Can a sub go through an un friendly staright?(denmark)

@genken said in Can Germany have more than 2 aircraft carriers in play:

I have searched for this on the forums and cannot find a reference to it. In the setup for Germany there are 2 pieces for aircraft carriers. I am axis and I started an Africa Korps movement but US entered the war in turn 1. Now I will need 2 carriers to guard the med in SZ 91 but I also want to place a carrier in SZ 113 to counter a possible Russian attack formulated by my cunning opponent. I can use a plastic chip in SZ 91. Is it permissible in the rules for Germany to have 3 carriers in play?

Why do you think that you need CV’s to protect the Med.?
I am curious, wouldn’t Bmbrs doing the same Job and give you more flexibility?
So now you spent 48 ipcs for three CV’s and 32 are lost compared to 48 = 4 Bmbrs plus your Ftr’s and the Allies player would have had to think about it sailing to Gibraltar…just my thoughts…

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

@PainState:

Ok, lets take a step back.

So, should Subs be able to bypass Denmark and go into the Baltic? Who cares, really? Lets just say the house rule is subs can enter the Baltic Sea. Is the UK or USA going to invest in subs to enter the Baltic for the sole purpose of killing off the German fleet? There are no convoy routes in the Baltic so that is in essence the only purpose of them going in in the first place.

Germany has a DEST with their fleet and a AB on W. Germany with planes. It is a suicide mission by the Allies to send in a sub or 2.

In the big picture of the game, it is a total non factor.

Same scenario with Italy. Lets say the house rule says subs can go through the Suez. What? UK is worried about a stack of 6 Italy Subs rampaging through the Suez? It is not even a point of discussion and thus a non factor.

Except the Suez and Panama are a moot point because those are canals that have locks which I agree doesn’t make sense however in the context of the Turkey, Denmark, and Gibraltar, submarines could in theory sneak pass these zones and historically speaking, did.

Denmark strait was pretty heavy mined, there where nets and underwater microphones. So yes a lone sub might get through but not nearly viable enough to make it for the context of this game. Units are not just a single unit they are a group of said units. Scapa flow was also at risk from subs with its many outgoing channels and yes 1 sub managed to get in it does not mean that the whole base was crap.

Well Allies going into that German area is foolish. Home Fleet just blockaded that region anyways however the others had enemy and neutral ships passing all the time.

I’ve seen it happen multiple times in SZ6 around Japan, where a massive US-fleet first sends precisely those units ( sub+air+tt ) in an amphibious assault because they can’t be targetted by kamikaze. After the amphibious assault, the rest of the fleet moves in during noncombat.

Thanks Variance

@Boldfresh:

honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup.  i feel like the allies need nothing.

I don’t see how the axis can lose in this setup if the allies receive nothing.

Probably just a ‘Clarification’.

@Cow:

if you make a sub submerge, does it still convoy? I just kinda assumed it does.

You mean disrupt convoy?
Yes, it does. The decision to submerge is a decision for the Conduct Combat Phase only.
Physically it is removed from the battle strip and placed back on the map.
Convoy disruption takes place later in the Collect Income phase.

@anderb:

attackung true neutrals is plain stupid. best way to lose a game.

:-D

mine was only a question of “if I were to attack as I do …” neutral attack is inconvenient for both sides, especially because the axis has no men to cover additional fronts … this is clear.