Why no US subs in 1941?



  • I’ve been playing A&A since I got it for a graduation gift in 1984, and was excited to see the many of the changes, including Italy and a 1941 scenario.

    The one thing that surprises me in the 1941 setup is that the US has no subs.  The silent service was crucial in the Pacific, especially in the early months of the war.  Any idea why the designers left that out?  It seems to me that it could have been included in the sz with the carrier or off the west coast so it’s out of reach of the Imperial Navy for Pearl Harbor.



  • Perhaps becz the US torpedos were so poorly designed and the failure rate was so high??  :?



  • @Constantinople:

    Perhaps becz the US torpedos were so poorly designed and the failure rate was so high??

    You’re absolutely right that torpedo failures and incompetence in the Bureau of Ordnance hurt their effectiveness.  Despite that, the US submarine was the only naval force to successfully engage the Japanese during the early months of the war.  US subs sunk 6 ships in December 1941, and over 100 in the first year of the war.

    From the King report…
    “Our submarines, operating thousands of miles from their bases and deep within enemy-controlled waters, began their campaign of attrition on Japanese shipping immediately following the attack on Pearl Harbor, and continued to fight with telling effectiveness until the Japanese capitulated. During the early part of 1942, while our surface forces were still weakened by the Japanese initial attack of 7 December 1941, submarines were virtually the only United States naval forces which could be risked in offensive operations.”

    I’m thinking about adding a house rule to replace the transport off California with a sub or two.



  • @klh:

    I’ve been playing A&A since I got it for a graduation gift in 1984, and was excited to see the many of the changes, including Italy and a 1941 scenario.

    The one thing that surprises me in the 1941 setup is that the US has no subs.  The silent service was crucial in the Pacific, especially in the early months of the war.  Any idea why the designers left that out?  It seems to me that it could have been included in the sz with the carrier or off the west coast so it’s out of reach of the Imperial Navy for Pearl Harbor.

    I noticed this when I was drawing up the PlayersAid maps.  No subs for US, UK or Japan in the Pacific.  I added some to the AA50Shades of Grey variant for an alternative setup Map.  Of course their are several other Changes like Axis Africa, Vichy units invadeable neutral countries etc… added also, enjoy.
    You can find it here under AA50 Alternative setups:
    http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
    enjoy.



  • Hey Bluestroke, that link doesn’t appear to take me to the right page…  :? I can’t find the files you’re talking about.

    I’m interested to see what you’ve come up with, as I’ve been working on my own alternative setup as well. It seems to me that, in the official 1941 setup, the European and Pacific theaters seem to be out-of-sinc with each other by about 6 months.

    For example, the Germans launched Operation Barbarossa in June 1941 (this is supposed to happen on G1), but then in the same round in the Pacific Japan launches its attack on Pearl Harbor, which of course didn’t happen until December. So it seems to me that the Germans should be well into Barbarossa on their first turn, at a minimum.

    What I’ve done is update the Eastern Front to reflect this, giving the game a starting date somewhere in the late summer/early fall of 1941 instead of spring. I’ve also fixed some big annoyances, like the lack of a  German BB in the Baltic, no subs in the Pacific, China’s impotence, etc. There are some other minor tweaks here and there, of course. The overall idea is to slow Japan’s expansion slightly to counterbalance Germany’s stronger position. I’m still playtesting it, but the results thus far have been promising. There also seems to be many more viable openings for each power with my setup, especially for the Japs and the Brits, but perhaps this is simply a consequence of not having played it enough (yet).

    If other people are interested in trying it out, I can post the complete list of changes.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    The sub was not included because it most likely will not balance, but i guess replacing the transport with a sub ( not two) could still be considered balanced.



  • Imperious Leader is right.  Play balance trumps all.



  • @Unknown:

    Hey Bluestroke, that link doesn’t appear to take me to the right page…  :? I can’t find the files you’re talking about.

    I’m interested to see what you’ve come up with, as I’ve been working on my own alternative setup as well. It seems to me that, in the official 1941 setup, the European and Pacific theaters seem to be out-of-sinc with each other by about 6 months.

    For example, the Germans launched Operation Barbarossa in June 1941 (this is supposed to happen on G1), but then in the same round in the Pacific Japan launches its attack on Pearl Harbor, which of course didn’t happen until December. So it seems to me that the Germans should be well into Barbarossa on their first turn, at a minimum.

    What I’ve done is update the Eastern Front to reflect this, giving the game a starting date somewhere in the late summer/early fall of 1941 instead of spring. I’ve also fixed some big annoyances, like the lack of a  German BB in the Baltic, no subs in the Pacific, China’s impotence, etc. There are some other minor tweaks here and there, of course. The overall idea is to slow Japan’s expansion slightly to counterbalance Germany’s stronger position. I’m still playtesting it, but the results thus far have been promising. There also seems to be many more viable openings for each power with my setup, especially for the Japs and the Brits, but perhaps this is simply a consequence of not having played it enough (yet).

    If other people are interested in trying it out, I can post the complete list of changes.

    Wow, this sounds just like my AA50Shades of Grey Variant.  I have fixed the Link and reposted to that reference.
    http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
      Thanks, I would be interested in the list of changes you made. 
    I listen to what players say, taking notes of things, they thought were missing from AA50.  Ex:subs missing from the Pacific, German Battleship, Invasion of Neutrals,  Extra territories , darker borders,  more space, Axis Africa etc…
    ( Similar thread about things missing from AA50, on Larry Harris site. )
      The missing subs is what I noticed, from the Gen Con pics, back when we were speculating about AA50 setup.
    Game Balance, I like what Larry did, I think each setup was unique and offers different problems, 1941 problem for Allies to overcome, greater advancing Axis strength.  In 1942 greater Allied advancing strength.  I find together, it is balanced. I am repeating this argument from earlier threads.
    Sorry, it took me awhile to get here,
    so was withdrawing subs from the Pacific, a bigger problem for the Allies?  I think it was.  A large Naval presence for Japan, reduced Allies… subs are good raiders perfect for ambush.  Immune to the long reach of Air units.  When attacked they can submerge and may survive.  As Imperious Leader often says the destroyers will have to become infantry of the sea and be everywhere to defend. 
    Japan has to be more careful, during it’s deployments.  As it stands, Japan is relatively free to deploy without hinder.  Those pesky subs, may have slowed down the Japanese advance, small argument yes.
    Again, we use stealth subs, so you have real surprise when those babies pop up and hit out out of the blue. 
    Early U.S. subs could have made problems for Japan and this steadily gets worse as more subs enter the arena and the game progresses.



  • Thanks, I would be interested in the list of changes you made.

    I’ll post my complete setup in the House Rules section once I’m satisfied with it. I’m still testing it for now. As you said, it’s very similar to what you have done in the Pacific, but Europe is a bit different. The main difference is that I gave Germany control of East Poland and Baltic States, so the game starts a few months into Barbarossa (late summer or so), while the German still had momentum.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 19
  • 1
  • 5
  • 2
  • 15
  • 16
  • 4
  • 13
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

55
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts