As far as having different sculpts to represent land based planes and those operating from carriers, you would really only need those for Japan and the US and we have those now:
US Land Based – P-38 (OOB), P-40 (HBG), P-51 (HBG)
US Carrier Based – F4U (HBG), F6F (OOB Pacific)
Japan Land Based – Tony (HBG)
Japan Carrier Based – Zero (OOB)
I know that England also had some carriers, but when you are playing England, how often do you actually buy carriers? We rarely see carriers built by UK in our games, unless the Allies are really whomping the Axis and the UK has extra money to spend. If some of you see more carrier action by the UK, then I guess you will have to do some of the options mentioned above.
As for the other countries, Germany, Italy, Russia, France and ANZAC, none of them even had carriers in service during the war, although I know for game purposes we would like the options. Plus, a standard G1 buy for a lot of people is a carrier. I guess if you really want to separate the planes, you will have to mark them like what was mentioned above as well. Since Germany never really developed a carrier in the real war, I can’t see HBG coming out with a specific carrier borne German plane any time soon. On a side note, I’ve often wondered if the Graf Zeppelin was finished and pressed into service, would Me262s have been able to operate on her.
Flashman,
I do understand your idea that land based aircraft should not be able to land on carriers – OR perhaps there could be a HR where if you spent an extra couple of IPCs per plane during your Purchase Units/Repair phase, certain planes could be modified to work on carriers.
However, why make the rule that carrier based aircraft can NOT land on land? Carrier based planes could still operate from regular runways. I think that restriction should be one-sided; any land based planes can not land on a carrier if they have not been modified. Then you would have to pay close attention to what types of planes you have where and not be sending any land based planes out on an attack where their only safe landing space would be a carrier.
I think this would only really affect sea battles, but I could see some occasions where a plane would take off from land, attack a certain territory then go to land on a carrier, like perhaps in anticipation of a future attack. So if you wanted to do that, you would have to pay that little extra to modify that plane (unless it was already a navy plane).
This might also affect Allies landing planes on carriers that aren’t their own.
Wittmann suggested that navy planes should cost more than regular planes. Perhaps they would cost 1 IPC more. Of course, you could buy a regular plane then convert it later but then it will cost you 2 IPCs to convert a regular plane to a navy plane. It’s like Minor and Major ICs. A Major IC costs 30 IPCs, a Minor IC costs 12 IPCs. You can convert a Minor to a Major for 20 IPCs, thus that Major just cost you 32 IPCs.
As I have been typing this, I was thinking of fighter planes but this could go for Tactical Bombers too. Again, the US and Japan currently have different sculpts but none of the other nations do.
US Land Based – Dauntless Dive Bomber (OOB)
US Carrier Based – Avenger Torpedo Bomber (HBG)
Japan Land Based – Val Dive Bomber (OOB)
Japan Carrier Based – Kate Torpedo Bomber (HBG)
So a Dauntless or Val would cost 11 IPCs, an Avenger or Kate would cost 12 IPCs. OR, you could buy a Dauntless or Val for 11 IPCs, then convert them later for an extra 2 IPCs.
What do you think? Good idea?