Im with the air transport plane. Need to use for inf and paratroopers.
@SS:
Im with the air transport plane. Need to use for inf and paratroopers.
And just to expand on that point: as SS correctly notes, a transport plane would be a multi-function unit, whose infantry-carrying application would be distinct from its paratrooper-carrying application. In its infantry-carrying role, it would basically be carrying regular infantry units (with regular infantry unit statistics) and landing them on the ground; a potential use, for example, would be to bring reinforcements quickly and from far away to a player-controlled territory that’s under threat. In its paratrooper-carrying role, it would be air-dropping paratrooper units without landing. These paratrooper units would have different unit statistics than regular infantry, to reflect the fact that paratroopers tend to be less heavily armed than ground troops; they’re typically high-quality soldiers with a high degree of initiative, but they can’t lug around as much stuff as ground troops do. In WWII, they typically needed to be relieved by ground forces within a fairly short amount of time (which failed to happen at Arnhem in 1944, with disastrous results).
Sounds great. Got any ideas as to unit statistics? I am debating whether or not it should have defensively ability. Some modifications of the C-47 (or at least a Russian one) did have machine guns for defense.
@Charles:
Sounds great. Got any ideas as to unit statistics? I am debating whether or not it should have defensively ability. Some modifications of the C-47 (or at least a Russian one) did have machine guns for defense.
I’m not good at devising specific numbers for unit stats, so I’ll just offer some general thoughts. I’d keep the transport plane unit completely defenseless (hmm…where have I previously heard the phrase “defenseless transport”?) for a couple of reasons. First, I’m not aware of WWII transport planes being armed to any significant extent, if at all. Second, I’d argue that giving defensive armaments to a transport plane would be both ineffective and counterproductive. A useful reference point for the concept of defensive plane armements would be the B-17, which carried heavy machine guns in multiple locations; they helped, but keep in mind that the defensive capabilities of these planes weren’t at their best when just a single plane was involved. Those capabilities worked best when B-17s flew in large, multi-level formations, designed to produce overlapping fields of machine-gun fire; transport planes didn’t operate in those types of formations, as far as I know. And keep in mind that the more you weigh down a transport plane by adding weapons and armour, the less payload it can carry, thereby negating its primary purpose.
yea I’d go with defenseless as well. When they’re dropping paras you could let them take a hit but when attacked I wouldn’t let them be hit soakers.
I currently have them at A0 D0 M5 +1 w/AB C 7 can transport one “Elite” unit into combat or non combat. Would like to add inf being able to be transported in ncm as well. I’m on triplea and ran into an issue trying to do that. I’ll have to revisit it. Obviously table top would have no limitations :)
They’re kind of expensive, in part due to the high cost of Elite (5), but are nice for a “Quick Reaction Force”. Hauling regular infantry would definitely make them more viable.
I have in my game d12 A0 D1 M5 C8
Can transport 2 inf non combat and must land plane or transport 1 paratrooper or elite which ever you use and also have a tech in tree where you can transport 2 para troopers and get a +1 for the whole battle of attack. AAA can shoot them down from any territory.
https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/ww2-transport-aircraft.asp
I ezz za got to get me some Bloch MB 220s !!!
Yes this is the 1 piece I want in game. Transport 4 inf or 4 Para Troopers ya ! Frenchies see these coming they would all lay down. :-D
Just added a poll. Tried to hit on the ones you guys pointed out below.
I’m glad this morphed. I’d originally posted this in the Global 1940 thread, so apologies for it not being game specific in my question. But again, glad it sparked discussion in the other games as well, or the gaming mechanic overall.
I think the air transport is an awesome idea, really for all the reasons CWO Marc laid out. He’s right in that naval and ground forces both show this in some capacity, but air is lacking. Very interesting. I agree though, would need a bit more something to create some spice other than just transporting infantry. In terms of dropping infantry off in combat (ie, paratrooper), you could give the infantry unit some kind of negative effect on the first combat round, or something.
Maybe a stretch here, but what about nation specific special units? Might be interesting to have had one special unit per power (at least major powers) that maybe had a unique ability each.
Germany - SS Unit
Japan - SNLF/Veteran Unit
Italy - Bersaglieri Unit
USA - Ranger/Marine Unit
UK/ANZAC - Commando Unit
USSR - Home Guard Unit
France - Colonial Infantry/Foreign Legion Unit
I’m thinking like a unique special ability. USSR gets +1 defense in home territories, French Colonials could spawn in any French territory, Commando can re-roll one missed shot on offense, etc. This might be a bit outside the scope, as it may potentially alter gaming mechanics a bit.
Before I rant too long there, I do think another simple choice may also be in just creating a fortification piece. I could see something like that playing a decent roll, you could give a couple in starting spots, but also the ability to build. We’ve all discussed fortifications before I’m sure. But having a little extra boost to a Gibraltar or Malta, or a German Atlantic Wall, would be interesting choices than could maybe alter some decisions in certain theaters.
Made it hard on purpose in having to only choose one, so I think to get to the crux of it, an air transport may get my vote as well, giving the different aspects in really brings.
Just added a poll. Tried to hit on the ones you guys pointed out below.
I’m glad this morphed. I’d originally posted this in the Global 1940 thread, so apologies for it not being game specific in my question. But again, glad it sparked discussion in the other games as well, or the gaming mechanic overall.
I think the air transport is an awesome idea, really for all the reasons CWO Marc laid out. He’s right in that naval and ground forces both show this in some capacity, but air is lacking. Very interesting. I agree though, would need a bit more something to create some spice other than just transporting infantry. In terms of dropping infantry off in combat (ie, paratrooper), you could give the infantry unit some kind of negative effect on the first combat round, or something.
Maybe a stretch here, but what about nation specific special units? Might be interesting to have had one special unit per power (at least major powers) that maybe had a unique ability each.
Germany - SS Unit
Japan - SNLF/Veteran Unit
Italy - Bersaglieri Unit
USA - Ranger/Marine Unit
UK/ANZAC - Commando Unit
USSR - Home Guard Unit
France - Colonial Infantry/Foreign Legion UnitI’m thinking like a unique special ability. USSR gets +1 defense in home territories, French Colonials could spawn in any French territory, Commando can re-roll one missed shot on offense, etc. This might be a bit outside the scope, as it may potentially alter gaming mechanics a bit.
Before I rant too long there, I do think another simple choice may also be in just creating a fortification piece. I could see something like that playing a decent roll, you could give a couple in starting spots, but also the ability to build. We’ve all discussed fortifications before I’m sure. But having a little extra boost to a Gibraltar or Malta, or a German Atlantic Wall, would be interesting choices than could maybe alter some decisions in certain theaters.
Made it hard on purpose in having to only choose one, so I think to get to the crux of it, an air transport may get my vote as well, giving the different aspects in really brings.
Yes Chris I do have all thee above units in all my games already. Add and tweak as you go on but another topic. At least every country could have some kind of air transport plane anyway.
I agree though, would need a bit more something to create some spice other than just transporting infantry.
A transport plane could also have the ability to carry artillery units and/or anti-aircraft artillery units, as well as infantry units and paratrooper units (though of course not all at once). This would make them similar to the truck units in Battle of the Bulge, which can carry infantry or artillery or the Bulge-specific supply tokens. That’s probably realistic in terms of what a WWII transport plane could carry. A naval transport can carry any type of land unit, but remember that ships can carry much greater payloads than planes. If A&A tank and mech infantry units were subdivided into finer groups than the unit categories allow, a plane could conceivably transport a light tank or a half-track…but if tanks and mech infantry are treated (as in the OOB rules) as undividable unit classes, then I’d disqualify them for air transport.
I voted other. Would like to see distinction on naval aircraft vs. land. Capabilities are slightly different. This is bigger issue in
Pacific version.
Naval and Army aircraft:
Certainly not all aircraft and pilots could land on a carrier. So, need to make a distinction on the purchase. Naval or Army.
Cost is same, but capabilities are not: Naval tactical bombers and fighters can land on carriers, Army cannot. Army tactical bombers get the combined arms bonus, Naval do not. Naval fighters change to D3 on non-island territories, it remains D4 on islands and sea zones. Any type scrambling fighter defends with D4. (Optional air superiority rule in effect only if both planes in their native environment - Army/territories; Naval/sea zones-islands).
@CWO:
I agree though, would need a bit more something to create some spice other than just transporting infantry.
A transport plane could also have the ability to carry artillery units and/or anti-aircraft artillery units, as well as infantry units and paratrooper units (though of course not all at once). This would make them similar to the truck units in Battle of the Bulge, which can carry infantry or artillery or the Bulge-specific supply tokens. That’s probably realistic in terms of what a WWII transport plane could carry. A naval transport can carry any type of land unit, but remember that ships can carry much greater payloads than planes. If A&A tank and mech infantry units were subdivided into finer groups than the unit categories allow, a plane could conceivably transport a light tank or a half-track…but if tanks and mech infantry are treated (as in the OOB rules) as undividable unit classes, then I’d disqualify them for air transport.
What if you were able to just carry 2 inf or 1 truck or 1 mech or 1 art or 1 aa gun per plane only in non combat ?
@SS:
What if you were able to just carry 2 inf or 1 truck or 1 mech or 1 art or 1 aa gun per plane only in non combat ?
I’d recommend the following payload options.
For runway-landing missions:
- 2 infantry (standard OOB unit)
or
- 1 artillery (standard OOB unit)
or
- 1 anti-aircraft artillery (standard OOB unit)
For paratrooper-drop missions;
- 2 paratroopers (special house-ruled unit)
No other OOB unit types could be transported. OOB generic tanks units and OOB generic mech infantry units would be too heavy for a WWII transport plane. The only A&A game that has a truck unit (meaning as an actual unit, not as a sculpt) is Battle of the Bulge; in other A&A games, it would count as a house-ruled special extra unit.
@CWO:
@SS:
What if you were able to just carry 2 inf or 1 truck or 1 mech or 1 art or 1 aa gun per plane only in non combat ?
I’d recommend the following payload options.
For runway-landing missions:
- 2 infantry (standard OOB unit)
or
- 1 artillery (standard OOB unit)
or
- 1 anti-aircraft artillery (standard OOB unit)For paratrooper-drop missions;
- 2 paratroopers (special house-ruled unit)No other OOB unit types could be transported. OOB generic tanks units and OOB generic mech infantry units would be too heavy for a WWII transport plane. The only A&A game that has a truck unit (meaning as an actual unit, not as a sculpt) is Battle of the Bulge; in other A&A games, it would count as a house-ruled special extra unit.
Sounds good CWO.
Yea, I’d agree with that as well. Makes sense to have different capabilities to drop into combat or just transport in a non-combat move.
Anything but Zombies. It’s more likely they could have had robots in WW 2 than zombies. Zombies aren’t a real thing, you might as well have leprechauns or easter bunnies.
Yea, I’d agree with that as well. Makes sense to have different capabilities to drop into combat or just transport in a non-combat move.
To expand on this idea a bit: one detail that would have to be worked out regarding non-combat-move runway-landing missions would have to do with whether transport planes can transport things in both directions. To give an example: if a transport plane takes off from territory X, carrying 2 regular infantry, and lands on territory Y, where it unloads the infantry, does it have to fly out of territory Y empty? Or can it carry out a payload, if the player wants to take something out of territory Y for use elsewhere? In most cases, a player probably wouldn’t need to fly something out after bringing something in…but having that option could be handy, and I can’t think of any reason why the plane would be prohibited from carrying something on the way out. (In war, it’s common to fly supplies and reinforcements into a combat zone, and to fly out wounded personnel on the return trip, but A&A doesn’t have a mechanic for wounded infantry.)
A potential application of the fly-something-out concept would be a situation in which a player would want to fly something out which is more valuable that what was flown in. Interestingly enough, one possibility would be a scenario in which some paratroopers had been previously air-dropped into a territory to help capture it. Assuming that the paratrooper unit is more expensive than a standard infantry unit, and given that (as I’ve mentioned) paratroopers are usually relieved by ground troops soon after they’ve accomplished their mission, a player might want to fly in some regular infantry to take their place once the territory is secure, and to extract the valuable paratroopers on the way out.
@CWO:
Yea, I’d agree with that as well. Makes sense to have different capabilities to drop into combat or just transport in a non-combat move.
To expand on this idea a bit: one detail that would have to be worked out regarding non-combat-move runway-landing missions would have to do with whether transport planes can transport things in both directions. To give an example: if a transport plane takes off from territory X, carrying 2 regular infantry, and lands on territory Y, where it unloads the infantry, does it have to fly out of territory Y empty? Or can it carry out a payload, if the player wants to take something out of territory Y for use elsewhere? In most cases, a player probably wouldn’t need to fly something out after bringing something in…but having that option could be handy, and I can’t think of any reason why the plane would be prohibited from carrying something on the way out. (In war, it’s common to fly supplies and reinforcements into a combat zone, and to fly out wounded personnel on the return trip, but A&A doesn’t have a mechanic for wounded infantry.)
A potential application of the fly-something-out concept would be a situation in which a player would want to fly something out which is more valuable that what was flown in. Interestingly enough, one possibility would be a scenario in which some paratroopers had been previously air-dropped into a territory to help capture it. Assuming that the paratrooper unit is more expensive than a standard infantry unit, and given that (as I’ve mentioned) paratroopers are usually relieved by ground troops soon after they’ve accomplished their mission, a player might want to fly in some regular infantry to take their place once the territory is secure, and to extract the valuable paratroopers on the way out.
But then not all planes could land or take off with dirt runways. So would you need an airbase or airport strip to land and take off only ?
@SS:
But then not all planes could land or take off with dirt runways. So would you need an airbase or airport strip to land and take off only ?
I don’t think we need to require airports or air strips for the transport plane to land or take off. Remember that all A&A units are abstracted: they represent broad types of military equipment rather than specific models, and they usually represent groups of military equipment rather than a single vehicle or weapon. And remember that A&A territories represent large areas of land (such as whole countries) rather than an area broken up into battlefields and non-battlefields. So I don’t think it’s necessary to consider whether (for example) a specific plane model like the Dakota could land on a specific type of improvised runway on a specific battlefield; I’d go with the assumption that a generic group of generic air transports is allowed to make a generic landing in something as big as an A&A territory, without any restrictions.
But you make a good point that some A&A games do have an airbase unit, and that it would be interesting to put it to good use. So instead of having a rule saying that a transport plane can’t land in a territory that has no airbase, I’d go in the opposite direction: I’d go with a rule which said that a transport plane can land in any territory it wants, but that it would get some sort of bonus advantage from landing in a territory that has an airbase. Perhaps the advantage could be that it could land and take off in the same turn. Perhaps the advantage could be that it can make two trips per non-combat move rather than one, provided that (to keep things reasonable) it’s not flying a total distance greater than X number of terriories by doing so. Or something else that’s a suitable bonus.
I think that the ability to move troops through the air is a missing piece from A&A. Which is why I have Air Transports listed among my house rules. That said, I think the important part is “the ability to move troops through the air”, not necessarily a new piece of plastic. Riffing off of the way Paratroopers are handled in the Global '40, SE rule set (bolded section my editing):
@A&A:
3. Paratroopers. Up to 2 of your infantry units in each territory with an air base can be moved to an enemy controlled territory 3 or fewer spaces away that is being attacked by your land units from adjacent territories and/or by amphibious assault. When moving, paratroopers must obey the same restrictions that air units do. If the territory being attacked has AAA (antiaircraft artillery) units, the paratrooper infantry units are subject to antiaircraft fire in the same way as air units. If attacking along with land units from adjacent territories, paratroopers may retreat as normal.
Perhaps in addition to flinging out Paratroopers from Airbases, perhaps we could use Air Bases to shuttle troops around the world? Perhaps we could use Naval Bases in the same way? Either way (Air Base or Naval Base): start in a territory with an appropriate base, can move in NCM to any other friendly territory with the appropriate base type (Air to Air or Naval to Naval).
Thoughts?
-Midnight_Reaper
Just based on my experience playing Frostion’s Iron War map in tripleA, which has an air transport type unit, I think they’re a pretty entertaining piece to have around. In that game the unit can only move 1 inf and has a range of 4, which makes it pretty limited in combat for air drops, though on non com it can be effective at shuttling inf around the map.
Another novel use for the air transports comes when the enemy has a big air wall set up (like a dark skies type scenario) where it is hard to move naval transports in range of the desired target territory. I’ve seen them used to island hop too, like in situations when Japan has a couple dozen fighters at the ready to smoke a naval transport fleet, but where air-transports could be used to maneuver troops around from island to island with less vulnerability on the enemy’s turn. I could see the 2 inf capacity thing working, or with a different capacity if used only on non-com.
I think it fills an interesting gap, offering some new ways to play but without totally breaking things. I think the key is to keep the range pretty limited, and make them week or defenseless like CWO said with a fairly hefty price tag to match their usefulness.
