@Cmdr:
I view AA Guns that are movable more as machine guns attached to the top of halftracks now. They arn’t always manned, and they are highly mobile, so they go to the front with the supply trucks and supply trains to provide transportational security. If the enemy happens to attack when they are present, then they’ll do their best to stop the incoming planes.
Built in AA Guns might need a beefup since I see these as more city wide AA Gun defensive screens of interlinked fields of fire being orchestrated by highly trained gunners and mixing canons and machine guns.
How in worlds do you view AA guns as half tracks with machine guns?
Would not these units already be there regardless of the AA gun? Armor, Infantry, Artillery; all these units can shoot down planes.
Built in AA Guns might need a beefup since I see these as more city wide AA Gun defensive screens of interlinked fields of fire being orchestrated by highly trained gunners and mixing canons and machine guns.
This is more what AA guns SHOULD be
@Uncrustable:
To cmdr Jen: You say that AA included simulates being ‘deep in enemy territory’, well under the old rule you could place AA guns so enemy bombers would have to fly over multiple AA. This simulates being ‘deep in enemy territory’ far better.
To me in this STRATEGIC game, AA guns represent a territory wide system of radar/aircraft spotters/scout aircraft and strategically placed surface to air weapons batteries. This system could pack up and move just as far as an infantry division, but would be near useless in a raid. Hence why AA guns cannot move during the combat move phase.
And in reality i highly doubt you buy as many AA guns as you seem to talk up, they are better fodder units (what each nation starts with) than they are at being AA guns
Built in AA is a mindless rule. You can send your AA to the frontlines for fodder to protect your army ranks and no worry in the world about how your going to protect your bases/ICs
They may still have their use, but far less than they use to