Aircraft tech tree

Apologies for the wall of text in advance

Note: I’ve played one game, won mostly because I didn’t realize spending 5,000 gold was a big deal at first. Well, now I’ve learned a bit more and read an excellent strategy guide. So now I know enough to kill myself

First off, I like this game. I don’t think I’ll play another for a while, I’m too busy now. But the tension in having movement take days to execute was wonderful. Keep it up!

But being a bit of an aircraft buff, I was rather disappointed with the progression for aircraft. Here is my proposal for a tech tree.

Assuming a technical progression from 1935-1947 (THIS IS A BIG ASSUMPTION. I saw some pretty late 50’s aircraft when I was playing. However this adjusts well enough if it’s from 1935-1955, just eliminate the first line and add a line afterwards)

1935 F1 LB1 MB1

1938 F2 LB2 MB2 HB1

1941 F3 LB3 MB3 HB2

( F splits to J and FB)(LB leads to FB)

1944 J1 FB1 MB4 HB3

1947 J2 FB2 MB5 HB4

J=Jet Fighter-air unit attack with shorter range then FB

F=Fighter-air unit attack

FB=Fighter Bomber-ground and air unit attack

LB=Light Bomber-ground unit attack

MB=Medium Bomber-ground unit and building attack balanced

HB=Heavy Bomber-building attack

Note: F, LB, and FB are carrier capable. F and LB will upgrade to FB once FB1 is researched.

Justification? This game simplifies the incredibly diverse role aircraft filled during WW2. THIS IS A GOOD THING. A game that tried to get all of these types into the game would be incredibly cumbersome. However, tactical bombers are filling a large role filled by 2 distinct types in practice. Medium bombers, which attacked cities and also attacked military units, and Light Bombers, which in my mind include torpedo bombers and dive bombers that (barring the many exceptions in history) were designed to attack military targets. With the introduction of carriers (hopefully) Tactical Bombers based from a carrier will be overpowered for what they were historically was capable of doing (since it is attempting to imitate a medium bomber) and don't have the ability to damage buildings which medium bombers were able to do. Thus the light and medium bomber.

In 1944, fighters had grown to the point where they were capable of carrying a significant ground attack payload, and thus the light bomber is now a redundant type. Example: the FW190 had replaced the Ju87 dive bomber. At the same time, jets had arrived, rendering previous fighters far less potent in air to air combat (but not completely useless!). But piston fighters were far more versatile, jets being too short range for escort missions, too difficult to land for carriers, and carrying too little payload for ground attack. So piston fighters soldiered on, not until the Korean War did jets overtake piston fighters in most of its roles, and even then only straight wing jets which were far inferior to swept wing jets, and thus would still be essentially a fighter bomber class. Thus a merging of the fighters and light bomber class and emergence of jets in 1944

Some (many) other notes:

In essence, in this tech tree jets replace the rocket fighters’ role as an interceptor. Given only one nation deployed rocket fighters and they proved to be a failure in service and jets far superior in every operational sense, I would argue for their elimination on the tech tree. If they are to be kept, I would say keep them as a very short range city defender (basically a surface to air missile) with not much air to air and a bonus verses a nuclear bomber (a nod to their fast climb to intercept times with short warning).

Naval Bombers are a very odd unit, only meant to counter one specific unit, a submarine. Naval patrol was not a large enough role during the war to justify I think an entirely separate unit. I think all air units should be able to spot and attack submarines, spotting perhaps in a more limited radius. Historically heavy bombers were the best at this role, and they would still be in game with the longest range. And would allow the escort carrier to do what it was meant to do, find and kill submarines.

V-1 buzz bombs were deployed in the 1943 period, and seem to be too early in the tech tree. Both it and the V-2 I don’t think should cause damage to military units, only buildings. Also as currently balanced, seem to make heavy bombers pointless (maybe someone else with more experience can chime in here). They should be exactly what they were in real life, a way to strike back at industry when you don’t have a strong air force.

Nuclear tipped long range missiles didn’t get operational until fairly late in the 1950s. I personally wouldn’t even include them in the game. I think a build-up of nuclear bombers and anti-nuclear bomber defenses would be far more interesting game play wise, and was the reality in the 1950s. At most a sort of Honest John (operational 1953) nuclear artillery rocket with short range.

Fortresses I think should give a city an anti-air attack value, given almost every major city in WW2 had fixed anti air defenses, in London and Berlins case extremely large ones. Or instead of a fortress, a separate building (Flak Tower). But this is rather minor given they already reduce damage.

An escort command for fighters. I tried to have my fighters patrol over where my tactical bombers were attacking to defend them from a pesky fighter, to find later my fighters fruitlessly attacking a large flak stack on the ground and dying rapidly. Another option would be a ‘patrol with no ground attack’ command. But would prefer the former, mainly since I don’t want my fighters to stick around when the bombers are done attacking, although the latter would make planes far better scouts.

That is the end. Comments and criticisms welcome.