Printable View
Just wondering if anybody out there chooses one maneuver card at a time instead of three. I'm just wondering how different the game would be if we didn't have to pick three maneuver cards ahead of time. I'm thinking we'd be able to react to what our foes are doing a little quicker and we'd be able to fly our planes a bit more realistically. Or, conversely, does choosing one card limit the randomness of the game and make each game feel similar?
Have you ever played the WW2 Dawn of War?Quote:
Originally Posted by KirkH
The two games feel quite different, mostly because the WW2 planes are less maneuverable than most WW1 planes, and then there's the high speed/low speed aspect. The 2 card system "feels" smoother once you get used to it, you are only picking one card ahead. ie: you have one card down and are picking another one, then you play the first card, return it to your deck and pick another card.
I think it would just slow down the feel of the game since I would thing be planning a move every single card. WWII has you only planning one card at a time and I feel it makes the game a little less fluid then the WWI version... but the planes feel faster and more agile because of this.
Actually the WWII version has you plan the next game turn before you do this game turn's maneuver. It is possible to forget what you planned to do and it does give the feel for faster flight. However I agree that the three card system feels right for the game. Although you can overfly your opponent, and may choose the wrong card occasionally, I think it does a good job of reflecting the flight characteristics of the planes. Besides it may become almost impossible to shake a tailling plane if you are playing against a good player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col. Hajj
Yes, you plan next turn's maneuver, but after the very first turn of the game, you are only planning one card at at time.
I actually like the DoW version better, it seems more like continuous flight rather than a series of discrete turns as in WoW. Either way works for me, the game is fun in both versions. We've tried the DoW rules using WW1 planes, it works out fine, but most of the group liked the original WoW rules better, so that's what we use for WW1.
Acctually I think it is impossible to forget your next maneuver because you can allway look in your deck which card is missing...Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie3
I think planning 3 maneuvers in advance is reallistic. WW1 planes were very delicate to fly. therefore you cannot react instantanously but have to complete a maneuver you started before you can react. I like the way the WW1 version is played but maybe planning 2 card instead of 3 would be worth trying...
I think I recall the "not looking at your already planned card" an optional rule in Dawn of World War II.
The three cards system works for the slower WOW planes. The DOW system
is fast an unforgiving. I prefer players not to look at the next turn maneuver card. While they plan the for following turn maneuver.
Rich
I'll be honest...
I've played both and it's undeniable that the WWI game feels much much better in terms of gameplay to me.
The WW2 game feels less tactical I guess because you're pretty much just forecasting your next card and only having to look at what your opponents may do on their 2nd card at any given time...
This makes things like shaking someone off your tail either much easier or much harder to do than in WWI where you've got a fair chance of escape.
Pretty much WW2 boils down to this...
1. Fly around for position and take some pot shots.
2. Get in some special damage on a plane.
3. Follow it until it blows up.
Fair enough those are real world tactics, but in gameplay terms it feels boring very quickly.
I have played WoW both with the standard 3 maneuver card game rules and with a 1 maneuver card house rule. I found the 1 maneuver card at a time to be faster and more fun. One problem we ran into was stringing along maneuvers like the Immelmann or split-s because they are harder to keep up with when you play 1 card at a time. Another issue with playing 1 card at a time is that the maneuver decks are designed to be played around the 3 card system so some planes maneuverabilty advantage is lost when you switch to the 1 card system.
Example: Nieuport 11 vs. Fokker E.III
Nieuport 11 (E Deck, 18 cards excluding dive & climb)
Fokker E.III (P Deck, 16 cards excluding dive & climb)
Both the P & E decks are identical in speed but the E deck has one extra right & left non-steep sideslip card. When playing the 3 card system, the Nieuport 11 could play 2 right sideslips while the Fokker E.III could only play one right sideslip.
Switch to the 1 maneuver card house rule and now the Fokker E.III could string as many right non-steep sideslips as they want.
I have not found this to be a negative thing in our gaming but it does deviate from the original intent of limiting the maneuverability of planes during their 3 card turn.
That being said, my gaming group consists of family so I have never had the opportunity to play the game with any other group. Playing 1 maneuver card at a time has helped my younger nephews (10 & 13) get into the game. When we played with the standard 3 card rule the younger ones had a harder time planning 3 cards at a time. By planning 1 at a time they are able to stay focused on the move at hand.
Either way, I love the game and it has provided my family with hours of fun.
I will let my four year old play 1 maneuver at a time. I pick my three, he picks his one, and then we go.... but I always make him pick before I'll show him my next maneuver.
My 6 year old nephew gets no such handicap.
They both have winning records against me..
Jay ...Your a good father and an Uncle. If you kill your young opponents every game, they won't want to play this game when they get older.
I myself haven't got into DOW yet. After reading this i could see how house rules, depending on the players, could be useful in each game. Some may like the 3 card rule and some may want just one or two.
Without playing.,,,,i can't see how the 1 card rule would be that GAMEFULL!.. if i can make up that word, for lack of my feeble mind coming up with the correct word.:p
This doesn't have to be the case. Continue to use all 3 slots on the control panel.Quote:
Originally Posted by rkhlegacy
Turn 1: select 2 maneuvers; place them in slots 2 & 3
Turn 2: reveal the first maneuver (in slot 2); move plane; put the maneuver back into slot 1, face up; move the other maneuver from slot 3 to slot 2; place a new maneuver in slot 3
Turn 3+: reveal the maneuver in slot 2; verify that it is a legal maneuver to succeed the maneuver in slot 1; put the maneuver in slot 1 back into your hand; move plane; put the maneuver back into slot 1, face up; move the other maneuver from slot 3 to slot 2; place a new maneuver in slot 3
This procedure both preserves the maneuverability distinctions in the WWI maneuver decks, AND obviates the need for the steep, straight, and immelman counters that I suspect most of us never bother to actually use anyway.
Funny,Quote:
Originally Posted by Col. Hajj
I hadn't thought of that. The way I have been playing is to use up the three moves and then plan my next three. But of course you can reveal one and place the next card down.
Doesn't that negate the tailing rule?
Gord
Gord, that quote was in reference to Dawn of War (WWII)
We plan 3 as the rules for the start. Then after moving the first, plan the new 3rd. We keep the special damage straight by placing them on the 3 cards or to the right where the new 3rd card will come into. This has sped the game up and worked well to not feel like a turn based game.
Sounds like another good tweak to an already fun game. I will see if the guys want to try this next time we play.
Tom
with one card, the game is far more action/reaction based as was real air combat. Pilots didn,t just set a course of action and blindly follow planned manouvrues, instead they reacted to their opponents, trying to exploit mistakes and weaknesses. I LIKE on card at a time, but still play three in total for the turn, leaving them face up. When tailing another aircraft it becomes deadly as you can easier counter your opponent and stay on his tail, such as it was in real life.
BD
You need to consider that the 3 turn phase represents only seconds of actual time. The real world battle between The Red Baron and Lanoe Hawker was one of the longest dogfights of the war, it lasted only 3 to 4 minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by BD Ford
The only issue I have (and was pointed out by someone else) with playing one card ahead is that planned limitations built into the maneuver decks are eliminated.
For instance; a Camel can only make two left weaves in a row (cards 19 and 20). In a one card system nothing stops a Camel from making unlimited use of cards 19 and 20.
I really like this aspect of WoW. Different aircraft abilities really add spice to the game as you learn to exploit your aircrafts strengths and weaknesses.
Do you guys have a method of restoring those limits?
Gord
Quote:
Originally Posted by BD Ford
See post 14.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gord
Hi.
I have found greats ideas here!
For a while, I have been thinking in a method of 2 cards to make the game more dinamic and for me, may be, more real, but after I read this post, I will try all diferents variants.
Thanks.
I have read all these posts. I have only played WW1 once and prefer Ares games version WW2. That said last night I played WW2 with altitude rules as the game should be played. Because we re-read the rules we discovered we had been we had played our previous 6-7 games playing a card at a time. The net result is we prefer to do it that way in spite of the fact that my friend is vehemently opposed to changing rules to suit yourself we intend to continue playing one card at a time. We found it makes target prediction a bit easier, we I should say he gets more target opertunities per game.
An aircraft game which does not allow shooting opertinities will become boring
Mik the stick
Mik - I think the beauty of this game is that you can add your own house rules relatively easy. Of course, Andrea Angiolino and Pier Giorgio Paglia have designed the WWII and WWI systems the way they have for many particular reasons. As long as everyone plays by the same rules and more importantly - is having fun - that is all that matters.
Michael
I've played one card games - much more responsive - we still use the three cards in a turn but select one card per phase instead of three at once, this preserves the limitations on manoeuvres that Gord mentioned.
A mistake we have been making is my friend has both WW1 & WW2 Game versions, and as he has more experience I tend to take his word as gospel. We have been playing "YOU CAN'T PLAY TWO STEEP MANEUVERS IN A ROW" in our WW2 games.
mik the stick
I will always play the three card system. Part of the game for me is trying to out think my opponent. You are adjusting your strategy every turn. But if you enjoy one card system than it is OK.
For those not knowing that, the actual Wings of Glory WW2 basic version is plan the card for the turn - play it. Then the standard rules for slightly xperienced player is: plan one card and start playing, and each turn plan one card for next turn and play the one previously planned (as in WW2 Wings of War).
Playing a card just planned is easier. There is an imitation game working in this way, but from people playinfg both that and WoW/WG I read that it is a bit too predictable.
To understand why three cards were chosen to compose a turn: In traditional air wargames as Blue Max or Dawn Patrol or Aces High, the maneuvres you do in a turn are roughly equivalent to the ones you can build with the three cards of a WoW turn, but you fire at the end of movement only. In Wings of War the turn has been split in three steps and so you fire in each of them: at one third of the movement and at two thirds of the movement, besides than at the end. This allows you to fire to fire during the turn at a target that you do not have in sight at the end of the turn: in previous simulations quoted, you could not fire at them at all. You can also deal more damage to planes that you followed all along the turn, and not just got in sight at the very last minute: more realistic, and making a deflection bonus less necessary.
So actually the three cards are three thirds of a traditional simulation turn. This is how the simulation has been conceived.
Not to say that it is the best system, just to understand the reasons why it has been designed in that way. Years later, the more "nervous" system for WW" has been conceived.
Having now experienced both WWI and WWII, I like the system as it is. Both the three card and two card methods seem to fit the game for each period as I envisage it.
Rob.
Andrea,
Thanks for the explanation (again) of the philosophy behind WoW (WWI) movement: a single manoeuvre turn composed of 3 cards which allows for 'reactive' firing as each 1/3 segment of the turn is moved, if and as the opportunity presents itself, but not manoeuvre as the aircraft is still completing it's overall planned movement turn.
BofB
Having been sceptical about WGS after playing WGF for so long, it was a real pleasure playing WGS for the first time. Its not complicated nor slow nor too many bits (its easy to dislike something when you've never played it or seen it being played). Being the 'guinea pig' rules tester it was down to myself to try it out. Game 1, HOOKED. I can't get enough of either game now. Whilst not being as historically orientated as some other rule set, ie dice rolling, deflection, tables, charts etc, its simplicity and ease of use is for me its draw. My WW2 collection is now getting near to outstrip my WW1 collection (just don't tell swmbo).
Apologies Andrea, and a much warranted thank you for explaining the reasons behind 3 and 2 card systems.
Hi Neil,Quote:
Originally Posted by Skafloc
In 2010 after playing a WGF campaign for almost 18 months I started playing DOW and really enjoyed the game, and these days my WGS collection is almost double my WGF.
I think the rules for both versions are well suited to the eras they represent.
Cheers,
Carl.
We never get past the first three cards because when I show up over the front the enemy plays the same three cards, Stall, Immelman, Dive and they're gone! So, yeah, it's a pretty quick game for us. ;):cheezy::lol:
You may find the next game a bit more interesting Terry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter
The penguins in the Caproni are out to get you, and I hear that they have put a price on your head with Don Penguini.
Rob.
As a rookie, I appreciate this interesting thread. I've played WoW mostly solitaire, picking one card at a time for each plane in the scrum. It allows me to play bigger games than I really could otherwise with the limited number of maneuver decks I own, with all the limitations already noted, and it allows me to play faster or quicker (to get in a game during a brief window of opportunity). I follow the special maneuver limits per plane too. (in my few FtF games, we've followed the rules)