Simplifying units interactions of Transports, Submarines, Destroyers & planes

toblerone77

Since the cheapest unit always will be fodder, why not just change the cost ?

Destroyer cost 8, A2 D2
Submarin cost 9, A2 D2 and submerge
Tranny cost 10, D1

I have advocated my HR of each ship costing 8 IPCs (toblerone77’s “8-8-8” house rule) but each having balancing stats and abilities. With those same stats and all other rules remaining OOB. This resolves the “fodder” problem. Transport are also no longer called transports but “Naval Support Vessels”

Also I have some serious disagreement the argument against the fodder argument, because ultimately to eliminate fodder and really get at the strategic level you would really only use an air, naval and ground unit, but the you basically have Risk!

baron Münchhausen

Hi toblerone,
you are talking about this one, isn’t it?
@toblerone77:

Here’s my take. 86 all the specialized rules for subs, destroyers and transports. Treat them like any other unit. Allow subs to make an “SBR” in convoy zones. Allow Destroyers in those zones to act as “AAA” if applicable.

First bump the sub defense back up to 2.

In the case of non-global games use SZs adjacent to ICs as convoy zones. Keep the sub’s range the same but allow them to return to a friendly SZ after a “commerce raid”, remember they must have range just like an aircraft unit.

Allow planes to take out subs and allow subs to fire back assuming they would have AAA capability, which not exactly historical, but did happen and is somewhat plausible. Same for TRNs.

Let TRNs defend at 1 all other OOB rules apply.

To balance it out let DDs support amphibious assault for one round 1:1 infantry, CAs 1:2, and BBs 1:3. All other OOB rules would apply.

Third, let APs, DDs, and SS just be one price 8 IPCs. Their abilities and advantages amongst each other at the same price-point (IMO) negate much of the debate of “fodder/balance/etc.” BS.

Just my take. Have at it guys :-)

So, your Transport is the same as the one in the opening post (A0 D1 M2 C8, taken last)?
But Subs are very different.

toblerone77

Yep.

baron Münchhausen

According to your HR combat values, the Sub will be more popular than Destroyer. No need to buy them, just planes for 2 more IPCs to kick out Subs.
Subs are more dangerous than the OOB DD, since it shoots down planes.
The less important historical feel can be disturbing for my part.
I could live with Subs defending @1 against all units, but @2 vs planes I couldn’t.

Maybe we should discuss about the impact or no consequences of the naval Cannon fodder effect.

@a44bigdog:

Most ASW of the time was the good old Mark I Mod zero eyeball. WWII subs were surface ships that could submerge. They spent the majority of their time on the surface. The electric engines used when submerged had a very limited speed and run time before the sub had to surface to recharge the batteries. Ariel observation was what lead the Germans to develop the snorkel a device for running the diesels while underwater.

Submarines also could and did engage aircraft. The preferred method however was to dive. Not because the deck guns mounted on the subs could not adequately engage the aircraft but that once spotted other aircraft and if close surface vessels would be called in. By diving the sub could flee the area.

This page has the loses by cause for u-boats. Note that almost HALF or to aircraft.
http://www.uboat.net/fates/losses/cause.htm

General 6 Stars

Baron,

What is your subpen rule if you have one. Thought I seen you post once. Can’t seem to locate it.

baron Münchhausen

I don’t have any.
What is yours?
How does it become an important aspect of the subs rules?

General 6 Stars

Its posted in Global War title under Major complexes.

baron Münchhausen

Thanks.
It’s adding another element of complexity for those which are found of historical background games.
For now it is outside the scope of this actual thread on simplifying things to improve the overall A&A experience.
I keep your Sub pen rules in my backpocket. It may be useful.

Narvik

I don’t think you can make rules that is both simple and historical correct. The hex and counter games have search rolls and sequenced fire, which make the games complex, not simple and fast to play. Xenon World at war have search rolls, and that makes sense. The ocean is a vast place, and the enemy is moving around behind that foggy horizon, so you need to roll a search roll before you find him, but then the enemy too can roll a search roll to avoid you. But if you find each other, then roll for combat. Land combat is different, you know the enemy is dug in behind that hill or city. So maybe a search roll will difference naval combat from land combat. Aircrafts will of course make for automatic find. But it will be a game in the game.

Another and more simple way is to differ the movement values.

Subs move 1, and can submerge from combat, but not retreat to another seazone.
Tranny move 2, and can not retreat to another seazone. If the escort retreats, the trannies are sittin ducks
Surface warships move 3, and can retreat to another seazone.

This model the importance of speed and range in naval operations.

To avoid trannies being fodder, let them cost 10 and defend on 1 against air.

And do you really want to use a sub as fodder when it move 1 space only in a turn, and a Destroyer move 3 spaces ? I know I wouldn’t.

General 6 Stars

I also think you should have search planes to find ships.
Small searchplane C10 A0 D2 M4 1d6 roll of 3 or less finds ships.
Big searchplane C12 A0 D2 M6 1d6 rol of 3 or less finds ships.

Narvik

@SS:

I also think you should have search planes to find ships.
Small searchplane C10 A0 D2 M4Â 1d6 roll of 3 or less finds ships.
Big searchplaneÂ C12 A0 D2 M6Â Â Â 1d6 rol of 3 or less finds ships.

What part of #Simplifying# is it you don’t understand ?

Besides of that, I love your idea 8-)

General 6 Stars

Just making a suggestion to your last post about finding ships. When it comes to simplifying a game no such luck when it comes to Global 39 games or shorter games for me. Play with all the advance pieces in all games. So I went off topic a bit. :-D

baron Münchhausen

Hi Narvik,
a more historically detailled game should have such Air and Sea Anti-Sub Search Mission.
But at our Theatre of Operations level, it is more abstract.
DK’s 1:1 for blocking Submerge makes for the difficulty on finding Subs.
Even when you bring a lot of planes, the Subs casualty will be restricted to the number of DDs.
With Knp idea, formulated differently in Running Silent, Running Deep, the single attack round allows better odds of survival for Pinned or Spotted Subs.

baron Münchhausen

I would add that even the Subs casualty rules Last Warship Chosen is another way to make Subs survive alike an harder Sub spotting.
In mixed fleet against mixed fleet, there is no more Subs destruction Festival in the first rounds.
Kind of Sub stealth ability.
The primary targets are surface warships letting Subs survival easier on both sides for the end of such naval battle because most players will not sacrifice their big damaged BBs and Carriers to destroy enemy’s Subs.

baron Münchhausen

@SS:

I also think you should have search planes to find ships.
Small searchplane C10 A0 D2 M4 1d6 roll of 3 or less finds ships.
Big searchplane C12 A0 D2 M6 1d6 rol of 3 or less finds ships.

Having no attack value these units cannot compete against reg Fgs and Bombers, if the same cost.

toblerone77

@Baron:

According to your HR combat values, the Sub will be more popular than Destroyer. No need to buy them, just planes for 2 more IPCs to kick out Subs.
Subs are more dangerous than the OOB DD, since it shoots down planes.
The less important historical feel can be disturbing for my part.
I could live with Subs defending @1 against all units, but @2 vs planes I couldn’t.

Maybe we should discuss about the impact or no consequences of the naval Cannon fodder effect.

Baron this HR has progressed beyond the simple blurbs here and there. I’ve also added bombard to DDs. A DD still can stop subs so yes you would still want them. Again I’ll point to my arguement against realism, historical realism attemps, and trying to correlate real-world numbers to units. Eventually the numbers go back to having 3 total types of units land , sea, and air which IMO is no fun. There is a game called Attack! Which implements this type of system you can get it for $15-20 on Amazon. It’s not exactly the same but comes close.

General 6 Stars

Sorry wrong plane cost.
Sm search plane = C6 A0 D2 M4 Only fighters can attack search planes.
Lg search plane = C8 A0 D2 M6 Only fighters can attack search planes.
Both search planes can retreat after first round of combat.

baron Münchhausen

@toblerone77:

Baron this HR has progressed beyond the simple blurbs here and there. I’ve also added bombard to DDs. A DD still can stop subs so yes you would still want them. Again I’ll point to my arguement against realism, historical realism attemps, and trying to correlate real-world numbers to units.

Ok. It is just not clear what was OOB for Destroyers and Subs and what has changed.
The Submarines can still Submerge and get First Strike, right?
A single Destroyer blocks any number of Subs, right?
This affect both Submerge and First Strike capacity.
1 DD can still be used as blocker against an infinite number of units, including Subs?

So a Sub being attacked by planes only could Submerge instead of rolling a Defense @2, right?
But, if a Destroyer is along planes, then a Sub, being blocked, can only roll a Defense @2, and if it gets a hit, the DD will destroyed first if the owner choose to (because it is cheaper).
Otherwise, such a Sub cannot flee (submerge) until the destroyer is sunk, right?

toblerone77

Baron the 888 rule is just part of a larger set of rules. In fact it is more so part of more than one set of rules varying in complexity. When I get more time I will elaborate more. The most simplistic you could get is to simply allow planes to hit subs and call it “tough cheese” if they or force a submerge. Again I’ll elborate later when I’m not at work.

baron Münchhausen

@toblerone77:

Baron the 888 rule is just part of a larger set of rules. In fact it is more so part of more than one set of rules varying in complexity. When I get more time I will elaborate more. The most simplistic you could get is to simply allow planes to hit subs and call it “tough cheese” if they or force a submerge. Again I’ll elborate later when I’m not at work.

Fine.
To understand it and evaluted by itself, you should start a specific thread for this 8-8-8 set of rules.
Did you get an occasion to play-tested it somehow?

Simplifying units interactions of Transports, Submarines, Destroyers & planes

Featured Topics

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

A & A Classic New Units

Research & Development House Rule

Adding 1942 units to 1941

Expanding on Units - New and OOB Types

Two new units

R&D Charts for Research Centers

If you could choose any TWO new unit sculpts, what would they be?

FMG COMBAT UNITS - Rules: COMMANDER

40

17.0k

39.3k

1.7m