RHS Transport Aircraft

[el cid again]

RHS put much more focus on air transport than WITP formerly had done - in keeping with its logistic orientation.


We added the heavy transport to both sides. We added gliders to both sides.

Query: should we kill these things? Do they get used? We could have more slots if we didn't use them.

[Elladan]

Of course not, transport planes are very useful, especially heavy/long range ones.

[showboat1]

I use 'em all the time.

[Buck Beach]

Keep the transport planes, but kill the gliders.

[el cid again]

The US CG-2 glider unit (2 gliders and a C-47 tug in what was called a "combination") carries more than ANY other air transport unit in the game.

The Japanese glider unit is less useful: 2x Ku-8 with a Ki-21 tug also in a "combination" does not carry as much. The Japanese DC-3/L2D2 actually carries slightly more to a greater range - and the Japanese G5N2-L carries almost as much to a vastly greater range. Since Japanese slots are at a premium, it might be worth taking out. But it is a lovely bit of chrome. In HI point terms, a Ku-8 combination costs the same as an L2D2 and much less (40% less) than a G5N2-L.

[el cid again]

IF we got rid of the Japanese glider unit

EOS only

would you rather have an UHU night fighter

or

a different G5N

(either early low performance or late high performance)?

[m10bob]

Kill the gliders

[el cid again]

But in favor of what?

[el cid again]

I have decided we can combine the C-47 in both US versions (army and navy) into a single type

using USAAF art

and similarly we can combine the C-54 in both US versions

gaining for us two slots - in ALL scenarios

SO we have more Allied plane options

and we have an art delay problem anyway

so we can think about it a bit