Rules Question: Can defending fighters kill subs?

@Kobu:

Why the discrepancy in what should be a very polished product? Getting people to play with a rule introduced outside the rulebook is not going to be easy.

Welcome to the wonderful world of Axis and Allies.  :roll:

I agree that this is very unfortunate, but it’s not the first time that there’s been a major correction to the published rules of an A&A game.  There were very important modifications to the setup of Pacific in the FAQ, and the reinforcement rules for Guadalcanal had significant changes in its FAQ.  There were also many major ambiguities in the rules of Battle of the Bulge that needed clarification in its FAQ.  The bottom line is that AH could do a better job of quality control.

That being said, I do think that the AA50 rulebook is probably one of the cleaner ones to come out in a long time.  It’s just unfortunate that the sub rules section is a pretty major blemish on it.

It isn’t, yet.  But it will be either here, or here, or both.  Until then, you’ve just got Craig and me.

@Krieghund:

That being said, I do think that the AA50 rulebook is probably one of the cleaner ones to come out in a long time.  It’s just unfortunate that the sub rules section is a pretty major blemish on it.

I agree. I think a lot of rules that seemed ambiguous before were cleaned up nicely. I’ve managed to correct long-held rules misconceptions in three different area play groups based on the new rulebook.

The sub rule will be tricky to integrate, but I’m looking forward to the FAQ.

According to me, with anniversary rules we are going to see two “historical” behaviour:

• DD have to be bought in larger quantity because TRNs and SUBs are not useful as cannon fodder;
• DD have to be used to hunt SUBs.

Destroyers are the Infantry of the seas. not subs. That was a mistake in Revised and now its corrected.

@Imperious:

According to me, with anniversary rules we are going to see two “historical” behaviour:

• DD have to be bought in larger quantity because TRNs and SUBs are not useful as cannon fodder;
• DD have to be used to hunt SUBs.

Destroyers are the Infantry of the seas. not subs. That was a mistake in Revised and now its corrected.

I agree with you IL. I am very happy of this new course for A&A sea war!

I think we need to think more about this.

If the submarines are attacking your carrier, then you KNOW where they are.  Just follow the torpedo contrails!

The reason fighters couldn’t just go out and attack submarines is because the submarines are not firing torpedoes to use to track them down.  Thus, you need destroyers to FIND them. (Although, I submit bombers should be able to fill this role as well, possibly with the caveat of having heavy bombers.  After all, America at least, and I’m kinda sure England too, used bombers with sonar buoys to find enemy submarines too.)

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.

Opps for got the link.

http://www.uboat.net/fates/losses/cause.htm