One of the problems in my eyes of aa40 is that some units just don’t seem to have any nitch. This is my attempt to correct this for several units.
Armor: Attack at 3, Defend at 2, cost 5, can blitz. Armor gains a +1 bonus on defensive rolls when paired with an infantry. The reason is to make them affordable, but to give them a drawback. It also makes sense, as armor has a very hard time against enemy units without infantry support. Mech Inf do not count, only true infantry, although I may rethink this.
Cruisers: Attack at 2, Defend at 3, cost 10, can bombard on a 2. This makes the cruiser the goto unit for transport defense, and allows it to trade with fighters for an even cost.
Tact Bombers: Attack at 3, Defend at 2, cost 11, first strike like subs. First strike is negated by defending fighters. I’m a bit unsure on this change, but it gives them a clear role, and it makes a bit of sense.
Any thoughts or ideas on my proposed changes?
some units just don’t seem to have any nitch.
’
All the units in AAP40 have a niche, you just have to think about it more. Some are not as sexy as they used to be (tanks, battleships) and some are certainly bought less by certain players, but in general this is representive of history.
This set of unit stats is the best to date.
Why should crusiers be able to be traded with fighters?
the tac bomber rules already give them a clear role and make alot of sence except they are simpler that yours.
I do like your rules for infantry supporting tanks on the defence, except I dont like tanks costing five. tanks are big things that take alot to produce they should be expensive and players should not be able to build stacks of them (unless they are the russian player, in AAE40 the USSR should not be able to buy mech inf and instead can buy tanks at 5.)
