AA diceless varient, well playtested

OK thanks

I think now that the no subs vs subs combat is not necessary at all.

Explaining: subs are considered a separate group inside the navy.
Allowing subs to attack subs still be as OOB rules.
For example, 2 subs can decide to attack another 3 subs with 2 DDs and 2 TTs in a same sea-zone.
If attacker target subs, then the defender had only to decide whether or not his 3 subs will submerge or combat.
Many will prefer to submerge, so there will be no combat.
If defender choose to fight, then it will be 2 subs@2 vs 3 subs@1, as per OOB rule.
So sometimes, but seldom, subs can sink subs as history reveal.

Possible to add a 6th option ?

hear me out…

AA guns can never attack.

On defense AA participates in every round of combat (as any normal unit currently does). Rolling one dice per AA gun hitting on 1 (2 if radar is researched) however (and obviously) AA guns can only hit aircraft and defender will choose the casualty’s. Attacking aircraft hit by AA guns are moved to the casualty zone just as if they were hit by any other unit. OR Attacking aircraft hit by AA guns are immediately removed from battle and do not return fire. OR Attacking aircraft hit by AA guns are immediately removed from battle ON THE FIRST ROUND ONLY. Subsequent rounds attacking aircraft hit by AA will be moved to casualty zone and return fire.

I really have never understood A&A anti aircraft rules… in a real battle the aa guns are not going to just stop shooting after a couple minutes lol that makes no sense. Like the AA gun operator gets bored because the crappy gun can never score a hit anyhow and he falls asleep… :P

if not i vote for option #4

@aaaaaa2011:

Tell me if you think aa needs bunkers they would increase the defense defending units in the province buy 1 so instead of infantry defending at 2 they would defend at 3 with a bunker 4 with 2 bunkers etc to simulate the west wall sigfried line iwo jima okinawa etc. it would be like artilly with infantry onle for defense they would be purchased like aa guns bunkers for ground aa guns for air tell me what you think?

Check out the blockhouse rules here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=17701.0

Transports move very slowly. They are prey to subs and planes. They don’t escape unless the enemy runs out of bullets.

I think you don’t like them as fodder in combat, but its insane to bring them in combat only to lose them deliberately and keep your warships perfectly undamaged.

This is a big change that i have always welcomed and wanted for years before.

awesome fined!

@Cobert:

It’s like when people try to incorporate the rules from Europe involving bomber escorts into Revised or AA50 - with each turn representing a period of several months and each territory representing miles upon miles of land or entire countries, I think it’s insane that they want a rule that makes a unit shaped like a fighter accompany a unit shaped like a bomber to actually mean that there are fighter escorts with the bomber.

Well I can see your point ref scale of the action and so I’d support the geographic boundary with no house rule for CAP or any FTRs defending adjacent space etc.

But otherwise, I’m leaning towards the optional escort / interceptor rule as it reflects the operational decision on whether you use your fighter resources defensively or base them forward to project air cover.

Hey,

Normally my friends and I don’t play M84, but I can think of two things you could try. Turn the required IPC value up, I’m not exactly sure what would be fair but placing it somewhere in the 90s might do it. The other thing is to require them to acquire and hold the M84 (or higher) value thru two turns. Or, another way is to say if they reach M84 during a round, then you play through the next. So if they get to M84 on Japan’s move in round 11, they have to hold it thru round 12 to get the win, etc. At least this prevents them from blitzing thru empty territory of little value and winning before a counter-attack can be sent.