Posts made by Entek

No, loading or unloading a unit is it’s movement.

It may only if the the unit that is doing the transporting has the fighting platform special ability.

I’m pretty sure this has been answered somewhere already, but in Alpha 2+ does the Soviet Union still get the 2 free infantry for free in Novosibirsk when at war or has that changed?

@Emperor:

I’m still digesting all the changes, are tanks still 6IPC, I thought I saw something saying it was reduced to 5?

I think what you’re remembering was the AA guns being reduced to 5 IPC’s.

Love that B-17

@leddux:

This came up in a game over the weekend.

sub vs sub no one had a destroyer

attacking sub hits….
defending sub
                        a. returns fire
                        b. is sunk without a parting shot

Doesn’t the defending Submarine have a chance to submarine have a chance to submerge before combat since there is no attacking destroyer?  Or do they both get there “Surprise attack” before it submerges?

@Stefano1189:

B E A U T I F U L!!!

I hope Brits will have Bofors! :-)

It is beautiful.  I am still curious what the rest of the German units will be.  Specifically the planes, I am hoping for Fw-190’s (fighter), He-111’s (Strategic Bomber)  and Do-17’s (Tac Bomber).  But I’ll just have to wait with baited breath for these.

Thank you!

@Krieghund:

Yes, but the transports would not be automatically sunk.  Since they can retreat, they are not defenseless.  The fighter would get one shot against the transports before they could retreat.  Of course, if they choose not to retreat, the fighter will sink them all eventually.  Either way, there will be no amphibious assault.

I have a question along similar lines.  The last game that I played my opponent tried an amphibious assault that required us to resolve the naval battle before but he was unsuccessful in sinking all of the defending ships, because of unlucky or lucky dice rolls depending upon how you look at it.  We were wondering if the transport is immediately sunk or if it can retreat?  And if it can retreat can does it get fired upon before?  I don’t think we’ve had a situation like this arise before in all of the games of AA50 and AA40 that we’ve played…  We had the transport just get sunk, but in hindsight I think he should have been able to retreat it.

In one of your vids you had yellow chips, what did they represent?

@calvinhobbesliker:

What model is the American tac bomber?

Is it true that the US tac bomber is the same as the Anniversary edition US fighter? They look the same.

The tac bomber is a SBD Dauntless, and the Anniversary Fighter is a F6F Hellcat.

Oh, and I also choose the P-47 for it’s roll as a multi use fighter as an interceptor, fighter and ground attack aircraft, like what Worsham said.

@Lachris:

This is a big thread and i don’t know if somebody asked this question, but where is the Mechanized Infantry?

Hasn’t been made yet.  We are still waiting for that and the Submarine.

@kcdzim:

@KOOLHOVEN:

Actually,I think the He 117 had 2 engines per nacelle,giving it 4 engines.I love the old hunchback,but I vote for the Piaggio!

Nope, only two engines.

No, KOOLHOVEN is correct the He 177 had four engines.  Even though it does appear to have only two engines it has two engines driving each propeller. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_177#Engines

But this is off topic…  Sorry…

@Variable:

Okay, how about this question - Who would be willing to give up the 2nd tank model for a 2nd fighter model just for the U.S.?

I would.

@kcdzim:

I’d prefer the FMG figs use the definitive model of a plane (P47N, P51D) rather than the earlier models, as I’d hate to see a razorback P-47D or P-51B.

This is just difference of opinion, but I’d prefer the razor back P-47D to the Bubble canopy, and I think if they were to make a piece they’d want to use the iconic version not the definitive version which they’d be making more pieces of then were produced.

But there’s no question, if they were to go with a P-51 it’d have to be a “D” model, as the razor back version just doesn’t look as nice.

@Variable:

I went to good old Wiki and discovered the Tacs are, in fact, SBDs. Definitely not Avengers, wings are totally different.

I stand corrected.  The US Tac is a SBD Dauntless…

I also agree with Yoper that the P-47 would probably make a good Tac.  I am also starting to thing that the fighter should be a Corsair.

As for the P-47, F6F, similarities I was thinking of a more top down view with the wing shapes of the planes, since most of the time that’s how it’s viewed in game.

As for the UK fighter it has to be a Hurricane and I think WOTC hit it on the head with Mosquito but a Typhoon would be great to see too.

@kcdzim:

I’d prefer the B-24 to the B-29.

As for the tactical bomber fig featuring a B-25 Mitchell or B-26 Marauder…  Well, it would allow the history geek to differentiate between the carrier dive bombers and the roll of medium bombers on land.  The Dauntless is similar enough in appearance to the Helldiver and Avenger that with AA50 Hellcats mixed in, there’d be quite a few grummany looking flying bathtubs if another prototypical US divebomber were mixed in.  Other options for tactical could be the P-39 as it had such a huge role in the pacific and was built around a 37mm cannon, but it was outclassed by pretty much everything as a fighter.  But if it’s going to just be another grumman carrier torp bomber, then I vote Avenger.

And as a US fighter, well, I’d like a mustang or a P-40.  The AA50 Hellcat looks enough like a P-47 for me.  And a P-40 would finally get an accurate Flying Tiger.

And absolutely, a DC-3 (C-47) skytrain for transport.

I would also love to see a B-24 piece, but I love the look of the B-29. It’s so art deco, which is also why I like the P-38.

B-26 would be great too for a TB, but a B-25 with the ability to “bring to bear 10 machine guns coming and four going, in addition to the 75 mm cannon, a brace of eight rockets and 3,000 lb (1,360 kg) of bombs.” would be awesome.  I think that the P-51 looks closer to the F6F then a P-47.  Don’t get me wrong I love the P-51, but I’d like to see something different like a P-47 or even a F4U Corsair.  Isn’t the tac bomber we have an Avenger?  A P-39 would be cool too, but that’s more of a fighter then a tac, I think a Dauntless or even a Devastator would be neat.

For the transport there is no question it has to be a C-47.

I agree with previous posters that this is one of the occurrences where WOTC got it right with the B-17’s, but for variety’s sake I vote for B-29’s.  If nothing else they could be used for the Long Range/Heavy Bombers Tech pieces for the USA.  Now if you’re talking US Fighters I vote for P-47’s, and I think that the B-25 would fill the more Tach Bomber Roll then a Strategic one.

Thanks bob!

I’m looking forward to seeing the Italian planes.