@Imperious:
I prefer top left. I other one has one leg in the air. it wont take longe before that scult would bend and no longer stand properly. Both feet need to be on the floor.
but with the bottom left sculp you can point from away from the German line…… :wink:
I garuntee damaged carriers retured to port during WWII with some planes on board
Of course they did, but this is a simplified game. If you want an element of reality to it make a house rule where some or all of your planes are on CAP, maybe even send them to adjacent sea zones declared during each turn, and then roll 1d6 per plane to land on a damaged carrier (a 6 ditches in ocean).
And while you’re at it, roll 1d6 after a sub strike to determine torp strike - 6 for critical hit - ammo magazine, all lost; 5 for rudder strike, steam in a circle, can’t move for a full turn; 4 for power loss, can only move one space at a time; 3 -1 for torpedo belt, land planes as noted above.
Or stop worrying about it cause your carrier will OCCASSIONALLY live slightly longer than before because it’s a minimal change.
Planes might be on CAP
Planes might be on deck
Planes might be in the hold when the sub attacksThat is why I prefer reducing the ammount of planes that can land to 1
so you do lose one plane if you have two, but arent punished unrealisticly if a sub sneak attacks you and somehow pops two planes when it hits the carrier
Realistically, the carrier is half on its side, unable to land any planes.
It could be argued that the point of a plane only having one move space as a defender is that they ARE in fact on CAP, not when attacked specifically but throughout the round until your turn again and as such are not fresh.
If you want to make it more complicated to realistically describe planes on CAP and on deck, maybe declare before combat whether you’ve got some sleepers. And if that carrier doesn’t fully tip you keep your decked plane. But if the sub hits the ammo mag… well… bummer. Guess you should have had them on CAP with their one move.
The planes launch to defend against a target they can not hit, and can not land on a now damaged carrier.
A torpedo killed 20 IPCs of fighters by damaging a carrier, does it hit the cargo hold? and the deck? and some of the planes on deck? after that, there isnt even much ship left to repair!
So you’re far from friendly land and a sub comes along against your lone carrier:
AA50 rules: sub hits the carrier and sinks it in one hit. Planes can’t land, planes die. Sub “killed” 34 IPCs.
Pacific Rules: sub hits carrier, carrier develops a list (which is really the damage we’re discussing, causing the planes to be unable to land on a tilted deck), planes can’t land, planes die, but carrier manages to depth charge a 2 hit on the sub. Sub “killed” 20 IPCs and if you get lucky, you can limp the carrier back home.
Much better deal. The “protection from this kind of insanity” is that your carrier MIGHT make it back, saving you 16 IPCs. It could be worse. It would make sense to me that planes would NOT in fact launch if a sub sneak attacked and hit (but they could launch if the first torp missed). Because you’d think the whole point of the sub is to catch them unawares. But that would make subs very broken.
I got many questions about price and how to pay for that poster, so here few infos…
If you are interested in the poster, the price is 195$ USD shipping included in Canada or USA. It’s pretty expensive, cause the printing of a poster 34 x 65 cost me a lot… Usually, it takes two weeks for delivery. I can agree a payment through Paypal or money order. Email me at eminence_rouge@hotmail.com if you are interested…
The actual photos that you can see on my posting, is a thick paper that I glued on a wood board and put some varnish after that.
My mind is not to make money here, but only to give a chance to all AA fans to get that nice map !
Wicked cool. May have to do this myself…
You will need at least one more unit to attack the stack, and that can be a world of difference in attacking the whole stack or not. Now the carrier+planes combo gives you 4 hits instead of 3
However I must agree with the cost, 14 would be better … or at least let them attack at 1s or defend at 3s. We are getting too much units with 0 attack values: trannies, aa guns and now ACs … or ignore those odd bases and autorepair as always …
Except you can retreat if they choose the hit on the carrier, leaving them in a weaker position when your ally attacks. And if they choose planes as casualties, each subsequent round is easier to win.
I know that if I attacked and they chose to hit the carrier, I’d probably immediately retreat if my partner could finish them off. Damage done.
@Imperious:
Who would ever take that hit on the carrier. Now the other naval units are cheaper than the carrier. 2 hit carrier was supposed to be an added benefit but it is useless.
You’d take the hit on the carrier when attacking a seazone within range of freindly territory. In revised, 1942, or AA50 '42 this might be the the japanese/british naval battle off india on the first turn. The planes are all in range of burma/french indochina, and I often reinforce there with the planes anyway leaving the navy to itself (no significant planes or navy in range to attack them). Now the carrier soaks a hit (assuming the BB also took one of course) and doesn’t die.
I’d say the 2 hit carrier can be helpful, but you’ll always need to plan for it. If you leave it to the enemy to exploit, well, buhbye planes. Still , with the downgrade in defense from revised to 50, and the further downgrade in offense now, even with the soaker hit, I’m with you IL. I’m not sure the price bump was warranted.
Re: having a carrier in the atlantic or med. It won’t be easily abused, as the carrier has to wait a full round to be repaired. But that will mean that one ally will need to make the first attack on it to leave it crippled, and then the next ally will have to attack it to finish it off, preventing them from attacking somewhere else. It’s helpful. Just not super helpful.
Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked. It doesn’t matter what the attacking force consists of. If your lone carrier is attacked by subs and hit, whether damaged or sunk, your planes will have one space of movement to land. If they can’t, they’re lost. The moral of the story is, don’t leave your fleets without destroyer escorts when there are enemy subs around.
Thanks for clarifying that. Considering the new rules of planes not being able to spot subs without the destroyer, I’m not sure I would have caught that they would be aloft when the torps hit (Although, it seems as though it would be an appropriate exploit if the sneak attack also meant planes weren’t yet in the air, but perhaps that would add an extra unnecessary rule).
the rules say you can’t launch a fighter/plane from a carrier with 1 hit on it.
the rules also say you can’t land a fighter/plane on a carrier with 1 hit
the rules also say that all fighters launch whenever your carrier is attacked, even if just by 1 sub.so this begs the question, is there a situation possible where you have a fighter/plane on a hit carrier, or is the first rule just redundant? I don’t see why we need to have the first rule, since the situation would never occur with the other 2 rules…
Oh, and my friends and I plan on using Carriers as a 1/1/2/14 unit, instead of this 2 hit but too expensive to buy crap.
It’s not redundant when it involves friendly powers on carriers. Say Britain attacks a fleet using his carrier (and it has to attack to land a plane in that sea zone) but has a US fighter on board. Carrier takes a hit in the battle, the british fighter that was to land there will be lost (or was selected as a casualty) but the US fighter will remain on board as cargo, and now will not be able to launch until the carrier is back in port.
@Imperious:
Make a easy example:
Carrier 2 fighters with 1 hit and 1 cruiser and Battleship defending against 2 battleships, 2 Cruisers
The attacker gets two @4, two @3
Defender gets one @ 2, one @ 3, and one @ 4 The 2 fighters don’t roll. but if this was AA50 it would be:
three at 4 and two at 3
So now we are in a worse position with a 2 hit carrier. The price is now 16 IPC as well.
This is not good.
It seems unlikely that this would ever happen as the only way to end with a hit and two fighters aboard would mean you would have had to attack with a carrier with two friendly aircraft on board. As in the above example, with two US fighters. But I cannot think of an instance where you would WANT to do that unless it was a massive fleet attack and you couldn’t leave the carrier behind (but why not wait for the non combat move as the 1 soaker hit probably wouldn’t help with the attack all that much.
So are you saying that your planes cannot deploy at all if an AC is attacked or they can’t only if a sub attacks?
If your fleet consists of a carrier plus fighters and is attacked by submarines, your planes would not deploy as defenders as they cannot target a submarine.
However, if your fleet consists of a carrier plus fighters AND a destroyer and is attacked by submarines then your planes WILL deploy as defenders.
The two hit carrier doesn’t substantially change game tactics other than you won’t have to buy a carrier to replace it and you’ll have to limp it back to port. If it’s attacked in deep water in AA50 by subs, your planes likely would have perished with only one move space. Now unless you have a destroyer present, they won’t even have that (assuming the subs do their job).
Worst possible scenario now is a lone carrier with fighters against a couple subs. Only slightly less bad is a carrier w/ planes and a destroyer that manages to kill the subs only after the carrier was obligated to take the hit (destroyers lost AND carrier hit once before planes/carriers/destroyers eliminate the subs). In this situation, you’ll keep the carrier, but if your planes aren’t close to friendly land or another carrier they’re going to be in the drink.
Otherwise aside from sub hits, if attacked you’ll only select the carrier as a casualty now after all planes are destroyed OR you’re in range for your planes OR it’s more important to weaken/destroy the attacking power regardless of potential loss of your planes after you successfully won. Which is exactly the same decision you had in previous games, now there’s just a soacker hit which occasionally might come in handy but may also be a hindrance as in previous games it was unclear but implied that planes survived the torp attack… and now they won’t cause they can’t launch.
Probably too early to say that Japan acquires an unrealistic amount of IPCs. Perhaps compared to anniversary but seems that this game everyone earns a lot more IPCs.
That was my conclusion as well, considering that once the US enters the game, even if Japan has crushed china to one or two territories, the combined economy of the allies seemed to match them (not sure though) At that point, if japan can’t keep up the momentum even that mass of cash won’t help with a 3 prong naval assault. After each of the allies were geared for war it seemed that even all that mass of cash had to be spread too thin to try and counter the US fleet steaming from Pearl AND the British/Anzac offensives in the east indies and India.
I believe the carrier cost needs to be updated in Advanced Shipyards to reflect the increase to 18 w/ 2 hits.
It also sounds as though a key battles were lost or worse, never fought.
Generally, Germany should take egypt first round. So Italy shouldn’t have an factory there. It’s rare indeed that Italy would have enough IPCs to purchase a factory when they should be building units to help Germany. If you did fight the egypt first round battle, it sounds as though you lost some rather important units
Karelia is also a priority target that it appears you didn’t catch in the first or second rounds. It’s more than possible first turn, and further you can reinforce in noncombat with a couple tanks if you left them behind in Poland (very annoying for russia). This may mean some British Navy is still floating, so it’s a judgement call.
The first turn for Germany and Japan is critical, and if you leave the wrong territories open or weak, or national objectives of allies still open (the phillipines comes to mind) you’re setting yourself up for a long hard crawl.