So replying to the ark had me think of this as comparision
Mk2 3TT, no defensive SA Mk1 2TT, deceptive target Elite(proposed) 2TT, 1TT at range 1
I dont think veteran/ark royal means a l9t in this discussion. If youre relying in a single squadron being buffed its not ideal.
I simply look at it as a question of managable risk. Eliminating ships AA from the equation makes swordfish a viable option over a second battleship in your fleet. That said, i dont look a sectors and other things a bit abstractly. Thus the range stuff on the jill doesnt factor on my thinking.
While I prefer a nighttime swordfish to represent the Battle of Taranto, I see Flaks/Texas point that from a game standpoint it becomes redundant with the Albacore. I also agree that we should not give a 1939 Torpedo Bomber Harass from a Distance.
Considering that later versions were given radar, rockets, and mines - why don't we focus on those options. For example:
SAs: Mission Selection - This unit counts as either a Dive Bomber or a Torpedo Bomber. (Choose the unit's role when you place during the Air Mission phase) Shadowing - At the beginning of your Air Attack step, you may choose an enemy ship within range 2. Your aircraft roll one extra attack die when attacking that ship this turn Mines - Once per game, instead of making an attack in the Surface Attack phase, this unit can mine its sector. Whenever a ship enters the mined sector, roll a die. On a 1, the ship takes 1 point of damage. On a 2, 2 points. Torpedo defense works against this damage.
I dont have any objection to the above, the problem in my mind is that the core stats are not delivering a consistent return for points spent. A carrier/airwing is worth 40-50points. For the RN, that better spent on a second battleship, or a cruiser and sunderlands that'll do everything the above does with less vunerability.
A 39 aircraft, against ships with best midwar AA fit and fighter cover being ubiqious doesn't work
Without creating fantasy units or blowing UK TB/DB stats out of proportion there is no way that they would ever have stood up to the Japanese or US fighters and AA, mainly because in Europe they had control of the seas with the exception of Raiders and Submarine warfare. So they didn't have to invest in more advanced aircraft bombers which were not sent inland. They tended to use long range bombers (aka Patrol Bombers) and land based fighters more so and that's what they invested in during the war. If they had a late war Torpedo Bomber or Dive Bomber that could stand up to anything in the Pacific I'm pretty sure we would have one now.
If we are set on a Swordfish, I don't think you will be happy with any outcome flak, especially sine Harass would be to unbalancing during early war or in the European theater.
The goal we should have is to balance the Brits against the German and Italian units, if you take any of the European Theater countries into the Pacific especially late war you will be fighting an uphill battle.
I don’t really know what those numbers mean, but per the probability chart
Escorted 5 AA aborts 46% of the time and destroys 5% of the time 6 dice 57% 10% 7 dice 66% 16% 8 dice 74% 24% 9 dice 80% 32%
And that’s of course if you have enough fighters to counter all the Swordfish. A reasonable build might have 3 defensive fighters. A reasonable 1939 build probably just has 1. If they all are fighting Swordfish they can’t do anything else.
Determination: Whenever this unit would be destroyed, roll a die. On a 5 or higher, the destruction is prevented and this unit remains in the game with 1 hull point
It would need to be modified as it leaves questions as to whether it can be attacked again, make attacks, or would be aborted if successful.
But I would be fine with swapping this out for the shadowing.