Trucks:
Each truck costs 4 IPC and can move any single unit +1 in combat or +2 in NCM.
You can’t just make it for some units and not others because you imbalance the other units the bonus must apply to all land units equally.
Also, trucks represent the logistical train as well. Fuel and ammo for all units.
Unit must start with trucks and move with them all spaces in order to benefit with the bonus.
I like that. Maybe a cost of 3 is better given your calculations.
Upon reevaluation i agree that 3 is better.
@Imperious:
Trucks:
Each truck costs 4 IPC and can move any single unit +1 in combat or +2 in NCM.
You can’t just make it for some units and not others because you imbalance the other units the bonus must apply to all land units equally.
Also, trucks represent the logistical train as well. Fuel and ammo for all units.
Unit must start with trucks and move with them all spaces in order to benefit with the bonus.
Trucks should be a NCM unit only. They are not a combat vehicle they are just a means of resupply or reinforcment. Like IL said compared to sea or air transport.
But Naval Transport can move during teh COMBAT MOVE phase?
Like IL said compared to sea or air transport.
Ok so they move in combat phase … like transports
but only +1 movement. In combat you bring more supplies and chaos of war has a reducing ability for logistics.
IN NCM we are really talking about trains and more strategic based logistics.
But Naval Transport can move during teh COMBAT MOVE phase?
Naval and air transport have to deliver the Marines and paratroopers to combat. The trucks do not. The halftracks, tanks and selfpropelled anti-tank guns are better suited for that. Actually the sea and air transports are stand off units. The Higgins boats take the Marines in under fire and the C-47s drop the paratroops from four or five hundred feet and then get out. I just dont see trucks unloading troops on the front line under fire. Just a hangup of mine I guess.
I think you are viewing trucks as just trucks. They are much more than that. These territories are in many cases the size of entire nations, so the “front lines” thing is not really what is going on. They are just bringing stuff to the front from factories or mobilization centers.
I suppose now I could advance a new concept:
Trucks are placed in controlled spaces and are used a ‘jump points’ for units boosting them +1 movement, but allowing multiple jumps. Every other space is where you place a truck, which allows the land unit continuous movement to front lines.
What i mean by this new concept is you can “chain” the trucks in a row, allowing any one land unit to move and continue moving along this chain.
Enemy player can now also bomb the chain and disrupt the logistical flow, so you must use land units to protect the trucks from bombers ( combat is done in normal manner)
@Imperious:
I think you are viewing trucks as just trucks. They are much more than that. These territories are in many cases the size of entire nations, so the “front lines” thing is not really what is going on. They are just bringing stuff to the front from factories or mobilization centers.
I suppose now I could advance a new concept:
Trucks are placed in controlled spaces and are used a ‘jump points’ for units boosting them +1 movement, but allowing multiple jumps. Every other space is where you place a truck, which allows the land unit continuous movement to front lines.
What i mean by this new concept is you can “chain” the trucks in a row, allowing any one land unit to move and continue moving along this chain.
Enemy player can now also bomb the chain and disrupt the logistical flow, so you must use land units to protect the trucks from bombers ( combat is done in normal manner)
Interesting concept. The Red Ball Express. But would all the trucks end up at the end of the chain?
Well the chain is every other space, so the last jump off point is 2 spaces from the last truck.
The key is to gauge the cost based on every other space, or just chain them in each space ( requiring double the number)
This will determine the cost because if you need double the number, the cost must go down.
Now of course by buying say 2 trucks per space, you can move 2 land units along the express.
Have to play it out and see.
Just allow them to transport 2 units with movement 1 2 spaces. Behaves like a naval transport otherwise. Cost of 3 seems fine for this. “Maybe” 2.
So just like a sea transport but on land. same exact rules?
Why would the cost be at 2, while a sea transport is 7?
If anything moving units by land is much more efficient and advantage for non-island nations. The game would be somewhat broken is Germany could build these for 2-3 and shuck infantry two spaces. At least 4 IPC would be fair.
I guess that could work, but it might be a bit much moving these trucks back and forth.
You definatly got a KISS rule here, but the price is too low IMO.
Yeah, maybe 4 is a bit better for them now that you point out the advantages for Germany.
Why would the cost be at 2, while a sea transport is 7?
The idea with making them cheaper than naval transports is that the main advantage to the latter isn’t that they speed up movement, it’s that they allow normally unreachable places to be reached. No matter a land unit’s movement speed, it can’t cross the atlantic without help.
New to posting here, but have been play the game and reading this site for a long time.
IMO KISS is sometimes the best way about doing something’s. The idea of a land transport is great, most if not all the nations need a way to move troops from there factories to the front faster, now that there is so many more territories. Which I love BTW. The cost of 4 for these units would be the best option IMO, as land vehicles are much cheaper then a ship would be. I think that keeping the same rules as naval transports, but just change the cost to 4 would be the best option.
Although I did have another passing thought. and this would definitely have to be play tested. The Idea of moving troops to the front is a slowing down factor, so what if these units cost 10 or so, and still had no attack or defence, but a player could mobilize 1 new land unit there per turn. But its movement would be restricted to just 1. This way you can get new units to the fight faster, but not make it to powerful as to total change the balance of the game. As I said at the start its just a passing thought. Opinion’s?
Personally I’d have it represent Motorized infantry.
Motorized infantry
Move: 2
Attack: 1 (2 when attached to an art)
defense: 2
Cost: 4ipcs
Special: each motorized infantry unit may be attached to a single infantry or artillery piece. Any infantry or artillery pieces attached to motorized infantry have their movement increased to 2.
Then I would revise Mechanized infantry
Mechanized Infantry
Move: 2
Attack: 2 (3 when you have the improved mechanized artillery tech and are attached to a tank )
defense: 2
cost: 5 ipcs
Special: the usual can blitz when attached to a tank rule.
Just my two cents
Personally I’d have it represent Motorized infantry.
Motorized infantry
Move: 2
Attack: 1 (2 when attached to an art)
defense: 2
Cost: 4ipcs
Special: each motorized infantry unit may be attached to a single infantry or artillery piece. Any infantry or artillery pieces attached to motorized infantry have their movement increased to 2.Then I would revise Mechanized infantry
Mechanized Infantry
Move: 2
Attack: 2 (3 when you have the improved mechanized artillery tech and are attached to a tank )
defense: 2
cost: 5 ipcs
Special: the usual can blitz when attached to a tank rule.Just my two cents
I like this. I think if the truck unit is simply a land transport only Russia and Germany will buy them (maybe UK to move troops from South Africa and India to Africa). Whereas if it has an attack and defense value other nations may use it. Mechanized infantry would be bought more as well with their new stats.
I can see Japan using this in Asia, or the US in North Africa also…
I doubt the US would buy the truck if all it did was transport units. The US is constantly doing amphibious assaults from Africa to Italy, then into Europe, and all over in the pacific. It has no need for a land transport. Italy and Anzac would have no need for it either. It’s only use would be on the eastern front and in getting Indians or South Africans to Egypt. Also, it is unrealistic to use trucks in Asia due to the terrain. Jungles slow things down, and the logistic nightmares they create are one of the reasons Japan’s ground war eventually stalled and floundered in South East Asia. Better to make it motorized infantry. Maybe a 1/2/2 unit costing 4 IPC that can pair with artillery or tank for +1 attack? Mech infantry would then change to the values DannyBoy2016 suggested.
