DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1026--------------------------------------------------
Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 20, 2019, 4:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is the thread for feedback on the Malta Spitfires campaign.
#Post#: 1071--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 21, 2019, 9:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I just read through the Malta Campaign rules, and really have
nothing to comment on it except that it looks cool and I want to
try it. I couldn't immediately think of any way to break the
campaign, but I suspect that it needs quite some testing to see
if there are gamey tactics you can employ in the scenarios that
skews the balance.
One question: Can a wave in a raid consist of only fighters, as
a sweep to clear the skies well ahead of the raid?
#Post#: 1072--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 21, 2019, 10:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Possibly gamey tactic: As the Allies, simply ignore all raids on
day 1. Since aircraft that don't fly on day 1 don't have to
worry about availability, all will be available for dat 2 to
slam a reduced Axis air force.
Variation of the tactic: Just accept the heavily damaged
airfield as a fact and only intercept attacks on the port.
I'm thinking all aircraft should roll for availability after day
1, those that hasn't flown will at least be affected by airfield
damage.
None of this may turn out to be smart in practice, but at least
it wouldn't hurt to remove the incentive for not flying, that
you are then not affected by airfield damage.
#Post#: 1073--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 21, 2019, 10:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's entirely possible that we may need to increase the
penalties for attacks on airfields. It's all part of the
calibration.
#Post#: 1075--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: Kevin Date: January 21, 2019, 2:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Allowing the airfield to be pummelled may not be too historical;
the reasoning of that is they were a lifeline for landing and
launching sorties. It doesn't feel right the Brits could ignore
those raids because if the airfield takes too much damage it
won't be able to handle more than x number of squadrons. Could
add a nice extra drama to the defense but only if this turns out
to be a problem in breaking the scenario.
I feel like I'm a long way off attempting this one yet but
looking forward to it!
#Post#: 1078--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 21, 2019, 3:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I recall talking to Gordon about this and he had some compelling
reason to keep the effects of bombing small. Maybe he will turn
up and explain.
#Post#: 1215--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: Gordon Christie Date: January 26, 2019, 8:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In many ways the obverse of the point above. If the Axis plaster
the airfield at the start of day 1 & the effects are too big it
potentially wins the campaign. Historically there were 3
airfields on Malta at this stage (plus a taxi strip which
effectively functioned as a fourth emergency airfield) all of
which were well hardened after 18 months of steady attack. It is
questionable whether the Axis could really have neutralised the
airfields in the face of a determined attempt to keep them open
at this point given the scale of attack they seemed able to
mount & sustain.
The curious aspect of this in many ways is the limited scale of
Axis effort. Although they had approaching 200 bombers in Sicily
as far as I can determine from fragmentary OB information they
managed about 50 sorties a day & similarly they managed only
around 100 fighter sorties a day from a force which should have
numbered around 150 or so aircraft. They also seemed to favour
repeated small raids spread through the day over single maximum
effort raids. It resembles the LW approach to phase 3 of the
Battle of Britain & presumably reflects the same doctrinal
concepts but the bottom line is that I don't know *why* they
fought this way. I've tried to encourage historical Axis
behaviour although I don't really understand the drivers.
Counterfactually you could simply allow the Axis to ignore all
the limits on raid size & see what happens BUT that takes us a
long way from the history & in my mind at least, breaks the
whole concept. Its a bit like a Battle of Britain game where all
2000 LW aircraft in Northern France fly every day & monster 11
Group's 200 operational fighters-it didn't happen &-to me- the
interesting (research) question is why not other than what would
have happened if it had.
Cheers
Gordon
#Post#: 1221--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: Elias Nordling Date: January 26, 2019, 11:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Not sure if someone else already caught this in proofreading,
but M5.1.2 Surface Targets doesn't list the type of Hvy Flak for
Port attacks.
#Post#: 1232--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: pilotofficerprune Date: January 26, 2019, 1:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Good catch. I believe that is Heavy Flak A. I'll correct the
document.
#Post#: 1618--------------------------------------------------
Re: Malta Spitfires Campaign
By: Kevin Date: February 10, 2019, 8:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting this beastie today! Axis planning for May 9:
1300: wave1 is 3 109s, 3 Ju87; wave2 is 2 109s, 1 202, 3 Ju88
1500: 2 109s, 1 202, 1 Ju87, 1 Ju88, 1 Sm79
1700: 5 109s on a Freijagd, one with bombs
This should keep up the heat on the airfield and hopefully keep
that +1 drm applying to Allied cycle rolls and reduce the amount
of repair. All going well, it will be a double wave on the port
at 11:00 on the 10th.
I'm going to put an extra condition on the airfield repair and
that is it can remove 3 damage if it has not literally been
attacked in the turn by straffing or bombing. The attack need
not have scored any hits. Rule 5.5.2 I think intends this but if
it was only targeted in the turn but Axis abort before bombing
then surely this shouldn't prevent repair.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page