Playing with paratroppers.

He!! no

Opening Axis air bases:

Western Germany
Southern Italy
Japan
Caroline Islands
=4 (+6*=10)

Opening Allied air bases:

Eastern United States
Western United States
Hawaii
Midway *
Wake Island *
Guam *
Philippines *
Queensland
New Zealand
United Kingdom
Scotland
Iceland ^
India
France *
Russia
Novgorod *
=16 (-6*=10)

• = easily captured by the Axis
  ^ = irrelevant

Interesting question. Overall, considering the usual swing of initial territories, the numbers of air bases on both sides turn out to be around equal. Mid-game, both sides could utilize the paratrooper tech nearly equally.

The real question, then, is whether or not any opening gambits are affected by the blanket awarding of the tech to all powers. The only real trouble spot I see is an overpowering Sea Lion, supported by paratroopers from Western Germany and occupied France. The UK gets AAA shots against paratroopers, but these could be selected for casualties instead of air units, which might prove to be a decisive buffer. (On the other hand, the UK gains a huge boost to the mobility of their island-bound troops…)

It’s a very tough call; you’d need to crunch the numbers. Sea Lion is such a distant possibility with the current 2nd edition set-up, however, this might revive this strategy. I’d definitely try it out before I dismissed it as an idea; it could add a whole new layer of strategy to the game.

I know this is more like a house rule, but…

You could mix the old way w/new and have bmrs work as air transport for para, but they have to leave from an operational air base. That way you couldn’t have more para then bmrs, and the AAA would be firing at the bmr (para is cargo, and would be lost if bmr goes down). Could allow the bmr to also fire in the battle (maybe at a reduced rate if used as a para transport).

Just a thought

I agree with Wild bill. in the 1939 variant this is how it works, but only certain countries can use them. I like the idea though.

Inspired by this thread, I’m currently trying out the idea of awarding paratroopers to all powers at the start of game with a friend of mine who’s learning to play Global 40 via TripleA.

It’s a fairly casual game, but you’re welcome to follow the proceedings if you wish:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28633.150;topicseen

Germany and UK should start with them.

USSR and USA get them when they enter the war

Japan should get them when they are at war with USA

Italy no. France no. Anzac no

Allow bombers to perform 2 out of 3 actions:

1. SBR
2. Be used on combat
   3 Be used to drop paratroopers

Italy was the first country to use Paratroopers in combat.

They Pioneered the trade.

I am dissappointed with anyone who didn’t know this.

Don’t reply to me. How many times do we have to go over this? Can you control yourself?

My comment was for play balance, not always historical accuracy. Italy didn’t make any major drops in ww2 and their is a huge difference from developing and training a large groups of paratroopers ( at least 30,000) and “inventing” something they didn’t use.

Gentlemen,

I almost always agree with everything IL ever proposes, but…

@Imperious:

Allow bombers to perform 2 out of 3 actions:

1. SBR
2. Be used on combat
   3 Be used to drop paratroopers

Irregardless of whether Italy, France, & Anzac are allowed Paratroopers or not,…

I much prefer that Bombers are used for Bombing ONLY,

and that Paratroopers must be transported by Air Transports ONLY, such as the American C-46 and up-coming German JU-52 by HBG and the Italian transport by FMG.

As far as GAMEPLAY issues(not to mention visuals),…IMHO these are a large improvement.

What are everyones’ opinions on Paratroopers allowed to drop ONLY from Air Transports?

“Tall Paul”

I played that game through with all nations auto-including the paratrooper tech; it was not unbalancing at all. For the purists, you can imagine that each air base has one Air Transport on station at all times, and to which it must return during non-combat.

Make it round & others,

@Make_It_Round:

For the purists, you can imagine that each air base has one Air Transport on station at all times, and to which it must return during non-combat.

I understand and respect your thoughts and ideas on the subject of Paratroopers. I, however, have a “different perspective” on what makes up the “FUN” part of each players gameplay style.

–-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

IMHO each player’s personal STRATEGY is what makes each game unique & fun.

And by STRATEGY,…I mean What units they buy, Where they place them, When they attack, etc.

And the players must “Invest” in their strategies.

Such as, If the U.S.A. wants:
-to dominate the Pacific ocean, a large investment in Ships is required.
-to Strategic Bomb the Germans, a large investment in Air Force is required.

This brings me to my point.

IMHO any player wanting to use Paratroopers needs to “invest” in Air Transports & Paratroopers in order to to use this capability. I feel it’s VERY important that Paratroopers may ONLY be dropped from Air Transports. The necessity of having to purchase Air Transports for Paratroop Drops signifies a players’ “investment” in that strategy and simultaneously warns his opponents of future possibilities.

IMHO a FREE Air Transport at every Airbase
-reduces a players personal contribution to his strategy
-is too radical and/or game-changing, especially for NO COST
-and doesn’t address the situation of how to concentrate several Air Transports/Paratroopers for a multiple Airborne assault.

–-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m in favor of global games with ALL players starting with the Paratrooper Tech if we can work out any “kinks” that might develope. The free “Tech” would still require the purchase of Air Transports & Paratroopers. Since no player would begin the game with Air Transports or Paratroopers on the gameboard, the delay in “purchase time” might be all we need to make this feasible.

“Tall Paul”

Actually, yeah.

I played ANOTHER game with all powers having the paratrooper tech from round 1, but this time I was the Axis.

Holy sh!t did I mop up those Allies quick.

Handle with care…

Make it round,

Consider it this way:

@Tall:

IMHO any player wanting to use Paratroopers needs to “invest” in Air Transports & Paratroopers in order to to use this capability. I feel it’s VERY important that Paratroopers may ONLY be dropped from Air Transports. The necessity of having to purchase Air Transports for Paratroop Drops signifies a players’ “investment” in that strategy and simultaneously warns his opponents of future possibilities.

IMHO a FREE Air Transport at every Airbase
-reduces a players personal contribution to his strategy
-is too radical and/or game-changing, especially for NO COST
-and doesn’t address the situation of how to concentrate several Air Transports/Paratroopers for a multiple Airborne assault.

–-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m in favor of global games with ALL players starting with the Paratrooper Tech if we can work out any “kinks” that might develope. The free “Tech” would still require the purchase of Air Transports & Paratroopers. Since no player would begin the game with Air Transports or Paratroopers on the gameboard, the delay in “purchase time” might be all we need to make this feasible.

“Tall Paul”

I will personally never be for air transports as a separate unit.

Give everyone paratroopers tech, and add one damage to an airbase for each paratrooper launched from it.

That way you still get to reflect the added cost of paratrooping.
BUT you don’t add more plastic to the board, you don’t add more units that can be taken as casualties.

Air transportation was not what we think of today in the 1940s. It was something special. “air mail” really meant something.
I guess you can fudge around the numbers if you want, and add +3 damage per paratrooper, and change the rules for how damaged bases work.

But honestly….drop the “air transports”. We don’t need more plastic.

Perhaps you will acknowledge we don’t need more plastic, and you want more cost.
So do it via damage, or just make a rule that you have to pay 1 (or 2) every turn for every paradrop

Gentlemen,

I COMPLETELY understand and respect your opinions. If you choose not to utilise Air Transports in your games thats just fine. If gameboard space is an issue, perhaps you should “chip-out” as many units as possible and/or make some “task force/task group” holders. The Air Transports might even be placed on top of an “Aircraft Stand” to lessen their “foot-print”. My viewpoint might possibly be different as I’ve played on an enlarged gameboard for so long. But even if I still played on the OOB maps,…I’d still be adamant in “making it work” with Air Transports.

I am completely sold on the idealogical, operational, and visual results of having Air Transports on the gameboard.

Doing so not only enables Paratroop Drops in Combat mode, but also Air Transport in non-combat mode.

True, you could accomplish this by utilising damage to airbases as the cost. But IMHO:

––Your damage cost isn’t nearly enough to signify the $$$ ENORMOUS $$$ investment necessary in building Airborne forces. Allowing any player, at any time, to bust out an Airborne operation for only 1$ seems extremely radical to me and IMHO would completely upset the gameplay balance.
––And, the defender has much too limited ways of countering the Airborne operation as it’s taking place.
----The reality that if the Air Transport is killed the Paratroopers, who like in reality, are “cargo”,…are killed, too.
----The extremely inexspensive and unlimited nature of Paratroop drops as you’ve described them seem to me to be overwhelming.

I’m certain that gamers will almost always have diverging ideas/preferences about their gameplay. IMHO,…the inclusion of Air Transports & Paratroopers in my games is already a CERTAINTY.

I love this forum, A&A.Org, that allows such interesting discussions about strategy, etc. to be enjoyed/shared by all. We ALL learn and benefit from it,……even when listening to Gargantua and his “interesting” ideas(Grin).

“Tall Paul”

Look, WWII simply isn’t the era for this.
Vietnam was the era of air cavalry, and we would expect a game in that time frame to certainly have a helicopter piece to represent that.

Paratroopers were not THAT widely used in WWII to warrant a new plastic piece, for all the countries that does something that could be done with ink on paper.

Aside from being “aesthetically pleasing” an air transport piece literally offers no other benefit to the game

• Realistically you could use bombers to fill the role. Everyone already has them, understands how they move, etc, and no one needs to buy new planes from FMG
• Alternatively, you can just force players to pay per turn in one of many ways when they paradrop. Either through airbase damage (which could go up to ‘3’ damage per trooper) or with just IPCs out of their pocket for each paratrooper.

What would this wondrous air transport do?
Carry 2 men by air into combat and during non-combat?
Would it have a cost? A stat line? is it taken as last casualties like sea transports.

Adding a unit is a BIG deal. And there simply doesn’t seem to be any room for a unit that isn’t fun. That you can’t pick up and go “pew pew, your dead”

From a standpoint of realism. WWII just wasn’t the war of mass transit by air.
To be realistic, the piece would have to look like this.

Move - 6, Attack - 0, Defense - 0, Cost - 9
Special Rules:
Transport - Air transports can carry two infantry, which act as paratroopers during combat, or may exit in friendly territory during non-combat.
Logistics Nightmare - Loaded Air transports may only take off if they are at a friendly operational air base
Vulnerable  - Air transports hit by AA fire are lost, along with their passengers

There are some problems already brewing here.
The US could circumnavigate the whole “naval issue” in the pacific, and just build a monstrous air wing and gobble up islands one at a time.
Because unlike naval transportation, which plods along, and can be interdicted by an enemy fleet via traditional combat, there is no way to stop a huge armada of planes in the game.
You can’t destroyer block them, you can’t anticipate where they are going nearly as well as you can a naval transport.

I see nothing but headaches.