Mech Infantry

I would say yes. I believe in the rule book it states that parings may occur in any stage of a turn. For example, if i have a tank and a mech. infantry blitzing into a enemy territory with a tank, that would be considered combat movement. Than in the combat stage one could pair the tank with a tactical Bomber. Both movements being legal in  my opinion and experience but i would check out the pairing section of your rule book to affirm this.

We were strictly following the setup, rules and NOs from Larry’s thread on A2:
http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4167

We didn’t want to make stuff up since the stuff we’d make up would naturally benefit the person coming up with it!

Too many rule differences are confusing and has caused many arguments while playing.  That’s why we decided to stick to rules Larry came up with - OOB, A1 or A2.

This game will likeley need a hammer approach to taking france rather than the funnel of transports

Because of the distance between the US, UK, and Normandy. The US fleet wont run like clockwork back and forth to canada like in other AA games.

There will be turns not enough transports can be filled because of logistics issues.
If you have the French INF in UK, and could get maybe 3 more, these units are insulated against combat when/if they land during an NCM move. And could be good fodder for the US/UK units there doing the real fighting.

im also thinking of the psycological impact on the german player. to add 4 infantry to france, then take paris and add 4 more? humliation combined with a useful stack to protect paris on the road to victory.

Exactly - I agree with the use of Russian pieces. Having identical tanks side by side in different colors looks weird (look at Italy and Germany)

@Corbeau:

@oztea:

id actualy like to see them use the japanese mold
and alot of japanese equipment. It looks more 1930’s-esqe, like much of the french army of 1940

Oztea, the French tanks at the start of the war were more modern and superior to thoses of the germans, both in numbers and individual strenght. The french tank divisions fought hard in the Dardennes but the German had significant air superiority, almost if not 3 to 1. It’s the massive Bf-109/Stuka attacks on tanks and artillery positions that spelled doom for France on top of the fact they got totally surprised by a clever manoeuvre. Air superiority would later spell the same doom for Rommels division and even the Japanese Imperial Navy. The point here: There is no valid reason to use ‘‘1930’s esque equipment’’ for France and it’s certainly not why they got beaten.

Which is why I’m hoping the starting setup for France will have at least two tanks. And here’s to hoping they’ll have at least the British tank model.

Flick a bic and watch the plastic melt.

Duh!!