Medium Bombers and Dive/torpedo bombers

  • '14

    If I could get a B-25 or B-26 piece, i would use the OOB tacs as dive/torpedo bombers.

    D/T bombers wouldn’t change from the OOB or Global 39 rules. Except cannot perform SBR.
    Tactical Bomber (B-25) would change: cost - 11-13
                                                      Attack- 7
                                                    Defend- 4
                                                      Move- 5
    can perform SBR. Of course this is on a D12 system.

  • Customizer

    I think the B-25 and B-26 would be more suited as medium bombers rather than TAC bombers.  However, I agree with you that if they introduce medium bombers, then TAC bombers should be restricted to regular combat situations, NO SBRs.

    With the new pieces, especially with the new sets being offered by coachofmany, I am wondering if we all will have to go to a D12 system.  What will that mean for the great FMG combat dice?  That is all I use, excepting for France, ANZAC and neutrals, and the French and ANZAC dice will be coming shortly.

    Hey, wouldn’t FMG combat dice be cool if they were made in 12 sided versions?

  • Customizer

    @knp7765:

    With the new pieces, especially with the new sets being offered by coachofmany, I am wondering if we all will have to go to a D12 system. 

    Hey, wouldn’t FMG combat dice be cool if they were made in 12 sided versions?

    I have the same concerns. I still lean toward D6 right now but if FMGs offered D12 versions It would defiantly push me over the edge as far as moving toward the D12 system (which is probably inevitable anyways.)

  • '14

    I understand what you are saying. So if a B-25 was a piece just make a medium bomber category and have tactical bombers also. The tactical bomber role would change, no bombing SBR on naval/air bases.

    I would like to see someone do a country specific D12. It is definetly more dynamic, allowing more specialized units for variant games. I think future games will have to go with a D12.


  • The B-25/ B-26/ A-26 are quite comparable to the pieces already being used by Japan and Germany in capabilities like speed, range, load-bearing capability: Germany and Japan didn’t really HAVE 4-engine heavy bombers in significant numbers.  I think if we brought planes in this class into the game (or the British equivalents, like the Vickers Wellington) I think we’d have to make the standard axis bombers move into this class, and then find a way to differentiate the medium and heavy level bombers from each other… Perhaps have each heavy bomber roll 2 dice, but at only a 2 on the attack, whereas Tac bombers (who have the advantage of the precision allowed by dive bombing) would attack on a 4 but have a shorter range.  Medium bombers could have the range of a heavy bomber but roll only 1 die??  I’m not quite sure yet… just brainstorming…

  • Customizer

    Yeah, I can get that the current Axis bombers would be more comparible to Allied medium bombers.  In fact, Germany deliberatly stayed with medium-sized bombers because they only thought of war against neighboring states so had no need for a long-range strategic bomber and many more medium bombers could be built for the same price.  That tactic served them well until they invaded the Soviet Union and the Soviets moved their heavy industry behind the Ural mountains.  Then Germany needed a longer ranged bomber but didn’t really have one, at least not out of the prototype stage.

    I think all the Axis countries did have either prototype versions or at least plans for long-range heavy bombers.  I think that we should have a corresponding game piece to represent those planes so that Germany, Japan and Italy could possibly get those bombers for gaming purposes.  Also, I think that there should be medium bombers for all the Allied countries so they would match the Axis types.  At the start of the game, ALL countries should just have the medium bombers and can get heavy bombers later in the game – either by graduating into them or as a tech.  Historically, both sides started with medium bombers, but the Allies worked more to increasing to heavy bombers while the Germans kind of slipped behind.  By the way, just my vote, the Fw 200 Kondor for the German Heavy Bomber piece.

    I’m not sure about having bombers only hit @2.  That seems to be too weak.  I do understand your thoughts on TAC bombers being more precise therefore hitting better than regular bombers.  How about TACs @4 and regular/strat bombers @3?  I like the idea of heavy bombers rolling 2 dice, but ONLY if you count BOTH dice.  So, if you have a heavy bomber and roll two 3s, you get two hits and destroy 2 enemy units.  None of this “roll 2 dice and choose the best result” crap.  I hate that rule!  Rolling 1 dice @3 for medium bombers sounds good too.

    One other thing regarding heavy bombers;  I don’t think it necessarily needs to be a tech, especially if we get medium bomber pieces.  I know it’s on the tech charts currently, but I imagine that could be changed.  Perhaps medium bombers could cost 12 and heavys cost 15-18.  This way we could have both types on the board.  Plus, if you start with medium bombers and get the “Heavy Bombers” tech, it would seem kind of silly to replace all the medium bombers you already have with heavy ones.  Again, maybe that tech could be changed to something else and heavy bombers would be a new piece to add to the game along with medium bombers.  I think there would still be a place for medium bombers as heavy bombers would be a fair amount more expensive.


  • Oh, when I said that heavy bombers get to roll 2 dice, but at a 2, I meant that both would count for sure!  The idea being that it’s harder for them to hit, but if they’re lucky they can do a heck of a lot of damage because of all the bombs they can carry.  I mean, hey, ask anyone who flew bombers back then and I bet they’d tell you that high-level bombing was a real “crap-shoot” (pun intended :-D)

  • '14

    @knp7765:

    Yeah, I can get that the current Axis bombers would be more comparible to Allied medium bombers.  In fact, Germany deliberatly stayed with medium-sized bombers because they only thought of war against neighboring states so had no need for a long-range strategic bomber and many more medium bombers could be built for the same price.  That tactic served them well until they invaded the Soviet Union and the Soviets moved their heavy industry behind the Ural mountains.  Then Germany needed a longer ranged bomber but didn’t really have one, at least not out of the prototype stage.

    I think all the Axis countries did have either prototype versions or at least plans for long-range heavy bombers.  I think that we should have a corresponding game piece to represent those planes so that Germany, Japan and Italy could possibly get those bombers for gaming purposes.  Also, I think that there should be medium bombers for all the Allied countries so they would match the Axis types.  At the start of the game, ALL countries should just have the medium bombers and can get heavy bombers later in the game – either by graduating into them or as a tech.  Historically, both sides started with medium bombers, but the Allies worked more to increasing to heavy bombers while the Germans kind of slipped behind.  By the way, just my vote, the Fw 200 Kondor for the German Heavy Bomber piece.

    I’m not sure about having bombers only hit @2.  That seems to be too weak.  I do understand your thoughts on TAC bombers being more precise therefore hitting better than regular bombers.  How about TACs @4 and regular/strat bombers @3?  I like the idea of heavy bombers rolling 2 dice, but ONLY if you count BOTH dice.  So, if you have a heavy bomber and roll two 3s, you get two hits and destroy 2 enemy units.  None of this “roll 2 dice and choose the best result” crap.  I hate that rule!  Rolling 1 dice @3 for medium bombers sounds good too.

    One other thing regarding heavy bombers;  I don’t think it necessarily needs to be a tech, especially if we get medium bomber pieces.  I know it’s on the tech charts currently, but I imagine that could be changed.  Perhaps medium bombers could cost 12 and heavys cost 15-18.  This way we could have both types on the board.  Plus, if you start with medium bombers and get the “Heavy Bombers” tech, it would seem kind of silly to replace all the medium bombers you already have with heavy ones.  Again, maybe that tech could be changed to something else and heavy bombers would be a new piece to add to the game along with medium bombers.  I think there would still be a place for medium bombers as heavy bombers would be a fair amount more expensive.

    This was my idea exactly for my 39 setup. All nations start out with medium bombers and have to develop heavy bombers….so if Japan and Germany want to skip this technology for another they can. These new pieces are going to open the games for more house rules…isn’t that what we want? It’s what I want…! I think making Heavy bombers for the countries that don’t have an OOB heavy and making medium bombers for the countries that don’t have an OOB medium is the smart thing to do.


  • @Tigerman77:

    This was my idea exactly for my 39 setup. All nations start out with medium bombers and have to develop heavy bombers….so if Japan and Germany want to skip this technology for another they can. These new pieces are going to open the games for more house rules…isn’t that what we want? It’s what I want…! I think making Heavy bombers for the countries that don’t have an OOB heavy and making medium bombers for the countries that don’t have an OOB medium is the smart thing to do.

    I agree with you here on the possibility of house rules.  In my house rules version major warships already get 2 attacks, one for primary and one for secondary armament, so giving heavy bombers two chances to hit isn’t much of a stretch, any more than having 2-hit warships (or in my case, even 3-hit ones, though I haven’t quite settled on whether the 3-hit ones should be rare “super-BB’s” or standard BB’s, giving BC’s and carriers 2 hits…)

    As far as making it a tech, you could also make certain techs be already awarded to certain nations as a national advantage: e.g., Germany could automatically get Heavy Tanks whereas the US & UK could automatically get Heavy Bombers, which to some degree reflects the realities of the war and of each nation’s research priorities in the early-war period up to 1942 (when some game scenerio’s begin, after all…)

    Giving the oob 4-engines a “tech” status, though (even if it’s automatically awarded to the US, say) does somewhat push the B-29 out of the picture as an “upgrade” options, though… but this may become a non-issue, as I have yet see anyone firmly commit to doing a B-29 piece… (Other than TT’s old piece which is maybe too small…)

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

43
Online

15.1k
Users

35.9k
Topics

1.5m
Posts