Submarine FAQ Question



  • I was about to make a topic about this statement in the FAQ until I went back and read the rulebook:

    Q.  If a (power) with which I’m not at war moves an unescorted transport through a sea zone where I have a submarine, can I attack it?
    A.  No.  However, if that power is making a combat movement that will result in war with you, you are already considered to be at war and may attack it.

    From my understanding, this is a change from AA50, where the attacker could always ignore subs and the defending subs have no choice (thus preventing sub stalling).  But now, unescorted transports can be hit on a one-to-one basis by defending subs on a roll of 2 (which is their attack value while they would normally be defending …whew).  I guess I should be faulted for not reading the entire rulebook (I only read the parts that seemed new and were highlighted on here).

    Are there any other significant changes from AA50 (that are not obvious, like war declaration) that should be highlighted here?  I know about carriers now taking 2 hits, and battleships and carriers require repair now (which is at the end of the turn, right?)



  • you can’t attack on someone else’s turn…



  • There is a paragraph on this in the rulebook, that “defending” subs (not the current player’s turn) can “attack” (1 round of dice rolling) the current player’s UNESCORTED transports with a roll of 2 (which is their ATTACK value, which adds to the confusion).  For every hit, 1 transport is removed, then the current player can continue with their move.  AND, this is during both COMBAT and NONCOMBAT (when fighting does not take place) movement…Holy crap, who added this rule.  What happened to KISS?



  • The FAQ is errata, therefore it is correct.  The rulebook has many, many holes in it.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Where is it in the rules?



  • Under the Submarine section at the end of the rules with the Units description.

    I understand that the FAQ and rulebook (when not adjusted by errata) are correct, but I’d like to have a page that highlights changes for veterans, since I would never have seen this rule without seeing the FAQ post on it.  Such as tanks cost 6 now, which I’ll have to get my head around.  And AA guns are only for “regular” combat, while factories have their own AA for ONLY strategic bombing.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    “Does not block enemy movement”

    Col. Flagg is 100% correct. I never noticed this rule addition. Can anyone else speak to this? Did we all miss it? That’s another big addition to mighty submarine rules.



  • I’m assuming someone didn’t miss it, and that’s why it is in the FAQ.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Well, I missed it. And that makes me blind. 8-)  😉



  • I guess another question is, what does “unescorted” mean?  Can a surface warship come from a sea zone that the transport did not originate from to enter the “sub defended” territory and thus escort the transport?  Also, what does “through” mean?  Does the sub only attack if the transport enters and leaves the “sub defended” sea zone, or is it when it enters (which would seem to mean that the escort must start with the transport)?

    EDIT: OK, the rulebook says “the sub can attack any transport that moves INTO or THROUGH its sea zone unaccompanied by surface warships.”  So it’s when the transport enters.  But the question still stands, does the escort have to start with the transport in the same sea zone?



  • Yeah, we had that rule come up a few games ago but really the ‘unescorted’ thing is pretty ambiguous. In the end, we ruled that as long as a surface warship was in the same zone at the same time as the TR, then it could pass through without issue. Dunno if this rule was worth the extra complexity…


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Seems to add even more fuel to the fire that DD are a way better buy than CC. Can we make DD 9 yet? Or do we go with CC at 11.



  • @Col.:

    I guess another question is, what does “unescorted” mean?  Can a surface warship come from a sea zone that the transport did not originate from to enter the “sub defended” territory and thus escort the transport?  Also, what does “through” mean?  Does the sub only attack if the transport enters and leaves the “sub defended” sea zone, or is it when it enters (which would seem to mean that the escort must start with the transport)?

    EDIT: OK, the rulebook says “the sub can attack any transport that moves INTO or THROUGH its sea zone unaccompanied by surface warships.”  So it’s when the transport enters.  But the question still stands, does the escort have to start with the transport in the same sea zone?

    in terms of common sense, no they shouldn’t have to “start” together.  I can move 2 fleets from 2 different sz’s into a sz with an enemy fleet and 1 big battle takes place.  but this is AA, so who knows what the “official” rule will be.  I will never understand why a mech inf needs a tank to blitz.  Blitzing takes place through an EMPTY square.  It’s BS.



  • If I’m reading this correctly, one can “sneak attack” with a sub (against an undefended transport) during someone else’s combat or noncombat movement turn, subsequently affording the attack value of “2”. However, if you are not in a state of war with the Transport’s faction, you may not perform this attack, because you cannot perform an action that results in a state of war, except on your turn (as per the errata).

    Additionally, the book’s description of this transport engagement states that surviving transports may then continue along their path for their remaining movement points. This leads me to believe that the sub sneak attack is only valid for one round, else all transports should just be removed immediately.


  • Sponsor 2017 TripleA '11 '10

    Yes, the rules say each sub fires once at a 2.



  • My guess is that in order to be protected, they have to come from the same sea zone.

    They can be attacked, if they move into the sea zone unaccompanied. If the surface warships come from a different sea zone, it’s a separate move that results in the transports becoming accompanied after both of the moves. Since the move itself was unaccompanied, and it’s the move that grants the option for the subs to attack, the move made by the transports would have to include the surface warships, for the transports to be protected from the attack.

    But, I could see it being FAQed the other way, as well.



  • Holy Crap! We never saw this one either! I’m gonna have to run off and grab the rules… 😮



  • again, it is in the rulebook which is a misprinted pile of garbage as we have learned.  the errata has changed the way this plays.



  • @MaherC:

    again, it is in the rulebook which is a misprinted pile of garbage as we have learned.  the errata has changed the way this plays.

    The errata clarifies that you can’t attack the unaccompanied transports of powers you are not at war with. It still allows subs to attack the unaccompanied transports of powers you are at war with.



  • @moompix:

    @MaherC:

    again, it is in the rulebook which is a misprinted pile of garbage as we have learned.  the errata has changed the way this plays.

    The errata clarifies that you can’t attack the unaccompanied transports of powers you are not at war with. It still allows subs to attack the unaccompanied transports of powers you are at war with.

    No that’s not the question at hand. Let me give you an example.
    I have a Transport in SZ4 and a Battleship in SZ7. The enemy has a Sub in SZ8. The question is could you have the Transport and Battleship meet up in SZ8 then continue their move to SZ1, since the Battleship and Transport met up on that spot and therefore the Transport will be escorted, or since the Transport and Battleship STARTED in seperate SZ’s would the Sub get the surprise attack on the way to SZ1?



  • We need an A&AP40 rules hotline set up ASAP.

    I figure at least 25-30 operators on duty around the clock.



  • I suppose the original question was what major changes from AA50 have occurred, but it evolved into clarifying this strange rule that breaks at least two fundamentals: combat during the non-combat phase (which is why I thought they changed the AA rules a long time ago for flying over an AA gun) and using the sub’s attack value when it is not that player’s turn.



  • I caught this rule. Mainly because my son house ruled something similar into AA50. He wanted a sub (or better yet a fleet of subs) to always have the option of sneak attack on any surface ship crossing over w/o a DD. He was happy to see at least you can now sneak attack lone transports. He feels he was on the right track.

    Any way with the new rule, I took it as if you merge war ships and transports from different sz into a sz w/enemy sub your transports would be considered escorted. Even if the sz the sub is in is the final destination for amp assault. These movements are simultaneous, once your ships are in the same sz they are considered one fleet.

    I don’t have the rule with me. I don’t remember if this rule only applies to enemy combat, or if its allowed in enemy non combat too.



  • It’s allowed in enemy non-combat, as well.



  • @WILD:

    Any way with the new rule, I took it as if you merge war ships and transports from different sz into a sz w/enemy sub your transports would be considered escorted. Even if the sz the sub is in is the final destination for amp assault. These movements are simultaneous, once your ships are in the same sz they are considered one fleet.

    I agree


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

47
Online

13.7k
Users

34.0k
Topics

1.3m
Posts