yes it appears that their are too many planes! perhaps we can narrow down the idea to “tactical fighter” I’m not sure…
No I think those choices are fine… Dive Bombers need an advantage vs ships, otherwise I won’t buy them… Perhaps giving them the -1 advantage when aa fires…
GG
I duno about the -1 to AA fire.
If NAV (naval) and DIV (dive) can carry torpedo…what stops FTR (fighter) from carrying torpedos?
Currently naval antiair is about number of dices (not stronger or weaker attack)…
Naval units with a non-zero Anti-air value have an additional antiaircraft function in opening-fire.
Each unit has a number of rolls equal to its Anti-air value, with each roll hitting an enemy air unit on 1.
Note currently only NAV (naval) can land/rearm on CV (carrier).
they should have a more limited range ( one space from carrier one space back–- whether or not the carrier has moved)
Ok I am adding to the draft a range of 2 for NAV.
Don’t think we should say “whether or not the carrier has moved” though, they changes something else.
We still let NAV fight on land though. No reason why they can’t be fitted with bombs.
I think problem is solved. You buy DIV not NAV for land because of range.
I think my line of thought was -1 one die, but that doesn’t sound correct since in some situations that would be reducing it to 0 die… I am just pointing out that as the rules currently are I wouldn’t even buy a DIV because they aren’t worth it…
GG
I wouldn’t even buy a DIV because they aren’t worth it…
Maybe DIV should be 3/2 and NAV 3/1.
Imperious does mention both should poor defence but which one should be worse?
Ok I see why Imperious said
one space from carrier one space back–- whether or not the carrier has moved
We made CV move 3. So If NAV moves 2 it’ll be weird with the OOB carrier “cargo” rule.
So we need to get rid of OOB’s “cargo” rule. You don’t have to launch fighters.
It doesnt introduce anything weird right?
Abd what about UK NAV on US carrier?
Dive Bombers are representing Bombers, NAV fighters… I don’t think the Defense should go up, instead you need a way to make them more formidable against Naval Forces… NAV I almost envision as there “opponent” unit… You want to be able to launch your NAV’s anyways to counter the DIV threat… Perhaps no Aircraft can hit Ships except bombers? (Fighters and NAV can hit Transports?)
just an idea… How many P-40’s did you hear of knock out a carrier with a 500 LB. bomb?
GG
What do you mean? I not suggestion up but actually down the defence of NAV.
As for planes attacking ships, we actually let them do it. FTR NAV and DIV, but not BMR.
We say that BMR do saturation level bombing from high altitude. Hence they can’t hit ships and have no selectively fire.
I was referring to DIV… Sorry I didn’t clarify… Capital Ships can only be attacked by DIV?
GG
Yeah, all air units except BMR can attack ships.
Another thing.
Should AA (Antiaircraft) still cost 5 IPC after our changes?
Maybe 3 IPC?
4 IPC is more accurate… Hardware weremore expensive than men (AA guns should cost more than infantry)
I thought all factories and VC have a built in AA fire? whats the use of aa guns? is it to now protect your land units? if so we can easily add the thing in artillery as part of their functions. extensive flak batterys did not travel with armies as they moved. Very limited aa flak artillery was present in military formations. We could just use those guns as heavy artillery unit or coastal batteries. But if you really like them then fine.
Ah yes the AA rules have been changed to reflect this. They are not mobile fighting units.
You can’t fire until you deploy them! You can’t move them after you’ve deployed them!
I retract my sugguest to reduce cost.
I just remember we planned to call the game piece ID (Infrastructure Defence) to includes Coastal Batteries.
Yes thats correct!
Ok people lets draft some Coastal Batteries rules…
We have a few ideas mentioned already.
Like they shall only be able to hit ships engaging in amphibious assault. That is, transports unloading units or surface ships doing bombardment or helping attacking infantry with +1 in 1st combat cycle.
Whats the range of coastal batteries compared to destroyers and batteships?
Ships can choose to not support infantry?
Should the actually “transport” piece be hit? Or should attacking infantry (in reality, landing crafts) be hit?
Coastal Battery:
4 IPC
Range (Sea): 1 (Most Coastal Defensive Guns had a range of 8-40 Km)
They fire in Coastal Bombardment. They can target Land Units and Ships Supporting Infantry involved in Amphibious Assaults. They hit on a 2 or less. They can target 2 Units in an Amphibious Assault.
GG
sources:
http://ca.ckwinfo.net/info/guns/index.html
http://www.nuav.net/coastgr5.html
http://www.petrowilliamus.co.uk/murals/background/background.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_3-40_3ns.htm
GG
Basically I am just reiterrating what you said…
Imperious Leader is opting for coastal battery can only target incoming land units (in reality landing crafts) not actual ships.
Coastal guns at 8kms would be outranged by destroyers and battleships.
But 40kms only some battleships would outrange them.
But who would operate at maximum range anyway…low accuracy shots?
A complex rule could be that coastal batteries can hit the ships. But ships can choose to stay out of range…still do coastal bombardment but can’t support invading troops.
The 40 Km guns were the “big boys” 350 mm shells, probably not the best in our description of a coastal battery since we are opting for “amphib” killers…
Yeah, obviously they can support and stay out of range… But I wouldn’t say they had low accuracy, and I wouldn’t say they had the best (hence my hit on 2)… They weren’t “bombard” weapons, you actually targetted ships with them, but naturally your artillery ranging in so you aren’t the best “shot”…
That is why I have what I have listed… perhaps target 3? and make them 5?
GG
you don’t mean 3 rolls hitting at 5 or lower do ya?
um no… 3 units targetted coastal bombardment costs 5
