Columbus Ohio overpowered Fokker E.IV fun killer

With damage deck A & B this quick little fighter hands you 4 damage cards at close range. In Columbus I won't play because one person continues to bring this to every scenario possible and no one has the backbone to say anything. The team with the Fokker wins every time. This has been going on at least two years.

Now I am looking at Origins. The scenarios are built to preclude the chance of this happening. So new people try and love the game, get hooked on the mechanics, history, minis, then they try the local chapter and wham, find the overpowered Fokker E. IV against them. They too may leave. Can this stop please?

Respectfully,

Nancy Snyder

You should express your concerns to the group that you play with. It appears you have nothing to lose really and simply pointing it out could resolve the issue. Or, plan a game with a scenario that the plane can not be used in. Do this several times and sort of become the de facto lead planner for the group.

Tried that, got shot down. Will try again, I was hoping for a ruling from you. I want to address this in open forum in case this is happening elsewhere also. Can/will you rule about this overpowered plane?

Sorry, but I've got no authority over that person or that gaming group. I also have not authority to ban or restrict any of the plans or modify the rules. Do you know if there are others that play (or did play) with that group that do not like the use of this plane either?

I am glad you brought the issue up here Nancy. I can tell you that our next scheduled session at The Soldiery is in July. I will be bringing up the issue at that time, along with a couple of other rules issues. I would love the input of any and all who have played with us at the Soldiery, or anyone else who would like to weigh in on the subject in this thread.

I personally feel that the aircraft in question (one of the cards from the original sets) is quite a bit "broken" as it is played now. Mostly I feel that if it is taking the fun out of the game then we need to do something to remedy the situation. I apologize that this has not happened before now. I would even like to hear from Andrea specifically on that plane and how he feels it should be handled. The player in question truly loves the game as well and has never been confronted on the issue by the group. He is not a member of the forums due to a lack of internet service.

The issue will be handled. How we handle it will come in part from what I hear in this thread so please chime in with any input. The last thing I want is ANY player feeling like they cannot play with us and not have a good time.

I'd suggest an easy solution is a rather elegant system I've seen used with other rules and periods. Toss a coin, and whoever calls it right gets to pick the scenario, and which aircraft will be used by *both* sides. When they've done that, the other player gets to pick which side they'll play. Straight-forward, and provides a rather massive incentive to come up with balanced games, as if you give one side unbalanced aircraft, your opponent gets to play with them.... :)

Looking at the timeline, you can justifiably fly Nieuport 17's & 21's and SPAD VII's against the Fokker E.IV. They will outperform the Fokker in everything except firepower.
I propose that you try flying over the Fokker and swooping down on it from behind.

:) Hi Nancy!
Unfortunately you find Gamers like that in all Games systems.
I played 40K for many years & we had one such "cheesy" or "Uber" player who would always push the rules boundaries. Eventually no one would play against him.

In Wings you dont often come up against such players & your chap probably feels he is doing nothing wrong as there is a card for such a plane. There are a couple of other unbalanced Aircraft in the mix including the two gun Roland (in my opinion!) as in game terms it is overpowered compaired to its actual ability & time.

I am sure Ken will explain the situation to him & perhaps another Answer is to change the War time frame from game to game & only allow Aircraft in use from 1917 for some games which will preclude that little Fokker.:cheezy:

Hi Nancy, sorry this little situation is getting in the way of fun. :( Barring a discussion akin to the one Ken mentioned, I like Dom's idea... nothing like the threat of being on the sharp end to inspire a little competitive balance.
;)

As for the three-gunned E.IV card? In my opinion, it's a munchkin's card. Plain and simple. Especially considering the fact that it saw extremely limited combat. Most E.IVs saw action as one or two-gun kites, not that up-gunned silliness.

Hi Nancy, I'm probably mistaken but I always thought the 3 gun E.IV didn't get beyond testing due to issues with the interrupter gear and was reduced to a 2 gun aircraft.
To that end I did a little trawling and found this discussion on the other aerodrome from 2008. It's interesting as it involves Andrea, our games creator, and pretty much outlines his thoughts on the E.IV in the game and the 3 gun version in particular (see post #6) where the phrase - "...will jam twice as often than any other plane in the game (enthusiast players will devise their own rules to make the pilot's life even harder). Designers' notes will be issued in newsgroups and sites to explain that it was an exception, not the normal way the E.IV were issued." - at least stated his intent even if this is not what happened. Whether this will help you or not I cannot tell but may provide you with some ammunition for your cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fast.git

As for the three-gunned E.IV card? In my opinion, it's a munchkin's card. Plain and simple. Especially considering the fact that it saw extremely limited combat. Most E.IVs saw action as one or two-gun kites, not that up-gunned silliness.

---

It is a munchkin card, and from everything I read, the plane never saw combat, and was considered an unsuccessful prototype. When flown it had terrible handling, and in static tests, the 3 guns shot props off regularly.
Karl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Cowman

I am glad you brought the issue up here Nancy. I can tell you that our next scheduled session at The Soldiery is in July. I will be bringing up the issue at that time, along with a couple of other rules issues. I would love the input of any and all who have played with us at the Soldiery, or anyone else who would like to weigh in on the subject in this thread.

I personally feel that the aircraft in question (one of the cards from the original sets) is quite a bit "broken" as it is played now. Mostly I feel that if it is taking the fun out of the game then we need to do something to remedy the situation. I apologize that this has not happened before now. I would even like to hear from Andrea specifically on that plane and how he feels it should be handled. The player in question truly loves the game as well and has never been confronted on the issue by the group. He is not a member of the forums due to a lack of internet service.

The issue will be handled. How we handle it will come in part from what I hear in this thread so please chime in with any input. The last thing I want is ANY player feeling like they cannot play with us and not have a good time.

---

Thanks, Ken. As a regular player in the Columbus group, I agree that this has been a long-standing problem. However, I also must bear some of the responsibility for not confronting the player who has put several others off (not just Nancy) by his play style. For that, I apologize. I am glad that we will discuss this at the July event, and hopefully come to a mutually acceptable resolution.

Suggestion... maybe add two Special Rules?

1. Any Steep played by the upgun E.IV must be followed by TWO non-Steeps instead of the normal one. (Represents impaired handling.)
2. When making an attack, first draw one Damage card--if this card is an Engine, Fire or Smoke Special Damage, you take an Engine Damage counter. (Represents prop damage.)

These are both very WEAK penalties compared to what they could be...

Hi Nancy, and all, sorry the gaming sessions have turned out this way. But like many have said, the person may not realize that they're spoiling it for others. I do find it hard to fathom that nothing has been said yet. But perhaps the game sessions are not the appropriate place. I'm a big mouth and talk first then think, so I'm not the best at diplomacy.
As far as the Fokker IV goes, a Dutch aircraft site in the Fokker subcategory states that only 49 of these machines were made. It also states that Immelmann had one "which had been especially equipped with three machine-guns but that performance was so poor, due to the increased weight, he reverted to the EIII". I don't have the card for the EIV so I really can't comment on the machines capability according to the game. But it sounds as if this craft could have easily been left out, and its use extremely limited.
Hope your situation is rectified to the satisfaction of all, including the EIV pilot.
A 14 cylinder two row rotary must have been a bear to fly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fast.git

As for the three-gunned E.IV card? In my opinion, it's a munchkin's card. Plain and simple. Especially considering the fact that it saw extremely limited combat. Most E.IVs saw action as one or two-gun kites, not that up-gunned silliness.

---

Further research has shown that it saw no service. It was tested once, on the ground, and shot its own prop off.

Furthermore, all of the Immelman booster cards have been superseded - the E-III and Moranes use a T deck, the DH2 and Halberstadt D-III the P deck. They are no longer canonical. E-IVs, if included, should use a V deck and be 2 guns. An inferior climbing, fragile, Albatros D-II equivalent, and of the same period. If 3 guns are fitted, a G deck is appropriate.

Quote:

---

Over half of the E.IVs entered service in June 1916 and the last were delivered in December 1916 by which time they were obsolete.

---

Most E-IIIs had been withdrawn from service by December 1916.

So by all means fly it as a "what if", but vs F2bs, Se5a's, Spad VII and XIIIs, Camels, 2-gun Triplanes etc. Not DH2s. An appropriate opponent would be the experimental N-17 N2263 fitted with 2 vickers and 2 lewis guns.

Attachment 133509

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zoe Brain

An appropriate opponent would be the experimental N-17 N2263 fitted with 2 vickers and 2 lewis guns.

Attachment 133509

---

So what would be the maneuver deck penalty for a 4MG Nieuport?
Karl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jager

So what would be the maneuver deck penalty for a 4MG Nieuport?
Karl

---

Either V or G deck and a climb rate of 6 I'd say.

Thank you everyone for your thoughtful, helpful answers. I am confident all will be well.

:thumbsup:

Nice 4 gun Nieuport, just the job to deal with 'Munchkins'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skafloc

Nice 4 gun Nieuport, just the job to deal with 'Munchkins'.

---

As long as it doesn't become a munchkin itself!
Karl