There’s no official answer that I know of. A&A is such an abstracted game that, in one sense, it would be meaningless to say that game unit X corresponds to real-world military (or naval) formation Y. Given the scope of A&A Global 1940, however, the various unit types on the map would roughly correspond to large formations if we were to assume that the allocation of units in the rules corresponds to real WWII numbers. As an example, Germany’s invasion of the USSR was carried out with over 150 divisions – so from that perspective, the small number of sculpts on the actual board could at best only correspond to army groups. At that level, it shouldn’t even be possible to differentiate between the components of the army groups, nor even of their consitutent armies or corps; the highest-level tank formations in WWII were, I think, armoured divisions and (one level further down) tank brigades. So one way to look at the game would be to imagine that we’re not actually seeing the military formations themselves, but rather a patchwork picture showing some of the elements of those formations, with some of these elements being high-level ones and others being lower-level ones (like tank brigades).
ANTI-TANK UNIT
-
Hey I just thought of this, we would have a new class of units.
Air,Navy,Land, and Armor units.There would be:
Light Tank:
A:2
D:2
M:2
C:5Heavy Tank:
A:3
D:3
M:2
C:6SPG:
Attack:3
Defense:2
M:2
C:7
Combined arms: Support InfantryTank Destroyer:
A:2
D:2
M:2
C:6
Every 1 rolled, remove a mech or tank -
Sounds cool.
-
Hey I just thought of this, we would have a new class of units.
Air,Navy,Land, and Armor units.I’m a bit puzzled by the terminology. Armour units (in the sense of tanks, SPGs and so forth) are all ground combat vehicles, so they’re a subcategory of Land units rather than a separate category.
-
@CWO:
Hey I just thought of this, we would have a new class of units.
Air,Navy,Land, and Armor units.I’m a bit puzzled by the terminology. Armour units (in the sense of tanks, SPGs and so forth) are all ground combat vehicles, so they’re a subcategory of Land units rather than a separate category.
Navy, Air, Foot, Armor
-
Foot, Armor
lol…
-
I don’t think the SPG should cost 7. SPGs were generally cheaper to build than tanks. They should at least cost 6.
-
Infantry are now outdated, artillery are outdated, mechs are essentially outdated, save for blitzing tanks are outdated, planes are nearly outdated.
This tbh.
I’m all for customization and house rules in a game, but considering the scale of the game an “armor” unit is not JUST tanks and would definately include SPG’s and other armored + softskinned vehicles. To add a unique Motorized/Armored Anti Tank unit starts to get into a bit too much specialization if you ask me … especially since having such a unit under the suggestions here would, as techroll states pretty neatly, make all other land units outdated (ie : worthless)
Now, that’s not to say that they can’t be implemented well. I just think on a D6 set of rules at this scale it will be difficult, unless you’re revamping EVERY section of the armed forces to compensate.
-
@CWO:
Hey I just thought of this, we would have a new class of units.
Air,Navy,Land, and Armor units.I’m a bit puzzled by the terminology. Armour units (in the sense of tanks, SPGs and so forth) are all ground combat vehicles, so they’re a subcategory of Land units rather than a separate category.Â
Navy, Air, Foot, Armor
Substituting “Armour” for “Land units” creates the problem that it leaves out the artillery pieces and the half-tracks, both of which are land units and neither of which are armoured.
-
@Rorschach I was referring only to the SPG idea that was 2 atk 2 def 1 move 3 cost.
I like the idea in principle of a $5 SPG, but making it less than that is bad.
-
@Rorschach I was referring only to the SPG idea that was 2 atk 2 def 1 move 3 cost.
I like the idea in principle of a $5 SPG, but making it less than that is bad.
Ah, I misread.
Even still, I really think the SPG/Anti-Tank unit needs some serious thought and consideration into its values and abilities (and anything less than 5 ipc cost is too little for sure) and probably a revamping many/most other units to account for this new unit.
It’s a great idea … in theory. In practice, I think it needs a lot of playtesting and thought.
-
I think incorporating TRAINS would be a superior addition, over splitting the hairs between SPG/Tanks/AT-Guns.
-
Honestly those who are wanting to split those hairs should be playing A&A miniatures
Railroads would be a nice addition however (USSR trans-Siberian for an example)
-
I think incorporating TRAINS would be a superior addition, over splitting the hairs between SPG/Tanks/AT-Guns.
Mechanized artillery (SPA, whatever) should definitively be added, but I’m with you, I’m itchin’ for some railroads.
I remember seeing a somewhat decent model on the Harris Game Design forums;
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2264
Perhaps you guys have already seen it, but I personally like it. What are your thoughts?
-
Railway stations acting like airbases and naval bases are an excellent idea
+1 movement to any land unit starting in a territory with a railway station
-
YES!!!
But I think it should be 2 for every unit–trains move at a certain speed (2 per turn) whether or not they’re carrying tanks or infantry. But +1 fits the base model…
IDK.
Cost?
Bombable? -
Ooh…another idea: Scramble Defense Team.
If a territory is being invaded, up to 3 land units from a neighboring tt with an operational railroad station can scramble (like planes).
-
Railhead
Cost: 12
HP: 5
Any SBR damage renders that railhead inoperable until repaired. Pay 1 IPC to repair 1 damage marker.
Each railhead has built in AA. (Similar to ICs and naval/air bases)
Each ground unit starting in a territory with a Railhead gets +1 movement in either combat or nonconbat moves. (Similar to air and naval bases respectively)
During non-combat move only; any number of ground units may move from one undamaged friendly Railhead to another, provided that there is a direct land route of friendly territorys between them.EDIT: HP = 5
-
5 hp
-
5 hp
5 is better now that i think about it:
airbases/naval bases and minor ICs have 6 hp but anything 3 or above takes it out of service. Thus a maxed damage base or minor takes 4 IPC to bring it back online.
Any damage to a railway renders it inoperable, so a maxed damaged Railhead is going to cost 5 IPC to bring back online.
Railheads cost more (though not too much more) to fix than an airbase, naval base, or minor IC, becuase rather than a single structure in a single place, a railway is vast, covering many miles, and tunnels/bridges will likey also need repaired to get the railroad back in working condition after a SBR.Anymore than that (5) and SBR would be too stong
-
I don’t know about those railhead rules…
You can basically rail from Soviet far east to poland in a single move, if you control everything? Please.
Either make it a maximum of 3, OR Make Rail Cars their OWN units. I’ve done this before.
The railroad, becomes like a transport, but on the ground. It moves 3, and can carry a certain alotment of units. (3 inf, 1 inf 1 art, 1 inf 1 arm, etc). But it is subject to capture like aa guns from the old days, or destruction by SBR.
It also can’t blitz.
Suggested Topics
