DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Wing Leader Rules Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3542--------------------------------------------------
Alert Status
DIR By: Vincent Lefavrais
Date: October 23, 2019, 3:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A more thorough pass over the various Origins scenarios let me
discover something disturbing about alert states and scenario
instructions. Something which should have raised questions from
everyone playing WL, so I'm at a loss to understand why it
doesn't seem to have cropped up before... Please allow me to
explain.
The Command and Control rule section specifically mentions, for
each relevant mission type, which alert status a squadron begins
play with.
Escort/close escort (9.2.2) and Sweep (9.2.3) squadrons begin
play unalerted.
Intercept/CAP (9.2.4) squadrons begin play alerted.
This is stated clearly in the very first sentence of each rule
section. So far, so good.
All scenarios (with the exception of S24 only I think) use the
binary All squadrons start alerted/No squadrons start alerted
instructions, roughly for defender/raider forces. But then, a
number of them have defenders flying sweep or sometimes even
bombing missions with escorts, or No-squadrons-start-alerted
defenders flying Intercept/CAP missions... thus resulting in
conflicting alert status info between what the rules mention and
what the Alert Status entries mention.
What should a player do in this case? Do the rules take
precedence over the scenario instructions? I would be inclined
to suppose it's the case, since for instance the Intercept
mission behaviour states that fighter units have 3 MPs to spend,
while 8.2 Movement Points states that unalerted fighter
squadrons have 2 MPs to spend... so I take it that an unalerted
Intercept-mission squadron cannot exist. But if it is the case,
then I'm starting to not seeing the point of these Alert Status
scenario instructions, or even to see them as a potential source
of confusion (for me at last).
But then, as far as I know no one has ever raised this issue,
thus... I'm probably missing something?
Just for info, here's a rundown of the numbers of "problematic"
scenarios per game/expansion:
Victories: 5 scenarios
Supremacy: 2 scenarios
Blitz: 1 scenario
Eagles: 1 scenario
Origins: 10 scenarios
#Post#: 3544--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 23, 2019, 4:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the rules take precedence over scenario instructions then
there is (a) no reason to have scenario instructions, and (b) no
way to modify alert status. We would have to resort to special
rules. So the scenario instructions must take precedence over
the rules.
That said, it's always wise to query where we deviate from
normal. I'm surprised there are so many examples in Origins.
Where are they?
#Post#: 3545--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 23, 2019, 4:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just checked the Origins alert statuses and that all looks legit
to me.
#Post#: 3546--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: Vincent Lefavrais
Date: October 23, 2019, 4:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario O01
British defenders - All squadrons start alerted: The three sweep
squadrons should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O04
German defenders - All flights start alerted: The three sweep
flights should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O09
German defenders - No flights start alerted: The CAP flight
should start alerted according to 9.2.4
Scenario O11
Dutch defenders - All flights start alerted: The two sweep
flights should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O17
Nationalist raiders - All squadrons start alerted: The two sweep
squadrons and the escort flight should start unalerted according
to 9.2.3 and 9.2.2
Scenario O18
Nationalist defenders - All squadrons start alerted: The sweep
squadron should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O20
Nationalist defenders - All squadrons start alerted: The two
sweep squadrons should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O21
Republican defenders - All squadrons start alerted: The five
sweep squadrons should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O22
Republican defenders - All squadrons start alerted: The five
sweep squadrons should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
Scenario O26
Nationalist defenders - All squadrons start alerted: The sweep
squadron should start unalerted according to 9.2.3
#Post#: 3547--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: Vincent Lefavrais
Date: October 23, 2019, 4:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood link ---
>
> If the rules take precedence over scenario instructions then
there is (a) no reason to have scenario instructions, and (b) no
way to modify alert status. We would have to resort to special
rules. So the scenario instructions must take precedence over
the rules.
--- End Quote ---
I've no problem with this; in fact, it's a good thing to be able
to modify the rules according to scenario needs (obviously). I
just regret not seeing this a few months ago, this would have
allowed to add a "Unless modified by scenario rules" caveat to
the alert status rules in the Command and Control section. :-[
#Post#: 3549--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: JoeKundlak
Date: October 23, 2019, 4:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood link ---
>
> If the rules take precedence over scenario instructions then
there is (a) no reason to have scenario instructions, and (b) no
way to modify alert status. We would have to resort to special
rules. So the scenario instructions must take precedence over
the rules.
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote from: Vincent Lefavrais link ---
>
> I've no problem with this; in fact, it's a good thing to be
able to modify the rules according to scenario needs
(obviously). I just regret not seeing this a few months ago,
this would have allowed to add a "Unless modified by scenario
rules" caveat to the alert status rules in the Command and
Control section. :-[
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't think that the rules as written currently raise any need
to have the "Unless modified by scenario rules" sentence added.
For instance in the section "5.1 Scenarios" it is written:
Alert Status. The scenario describes which squadrons start
alerted. All other squadrons begin unalerted [7.1].Thus this
means that the Scenario dictates the Alert status over the
Rulebook (which it superseeds/adjusts as needed). And for
wargames this is also business-as-usual, to have Scenarios take
precedence over the general Rulebooks.
#Post#: 3550--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 23, 2019, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That said, I'll take a look through the scenarios at the weekend
and check whether we should add any clarifications for
alerted/unalerted status.
#Post#: 3551--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: Vincent Lefavrais
Date: October 23, 2019, 5:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Joe Kundlak link ---
> Thus this means that the Scenario dictates the Alert status
over the Rulebook (which it superseeds/adjusts as needed). And
for wargames this is also business-as-usual, to have Scenarios
take precedence over the general Rulebooks.
--- End Quote ---
You're right Joe, this takes care of my concern.
It's just that where the rules offer a number of different
mission behaviours allowing a rich variety, the scenarios all
have "white-or-black" instructions: a side is either wholly
alerted, or not alerted... Even when they involve "exotic" OOBs
-- the scenario defenders having raids of their own coming up
later, for instance... This scenario "blandness" taking
precedence over the variety hinted at by the rules feels odd. To
me at last. But if it's the way it is intended, I'm not
advocating changing it; I'll get used to it. ;)
#Post#: 3552--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: Elias Nordling
Date: October 23, 2019, 5:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I just think the general rule ought to have ben evicted in the
rules revision as i think all scenarios list alert status
anyway.
#Post#: 3556--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alert Status
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 23, 2019, 7:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, but I'm not sure if it's a biggie.
It certainly is interesting to consider whether some scenarios
should designate mixed alert status. Particularly scenarios like
O11, where there's a case for having defender sweeps start
unalerted.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page