@cornwallis said in Can Tac Bombers Escort a Bombing Raid, but choose not to bomb?:
@panther but what if you send them in to bomb an air or Naval base, then they do participate in the dog fight?
Yes.
Tac. bomber VS Mech. infantry
-
Tactical bombing by themselves is a bit suboptimal, but you can bring them in with strat bombers so you can take AA casualties on tacs instead of strats.
-
It looks like Mech. is most people’s favorite so far and I see many good reasons why. :-D
-
I like the tac’s for naval purposes. It is that little extra punch from a fully loaded carrier that can really make a difference. The defense of coaurse, is reversed but a three and a four on attack and the same on defense seems a good ballanced flight deck. For land battles, the tac is again a good choice because the punch is the same as a strat bomber but it’s defense is the same as a tank. I have begun to use mech’s more as I have begun to play the axis more so I can appreciate both units. I still favor the tac though.
-
Tactical bombing by themselves is a bit suboptimal, but you can bring them in with strat bombers so you can take AA casualties on tacs instead of strats.
I assume you mean on bombing runs, and it doesn’t work like that (TripleA doesn’t handle it correctly). Each facility only shoots AA at the planes attacking it, so if you send 1 tac on the airbase and 2 strats on the industrial complex, your strat bombers are not more protected than if you sent them without the tactical bomber. The airbase will shoot once at the tac, and the factory will shoot twice at the strats.
-
Tactical bombing by themselves is a bit suboptimal, but you can bring them in with strat bombers so you can take AA casualties on tacs instead of strats.
I assume you mean on bombing runs, and it doesn’t work like that (TripleA doesn’t handle it correctly). Each facility only shoots AA at the planes attacking it, so if you send 1 tac on the airbase and 2 strats on the industrial complex, your strat bombers are not more protected than if you sent them without the tactical bomber. The airbase will shoot once at the tac, and the factory will shoot twice at the strats.
Oh right, tac bombers can only bomb bases, right? I guess you don’t need to bring in too many bombers to disable a base, since it only needs 3 damage.
-
I am not sure I understood the question. is the question : would I rather play axis global without mechs or tacs for all players? or is it: if my side could only buy one of them; which would i buy.
Bc, imo Mechs is the most important of those units for the axis. The allies probably would do fine with tac instead of mechs.
-
In an attempt to make the mec. a more appealing purchase, we have included a few house rules to enhance the mec. It can tow one artillerty unit or cary one redular infintry unit. We have also included transport trucks that can carry infintry. This gives a fairly quick moving force. The trucks and infintry are bullet catchers while the mec and artillery are able to hit a target in support of tanks. This has helped the axis players alot but has also helped the UK as well. The US, if making and African or Norwegian landing can benefit from this rule as well. We’re still play testing this but we have found it an interesting twist to our purchases and stratagies. Since I play the allies more than the axis, I end up with more tac bombers but I can see the benefits of the new mec abilities.
-
Yeah we play where mech can tow artillery also - good rule.
-
@Der:
Yeah we play where mech can tow artillery also - good rule.
Wouldnt that make the Tank redundant ?
-
@Der:
Yeah we play where mech can tow artillery also - good rule.
It also has a certain similarity to the rule in A&A Battle of the Bulge which allows truck units to transport artillery and/or troops (in addition to their ability to transport supplies). And some of the “mech infantry” sculpts in Global actually do depict trucks rather than half-tracks.
This fun little WWII-era video includes a few shots of jeeps towing artillery pieces…rather aggressively so in one particular scene:
-
@Der:
Yeah we play where mech can tow artillery also - good rule.
Wouldnt that make the Tank redundant ?
That’s exactly what this does. You’d still want one or two tanks for blitzing, potentially, but otherwise tanks become inferior in every way to mech + art, apart from situations where you had limited production capacity (IE: a mIC) but needed maximum land-based strength in the extreme short term (IE: you are attacking something two spaces away next turn).
48 IPCs:
mech+art houserule: 24 blips, 12 hp
tanks: 24 blips, 8 hpThis is a bad houserule, and you should feel bad for using it.
-
-
Just their name for a pip, “a small but easily countable item, such as the dots on dice or symbols on playing cards”
In A&A, a unit’s pip value is the highest number it can hit at, so an attacking inf would contribute 1 pip (2 if supported by art), defending inf would contribute 2, tanks 3 on either side, etc.
-
Hmmm…Well this is awkward - we never did the math there - I’ll have to fix that before next game night!
-
It’s always good to do the math. Always. This whole game boils down to math and positioning, with a bit of luck thrown in to make you hate yourself.
I have seen my fair share of crazy houserules, some worse than the mech+art thing, but I will say that I am always in favor of finishing a game with the same rules as when it began.
-
It’s always good to do the math. Always.
What if 5 IPC tanks from Revised Edition were used with mech and towed artillery - would that restore balance?
-
5 IPCs for a 3 - 3 unit.
40 IPCs:
8 tanks: 24 blips, 8 hp
5 mech/arts: 20 blips, 10 hpThat is at least closer to “balanced”, yes. Tanks don’t have as much staying power as mech+art, but they do hit harder, -20% hit points but +20% attacking power. They can also blitz, meaning now you can attach a mech to a tank to blitz, that can in turn drag a mech with it, forming some kind of holy trifecta.
However, after you introduce cheap tanks and let mechs drag artillery, Germany’s taking Moscow is damn near guaranteed every game. You have given basically zero economical benefit to russia, they are still best suited with infantry/artillery, but you’ve just reduced the cost of getting units to the gates of Moscow significantly for Germany. When it comes time to come crashing into Moscow, they’re going to have 4-6 more units than they otherwise would have, far more than that if they do it later than G6, and more artillery than they otherwise would have to make their infantry punch harder for the fisrt two rounds.
Assuming no big mistakes on either side, and a little bit of help from Italy, the odds of a G6 Moscow are definitely something like 90%+. The odds for G5 are also very, very high compared to “normal”. With good Italian can opening, G7 is probably 99%+ after this change, because Italy benefits greatly as well.
So, what I’m saying is, you’re giving a lot of help to the Axis on the eastern front, and that’s help they didn’t really need.
-
That is my problem with this House Rule, Teslas. Mech is the Axis’ friend and with the cheap and powerful Bomber, the combination that kills Russia.
If no one changes the easy Axis NOs, to reduce its income, then I would favour a 5 IPC Mech unit, rather than a cheaper Tank.
The multi purpose Mech is a nice concept though. -
Thanks for the sharp analysis and comments, guys - I see a good excuse here to put in some entrenchment, blockhouse, mine, AT Gun, and MG rules for Russia! (admitted house rule junkie speaking - lol)
-
@Der:
Thanks for the sharp analysis and comments, guys - I see a good excuse here to put in some entrenchment, blockhouse, mine, AT Gun, and MG rules for Russia! (admitted house rule junkie speaking - lol)
I did offer the house rule of TripleAs having the optional Anti-Tank rule, similar to their Anti-Air function.
Suggested Topics
