G40 Enhanced begins. All are welcome.

It was not only against attacking planes ?
AirBase were there to give any number of fighters a plain preemptive defense @3?
Is it your suggestion?
If it is the case, thanks because your first formulation help me think a totally different approach to this question.

:roll: :-) :-D

@Baron:

It was not only against attacking planes ?
AirBase were there to give any number of fighters a plain preemptive defense @3?
Is it your suggestion?
If it is the case, thanks because your first formulation help me think a totally different approach to this question.

:roll: :-) :-D

Yes… that was what I originally ment.

@Baron:

In addition to this version A of scramble rule, you can have this one to simulate the aerial battle over the territory:
during the first round only,
any “1” rolled by TacB or attacking StrB (I added StB because of version A scramble give an advantage to defense, so it is to keep balance) or attacking fighter destroy an enemy plane;
any “2 or less” by a defending fighter destroy an enemy plane.

Air Supremacy rule:
On this first round, if a hit cannot be allocated to a plane, then it is allocated to the costlier ground unit available, in the following order: Tank, AAA, AA, MecInf, Inf.

An other version C.
This time there is an AAA and scramble phase prior to the main battle.

Here is the basic:
Fighter A1D2 get +1A when paired with any planes.
TcB A1D1
StB A1D0
AAA can be taken as casualties.

Explanation: let’s see the +1A to paired fighter as a way to give them an escorting role.
Fgs will usually be with TcB. So TcB give bonus to Fg during air-to-air combat, while against ground target it is reverse situation: Fg giving bonus to TcB.

Air Superiority bonus:
All hit in excess are allocated to ground units (owner’s choice).

All defending Fgs and TcBs can scramble (as an OOB scramble from AB: both can).

But it is not mendatory and AirBase are not required to perform it.

Still to discuss:
wether or not giving 2 hits per unit (AAA causing 2 hits, any damaged plane is destroy) or divide by two � the hits taken by planes, then add directly any hits from AAA.

Wouldn’t all this Air Combat enhancement be made way easier if there was just a 1 round dogfight round before all combat and the implementation of a 1914 style air superiority rule?

And if one side has planes and the other doesn’t then their air units get +1 attack
So 3/3 fighters would become 4/4 fighters with air superiority. Representing how they could strike ground targets, and hell, naval targets with ease.
Then give cruisers an AA rule to boost them.

This is near exactly what i have now, except AAA (should not be taken as casualties) and the fighters +1A

On another note choosing ground units negates the whole point of the air battle.
Fighters should not get any +1s, Fighters should (and did historically) have a clear advantage on defense.

Since I was exploring a more develop and accurate  air combat and scramble phase, I tried to create a progressive scale from 0 to up to 2.
StB on defense being the worst: D0
Fg on defense being the better: D2
TacB was between: A1D1

**Fg on offense must be better than TcB and less than Fg on def.**There is not much choice other than pairing Fg with another plane.
(Historically, it can also be the corresponding paired match with TcB for Air combat instead of improved ground combat, as said earlier.)
Treating attacking paired Fighter as escort.

1 Fg on off= 1A1 vs  Fgs on def= 1D2
2 Fgs on off= 1A1 & 1A2 vs 2Fgs on def= 2D2
4 Fgs on off= 2A1 & 2A2 vs 4 Fgs on def= 4D2

At least, it was a try to create this progressive scale inside the actual combination of rules mechanics.

Don’t forget, on the other way, that OOB SBR raid, give all planes @1.

I will think about your revised version you just posted.
To not create a havoc of destruction amongst costly units.

@Baron:

This is near exactly what i have now, except AAA (should not be taken as casualties) and the fighters +1A

On another note choosing ground units negates the whole point of the air battle.
Fighters should not get any +1s, Fighters should (and did historically) have a clear advantage on defense.

Since I was exploring a more develop and accurate � air combat and scramble phase, I tried to create a progressive scale from 0 to up to 2.
StB on defense being the worst: D0
Fg on defense being the better: D2
TacB was between: A1D1

**Fg on offense must be better than TcB and less than Fg on def.**There is no other choice than pairing Fg with another plane.
(Historically, it can also be the corresponding paired match with TcB for Air combat instead of improved ground combat, as said earlier.)
Treating attacking paired Fighter as escort.

1 Fg on off= 1A1 vs � Fgs on def= 1D2
2 Fgs on off= 1A1 & 1A2 vs 2Fgs on def= 2D2
4 Fgs on off= 2A1 & 2A2 vs 4 Fgs on def= 4D2

At least, it was a try create this progressive scale inside the actual combination of rules mechanics.

Don’t forget, on the other way, that OOB SBR raid, give all planes @1.

I will think about your revised version you just posted.
To not create a havoc of destruction amongst costly units.

Another way to get them between TacB and defending Fgs, inspired by SBR in 1942.2, is to give attacking Fighter an edge over TacB:
Fighter A1D2 in air combat, this attack @1 is a First Strike.
So, instead of being simultaneous:
Attacking Fighters fire first rolling @1.
Remove all casualties.
Then, all other units and AAA shot at other planes.

There will be less casualties than in the previous suggestion and it keeps the gradual scale from 0 to 2.
Maybe this one is better because it is less calculation than the previous one and nearer OOB SBR rules:

Latest OOB SBR rules for reference and comparison:
1942.1 : AA fires, then surviving Fgt A1/Bmb A0  vs Fgt D2
1942.2 : Fgt A1/Bmb A1 preemptives shots vs Fgt D2, then AA fires
Global 1940: Fgt A1/Bmb A1 vs Fgt D1, then AA fires.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30248.msg1110913#msg1110913

Air combat for 1 single round between:
Attacking TcB A1 vs TcB D1 gives (att vs def):
83% vs 83%  1 vs 1, odds of survival.
27% vs 27%  2 vs 2, odds of loosing 1 aircraft.

Attacking Fg A1 FStrk vs TcB D1 gives (att vs def):
86% vs 83%  1 vs 1, odds of survival.
24% vs 27%  2 vs 2, odds of loosing 1 aircraft.
31% vs 35% 3 vs 3, of loosing 1 aircraft.
36% vs 39% 4 vs 4, of loosing 1 aircraft.
8% vs 11%   4 vs 4, of loosing 2 aircrafts.

Unfortunatly the BattleCalc cannot do this 1 Fg A1 FStrk vs 1 Fg D2.

I can just say that the regular fight for 1 round (A1 vs D2) is:
67% vs 83% 1 vs 1, odds of survival

With First Strike A1, it could probably rise 4% more for survival:
71% vs 83%.

Against 1 single round, 1A1 FStrk vs 1D3 unit=
58% vs 83% 1 vs 1, odds of survival

So it is certainly not Over Powering to give @1 First Strike.

The probability shows clearly that a defending fighter @2 still get a better chance of survival (83%) than 1 Fighter @1 with First Strike (71%).

It is not overpowering and it keeps a gradual scale inside aircrafts for the Air Combat units.

Of course, we could develop a specific (but more complex) attacking factor for fighter with TacB:
it is the same pairs of planes but the reverse match bonus +1A to TcB vs ground battle / +1A to Fg for Air combat:

Fighter in Air combat: A1 FStrk D2, when paired with TcB get +1A but loose First Strike

So for 1 single round:
1 Fg + 1 Tcb vs 2 Fgs
1A2 + 1A1 vs 2D2
89% vs 94% odds of survival

45% vs 56% loosing no aircrafts,
44% vs 38% loosing 1 aircraft,
11% vs 6% loosing all aircrafts.

So probability reveals that Defending fighters still get a good advantage (56% of no lost) in this special set of stat for attacking Fg (55% of loosing 1 or 2 Fgs).

Let’s suppose a more intense Air combat single round:
2 Fg + 2 Tcb vs 4 Fgs
2A2 + 2A1 vs 2D2
20% vs 31% loosing no aircrafts,
39% vs 43% loosing 1 aircraft,
30% vs 21% loosing 2 aircrafts,
10% vs 5% loosing 3 aircrafts,
1% vs 0% loosing all aircrafts.

80% loosing planes vs 69% loosing at least one units.

@Uncrustable:

Updated OP,

4. Enhanced air combat (land combat only).
New scramble optionOK,
a defender may scramble air units into a 1 round air defense battle vs incoming air unitsOK but for a more complex game: optional HR? or not?,
the scrambling air units must be in the territory being attacked OK.(cannot scramble from adjacent territory).

The territory must have an operational friendly airbase. Is it a necessary addition? / It will greatly limit the opportunity for this Air combat to happen.

Strategic bombers may not scramble.Very OK It give StB a Aircombat Def of “0”. So TacB will be better with D@1.

All air units roll simultaneously. Unless you agree to create more step in the scale of planes stats, specially for attacking Fighters. A1 First Strike?

All air units roll 1 dice hitting on a 1, except fighters on defense hit on a 2 or less. I still want something better than the TcB A1 stats for the attacking fighter.

All air rolls are at a 1:1 ratio, the number of air dice rolled will equal the side with the least amount of air units.
Here is the new aspect! Why did you introduce it?
Any attacker loose all advantage of having just a little more planes.
Since this Scramble Air Defense is a choice made by the defender, when there is too much enemy he will not scramble.
But with this rule, he will always do it because 1 single def Fg D2 will only get a 1 roll @1 against it.
If you keep this one, why not erase defender’s choice to scramble or not: make it an automatic feature of all battles with aircrafts in it.

AAA units also fire during this round. AAA roll AA dice on defense only as per current OOB rules. (Air dice = # of planes rolling, AA dice DOES NOT change from current OOB rules) Remove casualties before continuing to normal combat. All OK for this.

Hello fellow players

Here are my thoughts about this topic:

@Uncrustable:

3. Enhanced air units.

• a) Fighters cost 8, attack/defend at 2/3.

• b) Tac bombers cost 10, attack/defend at 3/3, no change to combined arms rules. Does not SBR

• c)Strategic bombers cost 12 attacking/defending at 4/1, SBR as per OOB rules (no change from OOB)

-No changes to range or carrier/airbase rules of any air unit.
-All air units have an air combat value of 1, except fighters on defense at 2.
-Only strategic bombers may SBR, only fighters may intercept/escort on SBR

I like the new air units, although the impact on naval battels has not been checked yet.
Also scrambling Fighters are now weaker (3 x D3 instead of 3 x D4), but 4 new scrambling fighters would be stronger than 3 old ones. This is to consider.
@Uncrustable:

4. Enhanced air combat (land combat only). New scramble option, a defender may scramble air units into a 1 round air defense battle vs incoming air units, the scrambling air units must be in the territory being attacked. (cannot scramble from adjacent territory).The territory must have an operational friendly airbase. Strategic bombers may not scramble. All air units roll simultaneously. All air units roll 1 dice hitting on a 1, except fighters on defense hit on a 2 or less. All air rolls are at a 1:1 ratio, the number of air dice rolled will equal the side with the least amount of air units. AAA units also fire during this round. AAA roll AA dice on defense only as per current OOB rules. (Air dice = # of planes rolling, AA dice DOES NOT change from current OOB rules) Remove casualties before continuing to normal combat.

I would roll the AAA after the air combat, just like SBR. AAA won’t fire into air battle.
This rule would strengthen an already strongly defending player but maybe that’s deliberate.

@Uncrustable:

5. Enhance naval units. a) Cruisers cost reduced to 11 IPCs. Bombards at 4. Units hit by bombardment return fire at -1(with 1 being lowest)
                                  b) Battleships cost reduced to 18 IPCs. Same bombardment rules as cruiser.
                                         c) Aircraft carriers cost reduced to 14 IPCs.
                                  d) Transports cost reduced to 6 IPCs. When empty may move 3 spaces during noncombat move.
                                              No transport may move 4 spaces under any circumstances
                                  e) Transport ‘evasive maneuvers’, each transport caught undefended by an attacking warship or plane may roll 1 dice. A roll of a 1 is a successful evasive maneuver, and that transport is removed from battle and placed back on the gameboard, a transport that evaded an enemy attack while undefended may not unload units until its next turn.

Cruiser, carrier and battleship: could work, needs further playtesting.
Transport: Movement 3 while empty might be fine but I dislike the evasive maneuver: everyone who lets transports alone should be punished. And I don’t see the point in a cost of 6 IPC. I don’t think that transports are to expensive now, especially given the threat they create.

@Uncrustable:

6. Enhanced Armor. For every single tank purchased, a second may be purchased for 4 IPCs. Both tanks must be mobilized in the same territory on the same turn. For example 2 tanks cost 10, 3 tanks cost 16, 4 tanks cost 20, 5 tanks cost 26, etc. If a nation purchases 2 tanks, but is going to mobilize them in different territories then the cost of both tanks remains 6.

This rule would effectively be “Tanks cost 5 IPC if built in pairs, else 6 IPC.”
And I strongly advise against this rule. Tanks at 5 are almost as good as artillery (if both are paired with infanterie) and bring with them the superior speed and blitz.
@Uncrustable:

8. Enhanced Lend Lease. During the US or UK research and development phase the US/UK may purchase lend lease tokens for 5 IPCs each. (Place a Soviet control marker to represent each token on Wash DC for USA and London for UK) During Russia’s research and development phase they may attempt to cash in any number of these in by rolling one dice for each token. The token is destroyed on a roll of 1, delayed atleast one turn on a roll of a 2 or 3. On a roll 4 or higher the Russian player may pick any of the following; A fighter in Amur, 2 Infantry and a mech infantry in Archangel or +10 IPCs if the allies control a series of connected territories from Persia to Russia. The territories must be under Allied control at the beginning of its turn (Soviet controll in the case of Amur and Archangel). The tokens are not redeemable if there are any non Soviet allied units in any original Soviet territory. If London or DC is overtaken by the Axis any tokens there are destroyed.

Again I strongly advise against this rule. It would be much, much to easy for the USA to strengthen Russia up to a point where germany has no chance to conquer Moscow. ESPIACALLY as a 5-IPC-investion from USA would lead (in average) to a 8.33-IPC gain in Russia. This is absurd. For a merely 20 IPC (per round), USA could give Russia 30 IPC (per round, on average). A Russia with this much IPC would be unbeatable by germany and that would be worth a multitude of the 20 IPC lost by the USA.
@Uncrustable:

9. Enhanced Air/Naval bases. Cost reduced to 12 for both.

Why exactly? Don’t see the point.
@Uncrustable:

11. Dice bonuses. On a dice roll of 1 (attack and defense) observe the following for the listed units:
-Fighters may choose an air unit as a casualty
-Tactical bombers may choose a ground unit as a casualty (land or sea)
-Cruisers may choose an air unit as a casualty
-Battleships may choose a surface vessel as a casualty (includes transports)
-Tanks may choose a ground target as a casualty
-Strategic bombers, (offense only) defender must choose 2 casualties

Seems mainly unnecessary and/or to strong.
But first: This would mean, that every third hit by a tank would be choosen by you, not your enemy. That’s a lot.
And second: This would strengthen the mentioned units. Is this really necessary? And why exactly these units?
Now per unit:

• Tacs and tanks are moderat, as the difference between the most and least expensive ground unit is moderat both in cost and power.

• Cruisers dito with naval/air forces.

• Fighters are critical, as they could hit the enemy air forces significantly. Also remember that fighters are now cheaper and therefore come in greater numbers.

• Battleships are ridiculous. The possibility to kill any enemy ship such as a damaged battleship, a carrier (“your aircrafts can’t land anymore, what a pity”) or even a loaded transporter is much to strong, even if battleships are still expensive.

In every case, I dislike this rule as the method of everyone choosing his/her own casualties is one of the most important parts of the system. Every change should be well justified and I just don’t see this here.

And last but not least a rule of my own:
I dislike the fact that every territory can by convoyed regardless of the way transporting the goods would be handled (convoy in a russian Iraq? Where should they even take the boat to?), so here is my rule.
The maximum convoy damage that can be made in a given territory is halved (rounded up? rounden down?) if the following condition is fulfilled:
A path can be drawn from the territory to the capital that only crosses friendly (non-enemy?) landzones.
E.g.: If germany controls all of france and germany, an allied ship in SZ105 can only make 1 IPC convoy damage.

This would mostly benefit Italy and on a smaller scale Japan and UK.

Thats all for now, see you around
Kion

@Uncrustable:

Baron:

Fg on offense must be better than TcB

I used to think the same way you do, however there was a thread not to long ago about enhanced SBR.
I basically argued the same thing you are, and i was showed (by the majority) the other side of the fence so to speak.

Ask yourself what is the sole responsibility of a fighter on an offensive? It would be to protect the bombers, at least long enough for them to do their job.
See the movie: Red Tails (its not a very good movie imo, but it shows very well the point im trying to make)
The scrambling fighters however, are under no such obligations. They will be attacking with abandon, in the hopes of thinning out some enemy bombers to save as many ground forces/installations as possible.
This dynamic is shown very well by all air units rolling 1s (as per OOB SBR rules)
Giving defending fighters a bonus however represents more than just this. There is also friendly radar, familiar territory, and the benifit of all the air drills conducted from the same territory now being defending.

All this being said, i read your post and come to this:
Remove 1:1 ratio (too complicated anyhow) the goal was to avoid too many air casualties.
This may be a better way…
Up to, but not exceeding 3 fighters on defense receive a defense bonus of +1. All the rest roll a normal air roll of 1.
Only fighters may scramble (from an operational airbase)
Tactical bombers may not scramble.

An airbase is required because this follows current OOB rules, and avoids confusion.
Airbases are now cheaper anyway, and most large battles occur in a territory with an airbase anyhow.

Scramble is always an option. Again it follows OOB rules, and would make no logical sense to force a scramble. (It would be abused)

So in essence, your coming back to the OOB SBR 1940.
But what do you think of the OOB SBR 1942.2, which kept the D@2 Fg?

Fg A1/Bmb 1A1 preemptive shot vs Fg D2, then AA fires

Just forget about the First Strike of StB.
I say it because I revised my post (and I don’t know if you see it).

By the way, maybe I was under the false impression that you were looking for more extensive application of Air combat because you drop the regular Fg by 2 points, from A3D4 to A2D3.
And you were trying to implement some rules to enhanced his role as the aircraft weapon against other aircrafts.

Actually there is two ways for emphasis his role with Air Base:
Mine : can scramble up to 3 Fgs get 1@1 Preemptive Strike (with no retaliation) for Air defence over the operational Air Base territory. It is in addition of any AAA fire.

Yours (more balance inside OOB 1940 A1D1 Fg):
+1Def to up to 3 Fgs, and all others Fgs can scramble, but no TacB.

2 Questions:
But, by forbidding TacB, your going against the OOB scramble for AB, you know?
How will it contributes to the same goal and balance, you tried to preserved with the 1:1 ratio rule?

Developing and improving this aspect of AB scramble in conjunction with Fighters function as interceptors is not necessary the doom of a more comprehensive/accurate/complex HR integrating all aircrafts (except the StB on defence) in an initial first round of Air combat.

Besides, adopting OOB 1940 SBR, is clearly at the expense of an “historical flavour” in the gradual scale of A/D amongst aircrafts.

But it is up to you, if you wish or not develop this layer of complexity HR in your enhanced version.
Because, I see great potential for a better flavour on aircrafts interactions in your Fg A2D3M4C8 and TcB A3-4D3M4C10.

Here come some interesting way to explore for an Air Supremacy:

@oztea:

Honestly, fighters could be 8, tactical bombers 9, and bombers 10, if you reworked their combat powers to realistic levels. While sneaking in a unique air superiority angle, no not 1914 air superiority, but that your planes get better when the enemy didn’t bring any of their own. So there is more incentive to spread them around.
Fighters could very well be 2/3
Tactical Bombers become 3/2
And bombers become 2/-

And all air units fall under the new umbrella special rule of “air supremacy”
“If the enemy does not have air units in the battle, your air units attack and defend at +1”
The tactical bomber combined arms rule is replaced with an air targeting rule
“Roll your tactical bomber dice separately when attacking, rolls of ‘1’ may be allocated by the attacker against an enemy land unit or warship”
So tacs can hunt tanks and carriers and stuff if they get a ‘1’,

Maybe Air Supremacy (when their is no enemy planes) should be a distinctive flavour according to the unit:
Fg get +1A/+1D
TcB and, even StB ?, get:
“Roll your tactical bomber dice separately when attacking, rolls of ‘1’ may be allocated by the attacker against an enemy land unit or warship”

Or what else for StB?

@Uncrustable:

For the love of mercy we need to move on from this Baron, lol

the 8,9,10 doesn’t work i have already discussed it here in this thread
not enough cost difference
planes don’t balance out amongst themselves or amongst other units
tacs at 2 defense makes no logical or historical sense, and not to mention they would again be the ‘odd plane out’ in buys (tacs would definitely no longer be the best all around air combat unit, and would no longer have a distinctive role)
Sorry, you responded to all the quote. I pick all because it comes from another threads and don’t want show disrespect to the author and help anyone retrieve it in his actual context. For me, their is no discussion about cost on planes: 8-10-12 fit very well.
The interesting aspect of a Fg A2D3 (which I think accurately balance vs TcB) is that there is some room left for this kind of temporary and special adjustment of +1 on A, D or both.
i have also pointed out that any air supremacy rule similar to 1914 would be massively in the axis favor (no one would want this)

That was this aspect that have my attention. Don’t know 1914, but with your FgA2D3M4 and TcB A3-4D3M4 (which stats are perfect for me BTW, sorry you answered this part of the quote. I like the way you see TacB. :-))
Are you sure, that it will unbalance the game?
At least, not at the beginning because the OOB initial set-up was created for a Fg A3D4!
So, anywhere you give this “+1 A/D bonus for Air Supremacy” it will even the balance a bit.
Don’t forget Axis has many fighters and, in your start-up board, they will be all riped off of A1D1.
We can easily suppose, the offensive punch of fighters (downgraded from Tank, to Art) can be missing in some battles.
After a first few turns, all players will be able to adjust their troops movement and concentration according to the new stats.
Maybe it is a way to save your HR from a complete redraw of the initial set-up on 1940 and keep the balance.  (I hope it is what you was thinking about moving on. :wink:)

All this has already been discussed and we are now running circles for no reason.

lets just move on.

(if you really want to continue to debate on it lets at least do it via pms, as this will only drag down the thread)

What about the others?
Have you checked out the 4 player variant proposal yet?

I have not enough experience on Global to have any wise comment on this matter. Sorry. Did you read my previous post? There is at least 2 questions inside.

This dynamic is shown very well by all air units rolling 1s (as per OOB SBR rules)
Giving defending fighters a bonus however represents more than just this.
There is also friendly radar, familiar territory, and the benefit of all the air drills conducted from the same territory now being defending.

The OOB 1940 SBR doesn’t show any advantage for either defending/intercepting fighters.
1942.2 SBR does: Fg A1 preemptive strike or First Strike, D2.
(Even StB get A1 preemptive strike but I downsized it to reg A1.)

I agree with you that any AB bonus could be understand as I bold in your quote.

However, Air Combat is not always German’s TcBombers vs UK Air defence Fg interceptors.
There is many others theatre of operation in which there is no AB and defending Fgs have still an homeland advantage (more fuel & longer operational flight time, more time in flight patrols in a restricted zone, better understanding of the nearby terrain advantage, less tired pilots, etc.) when there are not taken by surprise and destroyed on the airfields (like Pearl Harbour: the movie, I don’t know if it was an historical truth).

That’s how I can understand Fg A1 with First Strike vs Fg D2, sometimes the defender are cut off guard, or the escorting fighters are higher in the sky than the bombers they protect and the interceptors just fall into a trap, or were seen from farther away. That’s why attacking fighters can get a “surprise” First Strike but at a lower level than Def Fgs.

I just wanted you to see somehow the rationalization I saw in this almost OOB SBR from 1942.2.

And how it can allow a gradual scale of the three units types stats in Air combat:
StB A1D0 < TcB A1D1 < Fg A1+_FS_D2.

It allows Air combat Fgs’ stats to be better than TcB in offence (A1+FS>A1) and defence (D2>D1).

In my knowledge, Larry doesn’t disavow either this OOB revised second ed. rule.

Just to show you, it is not so alien to A&A mechanism and rules.

About Air Base bonus: any of up to 3 scrambled intercepting Fgs get First Strike.
There was still room to give a little “humph” to the Fg D@2.
Of course, it is not such a greater bonus as D1+1 (as you suggested, since the basis is A1D1).
or
Air Base bonus could also be, as said earlier: up to 3 Fgs get 1@1 AAA style preemptive strike without any retaliation from attacker, then start the regular Air combat single round.

And about Air Supremacy and a somewhat air combat phase prior to the regular combat, did you know these house rules and have you read this thread?
@B.:

Another variant would be what I suggested before, air-to-air combat for the first cycle of combat were only air units may be taken as casualties. If no side has got air supremacy after the first cycle of combat, the fighters attack as normal. If air supremacy then fighters attack/defend during opening fire step of combat!

#3 Air Supremacy
Fighters and bombers always attack or defend in the opening fire step of combat.
Any hit from a fighter or bomber should be taken by enemy air units prior land or naval units.

@Game:

Air Supremacy
Fighters attack or defend in the opening fire step of combat if no enemy fighters are present or remain in combat.

Defender should always be able to pick is casualties in order to get more strategy in the game, i.e. be able to use cannon fodder.

Air Supremacy
Fighters attack or defend in the opening fire step of combat if no enemy fighters or AA-guns are present or remain in combat. Any casualties are removed from play without being able to counterattack.

@Imperious:

Also, IN AARHE thats what we do.
Plane hits go on planes till one side no longer has planes ( fighting at dogfight values) , then hits go against land targets and land hits cant go against planes. However, some restrictions of ratios of land units and planes are also presented.

For example you can do that thing where 6 planes and 2 infantry go in and kill a bunch of stuff, knowing the planes wont be hit. Thats like sending in a division to fight an army, supported with 10,000 fighters…which is silly.

If you prefer we do not take too much space on this specific topic about Air combat, Air Supremacy etc., (because it is only one aspect of your many Enhanced HR) maybe it is better to follow-up on a specific threads?

Any discussion yet about throwing in a few more victory cities?  Seeing lots of complaints it’s too easy with 6 in the Pacific, so what if Japan needed 8 and we made 3 more VCs on the board?  Sikiang maybe (I don’t have the map in front of me, thinking of the one that is SW China in 2 spaces from Volgograd and would not screw up Mongolia if Russia reinforced), Alaska or at least Aleutian Islands since they really were invaded and I cannot think of one that would have been a historical target right now, but I am sure we can think of a 3rd one for the Pacific.

In regards to fighters A2D3:
New Tech or National Bonus maybe?  Superior Air Power fighters A3D3.  Leaves room for Jet Planes (would be A4D4 then?) Justifies reducing the cost of fighters to 8 IPC (life is a lot easier for the Italians and Russians.)

Might need some kind of combined arms rule for fighters though.  Maybe +1/+0 if paired with TB just like TB gets when paired with fighters.