@armedace
Those are some pretty cool ideas, I’ve thought about incorporating marines and how to do so-your ideas seem good. I also like the idea of interceptors at 2, more realistic and makes you think about SBR more. Although I’m not so sure about reducing air bases costs and increasing their ability to scramble to nearby land-seems OP.
AA50: Mech infantry as a tech
-
30 IPCS for lets say, 2 tanks and 5 Mech infantry. Resulting in a one trick pony charge at russia.
I have playtested this for like 5 years at least. 2-2-2 @5 does not kill Russia. Play it out in any version
-
2-2-2 at 5 IPCs?
Why….in the name of all that is holy, would you not just buy a tank?No kidding it wont kill russia, the 3-3-2 tanks have a ard enough time as it is
(I was placing the price for mech at 4IPC, the 30 was just a total) -
It has its uses. Play it out in your next game. You will see that in some situations these are good as alternative fodder when operating with tank groups and infantry is too slow.
actually i made a typo: the cost is 4 not 5. sorry!
-
Okay, I never imagined this was a scientist saying “Hey, we just figured out that if you pack a company of men into a cattle car, you can move them across the country faster.”
There’s a few things this could represent:
- Half-tracks
- Deuce and a Half’s (2.5 ton trucks.)
- A brigade commander writing to Washington and saying “Yo, you knuckleheads, if you gave me those trucks you use for moving around your frakkin Chocolate Cakes, I could be in Berlin by now!”
- A redesigned tank that has a flatter back end so more men can ride on the tank. (Probably the most accurate version.)
etc.
Remember, the tank was just invented in WWI. Planes, tanks, jeeps, trucks, artillery, etc all went through massive changes and upgrades throughout the war. Here is just a case where science upgraded vehicles to transport more men.
That said, i’d like to see the rule be:
infantry may move 2 during NON-COMBAT MOVE only. If you have Mechanized Infantry, then they may move 2 period.
-
@Cmdr:
Here is just a case where science upgraded vehicles to transport more men.
Still…. I’m thinking it shouldn’t even be in the same league as the guys coming up with rockets, radar and jet engines?
Seems its a question of production & doctrine far more than R&D and if I’m romping around accumulating IPCs shouldn’t I just be able to buy them without the research dice rolls to invent them?
Anyway, even if you’re for keeping it as a breakthru, the other half of my original post still stands: do you have one breakthru you’d like to see added to the charts?
-
as possible in revised I would like for the german subs to cost the allies 1 ipc pr sub pr round as a tech, as this could potentially give the germans some more motivation to build navy. The BUT is then that it should be made axis only. In order to compensate for this i guess an allied only would have to be added too i guess
-
my gaming group and I have concluded that a 2-1/2-2 4IPC unit is pretty much the last combonation of numbers that can be fairly combined for a unit.
Im on the side of 2-1-2 Mech infantry, decent attackers, but suffer in defense.
Purely for game balance, to make them much less desirable. And to not clog the 2-2 spot that already has artillery.And Jennifer, infantry non combat moving at two at all times is a bit of a big deal. It would almost cut the eastern front in half. Moving two is a big deal for guys on foot. Marching from eastern US to Western Us? Trans Jordan to India? France to poland. Canada to Mexico. In the modern world, that doesnt seem difficult for a 4-6 month time peroid. But the infantry unit is supposed to represnt an infantry unit, it would be a pretty harsh march to get from transjordan to india in 4-6 months on foot. There just wornt enough trucks for everyone.
Gameplay wise, if you take moscow with a desparation tank charge and air support. In noncombat you can move infantry from Karellia, baltic states, east poland, and Ukrane into russia, effectively putting so many infatry in there that no one will ever take it back. (asuming you bought any infantry)
New tech….i feel its fair to stick with armor.
“Heavy Armor - Tanks defend on a 4”
This might be completely unfair though…puts them on the level of a fighter, but at half the move and half the cost. -
Interesting Idea fighter commander, a re-worked tech system with a 3rd and 4th chart, only open to the axis or the allies respectively.
Ive been dabiling with a tech system that locks each country onto a tech tree. It doesnt have to roll for resarch, it just has to pay an R&D fee, as much as it wants each turn, to consistently recive tech.
For example, Germany: for each 3 IPCs germany devoted to R&D, place a tech counter on germany
2 tech counters - Advanced artillery, to represent 88’s
4 tech counters - Rockets, the V2
7 tech counters - Jet Fighers, the Me-109
and so forthI havent fleshed it out yet, or even gotten anywhere near doing all the other nations.
-
being a big fan of the national advantages of revised nation specifik advantages are more or less the only thing I miss in aa50. of course there is the option of using cmdr jennifers additions, but somehow I just want official rules (silly me I know) as in revised.
-
well, in that case, investigate my set of national advantages I wrote for AA 50, most are just copied from revised, but ive modified some, and of the 36 avalable (including italians) 18 are new to the NA system.
here is a link, and word document copy
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=14737.0 -
Mechanized infantry should not be its own unit. As said, each piece represents a varied mix of units. Once a unit becomes mechanized enough to be considered ‘mechanized infantry,’ it has moved into the realm of being covered by a tank.
On the other hand, ‘mechanized’ does not necessarily mean ‘armored.’ If there were a breakthrough for mechanized infantry, it would represent a country developing a cost efficient truck design that would allow all infantry to move 2.
-
Interesting Idea fighter commander, a re-worked tech system with a 3rd and 4th chart, only open to the axis or the allies respectively.
Ive been dabiling with a tech system that locks each country onto a tech tree. It doesnt have to roll for resarch, it just has to pay an R&D fee, as much as it wants each turn, to consistently recive tech.
For example, Germany: for each 3 IPCs germany devoted to R&D, place a tech counter on germany
2 tech counters - Advanced artillery, to represent 88’s
4 tech counters - Rockets, the V2
7 tech counters - Jet Fighers, the Me-109
and so forthI havent fleshed it out yet, or even gotten anywhere near doing all the other nations.
mmmm personally I think that Wpns Development the general type of breakthru should be elective but the timing of the breakthru should be largely random rather than budgeted
but that’s me… :-D
And I will confess: I also don’t like NAs unless there’s a reason beyond a strict replay of WW2 (e.g., no Japanese rockets or Russian marines etc.)
Suggested Topics
