Check this site: http://www.historicalboardgaming.com
There are no rules for those extra units. You have to make them yourself. But then you can better go to the forum for house rules.
Favorite Unit?
-
“ability to contribute to the glory of their nation, bringing them to ultimate victory.”
If this is the definition of valut then I will have to agree that infantry wins.
And Duke, Feld is for the german version of Field marchal.
-
Strange… I’ve noticed that barely any replies were for naval units. Is everyone here all about land war? :-?
-
That is one of the problems with the naval aspect of this game… it is way too abstracted and totally takes a side path to the game.
-
Good point Imperious. 8)
-
Yes, but a well-maintained Navy will bring swift victory––
In fact, how do you intend to take island capitals without boats? And how do you intend to protect those boats from air attack without carriers and fighters? And how do you intend to prevent sub warfare without destroyers? It seems all these are necessary conditions, and I therefore don’t see how one can write-off the importance of Naval superiority in this game so easily…
-
I agree about Naval futility (if it’s fair to call it that) simply because the game is won primarily by land forces. Maybe a navy doesn’t have as much pull as it could. But it just feels good, a symbol of power if you will, to have a strong navy. What are the marshalling cards used for? I’ve only seen one example where marshalling cards were used to represent land forces (justus you know what I’m talking about) and that was when a combined Russo-German force was occupying Persia, about to sweep through Southeast Asia. That was a great game, one I’ll always remember. But yes, in that game, when it came to navies, I (Japan) was supreme, at least for most of the game. (one of the reasons I love the Japs) :x
-
I’m making a new thread, and I’m calling it “Favorite Naval Unit.”
AgentOrange out.
-
I think tanks are the best. They have the same A/D/M as desrtoyers but cost 7 ipc’s less. I wish you could have more.
-
@Imperious:
Ok so your actually saying that when your Japan USA or UK your buying more of any other unit besides infantry? your buying more Tanks than infantry? more fighters than infantry? more transports than infantry? more battleships than infantry? more subs than infantry? please tell us how its possible to win this way… I need to know state the nation your playing what the basic build structure is …etc. I have never seen anything like this before. Does this work for 2nd edition too? aa europe? aa Pacific? or just revised?
Depends on when and who leader. I’m not going to buy hardly any (if any at all) infantry of the first turn with US/UK. What’s the point? I need units that will protect my ships so I can get my land forces into the battle. If the US goes into the Pacific it is the same kind of deal. You don’t need an overwhelming amount of ground forces to take out those islands. But you will need a large Navy to get to the islands. Eventualy the game is won by ground forces, specificaly infantry. But I have been beaten in the old game when America bought nothing but bombers from turn 1 on. I had Moscow and africa, but could not place a unit.
-
Of course thats true but the question is what ONE unit seems to show up in the builds more than any other regardless of the purpose. The value of this “MVP” should be assigned to what you buy the most of in general. If a fighter was the most value, then id expect money to be spend on it in excess of what was spent on any other unit. In battle the Infantry allways wins against an equal “cost” against any other unit.It has to be MVP of the game.
-
I think I was aiming for something more like this: Look at every unit in a stand-alone context. Forget about the game and what each sides’ goals are, or how much money each side begins with. NOW look at each unit and decide which one is the best, in your opinion, based on atk/def, movement, cost, and whatever abilities it has, if any. So… Which unit would you choose now? I stand by my original vote of fighters. :x
-
OK hmm. But a fighter cost alot to get that 3/4/4 stat. Id rather have 4 infantry together getting 4/8/1 and 4 hits to your one hit…I understand that a plane can attack ships and infantry cant, but Planes cant control territories and planes cant take victory centers.
-
I’m putting it more on a one-to-one basis. I just like fighters because they’re very mobile, as well as good attackers, and excellent defenders.
And I don’t see how you’re saying that four Inf. are worth 4/8/1, either. There may be four of them, but they are all still only worth 1/2/1. Now, I can’t argue that infantry are necessary, to say the least. But to have say, ten infantry backed by five tanks and two fighters makes for a very balanced force, on offense OR defense. However, I will back your point by saying that only once in a blue moon will I not spend my hard-earned IPCs on at least one infantry. They are A&A’s bread-and-butter! -
Yes good points but im just looking at the cost basis per IPC spent to choose the best unit in terms of value “per point” but also looking at number of hits and bonus say from supporting artillery. That makes Infantry the bread and butter, but also the most frequently bought unit. If i buy more planes in the game than infantry i will probably lose a quick game. So i feel Infantry is by far the “go to” unit of purchase but not necessarily my favorite unit. I prefer the tank which has a lot more “glammer” then a boring infantry.
-
Hey man, I love tanks too. Without tanks, I think land wars would get stale and boring pretty quick. But we’ve come across another problem; Sure, fighters are pretty expensive, but at the sacrifice of some more IPCs, you get increased combat and movement values.
So, an equation that describes this might be:
Greater cost = Greater power
That might be stretching it, but all I’m saying is that ya gotta pay a little more for the good stuff, otherwise your forces will not pack enough of a punch to defeat the enemy, yes?
-
…and I’m still wondering why people marked “This question is stupid” but didn’t bother to explain why. C’mon, people, don’t be shy! :lol:
-
A fighter moves 2 extra spaces and has one extra defense point. All that for the investment of 5-7 IPC depending on which game you play. Not a good ROI if you ask me. Tanks are a good deal better than fighters, plus they can blitz and occupy and control territories. The “stupid question” people believe Infantry is the best unit… and their right!
-
IPC for IPC the best unit is infantry
-
One other reason I like fighters is because they make navies much more practical. One of the navy’s main purposes (in my opinion) is to hold key strategic positions in the sea. If you have, say, two carriers sitting in a sea zone, you can fly fighters in there to help hold that zone, or fly 'em out to help reinforce somewhere else. Basically, fighters are mainly defensive units that can help out on land or at sea, and whose defensive value is great (outstanding with jet power!)
-
I removed all the votes for naval units, because they didn’t apply. To all those who voted for a naval unit, you’ll find a new post called “Favorite Naval Unit?” And if you will, maybe change your vote to a land unit?
Suggested Topics
