Archive for Axis & Allies ForuMINI Specialised in the World War II Axis & Allies Miniatures and War At Sea Games
 


       Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index -> WAS Scenarios & Houserules
Shigure

Destroyer House Rules

I seem to have lost the various threads from the old Avalon Hill forums that were dedicated to Destroyer house rules. Things like universal Close Escort for all DD etc.

If you don't mind I'd like to either get a thread started here specifically for this or get the links to the old threads some place where others can easily find them. But seeing as I don't recall all the really good house rules I'd love for some input from the rest of the community.
Mad Ghost/0331

I think we talked about that here not too long ago... it seems it broke down when we realized that it would give the USN 4 AAA shots in a sector what with atlanta and all. Iowa would never see another enemy aircraft...  Shocked barf... the British could use it since the Hurricane stinks...
swarbs

I remember some of the stuff you are talking about Shigure.  Way back a crotchety gent with the handle 'old fart' on the other boards suggested that all destroyers should have all the destroyer SA's.  I didn't agree with him.  Partly because I think the new sets (or custom cards) will make most of these available to all navies, and partly because it makes all destroyers cost a bunch.

There were a couple of house rules I played with that did help DD's, though.  First are split-movement rules(I think an EvilKobra creation but not sure).  Essentially, players go back and forth moving different sizes of ships instead of going all at once.  First player moves subs, second moves subs, first bb's, second bb's, all the way to destroyers which move last giving them at least the placement advantage thier agility and speed would have got them in real life.

Another rule that I haven't seen reprised after the DD's were upgraded in the rules is playing that all ships (excluding subs) are crippled when thier hull points run out and are sunk the next hit.  This seemed to help destroyers the most, they add 50%(2 to 3) to thier longevity, whereas BB's only added 20% or so.(5 to 6)
Okie

Here too we seem to want to change the game. It was meant to be simple and quick, if we want a more invoved game try VaS, much more involved and lot's of fun but much longer to play!! table talk  surrender
Blackeagle

swarbs wrote:
Partly because I think the new sets (or custom cards) will make most of these available to all navies


I've been thinking about this.  So far we've been basically extrapolating the SA's for the different nationalities based on the single example we've got in Set 1 (except for Sub Hunter).  So all the RN and RM destroyers have lay smoke, all the USN destroyers have chase the salvos, etc.  I think we may want to switch things around a bit more, give every country a choice of lay smoke and chase the salvoes.  

Sub hunter and close escort are different.  Sub hunter should probably go to DDs that were actually heavily equipped/used for ASW (Atlantic convoy escorts, etc.) which probably means that the RN will have it on a lot of destroyers, the USN and IJN, not so much.  

Close escort just gets too powerful if it's combined with Antiair Specialist.  People already complain about overpowering USN AA, what happens when you plunk down Iowa, Atlanta, and Fletcher all in the same sector?  Four AA attacks, ranging from not bad (Fletcher) to outstanding (Iowa).  I think close escort needs to be restricted to navies that won't get an antiair specialist.

I think the other exception needs to be the Japanese.  Except for specialists like the Matsu and Akuzuki class, they should all get Night Fighter and Long Lance, since these represent Japanese doctrine and the actual equipment aboard the ships.  Some of them could get Lay Smoke or Chase the Salvos, but they cost a lot and that would bump the price up even more.
swarbs

Blackeagle wrote:
I've been thinking about this.  So far we've been basically extrapolating the SA's for the different nationalities based on the single example we've got in Set 1 (except for Sub Hunter).  So all the RN and RM destroyers have lay smoke, all the USN destroyers have chase the salvos, etc.  I think we may want to switch things around a bit more, give every country a choice of lay smoke and chase the salvoes.  


I absolutely, completely agree.  Within the game itself because of repaints I fully anticipate that we will see destroyers of the same class with different SA's.  There will be another Fletcher at some point I'm sure and it may well have 'night fighter' if it served at some of the battles in the slot, or any number of other SA's.

As you say, I really think that only close escort should be out of bounds.  And I don't know that I see a reason to look at every single destroyer history and give it SA's individually, but between the numerous classes we may want to dole out the SA's.  And as you say for the Japanese, the best way to do this may be to look at intent in design and weapons suite instead of individual service.
swarbs

Okie wrote:
Here too we seem to want to change the game. It was meant to be simple and quick, if we want a more invoved game try VaS, much more involved and lot's of fun but much longer to play!! table talk  surrender


I understand your objections but this is the House Rules forum, where people discuss house rules.  I agree that the great part of the game is that it is simple, which means you can play it quick and dirty if you wish.  But, I also think that its simplicity is great because it lets you add detail to what you believe is the most important part.
Run Silent

goodpost  Agreed
Okie

I think if you want to change anything about DD's that they should count as half a shipfor stacking, it would go along with their historical use better. IMHO
Diamondback

But if destroyers are 1/2-stack, what are MTB/PT's and Subchasers? 1/4?

You know, "4 for 1" on stacking might make the Type 13 actually playable... Shocked
swarbs

Diamondback wrote:
But if destroyers are 1/2-stack, what are MTB/PT's and Subchasers? 1/4?

You know, "4 for 1" on stacking might make the Type 13 actually playable... Shocked


If they were on sale 4 for the price of 1 that would be even better.
Okie

I DON'T CARE!!!  I DON'T CARE!!! taz  DO IT MY WAY!!!
Uh-Oh-a, Pardon me I don't Know what came over me!! Twisted Evil  pirate victory
Diamondback

Blackeagle wrote:
I think the other exception needs to be the Japanese.  Except for specialists like the Matsu and Akuzuki class, they should all get Night Fighter and Long Lance, since these represent Japanese doctrine and the actual equipment aboard the ships.  Some of them could get Lay Smoke or Chase the Salvos, but they cost a lot and that would bump the price up even more.

Even Akizuki should get LL, just with a reduced dice-pool--they carried 5 Type 93 LL torps in one mount, but it was slapped on as an afterthought. Keeping the LL damage-bonus but reducing the chances to hit is IMNAAHO the best way to represent this...
Blackeagle

Diamondback wrote:
Blackeagle wrote:
I think the other exception needs to be the Japanese.  Except for specialists like the Matsu and Akuzuki class, they should all get Night Fighter and Long Lance, since these represent Japanese doctrine and the actual equipment aboard the ships.  Some of them could get Lay Smoke or Chase the Salvos, but they cost a lot and that would bump the price up even more.

Even Akizuki should get LL, just with a reduced dice-pool--they carried 5 Type 93 LL torps in one mount, but it was slapped on as an afterthought. Keeping the LL damage-bonus but reducing the chances to hit is IMNAAHO the best way to represent this...


Thats exactly what I did with the custom cards I made for them.  They get 2/2/1/1 with the LL SA (standard for ships with a 4-5 LL broadside).  Neither, however, gets night fighter (they get Sub Hunter and AA Specialist, respectively).
Demotox

I think the current destroyer rules do more than should be done to protect destroyers...
       Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index -> WAS Scenarios & Houserules
Page 1 of 1