• I am not sure what you mean? 3 planes per carrier?

    Under AARHE If using the optional units then you replace fighters from carriers (as per original set up) with naval fighters which are kept seperate. Land Fighters can no longer be used back and forth from carriers and land, while naval fighters cannot end their turn on a land space ( if the carrier is sunk the planes are gone).

    In terms of shared duty…

    naval fighters can attack land targets, but again must end movement on carrier.

    Land fighters can attack naval targets but they cannot land on carriers.

    So both can do everything except one cant touch land and the other cant touch a carrier. This is due to different skills required and different duties for naval fighters are controlled by the navy and land fighters by the air force.


  • The proportions aren’t prefectly realistic of course.
    Most incorrect being Carrier / Planes combination.

    1 carrier piece carries 2 fighter pieces.
    But in reality one fleet carrier can only take 50-100 planes.

    Japan only had 10 aircraft carriers at beginning of WWII.
    The game represents that with 3 carrier pieces.
    So each carrier piece is like 3 aircraft carriers, carrying maximum of 300 planes (which isn’t 6 air divisions).

    this is from tekkyy on the 1st page


  • Ahh but by reading that i too am in the dark. I dont think he actually said carriers should carry 3 fighters.

    he is saying a carrier is a group of 3-5 carriers. japan starts with 2 id take it to mean he meant 5 carriers.


  • naval fighters cannot end their turn on a land space ( if the carrier is sunk the planes are gone).

    Actually, we didn’t go that far with NAV (Naval Fighters).
    That are still allowed to operate on land.

    *they are weaker than normal fighters in both dogfighting and normal combat (so you wouldn’t go head-on against normal fighters)
    *they have reduced movement (so its only practical to use them with aircraft carriers)

    Thats to model carrier capable planes sacrificing features, for carrier capability.
    But there is little reason why a naval fighter pilot can land on a carrier but not on a full-size airfield.


  • OK thats fine. your correct Tekkyy

  • Moderator

    Ok responding to the mech infantry. In my opionon I think that " Mechanized Inf." should be as it is as a U.S.,  N.A. If you are looking at it as a tech so every one could possibly have a mechanized army. Insert,tried and true Tank Rider rules, Each tank may transport 1 Inf.  Call it something else if the name don’t fit right. yo could get real creative and allow a tank to pull an Arty. or Inf. one or other or maybe both.  The US should honestly have the only True Mechanized army as per OOB revised


  • During the war the Soviets employed Mechanized guards, Mechanized guards,and  Shock troops, The Italians employed motorized infantry, the Germans had panzer grenadiers and SS infantry whichg were also mech units. Of course the british had armored brigades which had the same or near same characteristics.

    This means that in different forms nearly all of the nations had these armored infantry forces. We use the term mech infantry, but its really alot of types of more heavily armored infantry.


  • What should be the cost of a attack 2, defence 2, move 2, mech infantry?


  • @tekkyy:

    What should be the cost of a attack 2, defence 2, move 2, mech infantry?

    Cost 4, Move 2, Attack 2, Defence 2
    May blitz with tank. do NOT receive a plus 1 from ART like regular INF


  • Imperious Leader has already added Mech Infantry to the AARHE battleboard.
    Although we don’t have Mech Infantry in AARHE yet.
    I am guessing he is very keen  :lol:


  • I vote for adding the Mechanized unit as an optional unit in AARHE. Like IL explained, every nation more or less formed them in the war. Only Japan didn’t really…

    The US Army was fully mobile, not Armored I think. I mean, their troops were supported by trucks and jeeps etc… No hundreds of miles of walking or horse ridding only, like many German and Russian troops… But I don’t think we want to cover that with the Mechanized unit, which represents the really armored INF divisions.  I think we can still ad a US NA for better movement of the US army.


  • What?

    WE got mech infantry as an optional unit… dont we?

    that was the first proposed idea for new units.


  • apparently not

    how does this one sound?

    @Micoom:

    Cost 4, Move 2, Attack 2, Defence 2
    May blitz with tank. do NOT receive a plus 1 from ART like regular INF

    “may blitz with tank” is good
    that is, I want it to be able to blitz only when matched 1-to-1 with tanks


  • yea add it.


  • Hi!

    Instead of introducing airborne and mechanized infantry as specific units in the game, I’m thinking of using a special rule.

    -Every nation gets one opportunity each turn to either use a paratrooper unit, or a mechanized infantry unit. This works as follows:

    Any infantry unit on the board can be used as paratroopers or as mechanized infantry, but only one unit per turn can be used for one of these purposes.

    A Paratrooper unit can land anywhere within two spaces, provided that there is a bomber unit stationed in the same territory as the paratrooper. The effect of landing in a territory is the same as if the unit had moved there over land, i.e. if an enemy territory is empty, it is captured, but if there are enemy troops there the unit goes into combat. The paratrooper has an attack value of 2 when in combat. When and if the territory is captured, the paratrooper unit becomes a regular infantry unit again. The paratrooper can land as a combat move or as a noncombat move.

    A Mechanized infantry unit is a regular infantry unit that can move two spaces (blitz), provided that there is a tank stationed in the same territory as the mech. inf. The mech. inf. unit moves together with the tank and also fights together with the tank, with an attack value of 2. When combat or movement is over the mech. inf. unit becomes a regular infantry unit again. The mech. inf. unit can attack during the combat move phase or move during the noncombat move phase.

    Still with me?

    Ok, I have also introduced a system of country specific units in the game. These units are regular AAr units painted light gray. The build costs are based on the assumption that the out of the box-rules costs are used.

    US:
    B-29 Superfortress. Move 8 (not affected by long range aircraft tech), attack 5, defense 1, cost 18. (painted american bomber)

    Germany:
    SS Panzer. Move 2, attack 4, defense 4, cost 8. (painted german tank)

    UK:
    Cruiser. Move 2, attack 3, defense 3, cost 15. Can bombard like Battleship. (painted british destroyer)

    Japan:
    Super Carrier. Move 2, attack 1, defense 3, cost 20. Can carry 3 fighter units. (painted japanese carrier)

    Russia:
    Il-2 Shturmovik. Move 4, attack 4, defense 4, cost 14. (painted russian fighter)

    So, any thoughts on this? Sorry if any of it is unclear, english is not my first language.


  • I like the BOTB syle mech infantry with the truck peice. A Truck unit can be bought for 4IPC. It than can carry 2inf or 1inf and 1Art or just 1Art Like a “land” transport. It has know attack or defense value itself. We already have them for U.S. and Germany if you have BOTB. That only leaves USSR and U.K. and Japan. Just paint the U.S. truck U.K. and Russia colors because the U.S. provided many trucks to those countries anyway. Japan never really had much mech inf anyway but you could paint the German one Jap Orange or Jap Red whatever you prefer.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 1
  • 86
  • 10
  • 3
  • 3
  • 52
  • 3
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

32

Online

17.5k

Users

40.0k

Topics

1.7m

Posts