DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
*****************************************************
#Post#: 966--------------------------------------------------
O26 Forgotten Planes
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 19, 2019, 4:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
New scenario thread for playtest of Forgotten Planes. Please do
not create a new thread for this scenario.
#Post#: 1074--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 21, 2019, 11:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
v0.1
Player: Elias Nordling (solo)
Well, that was the quickest Wing Leader game I've played! It was
over after turn 3 and the second combat, thanks to high rolling
on both sides.
The setup and maneuvering into combat is intriguing. The
variability of the tally rolls on turn 2 defines the situation
and will give one side or the other an advantage. In my game, I
had one nationalist flight bounce a republican flight, and the
rest pitted into one big mothball.
Three out of four combat rolls were 10 or 11, which meant that
the loss threshold of 5 was hit in the first combat, and
cohesion checks never really figured into it. The Republicans
got 3 hits and rolled a 6 for experte loss on one of them that
secured a victory against 2 losses and a straggler.
This scenario is always going to be totally up to the dice, but
I find it intriguing and worth exploring further.
Suggestions: The Republicans are listed as unalerted. I suggest
making them alerted as the Interceptors have to be, and to give
them another edge.
I suspect that when it comes to cohesion rolls, the Nationalists
will be at a serious disadvantage from being flights. The
difference of the 6 plane flights of the Nationalists and the 8
plane flights of the Republicans doesn't sound like it justifies
such a big step, but it would be a shame to remove one of the
asymmetries of the scenarios, so I suggest keeping it for the
time being. I do suggest increasing the sudden death trigger to
7 losses and stragglers, which would have allowed even this game
to last into the second turn of combats.
Looking forward to giving it another try. The maneuver phase
definitely has potential!
#Post#: 1079--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 21, 2019, 3:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I just realized I forgot rigid doctrine. I don't think it
affected any of the results. One of the combat rolls was already
checked for that as I missed a modifier in the other direction.
The important rolls, with so many hits, turned out to be the
kill rolls.
#Post#: 1089--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 22, 2019, 3:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
v0.1 (as written, no change to the loss level trigger)
Player: Elias Nordling (solo)
I like this, the maneuvering and tallying is unpredictable in a
fun way! This time, the fight turned into one big moshpit, with
one Republican squadron left out the first combat round. This
kept losses down. The Republicans managed to turn it to a
dogfight, which was to their advantage for the other two rounds
of combat. Poor rolling on the kill rolls prevented them from
seizing the victory. At the end of the third round of combat,
the loss level trigger was hit, and anyway the last fighter
broke. The Republicans lost 2 fighters, to 1 Nationalist fighter
shot down and 2 stragglers.
Suggestions: The fact that the Nationalists are flights and the
Republicans are Squadrons are a big disadvantage for them. I
like the asymmetry of it, but only being able to take one
cohesion hit is a brutal disadvantage for being 6 airplanes
instead of 8. I suggest either making the Nationalists
squadrons, or keeping them as flight but adding a special rule
that allows them to take 2 cohesion hits instead of just one. Or
the reverse, making them squadrons but with a size disadvantage
mod as a special rule.
Increase the loss level trigger to 7.
The attacker lottery when both sides have rigid doctrine doesn't
seem quite right. Maybe rigid doctrine schould cancel out? Or
maybe not. Something to look out for.
#Post#: 1090--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 22, 2019, 3:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I need to dig into this, and maybe Javier has a view on the
order of battle (in his original the I-16s had a max losses of
13, and the He 112s just 5). But what if we increased the CR.32s
to squadrons but left the He 112s a flight?
#Post#: 1091--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 22, 2019, 3:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Elias Nordling link=topic=66.msg1089#msg1089
date=1548147825]The attacker lottery when both sides have rigid
doctrine doesn't seem quite right. Maybe rigid doctrine schould
cancel out? Or maybe not. Something to look out for.[/quote]
This has come up in one of the other scenarios, and I think
there's a case for cancelling out in certain situations. Let's
keep an eye on this.
#Post#: 1092--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 22, 2019, 3:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]But what if we increased the CR.32s to squadrons but left
the He 112s a flight?[/quote]
Sure, that works too!
It's not like the loss limit will ever kick in, in this
scenario.
[quote]This has come up in one of the other scenarios, and I
think there's a case for cancelling out in certain situations.
Let's keep an eye on this.[/quote]
It can probably simply not be included in the scenario if all
units on both sides are rigid.
#Post#: 1094--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 22, 2019, 4:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The reason I'm cagey about this is that the whole rigid/loose
doctrine thing is a part of the narrative of the Spanish Civil
War, with the Germans developing this doctrine in the later
portions of the war. I'd prefer to preserve it, unless we come
across a good reason not to. But yes, in the smaller scenarios
the attacker determination may have a profound effect on how
things play out.
And we haven't yet discussed other stressors such as the lack of
radios.
#Post#: 1095--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 22, 2019, 4:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]The reason I'm cagey about this is that the whole
rigid/loose doctrine thing is a part of the narrative of the
Spanish Civil War, with the Germans developing this doctrine in
the later portions of the war. I'd prefer to preserve it, unless
we come across a good reason not to. But yes, in the smaller
scenarios the attacker determination may have a profound effect
on how things play out.[/quote]
In that case I'd suggest giving the Heinkels in this scenario
loose doctrine, for an additional dynamic.
[quote]And we haven't yet discussed other stressors such as the
lack of radios.[/quote]
Indeed. I quite liked your earlier suggestion to make no radios
-2 to ammo rather than automatically -1 on cohesion. The current
penalty might be too much.
#Post#: 1096--------------------------------------------------
Re: O26 Forgotten Planes
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 22, 2019, 4:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Elias Nordling link=topic=66.msg1095#msg1095
date=1548152522]In that case I'd suggest giving the Heinkels in
this scenario loose doctrine, for an additional dynamic.[/quote]
I believe the Heinkels were Spanish rather than German, so this
would not apply.
[quote author=Elias Nordling link=topic=66.msg1095#msg1095
date=1548152522]Indeed. I quite liked your earlier suggestion to
make no radios -2 to ammo rather than automatically -1 on
cohesion. The current penalty might be too much.[/quote]
We've used 'no radios' occasionally and sparingly in the game so
far. I think a test of the Spanish and Chinese scenarios will
reveal whether we need to consider such a rule change. Again,
let's keep an eye on this for now. I shall post up a thread in
the rules section.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page