AARHE: Phase 3: Revised NA's

@SS:

This is what we have in game now.

Bombers C10
H Bombers C12

Bomber     D6  1-6  3.5 ave  6 max dam 1 lowest dam

H Bomber  D6+2  1-8  4.5 ave   8 max dam  3 lowest dam

This is the change I’m putting in next game.

Bomber    D8  1-8   4.5 ave    8 max dam  1 lowest dam

H Bomber  D10  1-10  5.5 ave  10 max dam  1 lowest dam

Nice +1 dmg increase.
To your game, it fit perfectly well with no bonus, only 1 dice to roll.

I like the fact that heavy bomber get a wider range from 1 to 10.
I don’t think heavy (high altitude bomber) were more accurate than bomber.
Probably due to the high altitude of bombing.

thanks for responding…

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).

Hmmm, How do I alter the topic title? It says 1942 as the year - that was a mistake - the darn thing took so long to type.

Yeah you’re right, finished, not finalized…

Ok that explaination makes more sence. Can you reword it in such a manner that it captures both the examples and the language of your description?

Ok let me clarify my thoughts on that… They wouldn’t necessarily have to pursue a historic goal, but rather go for completing a certain amount of techs (3 for example)…

GG

Thats not too hard to model.
Just let fighters defend SBRs.

We’ll already made production capacity more realistic but limiting IPCs spent at an IC rather than no. of units.
So maybe SBR should destroy IPCs as well as reduce production capacitiy.

Actually, what if we purchase at the END of your turn, and pick which ICs to build them with. At the beginning of your turn some of the units may be destroyed while building and you never got to use them.  :-D Thats pretty cool on the timeline.