Subs were just too slow to be all that effective against warships.
Since freighters were half the speed of warships, Subs were much more effective against them.
To my knowledge no group of Subs big enough to be called a "Wolf Pack" ever attacked a convoy of transports on their way to invade or any force of warships. Therefore, in A&A Wolf Packs are misused.
Those forces were too well protected and/or fast for a Wolf Pack.
The most effective use for Subs was to attack freighters, that is the enemy shipping of raw materials and finished weapons. This is simulated in later versions of A&A with a rule about if Subs are on the map anywhere then they destroy enemy IPC in their "bank". This represents the loses to their shipping, lost ships and cargoes.
This is fine as a start but, Ger. Subs in the Baltic should not effect UK IPCs.
. . 1] The UK can indicate 1 Sub that is in range of a plane to be submerged at the start of the game.
. . 2] There needs to be a rule about where Subs can be to "sink" IPCs. Only US, UK, & Japan can lose IPC by Subs attacking their shipping. There needs to be a list of SZ that effects each nation.
. . . . a] For UK -- the North Atlantic Ocean. SZ 1, 2, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 17
. . . . b] For US -- SZ 10, 19, 18, 20, 21, 52, 54, and 55.
. . . . c] For Japan -- SZ 48, 49, 59, 60, and 61.
. . 3] Only Subs on the surface should sink the full amount of IPCs. If they are engaged by ships or planes and submerge then this should reduce the IPCs that they sink that turn.
. . 4] It matters when the Subs can resurface. The US should be able to help the UK by forcing Subs down in their turn so that in the UK turn the UK loses less IPCs. Also, can the UK use a plane to force Subs down to clear the way for a convoy of US TR to invade Africa?
. . 5] A Wolf Pack is now 2 or more Subs in a SZ trying to sink IPCs. They should get a bonus for being more numerous. And, this lets 1 plane force them both to submerge, so it is kind of a waste.
. . . . If 1 Sub in a SZ can sink stuff worth the roll of a die minus 1 IPCs or roll of a die minus 3 (where it can't be negative) IPC if it is submerged then this would average 2.5 surfaced and 1 submerged. Then if 2 Subs in 1 SZ got to roll 1 bonus die [for a total of 3 dice], they would average 3.75 surfaced; and 1.5 submerged.
. . . . This seems like a lot compared to Bombers making SBR, but historically, Subs were more effective than SBR was.
. . . Also, like AA shoot down Bombers, planes can sink Subs.
It might make more sense for the Subs to try to sink IPC in the owner's player turn. It can't be in the Combat Phase though. It would have to be at the very start of the Combat Move Phase, because the Subs need to still be submerged from the actions of the enemy players.
If no changes are made to the nation's incomes, then Russia benefits from this to the extent that Germany builds Subs. Germany benefits because UK & US will need to be distracted to sink any Subs that move to a listed SZ. And, Germany can build additional Subs. UK & US will lose a little. Japan stands to lose a lot, because the US can build Subs cheaply and Japan can't afford to build planes to counter Subs.
- Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015 1:59 pm (Total Number of Edits: 2)
- Posted Sat Aug 8, 2015 10:17 am