SAs: Submerged Shot - This unit can make Torpedo attacks against local enemy Submarines Limited Ammo - Remove this unit from play after the first time it makes a successful attack
+1 R0 torp over subkiller, simplified Limited Ammo
Ok... finally getting around to writing up some playtest feedback. NOTE: This is going to be long.
We used this version and played 4 games with it and different point costs. -------------------- CB-4 Ship Submarine 1941 Italy Speed 1 Points: 4 TT 2-1-1 A2 V3 H1
SAs: Submerged Shot - This unit can make Torpedo attacks against local enemy Submarines Limited Ammo - Remove this unit from play after it makes an attack or is sunk by enemy attacks. Your opponent scores points for the unit when it is removed from play ----------------------
Game 1: 100pts RvB The player took 10 of these units (40pts), 2 Chikuma (42) , 1 Mavis (7), and 2 Lupo (10) total points 99. Pros: - Was able to maximize each attack to 4 dice in sector, 3 out of sector. - Large swarm, scared the piss out of his opponent just by the threat of making torpedo attacks which swayed his tactics and where he moved - Very cost effective, even trading two of these to sink a 8 point destroyer. - Harder to sink than the Lupos, opponent eventually fed the subs targets to get them off the map. Cons: - None in this game, though would have traded the Lupos for 2 more subs.
Game 2: 200 point Nation Pure The Italian player took 10 of these and then build out the remaining 160 points with Battleships, Fighters, and destroyers. Pros: - With 10 subs on the map, it affected the tactics and setup of the opponent Neutral: - The opponent, pre-warned used some PBs and TBs, to sink some of them before using these attack craft to go after the main force. Sank 3 of them. - Player with subs lamented when it was removed with no successes, however when they hit they definitely were worth the points. Cons: - Took no shadowing or scout ships to boost the Torps... threat was much less.
Game 3: 200 points, RvB, Year Limit of 1942 Once again the Chikumas and Shadowing came out to support a fleet of 15 of these subs, supported by a 2 Battleships and 2 Carriers loaded with Fighters (4). Pros: - The subs ended up doing more damage than either Battleship, while they may not have sunk more... they took away the opponent's ER on their ships. Neutral: - Again, player got frustrated when the sub was destroyed with misses... but shrugged it off once they realized the unit is a statistical gamble. - Gave the enemy Destroyers a field day. Never saw so many declared ASW attacks and then sunk destroyers by their friends. This ended up cost neutral, but strategically beneficial as it was less surface ships to claim objectives. Cons: - The literal subs are glass cannons which break when fired
Overall comments: - Even with the removal of the subs with a miss they seemed to be cost neutral if you can build up support with Shadowing and Scout to increase the statistical chances of a hit. - Might want to consider removing the R2 attack and increasing the R0/R1 attack values to be more inline with the Chiyoda's Midget subs. This forces them to have to get in closer and reduces the threat area of each sub. If we consider this, I recommend another round of playtesting. - All players agreed that at this cost, the removal of the unit due to a miss was a good balance. Without that, they felt the unit cost should go up by at least 2 points to help avoid swarms of these. - In a nation pure game they don't have as much support, so might get overlooked. - Players thought the A/V/H was fair, especially for the cost - They felt like they had an overall balanced effect on the game, though emotionally it was a toss up with how the player rolled and viewed the threat from the other side of the board.
There's a lot here, so feel free to discuss and ask questions about the playtests.
It never rated 2-1-1 torps though. That'd be quited limiting if they are massed
The biggest feedback is that I think the players enjoyed the risk of the unit being removed on a miss as long as it could prove to be a big enough threat. A 2-1 attack line just isn't a big enough payoff to take them. To balance the removal of the R2 I think the 3-2 attack line is better (again see Chiyoda's midget subs)
Talking to the players (posted in the feedback) if the unit isn't destroyed after making the attack the point cost should go up by 2 to a total of 6pts to avoid 10 "guaranteed" torp attacks (assuming they survive ASW attacks) for 40 points.
Any thoughts on the rest of the playtest comments?
My offered changes, based on pt reports. 5 points 2-1 torps Remove on succesful attack and add Ambush: the first time this unit attacks, it has +1 on each attack die.
SAs: Submerged Shot - This unit can make Torpedo attacks against local enemy Submarines Limited Ammo - Remove this unit from play after the first time it makes a successful attack. Ambush - The first time this unit attacks, it has +1 on each attack die.
-------------------------
Comments:
1) Limited Ammo should read: Remove this unit from play after the first time it makes a successful attack. Your opponent scores points for the unit when it is removed from play. 2) Per the playtester feedback, if we do not remove the unit after a single attack the unit cost should go up 2 points. (Not 1.) It would still be the games cheapest sub. 3) The Ambush is a nice halfway point, kudos.