I think you should avoid the HfD as it could be unbalancing in early war games.
This would be my proposal for a new Swordfish:
Aircraft - Torpedo Bomber 1939 Speed A
ASW 3 Bomb 5 TT 2
A3 V6 H1
NIGHT SPECIALIST: While in darkness, this unit gets +1 on each search check and ignores darkness attack penalties. ESCAPE INTO DARKNESS: Once per game, while in darkness, when this unit would be destroyed by an Air Attack, roll a die. On a 3 or higher, abort this unit instead SURPRISE: If it's the first turn of the game, this unit rolls one extra attack die when attacking
I'm estimating the cost to be between 8-9 points.
This gives early war Britain several things: 1) A night attack aircraft that simulates the Raid on Taranto 2) A versatile Swordfish that can be effective against destroyers and torpedo boats 3) A chance to survive in darkness (at least once)
Two other alternative SAs that I think would be good for the unit would be: 1) COORDINATE ATTACK: While this unit is in the same sector as a friendly Torpedo Bomber, it rolls one extra attack die when making Bomb attacks. 2) PRESS THE ATTACK: Whenever this unit is aborted by a ship's Antiair attack, you may roll a die. On a 1, destroy this unit. On a 4 or higher, this unit makes a Bomb attack during your air attack, hitting on a 5 or higher only
Of all the games i've played over the years. I'm completely satisfied otherwise. Putting swordfish in defended sectors gets them destroyed, like anything less than 5/7/1.
HfD doesn't negate fighters and over successive decks every navy has gotten a basic 5point defensive fighter option.
3 Unhindered swordfish, attacking a hull5, speed 2 battleship will average 10 turnsto sink it. It'll take 7 turns to take all 3 objectives.
6 fighter aa dice against an escorted swordfish will abort 20%+ of the time Not accounting for 6s being double successes.
The probability of a 7die attack is 40%+ on the same conditions.
They are too weak to actually make attacks against a defended target. Its not a mattrler even of survivability, its a matter of not being worth thier points, at any value.
Not a fan of Swordfishes. Given the choice in an early war game, I would use the Canadian Hurricane Fighter Bombers...
The Swordfish needs a gimmick to be effective...
I think what this provides is a way for them to function as supports for a fleet in a way they can actually contribute. 3/6/1 will rareluly carry a fleet
I'm not keen to bake in reliance on other units. I think harrass from a distance is the appropriate mechanical solution to a pair of sunderlands are drastically more effective than than a squadron of rugged torpedo bombers.
I'm not keen to bake in reliance on other units. I think harrass from a distance is the appropriate mechanical solution to a pair of sunderlands are drastically more effective than than a squadron of rugged torpedo bombers.
Anything else is tinkering at the edges
I agree on the avoiding on the reliance of other units. I still think the night version of the Swordfish that I proposed would work, especially since they are historically accurate and fill a niche for the UK.
So, an enormously successful aircraft, in service throughout the war, but over-costed and unplayable in the game. Elite (armor plus),rugged, determined, and re-costed all seem in order.
As i said i regard HfD as neccesary at a mechanical level. The range stuff with jill need to consider the advances in tech by 44. A short ranged strike then was long by the AA capabilities of 1940. Especially with radar and VT fuzes.
If you guys want to add somethung else thats fine.