Maybe its better if you roll for it. If you throw 1, 1 trooper is gone, if you roll 2, 2 troopers are gone, etc.
Ive played this game yesterday by a friend, so I dont really know how paratroopers works. Because we didnt used paratroopers.
If you can only have 3 troopers in 1 plane, you can do 1,3, for 1 trooper lost and 2,4, for 2 troopers lost
5 for all troopers lost
6 for all troopers survive.
And of course they jump in the territory where the plane is shot down.
3 troopers per plane?
I think there should only be 1
i agree. any more than that and itll become too powerful of an addition. whatever floats your boat, but when you make ‘super units’ i think that shown your lack of a good grasp of strategy.
The rules in the Computer game say 1 per plane. But I don’t know if the infantry should be shot down. It all depends on when the plane dropped the troops. Here’s what I think:
If the plane is hit by an AA BEFORE it reaches the territory (i.e. hit by the
AA in WEur while going to Germany) The trooper is lost.
If the plane is hit IN the territory, then the inf still invades but the plane is lost. Losing the plane to attack with 1 inf is bad enough.
But, then agaain, I play that AAs can attack paratrooping inf and I spit the two up when it gets over the territory. So if you have a bmb and an inf paratrooping into Germany, then the AA gets 2 shots: one at the bmb and one at the inf. I mean, he’s in the air right? You still get to pick casualties…of corse.
Rommel said what I was thinking. I didn’t agree on the AA guns attacking the troops along with the bomber. If I were firing off a flak cannon I wouldnt shoot at the guys, I’d go for the whole plane. That way I get to hit all of them at once. And another thing I was thinking, what if airplanes are also defending the assaulted territory, do they get a special ability on the paratroopers? I’m kinda just thinking out loud…
I always felt that the die role on hitting bombers is representative of before they dropped their loads, whether it is bombs or paratroopers.
My reasoning is because when bombers fly in they need to keep a steady course to their targets giving AA a better chance. If they do evasives move they will miss their targets. However once they drop their loads they can change altitude and course when needed. Also since Paratrooping was not always the nicest way to go into battle, being lost can be reflected as a “bad drop” such as middle of a lake, forest, fortified enemy base. But I would be willing to play it either way.
yeah, if i were to play in a game w/ paratroopers, i would say that if an AA gun hit the plane, then the men (or man) inside should be lost before he even left the plane
i dont think the paratroopers went into battle at the same altitudes the bombers did. when playing on the board game i used a diff piece(a bomber with some white out on it)it cost 10 and flew 6 spaces could carry 1 inf. it defended at a 1 and attacked at nothing like a tranny. as far as the plane getting shot down i rolled a die to see if the inf got out odds they did evens they didnt.
Mike_105 you are absolutely correct about the altitude difference in bombers and transports. But their principles are the same and transports were susceptible to a greater variety of AA. I like the idea of transport planes, but i think I may make them cost 8 and have no defense.
I’d give them no attack and maybe one defense as well as cost 8 IPCs. Just like regular transports. Perhaps to solve the infantry loss problem you could do it like this. Any plane hit on the first round of combat loses the infantry. Any round of combat after does not, to simulate the jumping and landing in enemy territory.
8 IPC’s sounds like a good price, and i think they should get a roll of 1 for defence and no roll for attacking.
I would say that the plane should hold 2 inf. One is too little to make a successful paratroop drop while 3 is too much. And the plane should be a bomber that is used since its easier to just do that. You just say Im using this for a paratroop drop and then that bomber, for that turn, is only a paratroop plane. And i think the plane should only be able to go 5 spaces since the bombers would probably be able to go longer distances.
Here are my paratrooper rules that I use from time to time.
1. One guy per bomber this is to show how rare paratroopers were.
2. On the first turn of the drop the paratrooper attacks at a 2 then after that at a 1. This represents the suprise factor that a paradrop attack has on defenders then later the defenders regroup from the shock.
So what you guys think?
Sounds good to me!
Sounds good to me. :wink:
Though, any idea idea on the cost and specs of the plane itself. It’s almost a waste to use bombers as transports due their worth (15 IPCs) and the fact that they’re usual more effective on Bombing Runs (netting 3.5 IPCs while the average territory is worth 2)
A C-47 might look like this
Attack: 0
Defense: 1
Movement: 4
Cost: 5 IPC
a rough idea… but great for building mass aerial formations. :)
Hhmm Glider units now that sounds nice. But mine would look like this:
Attack: 0
Defense: 0
Movement: 4
Cost: 3
Gliders were not known to be armed and they were cheap to produce thus my stats.
But with gliders, don’t you also need a plane to tow it?
As far as combat, how would that work? Do AA’s only fire at transports, or can Fighters also particpate in the engagement. I didn’t A&A:E SBRs rule would work better here.
Use one fighter or bomber per glider. I would say about combat that the glider could not be used to absorb losses. The gliders were one shot guns!! Although maybe reducing the cost to 2 would balance the fact about not allowing it to be a loss. Any thoughts about this?
The problem is that you’re still using one of your valuable ftr or bmb slots for a glider. And countries like Russia and US, which don’t have a large airforce early in the game can’t really utilize gliders effectly
I would say that Air Transports should be revised to the following stats
Attack: 0
Defense: 0
Movement: 4
Cost: 4
I think that a cost of 4 since this puts them at half cost with transports (given their strengths and weaknesses). I agree, gliders should not take losses in combat, but what if the enemy strafes them on the ground? They’re virtually defenseless.
No what I meant was in the attack the glider couldn’t be taken as a loss. And after that the glider would either be removed or reused.
For example: 3 paratroopers are attacking a area that has only 1 infantry.
2 paratroopers roll a 3 thus a miss then the last one rolls a 2 a hit. The defending infantry rolls a 1 thus a hit. The attacking player couldn’t use a glider to absorb a hit.
If the gliders are in a area that’s under attack the defending player could not use them to take up losses!!
If the area is taken over the gliders are removed from play.
Common sense says you destory stuff that are about to be taken by the enemy.
I think you right though about using up fighters and bombers for that movement. I guess just move the glider with out them.
