I am happy to say that the rules are nearly done, in the final stages of completion, and I will begin play testing shortly before posting the final copy.
AARHE: Phase 2: Units
-
Ok, thanks
-
@Imperious:
or should planes even bomb in main round fire…which is when your troops advance…friendly fire?
+++ this is not clear…sorryBasically I was thinking letting jets attack in both opening and main round fire.
Hence they non-jet planes do not prevent enemy jet planes from attacking friendly land units.
But now I see you mean jets only hit twice for dogfighting.by the way, could WWII jet fighters dogfighting each other?
+++++ yes, however i never seen any actual encounter with a German Jet and say a glouster meteor jet fighter/bomberthen could it be because it wasn’t possible in WWII?
+++= twice attacks for jet fighters in air to air combat only… not jet bombers against land units for example. those values are good but they are against land targets only
Those values are just summary of current prooposal.
Jet bombers dogfighting worse than jet fighter…so taking that into account Jet Bomber is still bad value compared to Jet Fighter.Bomber 15 IPC 4/1 no selective, SBR, can’t attack ships, dogfight at 1/1
Jet Bomber 15 IPC 3/3 selective attack, no SBR, attack ships, dogfight at 2/3
Fighter 10 IPC 3/4 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 2/3
Jet Fighter 12 IPC 4/5 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 4/4Except for that Bomber can become Heavy Bomber…so Jet Bomber can become Heavy Jet Bomber…
Surprised to see you want Heavy Jet Bomber…since it conflicts with an “agile” and fighter-like “Jet Bomber”. -
Just a little out-of-topic discussion:
Just because it’s heavy doesn’t mean it’s slow. During the Mid Ages heavy infantry or heavy cavalry referred to armor. Much later, armor declined so the word “heavy” was used like “elite.” However some units still used armor (i.e. cuirrasiers) and during WWI the creation of the Mark tank series reintroduced the use of armor (thus the name “armor” for tanks). Anyway heavy doesn’t always mean slow, Battlecruisers had the firepower of battleships but had the displacement, speed, and armor of cruisers (heavy cruisers actually, but these were fast too). Anyway… back to the topic: Jet bombers can be fast little buggers while having a huge amount of payload.
***I think jet bombers should be 16 IPC 2/3 selective attack, SBR at half-strength, attack ships, dogfight at 2/2
-
I think jet bombers should be 16 IPC 2/3 selective attack, SBR at half-strength, attack ships, dogfight at 2/2
++++ at that price jet bombers would be worthless for 16 IPC. Id rather buy a fighter. -
or should planes even bomb in main round fire…which is when your troops advance…friendly fire?
+++ this is not clear…sorryBasically I was thinking letting jets attack in both opening and main round fire.
Hence they non-jet planes do not prevent enemy jet planes from attacking friendly land units.
But now I see you mean jets only hit twice for dogfighting.OOOO yes a great idea… jets cannot be intercepted so they can attack targets and then also in air combat. My idea on the twice attack was the fact that Me-262 was able to take out multiple planes with its speed. it was the tiger tank of the sky.
Quote
by the way, could WWII jet fighters dogfighting each other?
+++++ yes, however i never seen any actual encounter with a German Jet and say a glouster meteor jet fighter/bomberthen could it be because it wasn’t possible in WWII?
OOOOO no its because the quantities of these planes were so scarce that they never saw each other and because they had different roles in the war.
Quote
+++= twice attacks for jet fighters in air to air combat only… not jet bombers against land units for example. those values are good but they are against land targets onlyThose values are just summary of current prooposal.
Jet bombers dogfighting worse than jet fighter…so taking that into account Jet Bomber is still bad value compared to Jet Fighter.Bomber        15 IPC 4/1 no selective, SBR, can’t attack ships, dogfight at 1/1
Jet Bomber     15 IPC 3/3 selective attack, no SBR, attack ships, dogfight at 2/3
Fighter        10 IPC 3/4 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 2/3
Jet Fighter      12 IPC 4/5 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 4/4Except for that Bomber can become Heavy Bomber…so Jet Bomber can become Heavy Jet Bomber…
Surprised to see you want Heavy Jet Bomber…since it conflicts with an “agile” and fighter-like “Jet Bomber”.+++ it should be at least possible if the game is extended in late 1945 american “shooting star” jet fighter shows up.
also about 3 years later americans had that heavy jet bomber aka the flying wing.
-
@Imperious:
OOOO yes a great idea… jets cannot be intercepted so they can attack targets and then also in air combat.
Ok so we’ll let jets bypass dogfighting with non-jets.
If only one side has jets, those jets can choose to preemptively and selectively attack ground targets (as if that side had air superiority).And then we could apply the “armor hits on armor/artillery” rule to dogfighting!
“In dogfighting, hits by jets must be allocated on jets before non-jets.”Bomber        15 IPC 4/1 no selective, SBR, can’t attack ships, dogfight at 1/1
Jet Bomber     15 IPC 3/3 selective attack, no SBR, attack ships, dogfight at 2/3
Fighter        10 IPC 3/4 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 2/3
Jet Fighter      12 IPC 4/5 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 4/4So the problem remains. When you achieve Jet Technology, you would upgarde your fighters but you wouldn’t upgrade your bombers…
We may need to leave the Jet Bomber as a bomber rather than fighter-like units.
So it would be like…Jet Bomber 15 IPC 3/3, no selective, SBR, can’t attack ships, dogfight at 2/2
I mean you want Jet to be an upgrade not a new unit. It would be weird then you achieve “Jet” technology you suddenly lose ability to SBR :-P
Except for that Bomber can become Heavy Bomber…so Jet Bomber can become Heavy Jet Bomber…
Surprised to see you want Heavy Jet Bomber…since it conflicts with an “agile” and fighter-like “Jet Bomber”.
+++ it should be at least possible if the game is extended in late 1945 american “shooting star” jet fighter shows up.Ok how do we actually model that?
Separate into different techologies…“Heavy bomber”, “Jet bomber”, and “Heavy jet bomber” ?
“Jet” then becomes “Jet fighter”.This is complicated.
But remember we don’t want use fixed dates, unless there is a very good reason for it. Remember we want historical simulation not historical replay. -
Ok so we’ll let jets bypass dogfighting with non-jets.
If only one side has jets, those jets can choose to preemptively and selectively attack ground targets (as if that side had air superiority).++++ that would be an option for the owner of the jets… especially jet bombers
And then we could apply the “armor hits on armor/artillery” rule to dogfighting!
“In dogfighting, hits by jets must be allocated on jets before non-jets.”+++++ yes thats good!
Quote
Bomber 15 IPC 4/1 no selective, SBR, can’t attack ships, dogfight at 1/1
Jet Bomber 15 IPC 3/3 selective attack, no SBR, attack ships, dogfight at 2/3
Fighter 10 IPC 3/4 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 2/3
Jet Fighter 12 IPC 4/5 selective attack, no SBR, attack ship, dogfight at 4/4So the problem remains. When you achieve Jet Technology, you would upgarde your fighters but you wouldn’t upgrade your bombers…
+++++ no you have a seperate piece… all your planes dont just “poof” and become jets. you have to build them individually
We may need to leave the Jet Bomber as a bomber rather than fighter-like units.
So it would be like…Jet Bomber 15 IPC 3/3, no selective, SBR, can’t attack ships, dogfight at 2/2
I mean you want Jet to be an upgrade not a new unit. It would be weird then you achieve “Jet” technology you suddenly lose ability to SBR tongue
++++ yea that is a problem… for now lets take that idea and allow SBR for jets
Quote
Except for that Bomber can become Heavy Bomber…so Jet Bomber can become Heavy Jet Bomber…
Surprised to see you want Heavy Jet Bomber…since it conflicts with an “agile” and fighter-like “Jet Bomber”.
+++ it should be at least possible if the game is extended in late 1945 american “shooting star” jet fighter shows up.Ok how do we actually model that?
Separate into different techologies…“Heavy bomber”, “Jet bomber”, and “Heavy jet bomber” ?
“Jet” then becomes “Jet fighter”.This is complicated.
But remember we don’t want use fixed dates, unless there is a very good reason for it. Remember we want historical simulation not historical replay.++++ the tech boxes will allow each player to see where he stands on his ability to gain a tech advantage. The axis and allied tech sheets needs to be seperate so neither side has an idea where the other is at until its allready happened.
-
no you have a seperate piece… all your planes dont just “poof” and become jets. you have to build them individually
So basically… if you research heavy bombers and jet technology… You will have fighters, jet fighters, heavy bombers, and heavy jet bombers----I feel this is too complicated. What kind of pieces are you gonna use so people could easily identify which one’s which? I propose using the old system where you upgrade all your units when you research something.
-
That would be the easy path… i agree… however some of these pieces can be used from 2nd edition units…
the cruiser unit is the old battleship
the mech infantry unit is the old tank piece ( or buy halftracks)
use old fighters for naval planes
the old bombers can be used for regular bombers, the new bombers can be jet or heavy…
eventually some additional pieces may have to be purchased. Failing that ill make some stickers that will go on chips to delininate which is a jet, heavy, heavy jet bomber, etc.
It may seem complicated but the OOB have this same thing ( problem) except they shortcut the whole problem by saying in effect " all your planes are instantly " fill in the blank"
that is not historically based.
-
It is hard to call it AaAR Historical Edition, and call it not historical… :|
Isn’t this similiar to pushing a tactical level combat system into a global game?
GG
-
naw… i have this playtested on weekends. once you try it you never look back. Its not too tactical. it just maintains some additional items in a different sequence or perspective.
-
Did you guys ever think of adding cargo planes that can airdrop infantry and send money to allied powers, or even flying boats? I posted in the naval combat section about amphibious tanks and planes
-
And also frogmen (basically combat scuba-divers) are cool. The Italians and Americans used them
-
Flying Boats was actually mentioned a while back I think… If I’m correct it is in the line up… Frogmen are too specialized in my mind…
GG
-
So are Marines and Schutzstaffel, but I thought frogmen are cooler. Anyway, why don’t we add special forces to the game?
I have a draft:
UK––commandos, chindits, SAS, French maquisards–choose one
USA----rangers, marines, black devils, pathfinders
USSR----Delfin, Siberian shock troops (I have to give credit to Imperious for this one)
Germany----stormtroopers, Green Police
Italy----Bersaglieri, X-MAS
Basically this is jstill a dream, I have no unit values yet.
-
Well, I guess if you are going to add 3 types of Jets then you got some reasons there… It could be more like you can use so many per turn in that role…
GG
-
I have a draft:
UK––commandos, chindits, SAS, French maquisards–choose one ( on this id make chindits a specific NA for UK similier to commandos … they can pass thru enemy territory attack and move back)
USA----rangers, marines, black devils, pathfinders ( id pick marines easy choice)
USSR----Delfin, Siberian shock troops (I have to give credit to Imperious for this one) ( siberian shock troops are allready a specific unit) how bout soviet guard units?
Germany----stormtroopers, Green Police ( SS easy choice will become SS panzer also possible panzer grenadiers but that is mech infantry)
Italy----Bersaglieri, X-MAS ( how bout those special forgore units?-- my spelling is off but Italy maintained about 12-15 special mech armor divisions)
-
how bout soviet guard units?
Yeah, I like the Red Guard
( how bout those special forgore units?– my spelling is off but Italy maintained about 12-15 special mech armor divisions)
Ok but I just thought snipers (Bersaglieri) were better since we don’t have snipers yet
-
This war did not produce entire division level or corps/ army level formations of sniper units… that is way way too tactical and better fitted for AA minis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpini_Corps
i think that is what they called them… ill pull out a book soon to confirm
-
@Imperious:
This war did not produce entire division level or corps/ army level formations of sniper units… that is way way too tactical and better fitted for AA minis.
I agree, 1 infantry piece represents x amount of infantry and snipers were incorporated in with the corps.
Suggested Topics
