Lets Talk 2 Types of Tanks

[Deaths Head 420]

that thing is a huge pile o Shet.  Yeah 11 man crew, Get real.  The Damn thing looks like Rivets hold it together.  One shell hits the center of a plate and the whole Plate comes off.

:roll: :roll: :|

[crusaderiv]

So your rules are saying that if Japan had conquered Burma, India, Australia and driven to Moscow… or any of the other ahistorical achievements that occur in this game, they still would never have been capable of producing a heavy tank formation.

LOL, well if you driven to moscow with Japan, Don’t need tank anymore!!!

• fighters, a lot of fighters…

It’s up to you but I prefer accurate game.
The day i wil had heavy tank tech to Japan and I will add A bomb tech to germany!

Oh, why not bacteriological weapon for Japan?
1 Balloon per turn. Attack at 3 or less over USA?

[Emperor_Taiki]

@crusaderiv:

It’s up to you but I prefer accurate game.
The day i wil had heavy tank tech to Japan and I will add A bomb tech to germany!

Well  I still think everycountry should have a chance at any tech. Just because they didnt dosnt mean it was impossible for them to have these techs. All the nations in the game have modern econamies and had a good shot at producing any of the wars weapons especailly if the war continues longer than its hisotrical conter part, which you have to assume happens in many A&A games. Its probably not very accuarte to restric techs.

[Imperious Leader]

in the new AAE40 the tank is a 3-3-2-6 unit… 6 ipc to buy.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Imperious:

in the new AAE40 the tank is a 3-3-2-6 unit… 6 ipc to buy.

yah so heavy tanks should cost at least 8, if you want to show how much harder they were to produce.

[Imperious Leader]

yea 4-4-2-8

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Imperious:

yea 4-4-2-8

I have always questioned the heavy tanks offenisve capabilities, perhaps it should just be a four and attack like a regular tank. from what I have read, in all the european terrain the heavy tank had much difficulty advancing and was most effective when defending against medium armor. Of course then this unit would probably be obsoleted by fighters. Maybe if should have a first strike ability on the defence to account for its high-caliber and high velocity gun.

3-4-2-9 that has first strike on defence and acts like a normal tank otherwise, that feels like a heavy tank to me.

[Upside-down_Turtle]

@Imperious:

in the new AAE40 the tank is a 3-3-2-6 unit… 6 ipc to buy.

@Upside-down_Turtle:

What if instead of “land transports” trucks were “motorized infantry” distinct from mech inf.  I’m weary of this idea, because it overthrows some sacred A&A rules.  Here’s my new land combat unit chart for FMG’s New Pieces Project (NPP):

Piece              Name                            Attack        Defense              Move          Cost                  Special

Soldier 1        Light Infantry                1                2                  1              3                  N/A

Soldier 2        Marine                        1                2                    1              4              + 1 Attack during Amphibious Assult

Truck            Motorized Infantry          1                2                  2              4                Can Blitz

Gun(1)          Light Artillery                2                2                  1              4                + 1 to infantry attack on 1-1 basis

Gun 2**        Heavy Artillery              3                2                  1              5                +1 to infantry attack on 1-1 basis

Half-Track    Mechanized Infantry        3                2                  2              5                Can Blitz

Tank 1          Light Armor                    3                3                  2              6                Can Blitz

Tank 2          Heavy Armor                  4                4                  2              8                Can Blitz

*Note: Fighters can support tanks on a 1-1 basis.
**Field Marshal Games is not offering two artillery molds at this time (unless we beg them to).  Rather, it seemed to fit, so I added it as a possibility.

Umm, not to brag, but the 6 IPC 3-3 tank was my idea

[Upside-down_Turtle]

I call it the “Post-Revised Tank”

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Upside-down_Turtle:

Umm, not to brag, but the 6 IPC 3-3 tank was my idea

so it was, +1

I still dont like heavy tanks attacking at 4 though

[Deaths Head 420]

why are you afraid?

JK

my H tanks work as a 4,4,2,10

seems balanced in cost vs quality ratio

Russia had no issues attacking w/ H tanks.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Deaths:

Russia had no issues attacking w/ H tanks.

yah thats true, but i dont think that should be represented by a four or less attack. Alot of times it A&A it is good to attack with units that are good on the defence so you can better defend the terriotry. I think this is a pretty good way to reprsent soviet heavy armor because once they started attacking with it, they rarely lost any territroy.

[Flashman]

Heavy tanks are definitely strongest on defence, and should not have the blitz ability.

My values are revised to account for movement, which is always 1 territory into combat, 2nd breakthrough move for light and medium tanks, unlimited NC movement for all land units via train.

Inf: 1-2-3
LT:  2-2-4 (breakthrough)
MT: 3-2-5 (breakthrough)
SPG: 1-4-5
HT: 3-4-6 (tech)
Art: 2-2-4
HA: 3-2-5 (tech)
AT: N/A-3-6 (can transport 2 units safely)
RG: 4-N/A-8

Rather than elite infantry such as marines I’d prefer national infantry such as Indian (tan) and Anzac (tan and green).

And armoured trains would be the coolest pieces you can make…

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Flashman:

Inf: 1-2-3
LT:  2-2-4 (breakthrough)
MT: 3-2-5 (breakthrough)
SPG: 1-4-5
HT: 3-4-6 (tech)
Art: 2-2-4
HA: 3-2-5 (tech)
AT: N/A-3-6 (can transport 2 units safely)
RG: 4-N/A-8

thats alot of different land units, are you sure they all have a role to play? I have always liked the idea of self-proppeled artillery or assualt guns as Germany and the Soveits used many of these weapons as subtitues for tanks as mobile infantry support weapons, but why are they defending at four, shoudn’t they be good at attacking for there purpose was to advance with the infantry not hide hull down. Also I think your heavy tank just dosnt cost enough to reflect how much harder they were to produce than the medium tanks like the Sherman and T-34.

[crusaderiv]

Well yes it’s realy interresting but i agree.
Too much units.

[Deaths Head 420]

My axis and Allies pieces

Sea based units

All the traditional units including Cruisers

Land Based

Inf.
Mechanized/ Elite Units
Tanks
H. Tanks
Artillery
Paratroopers

Airforce
Sky Trains for all country’s  (paratroopers need a ride)

H Tanks, Paratroopers and Sky Trains are tech Based
Mechanized Inf call Pull Arty during Noncombat

[Flashman]

I agree that there are too many units in my list; I’m just comparing possible variations.

I’m not particularly convinced we need even artillery, and with my land movement rules the new “mech infantry” piece is anachronistic.  Neither do I want paratroopers, fortresses

As for the cost of my Heavy Tanks, remember that they are a tech, so (apart from Russia) the cost is born largely in development, and they don’t have the breakthrough ability (more powerful than blitzing).

I don’t see people buying heavy tanks at 10 IPCs, however powerful. Give me more fighters every time.

[crusaderiv]

I agree flashman.

Heavy tank must be a tech.
6 IPC for USSR
7 IPC for Germany.
Maybe 8 for USA.

Personnaly, i’m not a big fan of artillery but i think this weapon must be represented.
I used a lot paratroopers and for me it’s a must.

Fortress!= Useless!!!
lucky dice it’s my better defence!!!
Anyway I used this USSR House rules = Russian infantry defend at 3 in Moscow, Stalingrad and Leningrad.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Flashman:

As for the cost of my Heavy Tanks, remember that they are a tech, so (apart from Russia) the cost is born largely in development, and they don’t have the breakthrough ability (more powerful than blitzing).

Well, I guess I dont know as much as I should about this, but i would imagine that you could produce alot more medium tanks than heavy tanks even if you have the tech. Maybe the German over-engineered heavy tanks were an exception but I rebember learning how hard they were to make and were greatly infeior in production ability to the medium tanks like the T-34 which were made so you could produce them in large numbers. Wernt the IS-2 and M26 harder to make than the T-34 and Sherman. Heavy tanks should not obsolete medium tanks, thats just unhisotrical, as medium tanks were still being produced in larger numbers at the end of the war. Also it is not fare to call the KV-1 a heavy tank even though it was technicaly due to its weight. Should the CharB have the stats of a heavy tank?No. Th KV-1 in combat, attacking or defending, was inferior to the T-34. The Russian command beleive this at least. Its production was stoped in 1943 and almost ten times as many T-34s were built

I think 8-9 IPCs is a good price for heavy tanks that defend at four and fire pre-emptivly when defending.

And Flashman, what do you have against paratroopers? I see how you could say it was not used in big enough units for this kind of game, but is was a fairly decsive weapon. If could have stats that are lower than a normal infantry unit to show that it only represents a divsion or two, but then give it a powerful surprise attack ability  during airborne attacks. maybe they should select their targets the first round like fighter bombers might do at sea.

[HBG]

I think light tanks are needed to represent early war as well as nations that started out that way or used them more extensively. Japan would be a stretch to have med tanks. Italy used a lot of light and some medium but no heavy tanks. Even the French char-b was heavy but not like the late war tiger II or JS series the Russians had. I like the light , med, and heavy tank idea and the superheavy with Germany. I agree, no blitz on heavy tanks, they were slow.