DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
*****************************************************
#Post#: 64--------------------------------------------------
E14 Butcher's Bill
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 12, 2018, 9:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Mar
Playtester: Elias Nordling
Played Butcher's Bill, which turned out to be a very
straightforward scenario. I expected this one to be a tough one
for the US, even the dive bombers with their low drag are better
rated than the Wildcats! The first playthrough, the US catched
some lucky breaks and managed to break two bombers and disrupt a
third.
However, after 4 playthroughs, the US player managed to catch
those lucky breaks all the time, downing a slew of bombers and
breaking at least half of them, so maybe they aren't so lucky
after all? I still can't say this is the average expected
result, it still felt like being above the curve for the US, but
if I got them 4 times out of 4, they probably weren't outlandish
at least.
There isn't that much room for clever decisions and I sort of
found what I felt was the optimal play at the first try, but
there is a very nice asymmerty to the forces. It is a good,
enjoyable scenario suitable for relatively fresh players.
After the first playthrough, I was going to suggest adding
another green Japanese squadron, but there is nothing in these
results suggesting it is needed.
I would suggest a special rule that Japanese bomber squadrons
that are broken have to return to base. It isn't really
necessary, but it seems to be what happened, it adds a little
historical touch, and increases the satisfaction of winning
against the odds for the US.
Here are the scores for the 4 playthroughs (parenthesized
results if broken bombers have to return to base)
1st:
Japanese: Exit 11 (9 if RTB when broken), 4 Wildcats: 15(13)
US: 7 bombers, 2 escorts: 9
Final score: 6(4)
2nd:
Japanese exit 11(9), 0(!) US fighters shot down: 11
US: 9 bombers, 2 Zeros. Score 0(-2). 4 bombers downed in last
combat roll.
3rd:
Japanese: Exit: 14(12), +2 US ftrs: 16(14)
US: 9 bombers, 3 ftrs: 12.
Final score: 4(2)
4th:
Japanese: Exit 9(6), 5 US Ftrs: 14(11)
US: 11 bombers, 1 Zero: 12
Total: 2(-1)
Obviously I think the VP levels should go down a bit. All 4 sure
felt like US wins, but I'd be ready to call the 1st one just on
the right side of a draw for balance. Unless other players get
dramatically different results.
I felt the scenario was a nice quick fix, and obviously enjoyed
it, or I would't have played it 4 times in a row
#Post#: 65--------------------------------------------------
Re: E14 Butcher's Bill
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 12, 2018, 9:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The mean values of the scores on the four tests are: 3 (0.75)
#Post#: 128--------------------------------------------------
Re: E14 Butcher's Bill
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 15, 2018, 12:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The main thing here is that I’ll adopt the return to base rule
and then reduce the ‘draw window’ to +2 to +4.
#Post#: 320--------------------------------------------------
Re: E14 Butcher's Bill
By: Gordon Christie Date: October 7, 2018, 7:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Andrew and I have now run through this on three occasions. It is
an interesting scenario. The initial impression is that the
Americans are really going to struggle as the Japanese bombers
drop into the cloud and rain but this, as Elias has noted, is by
no means always the case. As a late war scenario it is also
quite interesting as the Americans are neither qualitatively nor
quantitatively preponderant and it feels as if the Japanese –
the fighters in particular – have something of a fighting
chance.
The first run through saw the Japanese (Andrew) let down into
the cloud immediately. Cohesion rolls for the US fighters in
particular were poor. Although the US fighters suffered no
losses only 5 Japanese aircraft were shot down and 2 intact and
1 broken disrupted Squadron exited for nett +10 VP (+15 exit -5
IJN losses) as the final score.
Second run through was altogether bloodier. On this occasion the
cohesion rolls for both sides fighters were if anything above
average. 11 Japanese aircraft were lost to 7 American but only 2
disrupted bomber squadrons made it off the map for a final score
of +2 VP. Our feeling on this occasion was that it was clearly a
US victory but that the US had been pretty fortunate with
cohesion rolls in particular.
After some discussion we decided to add an additional Green
squadron for the Japanese for the next one.
For the third run Andrew elected to keep the bombers level for
the first couple turns aiming to avoid the cohesion penalty of
the cloud which had afflicted the bombers on the second run.
Both sides had an element of luck which, probably, balanced out.
A Wildcat flight managed to break the trailing escort Zero
Squadron on the first combat, at which point it looked very
promising for the Americans however, defensive gunfire accounted
for 4 US fighters which probably balanced things out
considerably.
The US lost 6 fighters against 14 Japanese losses with 9 VPs
(one intact, one disrupted bomber squadron) for a final score of
+1.
It is a good scenario. The presence of a lot of cloud, and rain,
makes a bit different and it is good to have a late Pacific war
scenario where the Americans are not overwhelmingly
preponderant. The victory thresholds seem right. The first run
through definitely felt like a Japanese victory, and both of the
following run throughs felt like a American successes.
Interestingly the balance of losses in air to air combat favours
the Americans less than I would have expected (although the
presence of large numbers of Wildcats and the pretty slippery
Judy make many of the US attacks fairly low odds affairs, and
we saw a lot of turning attacks by the Wildcats at 0 or so which
accounted – in part – for the effectiveness of bomber defensive
gunfire).
It is a small, fast and relatively volatile scenario with some
interesting choices for both sides (for the Japanese the
decision about whether, or when, to let down into the cloud and
for the Americans whether to go for the escort or straight for
the bombers). On balance I would be inclined to add an
additional Green squadron to the Japanese order of battle as I
think, although we saw 2 US victories, luck slightly favoured
the Americans and it also fits the historical narrative better.
We'll likely give it one more run tonight & I'll ket you know
the outcome.
Cheers
Gordon
#Post#: 321--------------------------------------------------
Re: E14 Butcher's Bill
By: pilotofficerprune Date: October 7, 2018, 10:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Great work guys. So for the next release I'm thinking of two
changes:
(1) Add the extra green, as suggested.
(2) Tighten the draw window to a +3 to +4, which would make both
your last two run-throughs American wins.
My impression is that this one sits on a knife-edge.
#Post#: 322--------------------------------------------------
Re: E14 Butcher's Bill
By: pilotofficerprune Date: October 7, 2018, 10:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Interestingly, strictly the bombers can't change altitude in
this scenario as the bombing rules are not in effect. However,
if you're getting some cool gameplay from the choice of changing
altitude I'm inclined to permit it through a special rule.
#Post#: 323--------------------------------------------------
Re: E14 Butcher's Bill
By: Elias Nordling Date: October 7, 2018, 10:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Agreed, I don't think it will break anything and will add a
layer of decision.
*****************************************************