AARHE: National Units (Phase 1)

I think the Point is that their were more US Escort Carriers out there and used with incredible effectiveness in both theatres…

I agree with this however this idea is very entrenched in players minds as the “japanese style attack”  Perhaps instead of infantry we could go back to special Japanese fighters with a modifier +1 on attack and cheaper to allow the initial Japanese advantage of the “lance” torpedo which the US had no equilevant too.

so:
Japanese fighters cost 6 IP and get a +1 attack on naval ships in the opening combat round

OK now back to some other ideas:

German Blitzkreig: these units get a +1 combat modifier against enemy ground units in every round where no enemy fighters are present. They also give one armor unit a +1 attack with each paired unit at a 1/1 basis.

UK home defense: British fighters defending in home territories get a +1 defense modifier

Soviet Shock armies: Soviet armor units in the opening round of combat get premtive attack in the first round of combat

Japanese:  allready covered

USA: “blood and guts”  all armored units ( and mech infantry) can attack one territory and if they take it can continue onto a second attack in an adjacent enemy controlled territory .

Or you can install some US marines type of deal…

@Guerrilla:

I think the Point is that their were more US Escort Carriers out there and used with incredible effectiveness in both theatres…

Cool. So we can go without the move of 3 then.  :lol:

@Imperious:

German Blitzkreig: these units get a +1 combat modifier against enemy ground units in every round where no enemy fighters are present. They also give one armor unit a +1 attack with each paired unit at a 1/1 basis.

Yep you’ve had displayed this rule before, good to have to eliminate enemy fighers first.

Good to see national unit and national attack are represented clearly again.

I guess he is saying the German tactic also meant better fighting or less prepared defense by enemy.

But we don’t let bombers attack again do we?

so what are you saying?

bombers attack again like fighters like tanks in OOB’s panzerbltiz?

I meant the bomber piece on the game board

I see now, only dive bombers take part in blitzkrieg

German Blitzkreig: these units get a +1 combat modifier against enemy ground units in every round where no enemy fighters are present. They also give one armor unit a +1 attack with each paired unit at a 1/1 basis.

Yep you’ve had displayed this rule before, good to have to eliminate enemy fighers first.

OK ill explain how it could work… under the land combat system… air fights air and land fights land… once one side has “cleared the sky” after any combat round… they ( lets use the germans in our example) get this advantage as a matter of course due to the revolutionary concept of Blitzkreig. Specialized planes (dive bombers… skuka) worked well with advancing armor columns and took out the enemy armor and other strong points to allow the classic breakthru. This was clearly a german concept for war with the mind set of quick victories and a method of getting them. Armor gets a +1 because the divebombers are destroying and assisting the armor to accomplish this task. The benifit has to be rewarded with this bonus… so the germans will commit their armor ( a risk that they acknowledge fully)… i dont want to reward germany to use infantry… we allready have this with artillery giving the bonus to infantry, now planes give the bonus to armor… does this make any sense?

Duke writes:

“Well, I guess it’s clear, but not realistic. What does blitzkreig have to do with attack modifier? The OOB blitz rules were more realisitc in that if you atack for 1 round only, then you can attack again with armor. I think if we just include fighters to that also, we’d have a simple, realistic advantage.”

IN OOB your armor does not attack and attack again…But i do favor something like this in my games ( which have many more territories) in our project something like a “Breakthrough and exploitation” phase would not work because their are too few territories IMO.

Trust Imperious Leader to come up with solutions.
He has many games behind him.

Its probably true that our territories are too big for that.

There is a level of abstaction with respect to time and place that are key ingredients when assigning rules that may interfere with the established “unit” of scale. So some rules may be more complex or less abstracted but as long as they conform to the time and scale of the game they can be made to work.

So we are pretty much good with it? 1 National Unit and 1 National Attack/Defense.

Yea id go for that.

To sum up, round up, clean up, finish off…
I understand there is still strong debating on UK’s national unit.

National Units

USSR = Once per turn, 2 ARM can be puchased and placed in Moscow for 8 IPC.
Germany = Once per turn per IC, 1 SS can be purchased and placed there for 6 IPCs provided no surface naval units are purchased there.
UK = FTRs can be purchased and placed in London for 8 IPC each provided at least one FTR was purchased last turn.
Japan = Once per turn, 3 INF can be purchased and placed in Japan for 7 IPC.
US = Once per turn per IC, 1 CV can be purchased and placed there for 14 IPC.

National Attack

USSR = ARM fire in the opening fire instead of main round in the first cycle of combat.
Germany = FTR get +1 attack modifier and each gives 1 ARM +1 attack modifier when enemy FTR are not present.
UK = UK FTR defending in UK get +1 defense modifier.
Japan = Japan may declare no retreat at the beginning of combat, all INF gets +1 attack/defense modifier provided Japanese side consists of only INF.
US = INF gets +1 attack modifier in the fire cycle of combat of amphibious assault.

1)Yes SS is submarine.

2)“Why does Russia have strong tanks? Their tanks weren’t stronger, just much cheaper when mass produced.”
I would think the idea is not actually “strong” tanks but 2 things: 1) at the start of the campaign till about a year later the t-34 was the best all-around tank and it achieved superiority. 2) The tank also represents self propelled artillery ( su-122, su-155, etc) these things were very efficient as tank destroyers and i think thats what hes driving at 3) the katyushkas are also in this equation… but they were not the “icon” of the Soviet armor strike… but all three are embodied into the NA.

I think when we introduce the new units … somewhere a Soviet Rocket ( katyuskas) may be part of this… another use for the AA gun.

The list is very close but not exact he was tidying up the current situation… BTW where are we with Neutrals?

Yeah we haven’t defined clearly what the ARM or ART piece represents. It just because the ART piece looks like little infantry-pushed guns to me.

So these are some of the conflicts:

USSR attack: ARM opening fire (IL), or +1 modifier ART (theduke) ?
UK unit: FTR, or cheaper DD (theduke), or modern BB (IL) ?
US attack: toss up between marine and mech infantry?