That’s one of the problems with games is everybody banks there planes. My own game at least has it where u can lose planes in naval and ground when u don’t want to. If there’s a bonus plane kill u have to take one as a casualty
AARHE: Phase 3: land Combat
-
Then aagain is there anything technical difficulties assosicated with a forced landing by tanks instead of infantry?
Yes their is… tanks take much longer to deploy and would be destroyed by artillery before they fired a shot. Infantry is able like water to work its way in the cracks of the enemy line. In open country the opposite is true. A beach landing is allways done by Infantry… the assault landing is typically what Paratroopers are faced with. I forgot to mention that heavy tanks don’t perform too well in soft wet sand.
-
Thats fine then.
-
Current Index
Sequence:
Defender retreatAircraft:
Separate dogfighting and land portion
Bombers - fire in opening-fire instead when not dogfighting
Fighters - fire in opening-fire instead, selective fire, when not dogfighting
Dogfighting combat values
Defending aircraft must retreat after defending land units are destroyedAmphibous assault:
Coastal bombardment - all bombarding ships fire but number of hits limited to number of attacking infantry
Defending artillery - fire in opening-fire instead in first cycle
Attacking tank and artillery - enter combat at beginning of second cycle, if attacker defeated in first cycle they do not enter combat -
And the old argument on aircrafts…
The four boundary cases.
1 FTR attack 10 ARM - currently the 10 ARM would to retreat or be destroyed…maybe there should be a limit on combat cycles…say 6 cycles…after that attacking planes retreat, attacking land and sea units may choose to remain and the territory or sea zone is “contested” with no one controlling it
10 ARM attack 1 FTR - currently the FTR must retreat, realistic
1 INF attack 10 FTR - currently the 10 FTR must retreat, but not realistic, maybe defending aircrafts should be able to fight for say 2 rounds after land control is lost
10 FTR attack 1 INF - currently the INF is dead, realistic
-
Just checking…nothing in here for phase 1?
-
NO… this is prob phase 3
-
I have an idea.
Let anti-aircraft shoot every cycle of combat?
I mean the reason why it fires only for one round in OOB is because of the unrealistic model of shooting at every enemy planes. Now that thats gone this can be removed too.
-
If your talking about AA guns as built in ID of a factory or VC over land then allowing them to shoot more than once violates the 10% rule.
-
There must be more then that to the 10% rule?
I think enemy avoiding heavy AA areas make a part in the 90% fighter losts due to dogfighting.
Maybe the rate is to be further tuned.
-
only 10% of planes on average were shot down by AA during the war. Their is nothing more than that. It wasnt 11% or 15% it was 10% causaulties out of all sorties by land based weapons. WE need to end reinventing the wheel and move forward with phase two and three. The AA gun thing was allready decided at this time. WE will return to “fine tune” things after we get a clearer picture of the “big” picture. The other rules we introduce have a direct result on how much we intent to ADD to revised. If we add too many spices the soup will taste bad and nobody will play it because its gone too far in the other direction and we lost something in the translation of this varient. Once we all see what is done in the other 2 phases we can make things more accurate and complex. Right now lets just fix all the big problems with the game as we see it.
-
I like the idea of the infantry and tanks not being able to attack fighters. Thats maybe even better then defending and attacking on a 1. I agree if land control is lost and you only have planes they could defend for 2 rounds.
-
Oh ok we’ll leave the AA and sort out things by other means.
So lets look into the four boundary cases. Its a tough problem to model.
1 FTR attack 10 ARM
10 ARM attack 1 FTR
1 INF attack 10 FTR
10 FTR attack 1 INF -
1 FTR attack 10 ARM
+++ they most likely fight one round and the tanks move off the next round. They are committed for at least one round of death.
10 ARM attack 1 FTR
+++Nothing happens except the fighter is dislodged to another friendly territory in flight range.
1 INF attack 10 FTR
+++Nothing happens except the fighter is dislodged to another friendly territory in flight range.
10 FTR attack 1 INF
+++ fighters kill infantry but dont occupy territory
-
I don’t know about 10 FTRS Having to leave if 1 inf attacks. Shouldn’t the FTRS have a least one round of combat before retreat?
P.S. I just got a copy of the original A&A! Ya!
-
As before, the problem is the part jets are forced to retreat.
The model of land control needs fine tuning I think.It would be weird to make them retreat yet introduce all those new air missions.
-
OK ill come up with something then to overcome this problem.
-
The main problem I see with the rules is their complexity! Keep it simple if you want people to play them.
I find the idea of airplanes engaging airplanes wonderful. Very good idea. But a plane attacking another plane should have the edge. You think you can defend on a 4 with a Me-109 on your tail?? I think the one on your tail attacks on a 4 and you defend on a 3…
Now for ground units being unable to hit airplanes? What is that? Even in Battlefield 1942 you can attack a fighter with a jeep-mounted .50!!! Defending ground units should be given a chance to defend themselves against attacking A/U on a roll of 1. I mean ONE DIE for the whole bunch per cycle of combat. Even if you have 5 INF and 5 tanks, the whole bunch gets to roll 1 D6 per attacking ennemy A/U per cyle of combat. That would represent the small arms fire you encounter when strafing and the small caliber AA guns escorting ground units.
Infantry should be able to destroy tanks in defense…don’t you think?
-
I find the idea of airplanes engaging airplanes wonderful. Very good idea. But a plane attacking another plane should have the edge. You think you can defend on a 4 with a Me-109 on your tail?? I think the one on your tail attacks on a 4 and you defend on a 3…
++++in this sytem planes fight at different modified aerial combat values… attacking planes are at 1-2 defending at 1-3… bombers on either side at 1.
that way the planes dont get chewed up, plus its impossible to destroy that many planes in a short time. The defense gets the advantage because it has a shorter range to engage planes… ala the battle of britian… the defense was more able.Now for ground units being unable to hit airplanes? What is that? Even in Battlefield 1942 you can attack a fighter with a jeep-mounted .50!!! Defending ground units should be given a chance to defend themselves against attacking A/U on a roll of 1.
+++++ its possible for a .50 to hit a plane but thats in movies and … games… in the war this was not a common thing especially when a fighter = 1,000 planes… their is not realitic way any combination of land forces in the entire war had even destroyed more than 300 planes in this manner… all AA flak batteries combined were responsible for no more than 10% of all combined plane loses in the war… thats why air speriority is most important… during the the bulge campaign i ask you why didnt the German panzer korps just “shoot down” all those allied planes in the air in late december? … Antwort: because they didnt have any air units! and land forces cant do anything againt the air. Look at Iraq 1991 and the battle of the retreating forces back to bagdad… they even had surface to air weapons ( rpg) but no capabilities to do anything against planes… even with modern weapons… it was even worse in WW2.
I mean ONE DIE for the whole bunch per cycle of combat. Even if you have 5 INF and 5 tanks, the whole bunch gets to roll 1 D6 per attacking ennemy A/U per cyle of combat. That would represent the small arms fire you encounter when strafing and the small caliber AA guns escorting ground units.
++++++++++++ok what exactly is the rule? how many dice, what are the results? what are the effects? … the idea is not clear.
Infantry should be able to destroy tanks in defense…don’t you think?
+++++they can but only if their are no defending infantry left and only tanks left… In war tanks fight tanks and have great tank battles… this is no place for infantry to hang around… armor cuts thru infantry like a knife and butter. The only way to stop this is with …tanks so these hits go againt each other… So in a way infantry is still a sponge because it protects enemy infantry from killing your tanks… but in a real way we have solved that problem of “infantry as guinea pigs”
-
Even in Battlefield 1942 you can attack a fighter with a jeep-mounted .50!!! Defending ground units should be given a chance to defend themselves against attacking A/U…
Yeah I played that game too.
Yes that what I thought first, and then Imperious convinced me.
We are talking a about whole divisions here, in this strategic level (rather than tactical level) boardgame.A few planes suffer from small arms now and then. But not majority of a division.
-
Ok, it is true that if we look at it in a very global way, maybe a few planes are gonna be shot down but it’s not representative out of 1000 planes.
in this sytem planes fight at different modified aerial combat values… attacking planes are at 1-2 defending at 1-3… bombers on either side at 1.
I don’t understant the 1-2 or 1-3. Isn’t it 2 or less and 3 or less?
And for the tanks battles, Thats a great idea too. It’s more strategic like that.
Suggested Topics
