Ares Games
Results 1 to 46 of 46

Thread: Alternate Collision Rules

  1. #1

    Default Alternate Collision Rules

    Hi all.

    I wanted to share an alternate set of collision rules a buddy and I have been playing around with lately.

    The impetus for these modifications was provided by a night of gaming that saw many disastrous collisions resulting from bases barely touching. In particular, we had several collisions resulting from one plane barely overrunning another from behind.

    From playing Rise of Flight, I'm well aware that the slightest contact with another aircraft - from any direction, at any speed - could prove fatal in WWI. However, what we came up with seems more logical/accurate.

    Basically, the rules are these:
    • A "head on" collision (i.e., front base through front base) requires both planes to take two cards from the C deck
    • A "broadside" collision (i.e., front of one plane through either side of the other) requires both planes to take two cards from the C deck. The lower of the two cards is discarded - so take two cards, and the highest does damage
    • A "glancing" collision (i.e., side of base over side of base) is treated as normal, i.e., each player takes one card from the C deck
    • A "rear end" collision (i.e., front passes through rear) results in each player taking two cards from the C deck, and discarding the highest


    Thoughts? Obviously it would be more correct to work out some kind of system based on how much the bases overlap, but that seems like it would be tricky to implement.

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Default

    I always play that the contact has to be "base to peg" to avoid a lot of the "glancing" collisions.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MoonSylver View Post
    I always play that the contact has to be "base to peg" to avoid a lot of the "glancing" collisions.
    That's an interesting way to do it. I imagine you get a lot less collisions that way, which was not necessarily my intent, but I like the idea of using the peg to determine the severity of the collision. Maybe I can incorporate that into my system...

  5. #5

    Default

    The last time we played we went with "both planes' pegs have to be overlapping each others bases." I suppose one could say that would be two C cards, and a single peg overlapping a base would be just one C.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    The last time we played we went with "both planes' pegs have to be overlapping each others bases." I suppose one could say that would be two C cards, and a single peg overlapping a base would be just one C.
    I like this idea quite a bit.

    Maybe both pegs = 2 cards, 1 peg = 1 card, no pegs = 2 cards, discard the highest?

    I'll test this out the next time I play, that's simpler than what I had originally.

  7. #7

    Default

    Sounds like a good, easy to remember solution.

  8. #8

    Default

    I play base to peg. Remember the maneuver decks are roughly 1/1200 scale while the planes are 1/144. This is probably an overestimation anyway so you may want to consider peg to peg only.

  9. #9

    Default

    We play base-to-peg. I like the idea that if both pegs are covered, draw an additional damage card, though maybe with discarding the lowest. One rule I picked up from our fearless leader is that if two planes are at the same altitude, and if their bases overlap, neither can shoot, period, that maneuver as the pilots are trying to avoid a collision.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    We play base-to-peg. I like the idea that if both pegs are covered, draw an additional damage card, though maybe with discarding the lowest. One rule I picked up from our fearless leader is that if two planes are at the same altitude, and if their bases overlap, neither can shoot, period, that maneuver as the pilots are trying to avoid a collision.
    Given the actual scale versus the model scale, I don't buy that one.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    Given the actual scale versus the model scale, I don't buy that one.
    Are you referring to the ability to fire house rule?

    If so, what are your thoughts about two planes at the same altitude with overlapping bases being unable to shoot at each other? I am familiar with the game mechanics of this rule, but I don't know enough about aviation to understand the prohibition. If you think the scale issue makes not being able to shoot out irrelevant, do you think the rule about not being able to shoot each other needs to be reconsidered? Any explanation is appreciated.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horsepyre View Post
    That's an interesting way to do it. I imagine you get a lot less collisions that way, which was not necessarily my intent, but I like the idea of using the peg to determine the severity of the collision. Maybe I can incorporate that into my system...
    It was mine in part, just because there seemed to be a lot of collisions, it was starting to suck the fun out of the games, & since I was playing peg to peg on shooting, & it seemed like with scales & such that the dot/peg was where the plane is "really at", it all made sense to me.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    Sounds like a good, easy to remember solution.
    Agreed, nice idea.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    Are you referring to the ability to fire house rule?

    If so, what are your thoughts about two planes at the same altitude with overlapping bases being unable to shoot at each other? I am familiar with the game mechanics of this rule, but I don't know enough about aviation to understand the prohibition. If you think the scale issue makes not being able to shoot out irrelevant, do you think the rule about not being able to shoot each other needs to be reconsidered? Any explanation is appreciated.
    Crazy House Rule #129.
    Overlapping planes may fire at each other, based on the course they were flying when they crossed paths. Draw three damage cards.
    Planes with overlapping pegs suffer collision affects.


    Not that I've ever used it, but it has crossed my mind. I don't house rule often, but it doesn't keep me from thinking up house rules.

  15. #15

    Default

    And that is the kind of rule that I would only use with people who I knew were playing "A Gentleman's Game" of WoW/G, i.e., not looking to argue, but just to kick back and have fun.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    Crazy House Rule #129.
    Overlapping planes may fire at each other, based on the course they were flying when they crossed paths. Draw three damage cards.
    Planes with overlapping pegs suffer collision affects.


    Not that I've ever used it, but it has crossed my mind. I don't house rule often, but it doesn't keep me from thinking up house rules.
    Since I game solo, I don't have to worry about it () , but that's pretty much how I play: if they "overlap", but one (or both) are still in the field of fire, then shoot away. Pretty much the same rationale as collisions above.

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    And that is the kind of rule that I would only use with people who I knew were playing "A Gentleman's Game" of WoW/G, i.e., not looking to argue, but just to kick back and have fun.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    And that is the kind of rule that I would only use with people who I knew were playing "A Gentleman's Game" of WoW/G, i.e., not looking to argue, but just to kick back and have fun.
    That's the only type of game I desire to play. If folks don't walk away from the table better friends, it isn't worth it.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    That's the only type of game I desire to play. If folks don't walk away from the table better friends, it isn't worth it.
    Amen to that. I play because I enjoy it. Arguing over rules isn't my idea of fun.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PFactorDave View Post
    Amen to that. I play because I enjoy it. Arguing over rules isn't my idea of fun.
    Games should be a break from the drama of the world, not a source of more.

    I try to help my student-athletes recognize this. In the end, you're throwing a piece of inflated cowhide through a hoop. Is it really worth trashing others over such things? Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating not playing hard or working at one's skill, but if you can't enjoy yourself and those around you, find something else to do. Life is too short.

  20. #20

    Default

    We play peg over peg at same alt. is a collision. C damage . Climb counters count

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    That's the only type of game I desire to play. If folks don't walk away from the table better friends, it isn't worth it.
    Quote Originally Posted by PFactorDave View Post
    Amen to that. I play because I enjoy it. Arguing over rules isn't my idea of fun.
    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    Games should be a break from the drama of the world, not a source of more.

    I try to help my student-athletes recognize this. In the end, you're throwing a piece of inflated cowhide through a hoop. Is it really worth trashing others over such things? Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating not playing hard or working at one's skill, but if you can't enjoy yourself and those around you, find something else to do. Life is too short.
    +1 to all of the above. Though I'm currently solo only, I always gamed with a group in the past, & unfortunately there was always one "power gamer" in every group. which I never enjoyed nor understood.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    That's the only type of game I desire to play. If folks don't walk away from the table better friends, it isn't worth it.
    Which I why it took me well over 30 years to game with anyone outside of my regular gaming group. It wasn't until I met Pseudotheist and Tusekine at the Family Game Store that I came to realize my fears of all gamers being powers gamers was laid to rest.

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbmacek View Post
    Which I why it took me well over 30 years to game with anyone outside of my regular gaming group. It wasn't until I met Pseudotheist and Tusekine at the Family Game Store that I came to realize my fears of all gamers being powers gamers was laid to rest.
    Sue and I have been very fortunate to meet the folks in the Illinois/Wisconsin group here. Everyone is exceptionally nice, friendly, helpful, and likes to have a good time. Our scrambles are truly something to look forward to. I felt the same spirit at Origins and in the OTT campaign. We fortunate to have this community.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    That's the only type of game I desire to play. If folks don't walk away from the table better friends, it isn't worth it.
    WOW/WOG is a pretty special game in that regard. I'm a pretty competitive person, I love to win, but I've always had fun playing Wings win, lose, or draw.

    The historical aspect of it helps a lot, I think. I've played one-on-one dogfights against a friend that have lasted two or three hours and ended with one of us barely sneaking off the table with his engine damaged and his pilot wounded. Maybe some (ok, most) would consider that a waste of time, but if I even manage to survive a game it feels like a huge accomplishment. When I used to play sci-fi/fantasy games, it was always more about winning. Wings, for me, is more about reliving the drama and romance of the Great War.

    Cheesy, I know, but that's how it goes. What a great game.

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horsepyre View Post
    WOW/WOG is a pretty special game in that regard. I'm a pretty competitive person, I love to win, but I've always had fun playing Wings win, lose, or draw.
    Right with you there, Austin.
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horsepyre View Post
    Maybe some (ok, most) would consider that a waste of time … Cheesy
    How does spending several hours with a friend having a good time be constituted a waste of time? Only those that have not experienced such blessings could think that way. Anything but cheesy, Friend.

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7eat51 View Post
    How does spending several hours with a friend having a good time be constituted a waste of time? Only those that have not experienced such blessings could think that way. Anything but cheesy, Friend.

    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  28. #28

    Default

    I don't use collision rules at all. I think they unduly penalize pilots for doing something they can't always avoid. By that, I mean the game system forces me to turn 60 degrees - I can't turn 55 or 52 degrees to avoid a collision. Using the rules as written leads to a much higher chance of collision that happened in WW1.
    My rule is post on base is too close to fire, but base on base is ok.

  29. #29

    Default

    I use the collision rules base to peg, but add in the collision cards. (in files) This reduces chances to 1 in 3 of actual collisions. Add some fun too when choosing the cards, holding your breath when revealing to see if there is a colision!

  30. #30

    Default

    I don't know where I picked up this rule, but I like it alot. It takes into account the actual scale of the game (1/900, so the dot in the middle of the card), and the scale of the planes (1/144).

    When a card is used below an overlapping plane, a collision only results if the red dot on the card is not visible under the overlapping model.

    So, not base to base, as that is just wwaayyy too often.
    Not peg to peg, which would probably be more realistic to the scale.

    This means that you rarely get collisions with fighters, some collisions with bombers, and always collide with Zeppelins!

    Oh, and I haven't started playing with altitude rules, so overlaps are always at the same altitude, and therefore much more chance for collisions. I think the collision to overlap ratio is somewhere on the order of 1:25 (maybe even 1:50)?
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  31. #31

    Default

    Were there many collisions with Zeppelins? I can see two agile planes in a furball with many others having collisions but I would think a slow moving Zep should be easy to avoid? Slow moving bombers should be easier to avoid than scouts.

  32. #32

    Default

    BottosCon 2014, Defend London Scenario. DH4s against the Zeppelin. It was pretty badly shot up, and had most of it's gas bags destroyed, a few rudder and gun jams, but no engine or crew hits. Lots of fires, as the planes were using Incendiary ammo. As the Zeppelin was getting ready to fold in on itself and crash to the ground (perhaps a phase or two more of shooting would have done it), a pilot attempts to pass over/under the Zeppelin (or misjudged the ability to turn. It was his first-ever game.).

    He managed to run right into the last viable area on the Zeppelin, and pulled the Boom Card on the collision! I pulled 10 damage, and with only 8 damage remaining for the Zeppelin (shooting and fires had not been kind). It was a fiery end to both aircraft, and a suitably climactic end to the scenario. It was my first time ever with the Zeppelin on the table.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20141108_145614_Wings_Of_Glory_flying_inComp.jpg 
Views:	75 
Size:	160.6 KB 
ID:	152876
    Burning wreckage of the plane is under the Zeppelin, and a blast marker is on top (barely visible in the shot).

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	SaturdayAft_2_TheZeppelinDeparts.jpg 
Views:	75 
Size:	146.0 KB 
ID:	152877
    Maybe this shot is better for showing the results of the C damage deck.
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  33. #33

  34. #34

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Well we suffers from multiple crashes when we play. My daughter is an expert crasher
    Last time we played she got 5 victories. All crashes! Victories and victories...... She downed three of mine and two of her own
    So +1 for her

    I Think I must do rulechanges.........

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MoonSylver View Post
    I always play that the contact has to be "base to peg" to avoid a lot of the "glancing" collisions.
    Same here. Simple, clear and it reduces collisions, makes the game less like dodgems but still makes balloon busting a real challenge.

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOOP View Post
    Well we suffers from multiple crashes when we play. My daughter is an expert crasher
    Last time we played she got 5 victories. All crashes! Victories and victories...... She downed three of mine and two of her own
    So +1 for her

    I Think I must do rulechanges.........
    Sounds like me at the Derby Wargames this year.

  37. #37

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    I have done some thinking aboute the cr. A peg is have fixed lenght and a cc is a part of that length.
    A plane that have 2 in cr and gained 1 cc has travelled half the way. A plane that have 4 in cr and 1 cc has travelled a quarter...
    I don't know if I like this my self but you could argue that they are not at the same altitude.....

    Hmm...... well it will get complicated...... Nope I will not go there.

  38. #38

    Default

    Not really Per - this has already been worked out !

    http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...ight=collision


    "He is wise who watches"

  39. #39

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    As allways. There are allready a solution in hand here. This was exactly what I had in mind.
    well now I don't have to do it my self

    Thanks Dave

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rcboater View Post
    My rule is post on base is too close to fire, but base on base is ok.
    I like this.

    I play that peg on base is maybe a collision: I use a set of six collision cards (3 pairs of 2) that decreases the chance of colliding, but does not remove it from the game. If pilots draw both halves of a pair, a collision occurs... otherwise it's a near miss.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOOP View Post
    As allways. There are allready a solution in hand here. This was exactly what I had in mind.
    well now I don't have to do it my self Thanks Dave
    Thank Tony - Though he's not around now. I just remembered he did it !

  42. #42

    Default

    The chart is interesting but the cards are what I use. Very simple and a brief moment of suspense.

  43. #43

    Default

    The chart can be used to decide if you need to use the cards or not !

  44. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    The chart can be used to decide if you need to use the cards or not !
    Very true. That would ad a bit more precision between levels.

  45. #45

    Default

    How would you deal with a situation where a plane was diving and crossed a plane that was climbing. Would not a collision be inevitable in that case?
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  46. #46

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    Well I would say that they will.



Similar Missions

  1. Alternate to the +1 Damage rule?
    By Komorigumo in forum WGF: House Rules
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-25-2013, 11:20
  2. New Collision rules WoG?
    By Omegalazarus in forum WGF: Rules Help
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-12-2013, 12:50
  3. An alternate colour scheme for a FE2b.
    By gully_raker in forum Hobby Room
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-16-2012, 02:19
  4. Alternate Altiitude Rules
    By DJensen in forum WGF: House Rules
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-05-2011, 17:40
  5. Collision rules.
    By FreefallGeek in forum WGF: Rules Help
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 04-08-2010, 19:15

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •