Submarines being able to attack land

@Imperious-Leader Not as ridiculous as the OOB rule for Only the Attacker given the option of retreat but the defender gets to be Wiped out with no recourse- at least with my proposal the Defender can get away with maybe a few units, a number small enough not to wreck the game!

Probably because its based on a time frame. If you have inf with these landings then they have established a landing. Maybe both sides suck at hitting.
I like where attacking art and tanks get no 1st round attacks and attacking ships bombardment hit art and or a motorized unit first. If non then a inf.
Also when there is a landing most Inf won’t be on the beachhead. They’ll be dug in further back.

As I said before, just make landing craft give some kind of boost for landing infantry, like they attack at 2 on the first round, something like that.

Also, I agree landing craft are pretty much already in the game due to transports even existing however if you want to add landing craft, you can then “imply” that the transport without them are just docking at some port.

In the first game i played with my brother I just assumed that submarines have first strike. I actually
was rather surprised when I read that they don´t.
Also, I think that USW is rather weak.

Maybe using the damage rules from global 1940 and give the subs first strike could help the central powers
a bit in their struggle.

Yeah, I actually agree with you that using carriers to soak up 2 hits in a battle does seem ridiculous.  After all, carriers are capital ships and one SHOULD be protecting them, not throwing them in as fodder.  Unfortunately, this is a tactic that I often find myself using, particularly as USA because of their greater income can more easily replace the carriers than other nations.  Many times I have sent a fleet into a large battle and rather than taking hits on pieces that can still shoot the enemy, I will take a hit or two on the carrier. 
This usually happens in two cases: 
1=the first round of US hits didn’t go so well and there are still a lot of enemy targets to destroy.  In these cases, I usually intend on taking the planes that would have landed on the carrier as future casualties because I know I will be getting more casualties in the 2nd or 3rd round of combat.
2=the attack is taking place adjacent to a friendly territory, in which case I know my planes will still have a landing space.  Also, there will still be many enemy targets going into the 2nd round of combat.

So, while it may not be a sensible tactic, nevertheless it is one that I often find myself using.

That reminded me of a new idea i really like for AARHE:

‘night bombing’ where you SBR at 1/2 effective rate and forgo both AA rolls, and enemy counterair ( interceptors)

Thats perfectly cool dude.  I have no time to play A&A during the school year.  Play it out and let me know.  I have a feeling artillery might be a bit too powerful on my board.  Just out of curiosity what else are you thinking of tweeking.  Where is your blog?

I’m sorry, your explaination is right, but I just cannot see America going:

“Oh shoot, Germany’s got 400 tanks in French West Africa, I’ll land in Rio de Oro instead!!”

So yea, I have to say, most of the neutrals really will never get used.  They’ll be unscratched areas on the board until the day it disintegrates in the hands of an archeologist a billion trillion million years from now.

Some of the others are awesome!  Tkae Mongolia to avoid Yak.  Take Spain to avoid Sea Wall in Europe.  Take Argentina to invade Brazil.  Take Venezuela to liberate Brazil!  Take Switzerland for….uhm…uhm…ere…uhm…CHOCOLATE!  That’s it!