@crockett36
This seems interesting. I’ll try it out.
G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)
-
One idea I had ages ago was to make a check whenever you enter a sea are containing enemy naval units to see if you can even detect them (these sea areas are huge). You would need a 2 to detect submarines and a 3 to detect surface vessels.
I am also revamping ground combat to account for more protracted conflicts and change the way armoured and mechanized corps interact with the map. This is kind of based on the 1914 rules with a few ideas of my own to do with how defensible each different unit is or how organized it was.
Every couple of years I feel like playing A&A Global but problem is that the game’s design is kind of dated and there are some new offerings which just add to the metagame and make it so much more interesting though they don’t do scale quite as well as A&A does.
-
@mAIOR
Hi mAIOR,we actually use somekind of this idea in Triple A G40 Redesigned House rules, which Barnee constantly update, about detecting Sub, then attacking them.
I played an old A&A rules which was named WWII The expansion. The first booklet developed a combat phase named: Air search communication and combat. Each aircraft (fighters and bombers) were rolling and a “2” and less resulted in spotting Subs in the given SZ. Then, each aircraft proceed to attack. Either @3 for Fighter and @4 for Bomber. However, all other naval units were always visible.
In the Redesigned HR suggested in TripleA, Subs can be spotted and sunk on a “1” only by an Antisubwarfare roll by either Destroyer A1 D1 M2 Cost 5 or a Tactical bomber A3-4 D3 M4. This roll is prior to the Submarine’s Surprise Strike. It is a one shot opportunity before Subs can submerge to not being engaged in a Naval Battle.
This 1/6 roll come out from 2/6 (to search and spot) x 3/6 (to hit with an aircraft). So, 6 out 36 or 1/6 explains this very small odds of sinking a Sub by air, with only Tactical Bomber, or by Destroyer.
We tried to allow Fighter this capacity, but the attrition rate among Subs was too much. And since, Subs cannot retaliate against aircraft, it was not funny at all to see them sunk with no chance of defending themselves.
So, the correct setting was only 1/6 per unit, either DD or TcB, for a single opportunity before Subs submerge.
-
@baron-Münchhausen said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
@Baron:
As far as combat units go, I would set out these chief goals for fixing busted units in the current (ideally the solutions for the “problem units” should interrelated.)
Deal with the vulnerability of navies to mass bomber spams
Make the Cruiser a worthwhile purchase.
**Fix AAAguns once and for all.Last things first, AAguns suck. This is pretty universally acknowledged. It blows that the unit sculpt is pretty cool, but it just has no good role to play in the game for most players. For me the single most annoying thing about AAguns is how they are restricted the non-combat phase. This makes them an all around headache in addition to being overpriced and underpowered. So lets fix them.**
As for Cruisers, granting them some sort of AA shot on the water, would fulfill the dual purpose of giving them a unique role to play in the naval game, while also helping to mitigate the overwhelming power of Bombers vs Navies. Does anyone object? Or see this as a non-issue? I would love to find a way to make the AAAgun into a normal combat unit, that moves during the normal combat phase, and can load and unload from transports in the same way all the other transportable units can.
If no one objects to a tweak then I would suggest that we find a way to adapt the AAAgun and the Cruiser (oerhaps in a way that doesn’t violate the current battle board core info) perhaps by granting them some special or expanded abilities?Cruiser anti air capalities have been discussed before.
Flak that can move during combat has also been discussed.
I think it’d be nice if we took a look at some of those discussions and settled on something we can all get behind.Not saying we need to iron out all the details right now, but just to looking for some agreement in general principle. :-D
About AA guns, here is the link to a thread which explains my most recent idea and showed many quotes from other people in various thread. Food for thought. :)
Two simpler and balanced ways to handle AAA unit (Antiaircraft artillery)?
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36277.msg1433338#msg1433338I just found that Larry suggested a similar AAA unit on Alpha+.1 brainstorm.
I believe anything similar should be tried to solve AAA issue.Let me be the first one to post on this “Theorycrafting” site.
Flak guns… Just a fancy name for AA-Guns. Flak guns are a new unit. Each would be based on the historical weapon used by the different powers (TBD for sure). Hey, in other words its a new unit that has its own Attack/Defense numbers. Its own cost. It’s own capabilities and use. For example the numbers may look something like this:
Cost 5
Attacks: No attack power
Defense: Only aircraft that are attacking land units in which the Flak gun is located can be shot at. Flak guns can only roll 1 die but can roll for each round of combat, just like other units. Each Flak gun in a territory can roll up to 2 dice per round if under attack by at least 2 aircraft or more. They can be chosen as a casualty. They scores hits by rolling 1s.
Movement 1
Special notes: A player may have as many Flak guns per territory as he wishes.
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4062
My own idea on AAA wasn’t that far.
@Baron:
As far as combat units go, I would set out these chief goals for fixing busted units in the current (ideally the solutions for the “problem units” should interrelated.)
Deal with the vulnerability of navies to mass bomber spams
Make the Cruiser a worthwhile purchase.
Fix AAAguns once and for all.
ANTI-AIRCRAFT ARTILLERY A0 D1 M1 Cost 4, 1 hit,
Each round, up to 1 preemptive defense @1 against up to 2 planes, whichever the lesser, works similar to OOB AAA but can defend each combat round.
Stop any blitz, and defend itself @1 against enemy’s ground units, if no attacking air unit is present.
Can move during combat move phase, can be taken as casualty (owner’s choice).Talking AAA for changing.
With the help of Barnee (thanks man), I run a few test on 1942.2 V5 Triple A.
The AAA was
Attack 0
Defense 1
Hit 1
Move 1, both combat and non-combat
Capacity: preemptive 1 @1 against up to 2 aircraft
Cost 3I found that in major battle, with a massive opening round attrition, there is only a few if not at all Infantry surviving. In such cases, I understood why Larry decided to not give any regular defensive capacity at all. Instead, he increase the antiaircraft capacity to up to 3 rolls. In essence, it means that on average AAA survived a round and a half. In that case, giving these rolls in the preemptive phase of the whole battle is to be certain that all AAA have the opportunity of opening fire at aircraft. If it was a regular roll at aircraft, we cannot be so sure that these unit reaches the second or third combat round, meaning a single roll would have been shot.
So, make it only preemptive shots was elegant and simplify the regular combat round: each casualties are similar and left to owner’s choice.
However, at 5 IPCs it was a high cost for a unit which can be dodge pretty easily by not sending aircraft. Making it a pure buffer unit, in essence. Only good for absorbing hits to save other units, like a Battleship, but with no retaliation guns. This seemed broken to me. Or make AAA only good for the main theater battles over VC territory or important IC.
By reducing to 3 PU or IPCs as low cost as an Infantry, it provides a better feel of bunker and defensive fortifications which can be afford to lose on front line, as Infantry are used to be traded.
By giving a small Defense 1, in regular battle, it cuts the capacity to dodge it. It may defend by itself. No need to add more units in the territory. So it remains usable as a cheap fodder. And “1” are still clearly associated with this unit.
So, for balance, at best AAA would have the potential to roll 3 times @1. 2 in the preemptive phase and 1 the regular. 3 pips potential. This is mostly even with Infantry A1-2 D2 but you always get 3 pips in all situations and sometimes 4 when combined. I feel it is ok, since the fear of loosing an aircraft in the opening phase which embodied the AAA unit worth something after all.
Now, here is the interesting narrative part I discovered by toying a few game tests over it. Because of the potential of firing at aircraft, you may want to preserve this unit: if hope is high of winning the fight. But, there is a cost. You sacrifice at least 1 pip of defense (compared to Infantry or Artillery). This little 16,7% odds can sometimes make a true difference in the early combat rounds. By loosing Infantry over an AAA, I can read this tactical situation as the commander is not willing to lose or abandon a defensive entrenched line but at a cost. More soldiers have to pay dearly to keep this fortified position assuming that holding the fort will provide the upper hand the next season or month, if enemy is trying again an assault on that position.
I see this hard choice as an interesting dilemma which happens more often because Powers can purchase more of them.
And don’t be afraid about spamming, by giving no attack values, it is a warranty that Infantry mobility and attack capacity remains much needed.
If you don’t want these kind of dilemma during casualty selection. I believed this type of AAA will fit the deal where is more PUs ressources, like G40:
AAA
Attack 0
Defense 2
Hit 1
Move 1, both combat and non-combat
Capacity: preemptive 1 @1 against up to 2 aircraft
Cost 4 -
@baron-Münchhausen said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
So, the correct setting was only 1/6 per unit, either DD or TcB, for a single opportunity before Subs submerge.
This is interesting but I think that due to the size of sea zones, it should be for all fleets. In my current naval redesign, I made subs cheaper (4) and they attack and defend on a 1 (they were terrible at any kind of engagement where they were spotted) but they need to be spotted first. Surprise attack is still a 2.
I also halved the attack value of aircraft against vessels except for tactical bombers (which can be thought of as naval bombers as well) so fighters on a 2 and tac on a 3. Strategic bombers don’t have any use outside strategic attacks but strategic attacks matter more.
This means that air power needs volume to act as a deterrent.
Then I created a tech deck and you can develop radar and ASDIC to counter subs (centimetric radar was vital in the war of the atlantic as planes now could detect submarines far away and limit their on surface time which effectively hindered their ability to operate) and you can also develop Submarine tech to counter to some extent such advances (metox, decoys, snorkels, sonar ablative counters) and then the Type XXI and XXIII subs which can provide a new advantage if you are still in the battle of the Atlantic.
I also think that the rules for aerial combat from 1914 are the best ones yet and I kind of co-opted them. Planes can intervene only in the first round of combat and you can use TAC and fighters to attack enemy troops and there is a mandatory air superiority round (like the 1914 one) to decide intervention though both sides can scramble fighters and tac bombers to intervene in the ground combat.
I am in the process of revamping ground combat to a more interesting approach but I need to test a lot of things. Bottom line is that I always disliked the “one hit and you are out” system of A&A and I am trying things where units have multiple hit points and they represent army corps instead of divisions.
Here’s a couple of changes I am testing out so far (if anyone interested, we could arrange a tabletop simulator or another online platform game to try it out… It is quite a tedious process though as we aren’t playing a game really. Lots of testing, restarting, testing again):
When you buy an infantry corps, it has 3 disks under it (2 for Italy to represent their 2 brigade infantry divisions which in practice meant that their infantry formations were inherently weaker than French, British or German) and attack with 2 dice on a 1. Every hit, you remove one disc from under it. First disc is “free” and nothing much happens it just means that your infantry corps is getting disorganized. Second disc, you lose one attack die so now you only roll one die for attack. You need to pay 1IC per disc to recover org and strength. You lose another one and that unit is not combat effective anymore and wont roll any dice and another hit will remove it from the game (you will need to basically pay 3 IC to get it up to strength the advantage being that this inf corps will be at the frontline already).
This also means that Italian infantry after sustaining a single hit loses a lot of their grunt and in North Africa it seems to work quite well as the British with less apparent units can sustain themselves against Italy quite well especially on the defense since after the first round of combat, the Italians will lose a lot of their firepower and quickly becoming very ineffective.The advantage of this is that for Operation Barbarossa in 1941, you can give a malus to the soviet infantry where they use only one die to represent the lack of organization due to the red army purges and whatnot meaning that the early german advance will be easier even with a numerical disadvantage (more on that on another post ^^).
I am also toying with the idea that combat is limited to 2 rounds (armored and mechanized units can fight an extra round) and then you need to pay with discs to push the attack representing lack of organization and attrition. It also changes the concept of Blitzkrieg for armoured units as it means that the concept of contested provinces gets introduced here (again, a great concept from 1914) and I want armoured units to be able to push through a contested province and attack the next one which can lead to encirclements.
This also seems to make (more testing needed to calibrate costs and stuff) your IC having to be split between building new units and maintaining the ones you have.
Artillery also work a bit differently and instead of increasing infantry attack, they have a pre-attack barrage which can hit on a 1 before combat starts. And I am toying with the idea of artillery in neighbouring provinces being allowed to take part in this bombardment. And they attack normally on a 2 afterwards.
Anyway, there are still many, many more changes I am working on (to do with the planning level of the game) and if there is any interest, I can discuss them.
-
On your vessel attacks by planes u said fig at 2 and Tac at 3. Is this the same for attacking subs ? Also Tac I believe should be AD@3 first round against a vessel then @1 rest of rounds. This is based on dropping there payload.
There is a lot of stuff here so it will make the game take longer to play.
Do u plan on having planes needing to find fleets or even a single surface ship ? -
@SS-GEN said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
On your vessel attacks by planes u said fig at 2 and Tac at 3. Is this the same for attacking subs ? Also Tac I believe should be AD@3 first round against a vessel then @1 rest of rounds. This is based on dropping there payload.
There is a lot of stuff here so it will make the game take longer to play.
Do u plan on having planes needing to find fleets or even a single surface ship ?well, that is an interesting idea and I need to test things out. I was thinking of giving planes only one attack and then they would have to withdraw.
The game being longer to play is not necessarily bad. As it is it is too long for what it offers imho. Adding extra mechanics can make the game longer but more interesting.
Yes. They would provide a bonus (instead of a 3 roll on a 4 or something) but they would need to find it. Also, Limiting planes to a single sea zone away from shore is another thing I am thinking off. Replicating the Atlantic Gap and the air gaps in the pacific (maybe Japanese fighters early war have long range by default allowing for 2 sea zones worth of movement).
-
@SS-GEN said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
{snip}
Also Tac I believe should be AD@3 first round against a vessel then @1 rest of rounds. This is based on dropping there payload.
{snip}I don’t mean this to be a personal attack against you, SS-GEN, so please don’t take what I have to say that way.
That said, I have an issue with this idea that bombers, both tactical and strategic, lose their effectiveness after the first round of battle. Turns are supposed to represent months of time, not just one battle over the course of a day. Committing your Air Wing or Numbered Air Force to a battle over a piece of ground or sea that last for months doesn’t consist of making one bombing run, it consists of repeated bombardments over the course of time.
In the run-up to the invasion of Normandy, from late April to June 6th and beyond, UK and US strategic bombers conducted attacks on 72 different rail yards and flew “… 2,198 sorties were flown to sow mines in enemy waters either side of the invasion corridor, and at the mouths of harbours sheltering German motor-torpedo boats (E-boats) and submarines.” (Source: UK Imperial War Museum, https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/d-day-and-the-aerial-battle-for-normandy)
When you commit strategic bombers to your attack on the Normandy territory, you are unleashing those attacks against rail yards, slowing the movement of tank units to the front lines. You are sowing those mines, to prevent German torpedo boats from attacking the transports holding your troops.
Rome wasn’t built in a day, WW2 wasn’t fought in a day, so assuming that your strategic bombers drop one load and quit fighting for that turn afterwards is absurd from a historical perspective. If you desire that strategic bombers be better at bombing industrial complexes than ground troops or ships at sea, I hope your desire springs from a game-balance perspective. It is my studied opinion that there is no historical basis for such a thing.
-Midnight_Reaper
-
Non takin. Well I do disagree with you but IMO.
Didn’t mention but the Tac gets to pick his target first turn.Planes shouldn’t win all the battles. A stg bomber A@4 every round is just crazy.
Bombers weren’t that accurate.
I can see maybe a stg b getting 2 rounds but then aa guns should get a second round of defense roll against planes too based on your time frame of battles.
I’ve been playing the 1 round stg bomber with 3 dice rolled and Tac dive rolling first round pick target then AD at a lower rate based on there guns only. In games for a long time now.I do have I believe what your getting at for planes and ships in all combat rounds. Dog fighting and ship aa.
So anyway we probably will never agree on some issues but it comes down to what you want for your game play. I try to go historic as much as possible if it works in the game.
-
@mAIOR said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
@SS-GEN said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
On your vessel attacks by planes u said fig at 2 and Tac at 3. Is this the same for attacking subs ? Also Tac I believe should be AD@3 first round against a vessel then @1 rest of rounds. This is based on dropping there payload.
There is a lot of stuff here so it will make the game take longer to play.
Do u plan on having planes needing to find fleets or even a single surface ship ?well, that is an interesting idea and I need to test things out. I was thinking of giving planes only one attack and then they would have to withdraw.
The game being longer to play is not necessarily bad. As it is it is too long for what it offers imho. Adding extra mechanics can make the game longer but more interesting.
Yes. They would provide a bonus (instead of a 3 roll on a 4 or something) but they would need to find it. Also, Limiting planes to a single sea zone away from shore is another thing I am thinking off. Replicating the Atlantic Gap and the air gaps in the pacific (maybe Japanese fighters early war have long range by default allowing for 2 sea zones worth of movement).
Well we had in a game sea planes. Big and small. M4 and M6. If plane could reach sz then needed to roll a 3 or less to find ship etc…
The SM M4 plane could only land on a carrier. BG M6 plane could land on land only.
Then based on time of war your fig could find fleet I think starting on turn 4 then after a certain turn later in war game no need to find ships.I remember there was some times u couldn’t find the fleet for 2 or 3 turns. Just throwing stuff I’ve played with towards ya.
-
Update to 2.654
Adds a few Naval Units to Germany, UK and Japan to keep from breaking RD 1 battles when using the 2 Shot BB and CAs and the C5 DDs.
Also made Newfoundland British for the Canada Mod.
-
-
@SS-GEN
heh heh actually I think it might been AA gamer. I can’t remember. Pretty sure he’s mentioned it at some point tho. Or i asked him to clarify : )
-
@SS-GEN that is another kettle of fish altogether. I am trying not to go into new sculpts (or ways to identify new units) as that is another headache altogether and for now using Fighters as fighter/CAS, TAC as TAC/NAV and STR as STR.
I think an attack on ships should be preceeded by an AA defense equal to half the ship’s defense.
And I like the idea of TAC/NAV being allowed to chose target.
Another thing I thought of was to fix a scale for the units in game so we can have some more interesting OOB.
I think that each ship should represent 2 or 3 real ships and I like the idea that capital ships should take multiple turns to build…
I am going to organize and playtest some of my ideas sometime this week focusing on the naval side first. Will come back with the outcome of them.
-
@mAIOR said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
@SS-GEN that is another kettle of fish altogether. I am trying not to go into new sculpts (or ways to identify new units) as that is another headache altogether and for now using Fighters as fighter/CAS, TAC as TAC/NAV and STR as STR.
I think an attack on ships should be preceeded by an AA defense equal to half the ship’s defense.
And I like the idea of TAC/NAV being allowed to chose target.
Another thing I thought of was to fix a scale for the units in game so we can have some more interesting OOB.
I think that each ship should represent 2 or 3 real ships and I like the idea that capital ships should take multiple turns to build…
I am going to organize and playtest some of my ideas sometime this week focusing on the naval side first. Will come back with the outcome of them.
Ya kinda figured but was more or less another idea and without tech radar or whatever u could still find subs and ships if u didn’t want tech.
Be nice to see tacdiv get to pick target
Tac AD@3 first round pick target. Then AD@2 rest of rounds with AD chooses casualty.OK we wait on your test results.
-
We like people who playtest :)
-
@mAIOR said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):
I think an attack on ships should be preceeded by an AA defense equal to half the ship’s defense.
And I like the idea of TAC/NAV being allowed to chose target.
Another thing I thought of was to fix a scale for the units in game so we can have some more interesting OOB.
Any level of AA which is higher than up to @1 on aircraft, is going to create a lot of aircraft attrition. I saw this happened many times in various playtests. So, it implies to compensate for the accelerate losses of aircraft. Keeping 10-11-12 IPCs values is too high and was balanced for a game which was meant to shield aircraft casualties in many many ways.
As I wanted something like 1914 dogfight for Fighter while TcB being able to target enemy’s ground units (at least, but I’ve tried just 2 times with targeting warships too: need more playtests on that point ). I developed my own working house rule but on 1942.2. It works relatively well. But cannot say for G40 kind of scale.
Fighter are A2 D2 M4 Cost 7, always hit aircraft first if any present, as long as there is on the opposite side.
TcB are A3 D2 M4 Cost 8, pick any ground target as casualty upon a successful hit.I hope you will see how this going in the direction you intend to implement.
The 1914 dogfight mechanic can somehow be working each combat round, as long as you have Fighter remaining on any side.Just note that Tank A3 D3 C6 have better odds, so it happens very often when trying to take a needed TT, Fighters were sacrificed along the battle so to keep better odds and the opportunity to conquer the TT.
HTH, wish you luck to find the adequate numbers for your game.
-
@baron-Münchhausen Yeah… 1 Might be enough. It depends. It depends on the size of each individual unit. It might be better to give more AA dice to Battleships and carriers since these ships usually had quite a decent AAA complement.
Aircraft on the other hand (besides strat bombers) are too expensive imho. So it might be interesting to lower their prices.
Hmmmm…
Maybe fighter/Cas have a 2:2 value with no malus on air superioriry, TAC a 3:3 but 1 in air to air operations and Strat have no attack value but a defense of 2 in air operations (a box of B-17s was a tough nut to crack).Yeah, I think I will playtest these changes as well. Writting a small piece of software so I can make this easy as possible.
Is there a kind of calculator like this already made? it would save me the trouble.
-
Just to let you know based on Fig being the same Defense value as a Inf in playing the Fig was to weak. But this is based on more Inf in a game or battles.
Now Baron has mentioned it works OK in 42 game. G40 maybe not.
As far as ship AA it should be no more than 1 but for not every ship based on barnee’s play testing.
For every Carrier ya give them AA @1 plane.Not trying to deter any buddy’s play testing here . I’m just telling you based on my game what works and happens.
Yes my Battleships and Cruisers do get 2 shots each per round. I use d12. More room compared to d6.
Battleship C14 AD@8 + a roll of 1 gives them a AA hit on a plane too.
Cruiser C10 M3 AD@6 + a roll of 2 or less gives them a AA hit on a plane too.
So basically the big guns hitting ships while AA picks off a plane every now and then. This is for every round of combat. Now I believe barnee based on each getting a d6 AA @1 was to strong and he gave each ship a d12 dye roll for AA in triple A.
With d6 you would need to adjust this.From playing there’s not as many planes killed by ships than you would think. But with Carriers getting a AD@4 against a plane only helps the fleets on defense more if you don’t bring carriers to attack also.
Of course all my planes cost 8. As Baron mentioned in his play tests and what happened in war a lot of planes where killed, crashed or lost.
Plus figs and tacs/dives can hit each other in each combat round with after first round of combat you can retreat as many planes as an Attacker or Defender.
Fig C8 AD@5 + if roll is a 2 or less get a plane kill too.
Tac C8 AD@6 pick target First round then AD@4 + if roll is a 1 get a plane kill too. Attacker or defenders choice.
Stg B. C8 A3 @3 one round only. D @2. DF@1With Tacs and Dive Bombers getting a pick target is a awesome thing in games. Times you need to save a fig or the Tac Dive are scarificed.
Iv’e seen huge fleet battles with planes and only a few planes killed on each side with AA and DF per battle.
With Planes hitting planes on ground battles too this helps Russia some too but based on your setup of planes.
But still nice in any battle where a plane gets killed and you force the A or D to pick a plane. Idea here’s is to implement all scenarios of the battles. Some may disagree but its the middle ground across the board.
As mentioned not trying to deter anybody else’s play testing or suggestions. I only post ideas and outcomes based on game play and what and how Iv’e seen it work.
Other wise I had my say and I’ll butt out if you need me too.This is just some ideas that you may want to try.
We been playing this way now for 2 years.Yes with Baron and Barnee in the mix they can give you better imput based on there play of 42 or 40 game.
Oh by the way what is the 1914 plane plane and or ship rules you guys are talking about ?
-
@SS-GEN
1914 rulebook p. 19:Step 2. Determine Air Supremacy
If fighters are present on both sides, there must be an air battle to determine who has air supremacy. Each side rolls one die for each of his or her fighters. For each die roll of 2 or less, one enemy fighter is removed (after both players have rolled). Unlike the land battle itself, the air supremacy battle continues until one side has established air supremacy by eliminating all the enemy’s fighters. Additional rounds of fire are conducted until one or both sides have no fighters remaining.If one side gains air supremacy either by being the only one with any fighters left, or was the only one to have any fighters at all, he or she gains air supremacy. The player with air supremacy immediately promotes all of his or her artillery to the box that reads “Artillery with Air Supremacy Support”. Air supremacy provides your side with a high altitude reconnaissance advantage… a bird’s eye view of the battlefield if you will.
In addition to gaining promoted artillery, the side with air supremacy also gets to roll for their remaining fighter(s) against the enemy’s land units in one of the next two steps.
1914 Fighter is A2 D2 M2 Cost 6, and plays the whole Dogfight phase, then goes to land combat.
In my 1942.2 houserule Fighter A2 D2 M4 Cost 7 targeting aircraft first, both phase are played simultaneously. And when one side gets air supremacy, the Fighter’s rolls are simply applied normally against enemy’s surviving land units. -
@SS-GEN Thanks a lot for the info. I don’t want to use different dice than the D6 as one of my points with my mods is that it can be done by anyone (hence wanting to stay away from new sculpts).
I don’t mind fighters/CAS to be seen as worse than infantry. Frankly, they should be. They should be a force multiplier that can be called upon from further away and temporarily increase the fighting potential of the infantry. If you build more infantry and give the opponent air supremacy then you get punished.
But I am getting ahead of myself here ^^
For now I am going to focus on the Naval aspect. Finding fleets, new movement and convoy raiding, revised stats and costs and time to build.
Suggested Topics
