@Imperious:
So 1 fighter is all you need you defend against 10 armor!
Fortunately 1 fighter + 1 infantry is not enough to attack and take a territory with 10 armor. (Due to improved modelling, the small invading land force will die very quickly).++++where are you getting this? if one fighter decided to attack 10 armor, and the defender had no planes… then the plane would get one shot hitting a tank and the balance of tanks would run away and retreat. Whats not realistic about that?
If you have massive land forces you would order your troops to hold on to land and ignore a tiny group of enemy planes which are doing a little bit of harassing.
Thats what I am getting at when I said defender without air power will have to retreat no matter what.
Also a little strange with 1 fighter defending against unlimited land forces.
If we don’t consider limiting how much planescan fight on for…
The other way to look at it is how planes hold territory.
Maybe territory can be “contested” and not taken by either side.
Its rediculous to send 10 INF and not able to capture (or at least disrupt) a territory held by 1 FTR.
OK easy… In any attacks involving land units attacking enemy help territory by air units, the defender must retreat after one round of combat against these attacking units. So the land forces have to survive one round of getting hit by planes.
IN any attack where the defending units are destroyed but their still remains defending fighters… they also get one free round of combat against the attacking units. Of course all these “free rounds” against land units cannot result in either case of any hits against planes. Only air power can take out air power.
But now we come back to the earlier question…
Why should attacking planes be able land anywhere and fight on guerilla style without ground troops while defending planes can’t do the same?
So how about make it 3 rounds or something. Both attacking and defending planes without ground support must retreat after 3 rounds. This models both
*landing on grass and move away when enemy troops
*enemy troops ultimately closing in
Any ideas IL on this strange situation :-P
ALL i can say is to keep it simple… If we must then any attacks by ground forces against lone planes and the planes just either have to leave ( they cant be used for control of territories so technically they cant or should not participate in any battle) So the consequence is they must just retreat > their is no combat in this case. I dont like the 3 round thing because it is too arbitrary? why three? why just not any or none.
@Imperious:
If we must then any attacks by ground forces against lone planes and the planes just either have to leave ( they cant be used for control of territories so technically they cant or should not participate in any battle) So the consequence is they must just retreat > their is no combat in this case.
That doesn’t address why lone attacking planes can fight or fight-on while lone defending planes can’t.
Yeah 3 is arbitary. It should depend on the geography of the territory but thats too complex.
No worries. This is phase 3 stuff. We don’t have to decide now.
“That doesn’t address why lone attacking planes can fight or fight-on while lone defending planes can’t.”
Attacking planes are the active players prerogative they are what you get to do on your turn. Defending planes have different status as “reaction” to what the attacker is doing. They as it follows do not have the same abilities as the reacting force.
However, they can perform DAS missions, Defend territories from SBR, even possibly interdiction of enemy planes coming over to attack. They can also participate in coastal defense from invasions etc. lastly, we will add CAP as in AA pacific to address naval and sub stall problems in phase 2 and 3.
Defending planes cannot stay in fight when the attacker has decided to end his attack… that moves too much into the responsibilities of the active player. Defense has to be more passive as it is in OOB.
Oh yes good point about active and passive.
So we’ll make defending planes retreat after losing ground control.
We just have to consider the case of no where to retreat to.
They have to retreat to an adjacent friendly territory or one that is in flight range. (the closest one)
In the miserable case where no friendly territories are in range…do they just die?
Yes they die.
@Imperious:
Thats the most common way to gain the freebie… you attack France with 3 battleships and like 2-3 men and a plane or two, killing 5 germans because you planned to really send a few boys to gain France on the cheap. Thats the most common cheapo attack. Now you wont land less than 8-12 infantry to overcome 4-6 germans, because you wont get into those situations where you take France with one infantry… either France Falls with overwhelming odds or the Allies dont try it unless they are gonna be forced to to save the game from defeat.
Another method I mentioned earlier is that the defender only “sends down the beach” 1 land unit for every X attacking land units down the beach. Only these gets can be hit by bombardment.
Naturally you won’t send your whole army down the beach to be exposed to artillery fire just because 1 INF landed.
This system is probably more realistic because nothing physically prevents the battleship from shooting. They can saturate bombard and waste shells if they wanted to. :-D
Say defender engages the beach 1-to-1.
So now if UK send 5 BB and 1 INF to attack France with Germany defending with 5 INF…
99.6% chance the attacking BB kills the 1 defending INF sent “down the beach” in opening fire
80.2% chance the attacking INF gets killed by the remaing 4 or 5 defending INF
OK i see your idea… perhaps a BB or DD can just boost the attacking infantry by +1 on the first round…
something like this…
Attacking infantry lands and gets the shore bombardment support from friendly ships. Thay also get air support on round one.
On round two they can attack with artillery and tanks along with the rest… this looks good since we both know MEN are the first wave and hardware comes in only after the infantry have secured the beach.
Would this not solve the problem?
Your idea of a “dead man walking” on the beach makes it seem like their is not way to repulse an invasion on round one. We have to make this possible at least so by the other plan we bring the attacker in stages SO HE WILL COMMIT A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF FORCES TO ACTUALLY take the territory in force.
@Imperious:
Your idea of a “dead man walking” on the beach makes it seem like their is not way to repulse an invasion on round one.
Well the battleships and coastal batteries do fire first with their huge range.
Defending infantry on the beach need to survive battleship bombardment before they can do anything.
Similarly the attacking infantry in landing crafts need to survive coastal batteries (ID represented by the AA piece) before they can do anything.
The attacking land force can still be destroyed in round one.
But here nothing besides coastal batteries stopping land crafts from landing. So I am saying you can’t repulse the landing. I know planes and artillery should get to intercept land crafts but thats not something we can model right now.
Interesting idea about machine after infantry secured the beach.
Maybe attacking tanks only land if attacker survives first round.
another idea is to allow defending artillery to fire AFTER BB shor shots and are considered preemtive… that way defender gets something as well.
round two:
Maybe the IA representing coastal batteries should do the defender’s opening fire. I think artillery shouldn’t automatically get additional opening fire.
ok so this:?
round two:
Then aagain is there anything technical difficulties assosicated with a forced landing by tanks instead of infantry?
If not then is it a matter of military strategy because tanks on their own are sitting ducks?
Oh I just thought of something.
We already fixed “one lone defending FTR killing 10 attacking ARM” in our new system….by making them lone defending air units retreat or die.
What about “one lone attacking INF killing 10 defending FTR”?
I think we just might just have to use my system :-D …of letting defending FTR fight for X rounds before retreating or die.
Then aagain is there anything technical difficulties assosicated with a forced landing by tanks instead of infantry?
Yes their is… tanks take much longer to deploy and would be destroyed by artillery before they fired a shot. Infantry is able like water to work its way in the cracks of the enemy line. In open country the opposite is true. A beach landing is allways done by Infantry… the assault landing is typically what Paratroopers are faced with. I forgot to mention that heavy tanks don’t perform too well in soft wet sand.
