URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Airbattle Games
  HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 6921--------------------------------------------------
       S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 15, 2020, 3:48 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here's Gordon and Andrew's initial AAR:
       Kursk Counterattack
       RUN 1:
       VVS 10 fighters 3 IL-2s 1 disrupted IL2
       LW 3 fighters
       VP
       VVS 3 (AtA) +15 (exit)
       LW 13
       Nett -5 for VVS win
       Interesting scenario. Feels very scripted but there are more
       choices here than first appears...
       Andrew split the LW squadrons into flights & engaged all the
       IL-2s but only 1 escort. Escort reaction worked well & some
       helpful dogfight rolls resulted win a lot of fighter vs fighter
       combat which the VVS lost (predictably) but it kept the LW off
       the Sturmoviks for long enough that the remaining LW fighters
       made few attacks & IL-2 cohesion held up well to get 15 exit VP
       & deliver a tidy VVS win, which felt right. In many ways this
       was the historical outcome.
       The LW choices are early, and very consequential, as to whether
       to split (I think the answer is almost certainly yes but even
       for this there is a margin of uncertainty-hitting 2 escort
       squadrons on GT1 with bounces at +3 with +2DRM might just be
       enough to take most of the escort out quickly...perhaps:-)). The
       VVS are very reactive but it isn't uninteresting as the fighters
       try & parry the LW for long enough for the bombers to escape.
       Its not a complex scenario, and a bit puzzle like, but
       definitely interesting.
       We tried again, unchanged...
       LW 5 losses (2 to defensive gunfire)
       VVS 6 fighters 20 IL2s 1 IL2 sqn eliminated All broken
       CP
       LW 26
       VVS 5
       Crushing LW win. One flight passed 8 cohesion rolls(!)
       This was a classic dice driven outlier but still entertaining.
       The LW could do no wrong...one flight attacked on all 8 turns &
       passed every cohesion roll before running out of targets, though
       again the LW did lose meaningfully.
       My reading of Bergstrom suggests a LW kill:loss ratio at this
       point of 6:1 or so so both runs capture the Kursk narrative
       pretty well.
       We're both happy with this one at Alpha, unchanged:-))
       Cheers
       Gordon
       #Post#: 6925--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 15, 2020, 3:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Okay. I just want Elias to take a quick poke at this before I
       push it out to everyone else.
       #Post#: 6935--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: Elias Nordling Date: November 15, 2020, 12:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Did you plan on adding Yak 7B counters to Supremacy? Because
       currently they are only in Legends.
       I know the counter isn't strictly needed, but I bet you'll get
       question if the scenario setup uses the graphics of a counter
       that isn't included in the game.
       #Post#: 6937--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 15, 2020, 1:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes, I've planned on adding a Yak-7B counter.
       #Post#: 6938--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: Elias Nordling Date: November 15, 2020, 1:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Also, this makes for a much better intro scenario than Piling
       On, so may I suggest it gets renumbered to S02? Either that, or
       name specific scenarios in the "STOP" box in the rules.
       #Post#: 6940--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 15, 2020, 3:53 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Oh, you have an AAR?
       #Post#: 6941--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: Elias Nordling Date: November 15, 2020, 11:34 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Not yet, just eyeballing :-). Also, we had trouble with this in
       the 1st edition of Supremacy, and when I played Piling on with a
       beginner later I felt it was too much for him.
       #Post#: 6944--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 16, 2020, 1:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       At this stage I really don't want to renumber any scenarios.
       Sorry!
       #Post#: 6945--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: Elias Nordling Date: November 16, 2020, 3:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I can see the pain that would potentially cause. Perhaps a note
       at the start of the scenario book?
       #Post#: 6946--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S29 Kursk Counterattack
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 16, 2020, 3:58 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Perhaps. I'll have to think about how that's done.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Next Page