyer, Submarine compete with Destroyer as fodder unit.
I can easily imagine that on defense, Submarine would be taken as casualties mostly coming from attacking’s Sub successful hit.
Simply because both attacking and defending get their roll, while Destroyers still have to roll.
Naturally, it is better to maximize number of rolls per combat round.
So, it can be circumvent whether by a lower cost for Destroyer (5 IPCs),
or a special player enforced rule: “Submarine must be taken as last casualty amongst warship.”
Or both.
Using 5 IPCs A1 D2 M2 Destroyers directly decrease other warships combat power, especially on defense (OOB D2 cost 8, now it would cost 5).
Hence, it is a call for a DD5, SS6, TP7, CA9, CV12, BB15 cost structure.
Otherwise, (if Triple A cannot manage to “forbid Sub to hit Sub”, as Barney told us) it requires that we agree to try it with the special rule:
Submarine must be taken as last casualty amongst warship.
That way, it may be balance to work on DD A1 D2 M2 C6 ADC1 (which is consistent with the basic 2 IPCs give 1 combat point or 2:1 IPC/pt ratio for Naval unit).
However, I strongly believe that Cruiser M3 C12 and Battleship 2 hits C20 needs stronger boost to be balanced with Destroyer A1 D2 C6.
Here, I’m thinking about AA capacity (which can be done in Triple, Barney proved us.)
And even something more or different for Battleship (1 Inf carrying capacity? an increase Convoy Raid of 2 Dices as Subs? other?).
On the other side, Destroyer should no more be able to Convoy Raid, because, on same IPCs basis, it means 3 Dice compared to 1D6 for Battleship.
An issue remains about planes on attack.
They appear also weaker attack per cost ratio compared to Destroyer.
DD at 5 IPCs is extreme but 6 IPCs DD can still be an acceptable issue since many people complain about Fg being too cheap or OP.
Here, my single adjustment to 6 IPCs DDs should be on Tactical Bomber A3-4 D3 M4-6, TBR A1 D6 damage and A1 Depth Charge, cost to be put at 10 IPCs.
This would slightly increase the attack ratio of TcB compared to Destroyer.
But, contrary to OOB, now Destroyer are much more cost effective against planes.
Finally, keeping Subs and DDs at 8 IPCs is also problematic.
It takes 25% more IPCs to feed SZ in basic Naval units.
This will not help increase Naval interactions.
It can be suggested : DD C7 Subs C8 IPCs or DD C6 Subs C7, but need a few more AACalc comparison to find which is better.
Good work Baron. How skewed would it be if subs cost 7 and the DDs 6, everything else remain the same ? It would make the DD the fodder choice over sub which is the main issue correct ?
I did some minor battle testing. Various combinations of SS DD Trprt Ftr on Attack Defense. The SFR SS had a slightly higher survivability than OOB. When I ran the battles it was definitely noticeable that SFR subs survived more due to being able to submerge if surviving a depth charging.
Maybe that’s enough to try them at 7 ?
I’ll post your battle request in a few minutes
Good work Baron. How skewed would it be if subs cost 7 and the DDs 6, everything else remain the same ? It would make the DD the fodder choice over sub which is the main issue correct ?
Can you run this simulation, and swap units to get both situations:
7 DDs A1 D2 C6 against 6 Subs A2 D1 C7?
7 DD vs 6 SS 76-77% DD wins
For 6 Subs A2 first strike C7 vs 7 DD D2 C6,
Overall %*: A. survives: 51.3% D. survives: 48.7% No one survives: 0%
So it is pretty much 50%-50%.
This seems to make Destroyer too powerful.
8 DDs A1 D2 C7 against 7 Subs A2 D1 C8?
8 DD vs 7 SS ** 74-77% DD win**
For 7 Subs A2 first strike C8 vs 8 DD D2 C7,
Overall %*: A. survives: 54.4% D. survives: 45.7% No one survives: 0%
Slightly better for Sub on offence.
