Actually, we find subs to be generally more effective than destroyers. They are by far the most effective ASW weapon. I rarely see a DD attack a sub because there are usually much more valuable targets to use the DDs torpedoes on. DDs are best for "harassing" a sub to reduce its attack. Subs are about the only thing worth bringing against 5 - 6 hull BBs except more 5 - 6 hull BBs. In our club tournaments the "clash of the subs" is generally the opening round (turn) of the game. Whoever survives with the most subs is in a strong position since the surface ships have to come to the Objectives.
I have to agree, the difficulty in sinking a sub, and the distraction they provide, combined with the threat to higher value targets creates a high return on investment.
Actually, we find subs to be generally more effective than destroyers. They are by far the most effective ASW weapon. I rarely see a DD attack a sub because there are usually much more valuable targets to use the DDs torpedoes on. DDs are best for "harassing" a sub to reduce its attack. Subs are about the only thing worth bringing against 5 - 6 hull BBs except more 5 - 6 hull BBs. In our club tournaments the "clash of the subs" is generally the opening round (turn) of the game. Whoever survives with the most subs is in a strong position since the surface ships have to come to the Objectives.
As a member of the club referenced and confessed sub-build addict, I can testify that this is true. Nothing beats a good sub fleet if the dice roll average or above.
There's something wrong with my bloody fleet today!! A flaw in the system. From what i'm reading all hope is lost, the Subs rule; poor DD's they have no chance. All joking aside what is said is true; but we do have some options; lots of 6pt. 6 ASW DD's with ASW pinpoint and Hunter Killer Group a little help. Do feel air ASW attacks could use an improvement in die numbers, best out there 4 with ASW expert bonus i believe. Bit costly Might be nice one day to see PB ASW attack help. Thank heavens for the Hudson.
There is something else to take into effect. Play a sub heavy build once and your opponent may never forget it. His fleet choices may be modified for a year.
There is something else to take into effect. Play a sub heavy build once and your opponent may never forget it. His fleet choices may be modified for a year.
This is one of the reasons I play with the Order of Battle rules.
There is something else to take into effect. Play a sub heavy build once and your opponent may never forget it. His fleet choices may be modified for a year.
This is one of the reasons I play with the Order of Battle rules.
We have found the OOB rules greatly favor big battleship centered builds. So we gave up on OOB except for the occassional scenario where it might fit. No matter what we have tried, some type of build will rise to the top. That is why we constantly play new scenarios to keep everyone "thinking." We also require everyone to bring both an Axis and an Allied fleet to every tourament. The fleet you play in a game is decided by the first player. This keeps everyone focused on trying to create balanced scenarios. It also allows you to stop and say "could this Axis build beat the Allied fleet I just built? If not, back to the drawing board. It takes more time to create two builds, but I think it greatly expands our understanding of the game.
This is one of the reasons I play with the Order of Battle rules.
We have found the OOB rules greatly favor big battleship centered builds. So we gave up on OOB except for the occassional scenario where it might fit. No matter what we have tried, some type of build will rise to the top. That is why we constantly play new scenarios to keep everyone "thinking." We also require everyone to bring both an Axis and an Allied fleet to every tourament. The fleet you play in a game is decided by the first player. This keeps everyone focused on trying to create balanced scenarios. It also allows you to stop and say "could this Axis build beat the Allied fleet I just built? If not, back to the drawing board. It takes more time to create two builds, but I think it greatly expands our understanding of the game.
Interesting, we started playing with OOB because we were seeing too much homogeny in builds, too many apex builds, and too many single purpose builds. The goal of it was to get more variety of play styles and units on the board. having said that the OOB is now enforcing a homogeny of its own.
This is one of the reasons I play with the Order of Battle rules.
We have found the OOB rules greatly favor big battleship centered builds. So we gave up on OOB except for the occassional scenario where it might fit. No matter what we have tried, some type of build will rise to the top. That is why we constantly play new scenarios to keep everyone "thinking." We also require everyone to bring both an Axis and an Allied fleet to every tourament. The fleet you play in a game is decided by the first player. This keeps everyone focused on trying to create balanced scenarios. It also allows you to stop and say "could this Axis build beat the Allied fleet I just built? If not, back to the drawing board. It takes more time to create two builds, but I think it greatly expands our understanding of the game.
We have found the OOB rules greatly favor big battleship centered builds. So we gave up on OOB except for the occassional scenario where it might fit. No matter what we have tried, some type of build will rise to the top. That is why we constantly play new scenarios to keep everyone "thinking." We also require everyone to bring both an Axis and an Allied fleet to every tourament. The fleet you play in a game is decided by the first player. This keeps everyone focused on trying to create balanced scenarios. It also allows you to stop and say "could this Axis build beat the Allied fleet I just built? If not, back to the drawing board. It takes more time to create two builds, but I think it greatly expands our understanding of the game.
Has anyone ever made any alternate rules for subs along the lines of being able to be on the surface and have an AA/deck gun value, maybe along Surcouf lines. After all a lot of sub action was on the surface.
"That's right son, join the navy. Get behind a bloody big gun and knock the hell out of somebody"
"We went out, got our arses kicked, then came back again"
The alternate ASW payload SAs are designed to represent attacks made on surfaced subs. HMS Triton can shell an installation with a small dice roll. That's about all I know.