Tanks Vs. Fighters? I Don't Think So.

[Admiral_Thrawn]

I have always thought that A&A needed some refinement with how different units interacted with each other. Case in point tanks defending on a 3 against fighters, that can’t be right. This is how I changed the defense and attack values in my game. What do you guys think?

Fighter vs Fighter- A3,D4
Fighter vs Bomber-A3,D2
Fighter vs Tank- A3,D1
Fighter vs Art.- A3, D1
Fighter vs Inf.- A3, D1
Fighter vs Destroyer- A3, Anti-Air Roll 1
Fighter vs Battleship- A3, Anti-Air Roll 1 or 2
Fighter vs Carrier- A3, Anti-Air Roll 1 or 2

Infantry always attacks on a 1

Artillery fires in opening fire stage. Can attacks ships in adjacent sea zone. Does not give bonus to Inf.
Art vs Inf-A2,D2
Art vs Tank-A2,D2
Art vs Fighter-A1,D4
Art vs Bomber-A1,D1
Art vs Art-A2,D2
Art vs Ships-A1

Tank vs Tank-A3,D3
Tank vs Inf-A3,D2
Tank vs Art.-A3,D2
Tank vs Fighter-A1,D4
Tank vs Bomber-A1,D1

Bomber vs Tank-A4,D1
Bomber vs Bomber-A2,D1
Bomber vs Inf-A4,D1
Bomber vs Art.-A4,D1
Bomber vs Fighter- A2, D4
Bomber vs Destroyer-A4,Anti Air Roll 1
Bomber vs Battleship-A4, Anti Air Roll 1 or 2
Bomber vs Carrier-A4,Anti Air Roll 1 or 2

Sub vs Battleship-A2,D3
Sub vs Carrier-A2,D2
Sub vs Destroyer-A2,D3
Sub vs Sub-A2,D2

Battleship vs Carrier-A4,D1
Battleship vs Destroyer-A4,D3
Battleship vs Sub-A2,D2
Battleship vs Battleship-A4,D4
Battleship vs Fighter- Anti Air Roll 1 or 2,D4

Carrier Always Attacks on a 1
Carrier vs Fighter-Anti Air 1 or 2,D4

Destroyer vs Carrier-A3,D1
Destroyer vs Battleship-A3,D4
Destroyer vs Sub-A3,D2
Destroyer vs Destroyer-A3,D3
Destroyer vs Fighter-Anti Air Roll 1,D4

Transports always defends on a 1 and against planes anti air roll of a 1

[Imperious Leader]

I allways feel that artillery and infantry in combination are the best bank for the buck. AS long as you have more artillery than infantry and never cut into artillery. It beats any other combo in combat. However, of course the movement of 2 space tanks has a dynamic that can’t be ignored.

[B.AnderssonGameMaster]

There is an easy fix to your problem:

Air Supremacy

Fighters attack or defend in the opening fire step of combat if no enemy fighters are present or remain in combat.

[tekkyy]

Admiral_Thrawn, your list don’t tell me precisely how you gonna resolve the combat.
What happens when 3 ARM, 3  INF and 3 FTR attacks 2 ARM, 2 ART and 2 BMR?
Do all units get selective attack now? Would that introduce an arbitary level of tactical details?

Letting artillery attack adjacent sea zones would be unrealistic. Which artillery type are you modelling? Coastal batteries?

Yes the Air Supremacy is a quick fix while letting land units attack fixed or mobile “air fields”.
I mean we don’t really want 1 FTR to fly from UK to Western Europe and kill 10 ARM do we?

[Admiral_Thrawn]

I never liked the idea of you choosing your own causalties. Now that is unrealistic. I like the idea of the attackers units being able to choose targets. Maybe that brings some tactical element to the game and I know the game is not suppose to deal with tactile elements only strategic but it just feels right to me. War is strategic and tactical. Actually the perfect game for me would be a game that would have all the strategy of A&A but a tactical “mode” when you fought the battles. If that makes sense.

[Admiral_Thrawn]

Air Supremacy does not solve the problem. The problem in my mind is that tanks can defend on a 3 against fighters. Tanks can not defend themselves against fighters! They can’t point there gun in the air and hit fighters! It’s just inaccurate. Thats why I would have tanks attack and defend on a 1 against fighters.

[Imperious Leader]

Tanks as well as not other land units should be able to shoot at planes moving at 450 MPH… they dont posses tracking at this speeds. Thats why we need retreats for both sides and all air units fighting in uncontested skys should attack preemtively at all times. Look at the Germans after dec 22 1944 in the bulge their armor w/o air support looked like the Iraqi republican guards circa 1991 in the road of death all the way back to bagdad.Thats what true air power can do.

[tekkyy]

@Admiral_Thrawn:

Actually the perfect game for me would be a game that would have all the strategy of A&A but a tactical “mode” when you fought the battles. If that makes sense.

Yes I know what you mean. We have such games in the PC market.
For me I would need blowup maps of each territory to make sense. Otherwise I find the tactical decisions to not make sense.

After uncontested skies fighters attack preemptively and selectively. Bombers saturation level bombers preemptively but not selectively.
We also have an idea that tanks hits must be taken by tanks or artillery first. Infantry hits must be taken by infantry first.
This should fix the “select your own casualties” problem.

@Admiral_Thrawn:

Thats why I would have tanks attack and defend on a 1 against fighters.

That solution requires letting tanks select their own target, targetting an air division. Something they probably can’t do. They’ve got lots to worry about on land.

Tanks as well as not other land units should be able to shoot at planes moving at 450 MPH…… they dont posses tracking at this speeds.

Actually I have a new idea, posted in land combat thread.

[Admiral_Thrawn]

I have thought it would be great to have blowup maps for each territory for tactical mode. That would require so much work! Thats a lot of maps! Just imagine you invade Okinawa and you have a large map of the island and you have to disloge those Japs!

[tekkyy]

Its only a dream.  :-(