Baron's Convoy Disruption House Rule 1942.2 OOB cost structure

  • '17 '16

    It is a very original idea. A positive bonus working as Base.

    The issue it rise in my mind was about the number of pertinent SZs I already put on the 3 maps.
    Giving 2 IPCs per Convoy SZ will explode the economy. US 18, UK 16, Japan 14, Germany 4, URSS 2.

    That way, with your Base simile, you help me think about this other one:
    why not use a combination to reduce money flow?
    1 IPC per undamaged Convoy SZ.
    1 damage = 0 IPC
    2 damage = -1 IPC
    3 damage = -2 IPCs
    4 damage = -3 IPCs

    Since each Sub does 1+ 1-3 damage (4-6 = 0), it means each Sub block at least the bonus in the SZ.

    However, in all 1941, 1942.2 and AA50 there was not a hundred Subs to work with.
    If 5-6 were active in a given turn it was a good day for Sub.
    And this does not consider that Convoy is a lesser objective compared to attacking warships.
    Sinking Destroyer was prioritized over Convoy raid, most of the time.

    IDK if even 1 IPC bonus per working Convoy SZ can remain manageable.
    US 9, UK 8, Japan 7, Germany 2, URSS 1.


  • I kinda like Baron’s rule and roll for damage but once a sub attacks a zone the damage for the convoy zone stays and the sub can leave the convoy box.
    If you only have 3 to 6 subs in game at least 1 sub represents 10, 20, or 25 subs in that area. But you have to go into the convoy box in order to do damage.

    Then the defender has to either attack the sub if it stays or move into convoy to remove damage.

  • '17 '16

    @SS:

    I kinda like Baron’s rule and roll for damage but once a sub attacks a zone the damage for the convoy zone stays and the sub can leave the convoy box.
    If you only have 3 to 6 subs in game at least 1 sub represents 10, 20, or 25 subs in that area. But you have to go into the convoy box in order to do damage.

    Then the defender has to either attack the sub if it stays or move into convoy to remove damage.

    Your suggested mechanic might be better or more annoying to UK and Japan players (as it should be).
    However, I find difficult to rationalize a good explanation for an on going penalty even when Sub is destroyed elsewhere.

    Any plausible way to figure what this mechanic meant?


  • Just means when sub stops his move in a convoy zone box. Roll for damage put that subs country control token and damage chips under the token. Now next turn if sub is not attacked sub can leave that convoy box and damage would stay there with his control marker.
    So defending ship has to move into convoy zone box to remove damage. No damage repair aloud.

  • '17 '16

    @SS:

    Just means when sub stops his move in a convoy zone box. Roll for damage put that subs country control token and damage chips under the token. Now next turn if sub is not attacked sub can leave that convoy box and damage would stay there with his control marker.
    So defending ship has to move into convoy zone box to remove damage. No damage repair aloud.

    Yes. You explained this mechanic clearly. Thanks.
    My hesitation is about how it depicts WWII convoy and Sub actions.
    If Sub unit is out, then convoy are clear to pass.
    Why should they be destroyed and unable to deliver shipping if there is no sub in a given SZ?


  • It’s just where 1 sub represents a bunch of subs in the area .

  • '17 '16

    So it breaks the usual principle about projection of power of sub unit which was considered as 1 occupied SZ.
    That what is weird in your mechanic.

    But, maybe it is the way to go to work with Argothair suggestion: 1 Sub unit is blocking its own SZ (damaging IPC penalty) and all other adjacent SZs income (no IPC bonus).

    Clearly the u-boat menace will increase and better depict why someone wrote this:

    The Allies agreed on one thing. World War II would not be lost on any land battlefield but might be in the ship graveyard of the North Atlantic. Churchill wrote: “The U-boat attack was our worst evil. It would have been wise for the Germans to stake all upon it.”

    Maybe, a way to rationalize it historically is to say that merchant ships were waiting there was no more Sub infestation in a given SZ.
    A warship would meant a patrol has been done and confirmed this is no more a high danger SZ to navigate in.
    Or that Sub unit are like 20-30 real Subs traveling back and forth from the old SZ to the new one. So the old one is still under pressure.

    It makes for a less static SZ because the usual behaviour in ATO with u-boats was to wait in a SZ until a DD coming within reach and make an attack on it. But as long as no UK DD were put on ATO, Subs stayed mostly in same SZ.

    Below I quoted Der Kuenstler impressive opening post from another interesting thread on Subs and Destroyers:
    Reality wrecking destroyer rules need a revamp…
    I don’t exactly use the same Subs and DDs but his opening post is so cool.
    It have to be known.

  • '17 '16

    @Der:

    “The only thing that ever really frightened me during the war was the U-boat peril”. - Winston Churchill

    Dear old Winston wouldn’t have to worry about u-boats if he were playing the latest editions of Axis and Allies today. The current OOB rules make destroyers so powerful that just one of them can turn a wolf pack of submarines into a litter of baby kittens.

    According to the current rules, just ONE destroyer can do these things:

    • Stop any number of enemy subs from a surprise strike in a sea battle

    • Stop any number of subs from submerging (even 100 or more!)

    • Stop any number of subs from going through the sea zone it is sitting in

    • allow air units to hit any number of subs in the zone it is in

    It is no wonder that there is no proper battle of the Atlantic with these rules in place.

    On the other hand, the rules say that ANY of your ships or those of your allies have NO EFFECT on convoy disruption. Look at this picture from the 1940 RE rulebook:

    ![](http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc11/klustick<br /><br />/subs1.jpg)

    There is plainly a British DD sitting there in the same zone as the menacing u-boats. Yet the DD does nothing to stop any of them from raiding the convoys there. Huh?

    The answer to this unrealistic mess is to do what artillery does with infantry. Their powers work when being matched on a 1:1 basis. Just as one artillery does not make 10 or more infantry attack @ 2, one Destroyer should not be able to stop 10 u-boats from leaving the Baltic Sea. I’m proposing that the destroyer’s powers be limited to a 1:1 basis with subs, like this:

    1. SUBMERSIBLE: One destroyer and two fighters attack three u-boats. Only one of the u-boats should have to stay. The other two should be able to submerge and escape.

    2. SURPRISE STRIKE: If one DD is in a naval task force attacking four subs, only one of the subs should lose the surprise strike ability, not all four. One DD cannot be everywhere.

    3. TREAT HOSTILE ZONES AS FRIENDLY: If five subs want to come out of the Baltic and there are two British DD’s blocking their way, only two subs should have to stop. The other three should be able to get by.

    4. CAN’T BE HIT BY AIR UNITS: If a DD and three planes attack 2 subs, all the hits should apply to only one sub. The other can submerge.

    5. CONVOY DISRUPTION: DD’s should stop it on a 1:1 basis. As in the picture above, if three subs are there with an enemy DD, only two of the subs should be able to disrupt convoys.

    To me this would enable subs to compete with destroyers and make a real battle of the Atlantic possible.


  • im not a big fan of convoy distruption from a sea zone next to a convoy. On my 40 map and 39 maps there are convoy boxes where u need to stop in the convoy box to damage it.
    You’d have to come up with a different rule for 40 game because I see the convoy is only in the sea zone.
    But this may work also with the convoy boxes because some are connected to more than 1 sea zone. This may benefit Japan to. I’m gonna putt with this and see what way is the best for damage and Der’s idea is good to

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    IDK if even 1 IPC bonus per working Convoy SZ can remain manageable.
    US 9, UK 8, Japan 7, Germany 2, URSS 1.

    Well, there’s no reason we can’t decrease the number of convoy zones. The point should be to simulate a few of the most important, most vulnerable commerce lanes, not to put a convoy box in every single sea zone that saw merchant traffic. Just off the cuff, here’s another possible distribution of convoy zones for 1942.2:

    USSR: Archangel, Soviet Far East
    Germany: Baltic, Central Med
    UK: English Channel, Central Atlantic, Eastern Med, Persian Gulf, Cape of Good Hope
    Japan: Tokyo Bay, South China Sea, Java Sea, Coral Sea, Leyte Gulf
    USA: Solomon Islands, Pearl Harbor, Caribbean, New York, Brazil

    That should produce a less crazy income swing. If you think that’s still too much, you can relocate income from land territories to adjacent sea zones, instead of adding fresh income. E.g., Borneo drops from 4 IPCs to 3 IPCs, but the Borneo Sea Zone is now worth +1 IPCs if its convoy is undamaged.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 7
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 39
  • 15
  • 29
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

38

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts