Naval and Army aircraft

@The-Captain

Very cool and intimidating!

What I wouldn’t give to had that army…

@SS:

Ya I agree
Didn’t mean there was a cap neither just throwing up some numbers

So how much you need to repair before you can use it ? 4 - 6 ? Down to 3 ?

If increasing to 8 or 10, I rather keep 3 to make unoperational.
Thinking about the OOB rules, probably make it 3 and more to be unoperational was due to get Bases fix with only 4 IPCs or less, Minor IC cost 4 or less to be able to produce 1 unit at least.
Both have similar requirements.

Hi Marc.  I was hoping for your input on this.

What you are saying is very true.    This is why I’m proposing to simulate NB’s servicing ships/fleets with a “radius”.  The ships do not ever have to enter the actual sea-zone where the NB is located.

Therefore, if you have a chain of Naval Bases, your ships can stay at sea forever, as long as they stay within range of a base.  A range of 3 sea zones would be several thousand miles.

Ships would only need to actually go to a Naval Base to get repairs.

–—

The Japanese also had their ships out on very long missions.  Example being their carrier fleet around Java back in '41.  But they were able to do that with a very nice series of Bases leading all the way back to the mainland to service them.

I’m biased since I live in wcanada.Since about 1875 there has been a naval base in wcanada.Its not huge but I’d bet in ww2,it was equivalent to bases in NewZealand,Africa,Australia.I’m wondering what effect it would have on game if uk started with a base in wcanada?
  Esquimalt naval base its called.

The United States naval restrictions on the Europe map while not at war have been modified and will now read as follows.

American sea units may not end their movement phase within sea zones adjacent to European or African territories.

Thoughts?

@AlphaKappa:

 Which Neutral Powers would have the economic equivalent of a “Minor Industrial Complex”?

I think Spain, Turkey and Sweden are the obvious neutral powers that have a large enough industrial base to build their own tanks, planes and ships. Depending on how the sculpts are going to look, I think the Italian burnt orange will fit Spain, and maybe the french dark blue will fit Sweden. Turkey already got their units.

Maybe use the medium green for Brazil, and lime green to supply China.

Maybe even Canada can have own nation specific units ?

The Russian maroon will fit Mongolia I guess

If you plug them into a combat simulation ( online) the odds give you these results.

Aircraft Carriers can be outfitted with technology to have AA Guns that fire just like ground based AA Guns.  Only one per sea zone may fire, but it may fire at each attacking enemy aircraft.

CV was a poor defender for anti-aircraft. They relied on CAP to intercept incoming planes at lower altitude to intercept these and drive them away from the fleet. The Carrier created an umbrella of air cover to protect in this manner. It could not stand up to much of a fight and was the weakest in terms of AA capabilities in WW2.

IN modern times this changed but not in ww2. At midway 3 Japanese carriers were sitting ducks because the air cover was lost fighting off waves of incoming torpedo-bombers, and the carriers had the best Japanese equipment money could buy and it didn’t mean a thing because they were unescorted by cruisers and enough supporting ships.

A BB was a slower moving ship and was meant not to engage fighters but to engage surface ships and having the slower speed could only hope to surprise the enemy from nowhere or fight on equal terms against other battleships. Cruisers were some of the fastest ships and much better suited to fight airplanes by escorting fast carriers that were vulnerable.

The only thing the BB should have is a first strike attack against other surface warships.

Cruisers should move 3 with carriers and have a AA gun at planes hitting at 1 on the first round.