Alternative to OOB aircrafts, destroyers and submarine warfare in G40 and 1942

  • '17 '16

    Hi everyone,
    since the creation of A&A, the submarines rules receives a lot of modifications.
    The actual OOB rules on Sub warfare includes mostly 3 units: Sub, destroyers and planes.

    The Subs have 6 caracteristics:
    1-Stealth movement,
    2- First Strike,
    3- Submersible
    4-cannot hit aircraft.

    A fifth one is derived from aircraft limitation: cannot be hit by aircraft.
    A sixth one is an offspring of the no control of SZ for Subs: prevent unescorted transports from offloading for an amphibious assault.

    Aircraft: cannot hit subs unless there is a friendly Destroyers which is taking part of the combat.

    Destroyer have an Anti-Sub Vessel (ASV) role which negates Subs capacities:
    mainly First Strike and Submerge.

    In addition, a Destroyer allows all friendly planes to hit submarines during combat.
    And also block Submarine stealth movement and force him to battle with DD in a given SZ.

    For reference, here is the OOB Submarine rule in different A&A version:

    1st Ed. 1984: A2D2M2C8, attacking Subs get Surprise Strike, cannot submerge but can withdraw in another SZ, cannot hit air.
    2nd Ed. 1986: A2D2M2C8, attacking Subs get Surprise Strike, cannot submerge but can withdraw in another SZ, cannot hit air.
    3rd Ed. 1997: A2D2M2C8, attacking Subs get Surprise Strike, withdraw in another SZ, defending Sub can submerge in SZ at the end of the round, cannot hit air.

    Iron Blitz Edition by Hasbro and Microprose 1999, A&A 3rd Ed.:
    Sub: A2D2M2C8, Surprise Strike on attack only, can submerge in SZ at the end of the round, cannot hit air.
    Destroyer: A2D2M2C8 can retaliate even when hit by subs surprise strike and cancel Subs submerge.

    Pacific 2001 and Europe Edition 1999:
    Sub: A2D2M2C8, Surprise Strike on attack only, can submerge at the end of the round, cannot hit air, cannot be hit by air.
    Destroyer: A3D3M2C12, cancel Surprise Strike and allows planes to hit subs.

    Revised Edition 2004:
    Sub: A2D2M2C8, First Strike (attacker and defender), can submerge at the end of the round, cannot hit air.
    Destroyer: A3D3M2C12, cancel First Strike and Submerge.

    Anniversary Edition, AA50, 2008:
    Submarine: A2D1M2C6, First Strike, Submersible: can submerge in First Strike phase before regular cmbt, cannot hit air, cannot be hit by air.
    Destroyer: A2D2M2C8, cancel First Strike & Submerge and allows all planes to hit subs.

    1942.1 (2009) : Same as AA50.
    Pacific 1940 (2009) and Europe 1940 (2010).: same as AA50.

    1942.2 (2012) : Same as AA50.
    Plus: prevent unescorted transports from offloading for an amphibious assault.

    Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940 2nd Ed. (2012): same as 1942.2.

    There is also an evolution of how to treat a Sea-Zone when a sub is present. But, it is also a complex matter, that I left for now.

    What I would like to develop is a different relation between aircrafts and submarines; so planes could be able to hit submarines without any destroyer unit.

    It will better depict the impact of aircrafts in WWII on Submarine warfare and I hope will create some new tactical situations for naval combat.

    I would like also to get rid of the aberration which is created when, paired to others, 1 destroyer unit can give a specific ability to an infinite number of units.
    In this specific case:
    1 Destroyer gives to an infinite number of planes the ability to hit subs,
    1 Destroyer is able to negate the First Strike and Submerge of an infinite number of subs.
    For instance, this creates the kind of aberration where 1 DD and a large air fleet can destroy numerous subs and the attacker can only loose 1 single DD unit.
    Here someone which said it better than me:


    So you’ll have to match my sub purchases with dd purchases?  And I defend at a 1, whilst you are just trying to detect me?  I don’t know how well that would work… seems to hard to kill the subs.

    Well Gar, it is harder to kill subs as we found out in our last 1939 game. That is the whole point. We want to make the subs a more effective unit. In the 1940G OOB rules you can have a German wolf pack of six subs and an allied power can send one destroyer and half a dozen planes and just about wipe out all the subs in one combat round. That is just ludicrous!

    My new Sub warfare rule will be on my next post.

    Here is, as a reference and source, a description of historical warships used in WWII:


    The rise of air power during World War II dramatically changed the nature of naval combat. Even the fastest cruisers could not outrun an airplane, which were increasingly able to attack at longer distances over the ocean. This change led to the end of independent operations by single ships or very small task groups, and for the second half of the 20th century naval operations were based around very large fleets able to fend off all but the largest air attacks. This has led most navies to change to fleets designed around ships dedicated to a single role, anti-submarine or anti-aircraft typically, and the large “generalist” ship has disappeared from most forces.

    The Naval Units in WWII

    The new cruiser unit represents an antiaircraft cruiser able to lay a deadly fire on incoming enemy planes.  She had a weight of about 6000 tons, with a main armament of about 16 dual-purpose guns (both air and surface attack) around 5 inches. The cruisers could steam at around 35 knots. More cruisers were built by the major naval powers than any other naval unit, for not only could she support the battle fleet (fast carriers), but she were less expensive to construct.

    A typical destroyer weighted about 3000 tons, with about 6 guns around 5 inches and torpedoes tubes. She was the fastest ship in the fleet, up to 40 knots. Her weak point is the range. Whereas a battleship or a cruiser can sail 10 000 miles upward, the destroyer can hardly put more than 1000 or 2000 miles, a couple of days of sailing. She required support ships, such as fleet tankers or bigger ships (carriers, battleships) that gave away part of their fuel to the guzzling destroyers. Hence the destroyers of WWII were not suitable for independent long-rang operations (…).

    A typical submarine in World War II was a boat of 1500 tons displacement and was armed with one 3 inches gun and 10 21-inches torpedo tubes. She ran at a speed of up to 17 knots while surfaced and at a speed of up to 8 knots while submerged. The Germans later developed the high-speed submarine in the Types XXI and XXIII. The former had a 16-kt submerged speed, under water control and advanced torpedoes (the Zaunk’nig acoustic torpedo, tuned to home in on the enemy’s fast running propellers). (…)

    Between 1939 and 1945, a battleships weighted from 30 000 tons to 70 000 tons. She carried about 10 guns from 11 inches (German Scharnhorst) up to 18 inches (Japanese Yamato). She ran at a speed of around 20 knots. Until World War II, speed was not a major requirement for battleships. The other ships had to adapt to the battleship, not the other way round. The rise of the aircraft carriers changed all that.

    Although the battleships themselves do not launch torpedoes, they must protect themselves from them. For that reason, a second hull was built around the first to make the torpedo explode before reaching the vital parts of the ships (reflected by battleships special ability of Two Hits to Destroy).

    The fleet carriers were speedy ships (around 30 knots) and weighted from 20 000 to 30 000 tons, carried 50 to 100 planes on board. The largest aircraft carrier of the war was the Japanese Shinano with no less than 70 000 tons. Shinano was a slow carrier since she was build on the Yamato class (battleship) hull to be used for repair and resupply ship to front-line carriers.


    Submarines should never be cannon fodder. In fact, Submarines should only participate in one round of combat and not engage in multi-surface combat actions. Their was never any major naval actions where submarines were used in a major role in such combat. They are basically sinkers of commerce ships. They participated as advance screening for fleet movements to locate and possibly sink a few ships that were passing through the area, but a sub travels at 7 knots underwater and a cruiser is at 34 knots and a battleship is 25-32 knots. That’s why the other chap in an earlier thread bought those destroyers and stopped buying battleships. (…)

  • '17 '16

    Some historical reasons about StB capacity to make ASW:

    The Liberators made a great contribution to Allied victory in the Battle of the Atlantic against German U-boats. The decision to allocate some Liberator Is to Coastal Command in 1941 to patrol the eastern Atlantic Ocean produced immediate results. The Very Long Range (VLR) Liberators “almost doubled the reach of Britain’s maritime reconnaissance force”.[24] This extended range enabled Coastal Command patrols to cover part of the mid-Atlantic gap, where U-boats had operated without risking being attacked and sunk by Allied aircraft.[25]

    For 12 months, No. 120 Squadron RAF of Coastal Command with its handful of much-patched and modified early model Liberators, supplied the only air cover for convoys in the Atlantic Gap, the Liberator being the only warplane with sufficient range. The VLR Liberators sacrificed some armor and often gun turrets in order to save weight, while carrying extra aviation gasoline in their bomb-bay tanks. Liberator Is were equipped with ASV (Air to Surface Vessel) Mark II radar, which together with the Leigh light gave them the ability to hunt U-boats by day and by night.

    These Liberators operated from both sides of the Atlantic with the Royal Canadian Air Force and the U.S. Navy from the west; and with the RAF from the east, based in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Iceland, and beginning in mid-1943 from the Azores. This role was dangerous, especially after many U-boats were armed with extra anti-aircraft guns, some adopting the policy of staying on the surface to fight, rather than submerging and risking being sunk by ASW (anti-submarine warfare) torpedoes and depth charges from the bombers. In addition to flying from the East Coast of the United States, American Liberators flew from Greenland, the Azores, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Trinidad, and from wherever else they could fly far out over the Atlantic.

    The rather sudden and decisive turning of the Battle of the Atlantic in favor of the Allies in May 1943 was the result of many factors. However, it was no accident that it coincided with the long delayed arrival of many more VLR Liberators for maritime patrols. Liberators were credited in full or in part with 72 U-boat sinkings.

    Behold the Power of Yavid

    Keep all OOB, except no need of DD for planes.

    Aircraft can hit submarines under this limitation:

    Planes cannot hit any subs if their is any other eligible combat unit casualty.
    Said otherwise, Subs are chosen last by planes, then transports, as a non-combat unit, are chosen last

    Destroyer still cancel Submerge and First Strike, and block sub movement.

    For those which see the issue about Destroyers this way:


    I think that destroyers are overpowered since one destroyer can negate an unlimited number of submarine special abilities as well as allow an unlimited number of planes to attack all the submarines in a single sea zone.
    Perhaps each destroyer should be limited to negating ONE submarine’s special abilities as well as allow planes to attack ONE submarine.

    This would force the player to buy more destroyers in response to the enemy buying a bunch of subs.
    I have no idea how this would play out in an actual game, so who knows if its a good idea or not.

    But under this limitation to Destroyer capabilities:
    OPTION 1: each Destroyer cancel Submerge and First Strike of up to 2 Submarines. 2*X DDs= number of subs.
    So 2 DDs cancels 4 Subs, 3 DDs cancel 6 Subs, etc.

    Destroyer class naval unit can “screen” out one warship at a 1:1 basis. So, basically any 1 DD unit can screen from Subs another unit and itself. Hence, 1 DD unit can block 2 Subs units.

    Almost same idea from Wild Bill here but DD still needed for planes:

    OPTION 2: each Destroyer cancel Submerge and First Strike of 1 submarine + 1 additional unit (for the whole group of DDs) . X DDs +1= number of subs.
    So 2 DDs cancels 3 Subs, 3 DDs cancel 4 Subs, 4 DDs cancel 5 Subs, etc.

    Results for Subs in excess:
    All other extra subs can pick casualties amongst any units and this unit cannot retaliate, as OOB for First Strike.

    Version A + OPTION 3 (and can be in addition to option 1): Wolf-pack effect on transport.
    When a sub-only force of at least 3 Subs attack an enemy fleet, if any Sub can get a hit, then take also 1 Transport unit (if any is present) as casualty, this is in addition to any other naval casualties. (A sub-only force can take at most 1 transport casualty per round.)

    What do you think of Version A, by itself? (in which Subs will be less potent than OOB (because in many usual OOB situations planes would have kill them but can’t without DD, now subs will be picked as casualty.)
    Or version A with either Option 1 or 2? (in which some Subs can sometimes be able to get a Surprise Strike against DDs and warships.)

    Version A + OPTION 4:
    Destroyer cancel Sub Submerge for the first round only.
    Subs have to endure at least 1 round of combat if a DD is present, but not multiple rounds.
    This option 4 imply that any attacking air unit with DD against a sub-only force get only 1 round to target and destroy subs units in a SZ before they submerge (if subs chose to).

    It is a way to fix this issue brought here:


    It’d also be nice to see if subs could retreat if they survive an initial attack by a destroyer, their 1 defense is pitiful and they need some method of escape.

    I whole-heartedly agree with this. I’ve never liked the idea that subs can NOT submerge with an enemy destroyer present. I’m fine with destroyers preventing the surprise strike and letting aircraft hit subs, but keeping them from submerging is a load of crap. Submarines could escape destroyers. It may have been harder to do, but it was possible. It’s not right that the presence of an enemy destroyer suddenly “traps” all your subs into taking whatever pounding can be delivered by other warships and air force with no chance of escape.

    Here is a question based on OOB Revised Sub rule about how planes vs subs work:

    Here is some critics against OOB Subs rules which originated from AA50:

    Another HR thread on expanding subs capacity within AA50 OOB rules:

    On Subs vs carriers and planes within AA50 OOB rules:

    Questions on the difference between OOB rules on Sub movement (Krieghund answers):

    Here is a discussion on 1 to 1 ratio of DD blocking Subs units.

    OOB Sub Rule explanation for AA50:

    Questions and Sub HR for AA50
    On Destroyer blocking capabilities:

    A general discussion on the weakness of warships (and mainly Subs) vs planes:

    HR based on OOB Sub Rule for AARe:

    Questions about the no planes vs Subs OOB rules in Spring 1942:

    Clarification questions on Subs in Spring 1942 compared to Classic:

    Questions about OOB Sub rule for AAEurope:

    Questions about OOB Sub rule for Global 40:

    A HR thread on Sub only fleet (based on G40 OOB):

    Question about G40 OOB Sub submerge individually or as a group:

    House Rule thread on Convoy Raiding more like SBR:

    House Rule on Subs in which Subs and Battleship cannot hit Subs:

  • '17 '16

    I’m actually trying to get references for specifics, or mainly based, threads on Submarines.

    If you find some interesting posts which discuss or criticize  all the various aspects about Subs, and planes, carriers and destroyers capabilities or interaction, I will be very pleased if you can give me an input via a quote or link.

    Just put in a reply, please.

    and Thanks for your help.

  • '17 '16

    I was pretty sure someone got similar ideas, and I finally found one post:



    It’d also be nice to see if subs could retreat if they survive an initial attack by a destroyer, their 1 defense is pitiful and they need some method of escape.

    I whole-heartedly agree with this.  I’ve never liked the idea that subs can NOT submerge with an enemy destroyer present.  I’m fine with destroyers preventing the surprise strike and letting aircraft hit subs, but keeping them from submerging is a load of crap.  Submarines could escape destroyers.  It may have been harder to do, but it was possible.  It’s not right that the presence of an enemy destroyer suddenly “traps” all your subs into taking whatever pounding can be delivered by other warships and air force with no chance of escape.

    2 solutions:

    1. “Dark Ship - Quiet Ship Run Silent Run Deep”
      Defending Subs choose to either Hit or Submerge on a 1,  and May Submerge on 2-3


    1. “Wolf Pack Tactics”
      when more than 2 defending subs are in the same territory – Each Destroyer may only nullify/spot 2 subs.

    (Might even make it 1 to 1.)


    I agree. I don’t think defending subs should be allowed to retreat, but they should be able to submerge. If you think about it, that’s the tactic they employed when they encountered a destroyer. I like the 1-1 match up. Should (defending subs) not matched up be allowed to submerge before first round of combat? I think so.

  • '17 '16

    Here is an House Rule about ASW, I add it because it is at the opposite of what I’m looking for, but it is a complementary approach to Subs issue:

    I like Anti sub warfare or ASW.
    Only destroyers and cruisers can attack subs but must make a detection roll to locate or pin the sub first.
    Each attacking ship gets 1 die roll. 1-3 sub is detected. 4-6 sub has eluded attackers.
    You only need one ship to get a 1-3 and all ships can attack sub.
    Planes can also attack subs if accompanied by destroyers.

    This rule really helps to simulate the stealth abilities of a submarine.
    Also subs get to target ships, not such a far stretch.
    The only condition is if a destroyer is present, and the sub gets a hit, the destroyer has to be taken before a battleship, carrier, or cruiser.
    That is ASW

  • '17 '16

    Here is a compelling House Rule on Subs:

    A couple of house rules that my group uses:
    Defending Subs are allowed to submerge after first round of combat even with enemy destroyer(s) present.
    Basically, the attacker gets to roll with whatever he/she is attacking with, including aircraft of course.
    If they score hits on the subs, then tough luck.
    If they miss some/all of the subs, then the subs can submerge and escape the battle.

    I get the idea of destroyers cancelling the first strike capabilities of subs and spotting them for aircraft attack, but I have never liked the idea that a sub is “trapped” and can’t submerge just because an enemy destroyer is present.

    In reality, subs COULD still evade destroyers, it was just a little harder.  Plus, I don’t like the idea of a single destroyer showing up with 10 fighters to wipe out a stack of subs.  That just doesn’t seem right to me.

  • '17 '16

    Here is the thread which discuss this issue about Sub vs DD ratio based on OOB AA50 rules:


    I never liked the implementation of destroyers in A&A.  Basically all one player has to do to innoculate themselves against sub attacks is build a single destroyer per fleet.

    So US and UK each build a single 8 IPC unit (or maybe two) and it completely removes the unit from play for the germans.

    Huh?  Why should 16 IPCs completely invalidate a unit’s usefulness?

    I always enjoyed the house rule of the destroyer’s ability to cancel sub’s specials being a 1-to-1 ratio. I.E. a single destroyer cannot stop a vastly larger number of subs.  Are the ASW capabilities of the destroyer endless?  no matter how many fleets of submarines, this one fleet of destroyers can stop all of them from getting a sneak attack?  It seems bad from a gameplay and realism perspective.  Instead, for every destroyer present, one sub loses it’s opening fire/submerge/submersible abilities.  So if you attack a fleet with 3 subs and they only have one destroyer, two subs still get opening fire.

    This makes much more sense in terms of gameplay and actually allows for utilizing a sub strategy as germany.  Anybody have any reason this shouldn’t be the case?


    Heck. Even a 1-to-2 ratio or 1-to-3 ratio would make subs more attractive.

    The only reason is that even without surprise attacks subs for let’s say 24 ipcs (4 subs) beat 24 ipcs of destroyers (3 destroyers) on both offense and defense on average.

    If the ratio were 1-to-1 maybe the pieces should cost the same?


    As others have said before probably, Destroyers counter subs on a 1 to 1 basis and allow undetected subs to choose transports as targets. This was there goal anyway.


    Here’s a house rule that we used to use back in the the day:

    attack 2
    defend 2
    defend 1 against air units when no surface units present
    special attack: commerce raid against coastal ics similar to strategic bombing raids

    The alternative is that you can do the same attack against freighters but with no actual loss of the freighter and the destroyer acting as an anti-sub similar to an AA gun.

    Historically Subs did fend off air attack but usually losing.


    I think subs are underestimated…
    I like them a lot more than the Cruiser for instance. The extra cost of 6 IPC’s doesn’t make up for the shore bombardment and extra punch.
    Now, let’s take a look at their advantages:
    -subs are CHEAP! 6 IPC’s for a naval hit is dirt cheap!
    -subs are invulnerable to lone enemy aircraft => this allows them to swim around Europe/Pacific avoiding those German/Japanese ftrs.
    -subs can’t attack airplanes, and apart from DD’s, other sea units are more expensive than airplanes. As a result, if a fleet has got only 1 DD, it won’t stand a sub attack, because the expensive carriers, cruisers, and battleships will be the first to get hit. This is often underestimated!
    -subs have a greater mobility than other fleet units because they can’t be attacked without an enemy DD.

    -1 defense is little, even for 6 IPC’s. Don’t count on subs to stand tall against an organized attack.
    -subs can’t hit air, but air with DD can hit subs
    -subs don’t like a lot of DD’s (a single DD is seldom a problem)

    To summarize: I like subs a lot the way they are implemented now. And I think Germany building a sole sub fleet is a viable strategy. If you just don’t let the British navy too close, the subs+air will keep the baltic.

  • '17 '16

    A rationalization about the Planes need DDs to hit Subs:




    what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

    I am not sure where you reading this from but I check the rules again for AA50 under submarine page 16 of 16, and the only thing it mentions in reference to defending submarines is that -if there is a attacking destroyer present they have to roll a defense roll and cannot use the submerge option instead. If there is no attacking destroyer then they can submerge instead of defending.
    This is from the rule book: “If there is at least one attacking destroyer on the battle board, defending submarines will participate in combat during the defending units fire step of the General Combat sequence. Otherwise, each defending submarine may submerge or fire. Remove each submerging submarine from the battle board and place it on the gameboard in the contested sea zone. Roll one die for each remaining defending submarine.”
    So I interpelate this as been subs can stay in a battle if they want, but they must stay if there is an enemy destroyer attacking. If you attack a sub without a destroyer then your ships must withstand a free sneak attack and remove any casulties before they get to fire. If they miss then the sub can now sneak attack again or submerge. Also remember planes canoot attack subs without a destroy to help and subs cannot attack planes so they hit only boats.

    If you attack my fleet with your air and you do not have a destroyer then my subs cannot soak any hits from your planes, my capital ships have to take it in the shorts. I disagree with this because if I order my subs to stay engaged on the surface and not submerge then they should be eligible for casualties from the planes.

    I hear what your saying.

    In real life subs did have an anti-aircraft gun mounted on its deck for this very reason to protect against planes, but they were only of limited effect.

    This is probably why the A&A designers decided to allow subs to be hit from planes only if a friendly destroyer is present and to not allow subs to hit planes. Because a sub would normally submerge away from planes and planes could fly out of subs range easily. Think about it this way: if you were a fighter pilot engaging a fleet you would target the more visible and valuable surface warships anyway.

    I know it is supposed to be the defenders choice to remove casualties, but it does clearly state subs cannot hit planes in the rules. Planes are an expensive piece and subs are not, so I suppose they are trying to “equalize” the pieces being removed. Therefore your fleet should always be comprised of lesser value destroyer pieces to protect the capital pieces from planes and subs, because A&A have eliminated “canon fodder” naval pieces by not being allowed to select a transport as a hit anymore.

    I believe this is why they added cruisers and made destroyers cheaper to buy.
    They are the battleship and aircraft carrier protectors.

    Even in the original game rules subs could not attack planes, but planes could attack subs without a destroyer (they did not have them in the game yet), so a sub sitting alone in a sea zone was almost toast if a plane could reach it, it had to wait to see if the plane missed then it could submerge. Now a sub can submerge right away before being hit by any piece if there is not a destroyer present. I guess you have to take the good with the bad.

    I also think changing the rules so that subs and transport do not control the sea-zone has changed the way everyone plays, because that was an old trick and it used to bug me how that could be use to slow down your fleet at every turn. 😄


    panzer: my point was that I cannot take hits from air to my subs unless you bring a destroyer so if you attack my fleet without a destroyer it is actually to your advantage because all your hits must be taken on my air force and capitol ships rather than taking them on my subs. I know that my subs get a “deadly” first shot (@1) without your DD but I hardly find that equitable, you sink my fleet (except subs) then move your DD over in non combat to neutralize them on my turn. I feel that as the controlling nation I should get to decide if they submerge. I am with Octo on this, I play the rules as stated and avoid house rules (except perhaps bids).

    Perhaps I have not played enough games to see the air/sub balance.


    After playing several more games with these new sub rules, I find it actually a lot harder to kill subs now as you have to chase them around with your destroyers.

    You now have to have at least one destroyer to attack a sub because your other surface ships suffer a first strike or the sub submerges and gets away. Also planes cannot attack it either without that destroyer.

    So what happens is you either have to move just one destroyer with some planes to attack the sub and then the destroyer is left alone for counter strike, or you have to commit to moving your fleet to protect the destroyer. It plays out a lot more in the Pacific then the Atlantic.

    My new trick is to have my subs (specially as Japan or USA) moving all over by themselves to create havoc. It really does work. I always consider submerging first if allowed just to be a pain in the butt and frustrate the opposition.

    If Germany started with a few more U-boats in the Atlantic 8-), it would be a lot more like the real history when they were very effective at stoping Allied transports and supplies.

    A premonition from Wild Bill about a future OOB rule incorporated in Second Edition of 1942 and G40, which worth a quote:

    I do see why they didn’t want to complicate the sub rules w/exceptions and what not, sub rules are tough enough. It would have been easy to add transports must be escorted with surface war ships through enemy sub infested waters or they are lost however. This would have pacified some of us.

  • '17 '16

    Another capacity which can be added as an HR to Submarines in the 1942.2 Edition:

    In some WWII games you have “off map boxes”, so simulate the economic warefare. But I think that it might be somewhat difficult to actually simulate the economic ware fare in A&A. A&A is a simple and fast played war game. Not a hard core game like WiF. But that’s the soul of A&A. It is the simplicity that make it so fun!

    However, in the optional tournament rules for A&A revised, you actually have one German economic warfare sub-rule. I have never played with it, but perhaps you like it?

    1. U-Boat Interdiction
    During the collect income phase of the U.K. and U.S. turns, subtract 1 IPC from the collecting power’s income for each of your submarines on the game board.

  • '17 '16

    I finally found a different HR intended to fix Subs vs planes:

    IMO, subs are too weak if they can’t be used as defending fodder (I know some other user agree as I read posts complaining about this).  To illustrate, suppose USA approaches Japan with an invasion force and Japan strikes first:

    Japan (attacker):
    8 ftr
    2 bmb

    USA (defender):
    2 CV
    4 ftr
    8 sub
    2 dd
    4 trn

    The rules are fairly clear that in this battle the USA can’t choose to take subs as losses, which means Japan has a ~90% chance of victory (killing everything except for the subs).  I’m contemplating a house rule that states:

    Defending subs can be hit by any air/sea units regardless of whether or not an attacking DD is present.  However, if no enemy DD is present, the subs may submerge before any rolling.  If subs attack and no defending DD is present, then defending air units can’t hit subs (even when they’re on the surface).

    (I believe that the last two sentences are how it already works, but I included them with the house rule for clarity)

    This way subs’ current capabilities are preserved, but they can now be used as defending fodder. Does that seem reasonable to the more experienced players here or does it throw off the game mechanics? (I’ve only played AA50 a couple times)

    And there is also this thread about how to limit the DDs vs Subs ratio (same problem):

Suggested Topics

  • 1822
  • 6
  • 7
  • 13
  • 1
  • 5
  • 1
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys