mattthemuppet wrote:
I think the problem is more that the aircraft rules are so intertwined with all of the other units and their points costs, that changing the aircraft rules would require rebalancing pretty much every list, eg. if immediate disengagement became the norm then bombers would become more valuable and intercepters less valuable. Would flak be less valuable given it's limited opportunity to fire?
In testing, this wasn't true. There ends up being very little difference in value.
Fighters often ground attack so they have offsetting gains/losses. Also, the +1 to hit on Intercept was part of this original proposal.
Flak units lose flak-rush but they still get to fire when the enemy disengages. Compared to the current rules which downgrade the end-phase flak attacks, it's pretty close - no flak rush, but no penalty on to-hit rolls if they are in position.
Air assaults end up on the ground so only CAP is useful under the current system.
Only pure bombers gained any substantial benefits and that really only applies to high-SR armies that can count on having the strategy win to run an unopposed bomber attack. Even then, they only get one "free" run because the enemy can stay on CAP through following turns and intercept as normal.
so the only difference is instant disengagement and loss of intercept to fighters not on CAP?
What are the reasons for this again? To reduce complexity and flak rushing or to make it more "realistic"?
