DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Wing Leader Rules Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 146--------------------------------------------------
Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: Elias Nordling Date: September 16, 2018, 12:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Frankly, I find the whole concept of special guns a mess. There
are AT Guns and AT gun pods, and they are treated entirely
differently. There are counters for the AT Gun pods that has
ratings that apparently aren't valid for this situation. And
there are heavy gun pods that work differently from the AT gun
pods, and there are heavy guns that aren't pods. Sometimes a
special note means the type has this ability, sometimes it just
means the ability to carry pods. The differences in terminology
are subtle and very easy to miss, and you have to piece together
the information from all over the rules.
I've come to fear scenarios that have special gun types.
#Post#: 147--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 16, 2018, 12:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I've split this out from the Kuban Meatgrinder thread into the
rules section, as I think it's an important topic that Elias
brings up here.
I don't disagree with Elias, but I'm wrestling with what to do.
What we have is two separate kinds of rating that can
potentially cause confusion.
We have the Heavy Guns ability, which is designed to model
anti-bomber ordnance. The main feature here is that the piece
usually fires a high explosive round of some sort.
Then we have the AT Guns ability which is designed to model
anti-tank ordnance. The main feature here is that the piece
usually fires some form of armour-piercing round.
So, what to do? I have certainly given thought before to the
notion of combining them into a single rating for the second
edition. This would at least streamline the system and hopefully
make it less confusing. There are three downsides to this:
(a) It means bringing the rating system for the two weapon types
into alignment under one ability, which we can call 'heavy
guns'. In practice, this could really boost the value of some
heavy guns, as some anti-tank weapons are ranked up to values of
7 or so. This is a minor problem, but it exists.
(b) It may make anti-tank gun equipped aircraft super-powerful
in air combat--though of course this is only air combat with
other bombers, so maybe this is a scenario that hardly if ever
appears. However, it could lead to situations where someone
builds a scenario featuring Hurricane IIDs against bombers and
the scenario designer declares the Hurri II the best anti-bomber
fighter evahr. You see where this is going. . .
(c) It would mean making AT guns super-powerful against non-tank
targets. Without a distinction between anti-bomber big guns and
anti-tank big guns, this is the biggest problem I can see.
Any thoughts?
#Post#: 148--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: Elias Nordling Date: September 16, 2018, 1:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
i planned tio start an own thread myself. since posting, I wen't
into hard studying what the rules say about guns to identify my
sources of confusion. Post coming up...
#Post#: 149--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: Elias Nordling Date: September 16, 2018, 2:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OK, so to sum up special guns abilities, there are actually five
different varieties, treated differently.
First there are the two gun pods, then the two gun ABILITIES (AT
Guns, Heavy Guns), and finally there are the dual firepower
aircraft. The difference between AT Guns and Heavy Guns isn't
intuitive, and probably has more to do about what type of
aircraft they are mounted on than the actual gun. It is one
source of confusion.
Except for the dual firepower, the other four all require a
listed ability to the aircraft. However, if the ability says
AT-pods, you don't automatically get them, you have to use them
instead of bombs, while the AT Guns ability is in addition to
bombs. This is one source of confusion, as AT Gun Pods and AT
Guns sound awfully similar yet are treated very differently. I
know the space for Abilities is limited, so I don't have a
better suggestion.
There are two uses for firepower: Confirming kills and Strafing.
For confirming air losses, rule 10.6 is used. Only three of the
five special gun abilities are mentioned here. Use the second
value for dual rated units, and add one for either kind of gun
pod. Heavy guns are an exception not mentioned in 10.6 but in
13.5.2, where the value is replaced by the Heavy Guns value
against bombers. The fact that pods add to the existing
firepower while heavy guns replace the firepower is one source
of confusion. AT Guns aren't mentioned at all so presumably they
have no effect in air combats. It would be nice if this was
mentioned.
For strafing, we go to 15.3.7 (not the other rule also named
strafing, another source of confusion). Here we find: Use the
first value for dual rated units. Add Gun pods to the value, but
you have to look up in 13.5.6 what these values are. Since you
are only ever going to use these values when applying this rule,
why not put them here instead? Checking 13.5.6, I find that
15.3.7 is in fact in error because you do not add the AT pod
value but rather the aircraft gains the ability of AT Gun 5. So
you have an ability that gives you the option to gain another
ability as its sole function. Yes, I understand now, but it IS
inconsistent and confusing. Anyway, one pod adds to the
firepower while the other supplants it. So does Heavy Guns, and
AT Guns, but AT guns only for special targets. You find what
targets these are in 15.3.7, but not 13.5.6, so you have to flip
between these two rules.
I am not sure if an AC with FP 0 with a gun pod gets FP 1 or 2,
but perhaps there are no such aircraft. I sure hope there are no
dual firepower aircraft with AT gun ability, as those would be
really confusing too. Also, I'm not sure why heavy guns work on
more targets than AT guns, explosive ammo perhaps?
Where to find the FP for the given situation:
Dual firepower: On the ADC, but in practice in 10.6 or 15.3.7,
because there is no easy way of telling which value is used
when.
Heavy Guns: On the ADC, once you've memorized 13.5.2, but I'd
admit that's not very hard now.
Gun Pods: On the counter, or 10.6 or 15.3.7.
AT Pods: On the counter, except the counter is now in error due
to a rules change, so 10.6, but not 15.3.7 but 13.5.6.
AT Guns: On the ADC while cross-reading 15.3.7 because it is
hard to memorize which targets they apply to. Unlike AT Pods,
these don't seem to add to air combat.
That's a lot of rules flipping to find out what firepower to
use, with a lot of inconsistencies in where to find the values,
and whether they are in addition or supplanting each other. I
don't have an easy solution to offer, but perhaps this helps you
see why I am confused at least.
#Post#: 172--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 18, 2018, 10:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That's a really good summary, Elias, and i'm trying to think of
a way to address all these issues. Let's start by trying to
break all these things down:
(1) For regular firepower we have:
* Single value
* Dual rating - first value is for strafing and second for air
combat
* U rating - Aircraft is unarmed
In the latest rules these basics are outlined in 3.3.
(2) We have two types of pod that function in different ways:
one (Gun Pod) adding air combat firepower and the other (AT Pod)
adding a specialised form of strafing firepower. But this is
confused by the fact that the AT Pod can add air combat
firepower as well.
Pods are outlined in 13.5.6. Load restrictions for pods are
outlined in 13.5.1.
(3) We have, in addition to regular firepower, two types of gun
ability, both of which function to replace, and not add to, the
aircraft's regular firepower. These are the Heavy Gun (limited
to bombers only) and the AT Gun (limited to spcial surface
targets).
In the 12Aug18 rules set, the rules for the Heavy Gun ability
are outlined in 13.5.2 (and 13.5.2.1 for standoff attacks).
The rules for AT Pods are spread across 13.5.6 (the pod grants
the AT Gun ability) and 15.3.7 (how AT Guns change the firepower
value).
Does that cover it all?
[hr]
So looking at the issues Elias raises, we have a number of areas
of confusion:
(a) Confusion as to when pods add value or when they replace
value.
(b) Confusion as to which dual value applies when (I have
simplified this in the more recent drafts, but this might still
confuse).
(c) Confusion as how how FP 0 aircraft are modified.
(d) Confusion as to the function of Heavy Guns and AT Guns.
(Would it help to specify the difference between HE and AP
ammunition?)
(e) Lots of rule-flipping to understand what is what.
[hr]
Okay, assuming I've internalized the problem now, I'm open to
ideas on how to resolve this. The one thing that I'd like to do,
where possible, is try to keep some level of
backwards-compatibility on the ADCs. What this means in practice
is that the format of the dual rating aircraft cannot change.
#Post#: 173--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: Elias Nordling Date: September 18, 2018, 12:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Also a bit of confusion on where to find the values.
Also, there is the rocket gun Ki45 which works almost but not
quite like armed with a heavy gun, and the Ju87G which have a
mandatory AT gun pod, making the chain you have to piece
together even longer.
#Post#: 176--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 19, 2018, 1:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You bring up good points. There's a case for giving the Ki-44
(rocket gun version) a Heavy Gun ability. Also the Ju 87G and
Hurricane IID AT Gun abilities without the pods (though probably
with a no bombs note).
I'm still not sure how to simplify or streamline the rules. At
least not without losing something. However, organising them
better might be a thing that I can do.
#Post#: 177--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: Elias Nordling Date: September 19, 2018, 2:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Having the AT Pod firepower in 15.3.7 would help a little.
#Post#: 178--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: pilotofficerprune Date: September 19, 2018, 3:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Shall I complicate things further? Having done some quick number
crunching, I'm starting to think that regular gun pods should be
worth +2 FP, not +1.
#Post#: 179--------------------------------------------------
Re: Heavy Guns and AT Guns
By: Elias Nordling Date: September 19, 2018, 5:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That would make them less crappy, yes. As is, I rarely find them
worth the bother.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page