Mixed Questions



  • Its correct but I wouldn't want to have a unit that has only one purpose like strategic bombing. I have been toying with these ideas after discussings what would you think?

    AAgun is removed and instead all units get AA ability except transports and submarines. Fighter becomes 2/3/4 with 6 cost. Bomber 3/1/6 8 cost.

    Submarine: 2/2/2 6 cost same features with v3.
    Destroyer: 2/2/2 8 cost same featrues with v3
    Crusier: 3/3/2 10 cost, bombard
    Carrier: 1/2/2 16 cost 2 cap.
    B.Ship: 4/4/2 20 cost bombard.

    Sounds like it became way harder to perform amphibious invasion but it can be compensated by increasing handicapped side's production.

    There is also trench with 0/1/0 'HP, it gives various options but it totally negates bombardment abilities when cruiser is already realtively bad unit.

    Could there be way to make them useless against naval bombardment?



  • Bombers were an odd thing in WW2. They weren't effective against ships who could evade their high-altitude attacks (except for slow moving transports). Doctrine dictated their use against strategic targets but when used against operational or tactical targets (as happened in the Normandy campaign) they were effective.

    I would think that you could use cannotTarget with bombardment attacks, but I would test to make sure. Bombardment isn't all that effective in TripleA, as ships are more expensive then planes and only get to fire the first round.

    Amphibious attacks are too easy in TripleA, Consider the huge effort to put 7 divisions ashore in Normandy. On the other hand transporting units in non-combat situations is too hard.

    All units having AA is not a bad idea (operational losses were significant) but you should make planes more effective or cheaper. Planes having an AA-type attack could be interesting.

    Give your ideas a try and see how they work.



  • What about this unit set-up?

    Infantry: 1/4/1 AA 3Pu
    Trench: 0/1/0 2HP, free placement, 3Pu
    Artillery: 2/4/1 AA 4Pu
    Armour: 4/4/1 AA 5Pu
    Fighter: 2/3/4 (2/3 for bombing campagins too) 5Pu
    Bomber: 2/1/6 (2/1 for bombing campaigns too) 6Pu
    Transport: 0/0/2 5 cap 7 Pu
    Destroyer: 2/2/2 anti-stealth, AA 8 Pu
    Cruiser: 3/3/2 bombard, AA 10 Pu
    Carrier: 1/2/2 2 cap, AA 16 Pu
    B.Ship 4/4/2 bombard, AA 2HP 20Pu

    Special units:

    Tiger: 5/5/1 2HP AA, 9Pu Germany only (to preserve HP because there is neither building new factory nor using captured factories)
    Submarine: 3/3/2 stealth 6Pu Germany only (To give reasons to invest them for Germany instead just fighter coverage)
    Tankette: 1/4/2, AA 3PU Italy only (to help in the Eastern front)
    L.Cruiser: 2/2/2 AA 6PU Japan only (to compensate Japan's low income and to use it more cost effectively in blockade zones.
    Kamikaze: 4/0/3 4PU suicide unit, attacks both air and land, ignores trench, 1 carrier cost, suicidal bomber. Japan only (to give more stragic options to Japan)

    Siberian 3/4/1 AA 3PU, Russia only can be placed only in the east of Urals (Slowing down Japan in the East Asia)
    Boat 1/2/1 AA, transport 6PU Russia only (Reinforcing Leningrad via Ladoga, Same for Stalingrad via Caspian.

    I know Axis special units are too good but I would want to achieve the balance with this way rather than buffing Japan and Italy too much.



  • Why the engine does not accept setting up an air unit with having less air defence than air attack?



  • @Schulz With infantry having a defense of 4, do you really need trenches?

    I suggest build capping the special units so they don't dominate the game.



  • They give some tactical options to all nations considering it is the only unit without factory requirements. but I can still consider to remove them.


Log in to reply