True. Mind you, having effective flak meant that planes had to adapt their attacks to higher level bombing, which reduces aircraft casualties but doesn't mean that the flak itself wasn't having an affect on the effectiveness of the attack.Imperious leader wrote:It just allows the results to better reflect the units capabilities. AA guns can now go to 1 out of 12 ( only 10% of total plane loses due to SBR were the result of any land based flak artillery or related weaponry)And with larger numbers we could easily expand the game to have much more combined arms and possibly even more units
That's a great system - we use that in our games. It makes cheap 'soak-up-the-hits' deployments a little more risky as the BBs' combat value drops.Imperious leader wrote:Battleships could have a reduced (damaged) combat rating
These would be nice, too. We use the latter and enjoy them, but we haven't got a Light Cruiser piece. Hmm...Imperious leader wrote:Light cruisers could be built
[/quote]Airborne which are elite troops would actually have better values than regular infantry.[/quote]
This one is hard to justify. To have the same fighting power as an Infantry piece (which seems to be about Corps level to me but you treat as Army level, i.e. even larger), a single Paratroop piece would have to have an equivalent then to 40,000+ infantry with all the heavy weapons that are associated with them (not even including the Corps artillery).
The Paras obviously are an elite and tenacious fighters, but not having the heavier equipment (heavy mortars, field guns and AT guns, etc) in anything like the quantities that the infantry divisions did means that their ability to fight is lower after the initial surprise effect of the paradrop has abated, and grows lower still over time.
Bastogne was a perfect example of how Paras can hold an urban area against a determined attack, but it doesn't follow that this can be scaled up from regimental levels to Corps or Army levels. In any case, with the approximate six-month turn that we have, the idea that Bastogne could have been held for many months is surely suspect - I seem to recall that the paras were under real strain.
Paratroop pieces are not as suited to Global level games (or even theatre) as they are to games on the level of BotB and D-Day as they would need to represent at least two if not three or more divisions of Paras each. Nonetheless, they can be represented - we DO use them in our games, but they cost a fair bit more than Inf (5 IPCs), must be flown into battle, and get to attack on a '2' in the first round of fighting. We left their defence at '2' to represent their elite nature and more adaptive and creative command structures, despite the lower establishment of heavy weapons.
We found that we needed some cost penalties to prevent rich nations building only Paras and Transport planes (Bombers in the normal game I suppose), and then dropping unfeasible numbers each turn at various locations. It's clear that no nation in World War Two could have raised more than 3-6 Paratroop divisions without an ENORMOUS concomitant drop in quality.
HOWEVER: back to the main point - a d12 would be fantastic.
I have tried to persuade our group to move to d12 for the reasons that you mention, (and because they roll better - everyone hates it when the enemy throws an AA Gun die roll and it lands flat with a '1' upwards and then slides along: "That didn't roll" "Not fair", etc...)
I would love to add benefits to elite pieces or to distinguish between British tanks and Italian ones. It would also be possible then to add a Tech representing the automatic rifles (StG 44) the Germans got towards the end of the war: +1 Att or Def (whichever, or both if you want to argue for it). Under the current d6 system, this would be vastly overpowered, but a d12 version might work nicely...