DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
*****************************************************
#Post#: 4204--------------------------------------------------
L01 Raid on Nanking
By: pilotofficerprune Date: December 31, 2019, 3:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is a thread stub.
#Post#: 4247--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 2, 2020, 12:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The rules say Chinese and Japanese squadrons have rigid
doctrine. This suggests a) flights don't have rigid doctrine,
but b) bomber squadrons do. Is this intentional?
#Post#: 4248--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 2, 2020, 4:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Doctrine applies to fighters only [5.1] and we use the term
squadron to apply to squadrons and flights. Is this really
unclear?
#Post#: 4249--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 3, 2020, 1:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I thing it is ambiguois. Generally, scenario rules can overrule
the standard rules.
#Post#: 4250--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 3, 2020, 1:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is the formulation that Vincent has been applying to the
doctrine text. We use this extensively in Origins.
#Post#: 4251--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 3, 2020, 2:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry I didn't notice earlier! It kind of sticks out here where
the Japanese doesn't even have fighter squadrons. I think it is
remote to interpret the rule as applying to bomber squadrons,
but why send the players to the rulebook when you can replace
squadron with fighter? As for flights, I could definitely see a
situation where an air force had nimble smaller formations but
bigger ones are rigid.
#Post#: 4255--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: Peter_Wagner Date: January 3, 2020, 2:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: L01 Raid on Nanking (First Play)
Version: v0.1
Playtesters: Elias (Japanese)/Pete (Chinese)
Report: Japanese escorts all break after first combat. Chinese
able to turn back one bomber squadron. High average combat rolls
provide high level of hits but a good number of low confirm
rolls keep losses light. Chinese bag 1 Susie,2 Daves and a
Claud. Japanese shot down 3 Hawks and 1 Cr.32.
This is a pretty light and fast playing scenario with some
interesting strategy for Chinese to either target the lead
bombers (which are tougher) or the trailing bombers (easy prey).
The strategy for Japanese comes down to escort placement to try
and protect from either of these Chinese strategies.
Victory:
Japanese bombers (18) + air kills (4) = 22
Chinese air kills (4) = 4
Total: +18 Japanese victory
Recommendations: None yet. Need to play this one again.
#Post#: 4267--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: Peter_Wagner Date: January 8, 2020, 1:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: L01 Raid on Nanking (Second Play)
Version: v0.1
Playtesters: Elias (Japanese)/Pete (Chinese)
Report: Chinese again target lead bomber group and suffer
greatly in losses and disruption rolls (3 units broke on first
combat and the 4th, a squadron, lasted for 3). Only 2 bombers
shot down and 1 Japanese fighter. Chinese lose 5 fighters. 1
bomber formation disrupted but the loses were to 2 different
formations so none turn back. Chinese may have to go for rear
bombers to get better combat odds. Combat rolls produced a good
amount of hits but those low fire power ratings still cause few
hits.
In this game the Escorts focused on protecting the front bomber
formation so I should have placed vectors to intercept the rear
formation.
Victory:
Japanese bombers (21) + air kills (5) = 26
Chinese air kills (3) = 3
Total: +23 Japanese victory
Recommendations: I'm struggling to find recommendations. This is
an uphill fight for Chinese.
#Post#: 4269--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 9, 2020, 2:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It is tough for the Chinese, but not in a way that can't be
adjusted with VPs as they have at least made a net plus for
attacking in both games.
I'm thinking that you could give the no radio penalty to the
bombers too, to make it easier for them to take cohesion hits?
#Post#: 4273--------------------------------------------------
Re: L01 Raid on Nanking
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 10, 2020, 2:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'll take a look at VPs. Do we need to double VPs for shooting
down bombers?
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page