paratroopers

[Sondrax]

i played aa50 yesterday with some friends.. the german developed paratroopers in his first round. having played with paratroopers in revised already (when they were only able to transport inf during non combat movement) no one of us thought about those beeing a threat untill there were 9 bombers landing in London lol

i wonder though.. is it really intended that bombers can also pickup their cargo along the way? (its not really mentioned in the rules.. but neither denied)
germany is now able to permanently threaten uk without having a navy.

[LT04]

I don't see why you couldn't.  Even today the US army and Air Force don't keep the paratroopers and the planes on the same base.

Fort Bragg has Pope Air Force Base.

LT

[Krieghund]

The infantry and bomber must begin their movement in the same territory.  This will be in the FAQ.

[Constantinople]

I don't get this rule:

on p12: Breakthrough Chart

"3. Paratroopers............The Bomber may still attack during the Conduct
Combat phase, but it cannot make a strategic bombing run in a turn that
it transports an infantry unit...."

So this rule is telling us that the Bomber may transport an infantry unit, only during the combat movement phase, and then it may still do a normal attack i.e.bomb after it throws out it's paratroopers?

In other words: it may still attack/bomb as normal after it's paratroopers jump, but it may not attack as a strategic bomber after it's paratroopers jump.

Is that right?

Also, since the rule uses the words "your bombers can act as a transport," may the bombers deliver it's cargo of infantry to friendly territory instead of dropping them as paratroopers? Japan can reinforce islands with infantry by air instead of by sea?

[Sondrax]

thx krieg, we kinda assumed that but werent sure
what may also need some clarification is: "the bombers must stop in the first hostile territory". does that include hostile SZs?

[Krieghund]

I don't get this rule:

on p12: Breakthrough Chart

"3. Paratroopers............The Bomber may still attack during the Conduct
Combat phase, but it cannot make a strategic bombing run in a turn that
it transports an infantry unit...."

So this rule is telling us that the Bomber may transport an infantry unit, only during the combat movement phase, and then it may still do a normal attack i.e.bomb after it throws out it's paratroopers?

In other words: it may still attack/bomb as normal after it's paratroopers jump, but it may not attack as a strategic bomber after it's paratroopers jump.

Is that right?

Yes, and it must attack the same territory in which it dropped the paratrooper.

Also, since the rule uses the words "your bombers can act as a transport," may the bombers deliver it's cargo of infantry to friendly territory instead of dropping them as paratroopers? Japan can reinforce islands with infantry by air instead of by sea?

No.  Paratroopers may only be used in combat.

[Krieghund]

thx krieg, we kinda assumed that but werent sure
what may also need some clarification is: "the bombers must stop in the first hostile territory". does that include hostile SZs?

No.

[Greand Stone]

Forget about the problem with heavy bombers. I say partroopers are potentialy more gamebreaking, and is
my number one concern regarding the technologies.

Germany might take London with it. If you go for a strat using bombers and hope for
paratroopers, its not that unlikely to take London as if you get paratroopers at a lukcy point London might be very poorly defended.

But just think about what USA/UK/JAPAN might do with it:
They may take the majority of the pacific islands without building a single transport.

And I'm sure its 1000 creative ways of using the paratrooper in totaly stupid ways.
Take Brazil, then from there threaten USA?

Long-range aircraft+paratroopers: Invasion of Japan by placing troops in alaska?

Sure paratroopers had a role in the war, but not as implemented in Axis and allies

[Marquis]

But just think about what USA/UK/JAPAN might do with it:
They may take the majority of the pacific islands without building a single transport.

And I'm sure its 1000 creative ways of using the paratrooper in totaly stupid ways.
Take Brazil, then from there threaten USA?

Long-range aircraft+paratroopers: Invasion of Japan by placing troops in alaska?

Sound like a fun tactic.  And that's my point it's fun not hisotrical - if you want hisotrical you'll need to make a house rule or you could play Europe Engulfed - that's a very fun hisotrical game but plan on spending 10+ hours in playing...

[Krupp Steel]

"It's raining Falschrimjager! To the Bofors!"


No but I agree there are going to be some really cool strategies with Paratroopers, and no doubt some really funny ones.
But it is going to hurt when a couple fully laden bombers get shot down :-(Thats a hefty amount of IPC's gone in one round.

[Sondrax]

well 12 IPC for a bomber is not much in AA50, with those NOs theres generally much more money available than it was in revised. having 50-60 income seems to be the norm for US, germany and ���. russia also remains around 30 for a long time. even italy should get 20+ for a few rounds at least.. UK prolly wont stay at its 43IPC starting income, but should remain above 30ish anyway.

[Greand Stone]

If you are playing UK and suddenly out of the blue german gets partroopers by a lucky dice and then german manage to capture LONDON, THAT is NOT fun at all.

[Sondrax]

yeah true hehe.. since techs now come into effect immediatly, german paratroopers are a threat even though they are not on the board yet.
lets say germany saved some money and has 65IPC at its hands.. 5 for the tech + some luck = 5 bombers/inf in london right this turn. thats an attack value of 25, so UK should  _always_ have a def value of 30+ in london.. thats 15 inf, or at least 45 IPC bound to this territory. a lot more if germany developed heavy bombers prior that.
if japan or italy are in control of wcan or panama and germany also has long range, the same counts for washington and germany doesnt even need a single ship.
needless to say that moscow and stalingrad need to live with this in mind as well.

ofc this works both ways, but with the axis capitols beeing surrounded by water or other "big" territories, its just not that imminent.

i think this just needs some sort of house rule..

[FieldMarshalGames]

I am very happy to see this old HOUSE RULE implemented in the game.  I have not used it yet to much effect but it will lead to some interesting strategies.  The fact that LONDON, BRAZIL and even the USA are threatened by them makes the game more dynamic in my line of thought.

[Driel310]

With all due respect, Germany having 5 bombers is not something one would see in every game.

It's more likely Japan in the end game gets it and lands her bombers in Berlin, but then , you don't have any infantry to load... 

In another example you state that Germany has long range and then Japan has Panama or Western Canada........ hmmm, another situation which won't happen that often.

As for taking Russia, don't forget that the bombers have to stop in the first hostile territory they enter, so as long as there is no clear path to Moscow, the Kremlin is safe from Paratroopers.

All in all, do not overrate para's that much.  (besides, tech is random, so it's not something you can take into account with, same as getting Heavies just before a major Pacific fleet battle..)