Destroyer Rules question…

@bigfatal

Yes and no. The UK has a lot of earning potential, but a lot of it is vulnerable to attack or capture, making UK very “swingy”. If things are go well for the allies, UK will be pretty wealthy, if it goes badly UK can end up being very cash strapped indeed. Playing with national objectives (which is the way I prefer to play) will amplify this even further as the UK is the easiest ally for the Axis to prevent earning any bonuses.

Meanwhile the US has a huge does of IPCs that are rarely touched by the axis, even when things go badly for the allies, and is also the only nation with 20 ipcs of objective bonuses available, so the US is still very much the big spender of the game.

As to what’s in it for the US in the pacific: Its less about increasing US earnings and more about limiting Japan’s. Left unchallenged Japan can reach stratospheric income, bringing the UK economy to its knees as they drive to Moscow.

There are also two pacific based objectives for the US, so that adds 10 potential ipcs of direct incentive, plus the chance to pick up one more for the UK and prevent Japan from earning any, which stacks up to enough money to justify a US fleet investment.

I find allied players that are good with a slow push play style do well fighting it out in the pacific, but those that are better at a quick kill/knockout blow style will have more success trying to kill Germany before Japan gets too big. I also find a pacific allied strat is more likely to work in the 1942 set up than it does in 1941. (Part of the reason I like that set up better)

Without objectives it may be better for the allies to just fight a delaying action in the pacific and focus on Germany, but I have not played that way enough to say for sure.

@Panther

Thanks for the clarification and quick response!

yes but then you’ll get a chance to shoot down his bombers with something that rolls def at at least 2.  unless you have some bomber on bomber action going on…

now now, lets not make fun of virgins.  i’m playing joe cold, i think i’m doing alright, but its just about to be rnd 3, and this is where the allies usually get it together.  we’ll see.

I’ve seen a search roll used, maybe in aarhe, or somewhere, where you would roll to see if you could find the enemy ships, whether subs or surface within the zone because it’s so vast, and if found, then you could shoot.  you could increase it for each sub/destroyer perhaps.

Thats what we have and have always used namely the 1:1 ratio for determining how many subs are negated and also the number of rolls for search

@Krieghund:

@P@nther:

@Krieghund:

Since Jet Fighters increases fighters’ attack values to equal their defense values in normal combat, I’d say it would do the same in SBRs, allowing attacking fighters to roll on a 2. However, Larry will need to confirm that.

But this is still not confirmed by Larry as I think. Or is it?

Yes, it’s just been confirmed.  It will be in the next version of the FAQ (soon, I hope).

Great, thank you :-)

Keep in mind however, subs alone always reserve the right to submerge before even the Attacker rolls his dice. so essentially, without a destroyer, you can NEVER attack subs unless your opponent allows you.

Thank you for the answer, Kreighund

While I think the SUBs are much improved over Revised OOTB, I feel they are still to vulnerable and not very cost effective.

Do you know if Sub Detection rules or Convoy Raid type rules were ever considered, either during the development or playtesting phase.  I suppose they may have been considered too complex by either WOTC or Mr. Harris, but I do feel this is the one thing that the game is really missing.