Air Bases

@SeaYa quick point of reference. I play test games. So no version, certainly not out of box, is completely baked. And this is proven by 2nd editions and tournament rules. That is why I have been advocating for a governing body for years. Gotta go.

@MM1940

Well done!

Optional Rule 10.2 is in the non-combat section.

During non-combat, you land the aircraft that took part in combat (10.3) and can move aircraft that did not (10.1), so both options would be available.

@david-06 don’t agree, sorry

@imperious-leader said in Global 1940 Fixed Units Variants:

@gen-manstein right, just off the top of my head.Baron M. could collaborate

Barons to busy. We don’t need his collaborate.

@credulous said in Base Set 2:

I’ve caved and just bought the 3D printed versions instead where I need them as maybe it will never arrive (given the focus on individual nation sets instead).

I feel your pain and came to the same conclusion. This increases the cost of entry and therefore decreases the number of people who will play this game.

Two points

Airborne Inf. aren’t very effective attackers, attacking at 3/2. By the numbers a couple of militia is a sufficient garrison to probably win.

Using airbases to scramble into adjacent zones where an airborne assaults are taking place. You do however need one defending unit there though.

Mind you, you could pair your reduction of IPC values with a reduction in the number of units on the board at the start of the game. How much you would have to remove is something you would have to play out several times in order to get the balance right. I suspect this would start moving away from “easy fix” and moving towards “might as well be a different game”.

Such is gaming.

-Midnight_Reaper