AARHE: Phase 3: Revised NA's

@SS:

This is what we have in game now.

Bombers C10
H Bombers C12

Bomber     D6  1-6  3.5 ave  6 max dam 1 lowest dam

H Bomber  D6+2  1-8  4.5 ave   8 max dam  3 lowest dam

This is the change I’m putting in next game.

Bomber    D8  1-8   4.5 ave    8 max dam  1 lowest dam

H Bomber  D10  1-10  5.5 ave  10 max dam  1 lowest dam

Nice +1 dmg increase.
To your game, it fit perfectly well with no bonus, only 1 dice to roll.

I like the fact that heavy bomber get a wider range from 1 to 10.
I don’t think heavy (high altitude bomber) were more accurate than bomber.
Probably due to the high altitude of bombing.

It is more realistic to move warships from one SZ to another.
But, would you retreat more than 1 TT to repair your Tank?
(Land movement are much slower and falling back damaged Tanks while staying in position with Art and Inf make such delay an issue. You also have to compare between planes for the cost. Aircraft mobility and versatility is way more interesting than 2 hits units which have to return to IC for repair.)

IMO, it is easier to consider that such unit are repaired right on place with spare parts.

A different procedure I suggested a while ago is that you can only repair one and have to pick a damaged Tank as casualty before allocating a hit to damage another Tank.

So, instead of 10 Tanks staying on battle until the 11th hits.
A second hits eliminates a first Tank.
This becomes far less effective, but it is easier to follow a single damaged Tank per stack.

However, I did not search on how to calculate such way of allocating damage.

And instead of giving the US an extra $10 for having the Philipines and Hawaii, they should start off with $10 extra and lose $10 due to a massive loss of morale when they lose them. A penalty as suppose to a reward. The loss of morale can truly result in a loss of production. That would make it more realistic.

I am probably going to post this topic in another section. I would like to build more support for this for any future revisions to the rules.

No, but I didn’t make a pig’s arse of the Russian Revolution rules.

@Vareel:

some units just don’t seem to have any nitch.

’

All the units in AAP40 have a niche, you just have to think about it more. Some are not as sexy as they used to be (tanks, battleships) and some are certainly bought less by certain players, but in general this is representive of history.

This set of unit stats is the best to date.

Why should crusiers be able to be traded with fighters?

the tac bomber rules already give them a clear role and make alot of sence except they are simpler that yours.

I do like your rules for infantry supporting tanks on the defence, except I dont like tanks costing five. tanks are big things that take alot to produce they should be expensive and players should not be able to build stacks of them (unless they are the russian player, in AAE40 the USSR should not be able to buy mech inf and instead can buy tanks at 5.)

yes… :-D

I can see what your doing…(avatar)

Well that explains that.  I wish there was some really easy way to create a good hex map.  Have not found out how to do that yet.

@Trusty-Sapper
Wow, you’ve responded to my reply from a year ago, on a very old thread. I checked my PM’s and I was able to send Bass my most recent version of AARe.

I do agree with you Trusty, that “National Advantages plus bid makes every game a strategic puzzle”
Don’t forget the targeted tech rolls too. No chance to develop super subs when my scientist were working on long range!

I was a bit upset when it was only a short 5 years after Revised was released (and we fine-tuned Enhanced) that AA50 (Anniversary came out). Everyone ran for the new release and Revised was left to rot.