Anyone have this happen? Your bird is on fire and then you get both left and right rudder jams, what happens? When on fire you cannot use a straight maneuver but when double jammed...?
Not a good situation to be in.
Anyone have this happen? Your bird is on fire and then you get both left and right rudder jams, what happens? When on fire you cannot use a straight maneuver but when double jammed...?
Not a good situation to be in.
No doubt we should call it a barbecue damage.
No chance to turn, so just keep flyin' straight. If you play with altitude one should consider a houseruled mandatory overdive procedure...
"We do not stop playing when we get old, but we get old when we stop playing."
I thought just let you fly straight as it was bad enough. I haven't played with altitude much but saw that option. I'll start using altitude soon as I plan on starting a solo campaign. I want to get flying with altitude down so I can use it at the next convention game I run.
Peter, in a situation like this, I usually pray.
I started playing with altitude not too long ago. I was amazed at how easy it actually is. As I learn more about the different planes' capabilities, I see climb rates as a real tactic now. You will enjoy incorporating them. They will slow the game down a bit, and you will need to pay attention to them when strategic targets or goals are involved. For example, it does no go to have height advantage if you are protecting a target but cannot shoot at the enemy who is trying destroy that target because the enemy is two pegs lower than you. I have seen this done in games. For a real scrap, though, being at the same altitude is pretty fun.
Crash. Flying without alt is like a sub that can't submerge.
Altitude is a bit daunting to new players. The few games I have put on at conventions I have not used altitude as most prefer not to. As is, it is an extraordinary simple fun game to play but altitude looks to bring out all the nuances to the different aircraft inequalities. Playing without is not truly an air battle. Hopefully soon I will be flying in the 3D world!
Depending upon the time slot of a con event, I could easily forego altitude rules if not using them gets the folks engaged. If the time slot is long enough, altitude does add some nice flavor; if the time slot is short, better to maneuver and shoot on the same level, especially for relatively new players - more exciting for them.
I`ve noticed that a lot of new players seem to approach the altitude rules with the attitude, "climbing and diving, MUST be hard"!
Dont know why that is unless a lot of people suffer from "two-dimensional thinking" as Star Trek would have it!
As far as getting double rudder jams with a fire is concerned, basicly you`re dead (or barbequed) meat unless you pull an overdive in an attempt to put the fire out. If you try to do just about anything else then the `performing an illegal maneuver` rule comes into effect.
So, depending on which version you use either your plane is destroyed or flies in a straight line for the whole turn taking damage each phase.
If you`re at level one when it happens, well I suppose you could try landing in order to save the pilot. (If he survives the probable crash that is!)
Last edited by Rabbit 3; 12-14-2013 at 04:46.
I played with altitude from the start, yes its easy but IMHO it doesn't add really add anything to the game other than a longer duration. That said I can quite understand why others like it but for me its usually just not worth the hassle.
I agree. It tends to draw the game out, though sometimes it does make a difference. Case in point, using altitude saved my butt repeatedly in the Origins Grand Invitational this year.
As for the original question... well... we tend to ignore the new fire rules in my immediate group, and sometime ignore them on Second Monday at the Game Store. That being said, when on fire, Overdive!!!
Altitude does draw the game out... but I find that it adds a little more flavor. In smaller games, I use it. Larger, not as often. As for fire? We've have an incredible run here... an emergency overdive has snuffed out every fire save one.
I have also found that overdive is the best way to deal with a fire, as long as you use it at the first possible chance. It also takes you out of the fight for a while, whilst you recover, or make a dive for the lines if you are too badly hurt to continue.
As someone said earlier, if you have both left and right rudder damage and are on fire, you would most likely be going down anyway.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
I like using altitude. It gives less maneuverable, like the SPAD, some options in a fight by using the vertical. The power dive can be used to get you out of trouble fast. One of my favorite tactics is to gain altitude and fly over a furball, out of gun range due to altitude, and split S, and dive if necessary, behind an enemy aircraft. Quite often it catches your enemy by surprise because he is preoccupied with the aircraft he is engaging at his altitude.
The rule we play with is that any straight while on fire does an extra A class damage, rather than a blanket prohibition.
I started playing without altitude, and then took the plunge. The visual effect far out weighs the time taken to use it. I will never return to 2D unless I'm with new players.
I see that a fight with many planes altitude will be very interesting. How about with one on one duels? Would the plane with the better climb rate have the advantage? I think todayI'll try a game or two with altitude. It will most likely be solo to get used to it but may get to convince my girlfriend to try it. She's played WoG a few times with me and really likes it.
Last edited by Twisted_terrain; 03-20-2014 at 13:05.
Zoe is quite right as usual. An illegal move leads to an extra damage card.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
This is what Andrea had to say in another thread regarding these rules & covers the jammed rudder rule for Pete:
"Hello!
A single engine plane with fire can do sideslips. They are not straight - they have a little arrow to left or right on the card. Straights are the ones with a little arrow pointing up.
I would have eliminated a plane going straight with flames, but Ares preferred to leave the usual penalty for illegal moves - replace with a straight (actually you already have one in this case) and get an A damage. Or eliminate the plane if the optional rule for illegal moves is in use.
If you have the rudder jammed in both direction, plan stalls or dives or climbs as much as you can (they are not straights). And then illegal moves: plan straights, or left/right cards - no matter which you will plan, they will be replaced with straights and inflict an A card of damage (or eliminate you if the optional rule is in use)."
In answer to your question Chris do the rules not say "only non-straight manoeuvres can be planned" which would negate your pilots choice to play them & take the damage ? Doesn't stop you house ruling it though.
Nothing in the rules to say you can't Chris.
In any case without a crystal ball I don't see how one could know if it were deliberate or no.
So unless the pilot on fire tells you, you will never know.
From the records, we know a lot of pilots went straight down and burnt, so I guess it is also historically correct. personally, I would let him decide for himself, and if he feels really bad about things he can always resort to using his pistol, as any gentleman would if he were caught cheating.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Fair point. The pistol is always an option.
That is always the way we play it. However, if you feel that you really must go forward, why not just do a sideslip left followed by a sideslip right, and end up in the same place as if you had done two illegal straights without paying the penalty?
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Realistically and historically I would think I pilot on fire would do the utmost to do whatever to put it out. Having read the comment about Rickenbackers Co who was seen edging back towards the tail when his aircraft caught fire and then the inevitable crash outcome. So thruens or if rudder damage x2 the only option an overdive. I would think any pilot on fire would try and dive out of the immediate combat zone as his thoughts would be on the fire not the enemy.
Reading the first hand exploits of a camel pilot who wrote that the camel was tail heavy, difficult for beginners to maintain level flight and prone to go into a tail spin (right) due to over turning and engine torque. They also learned to adopt this spin tactic to evade dangerous confrontations.
Perhaps there are other tactics that could be incorporated into our 'flight manuals'.
See you on the Dark Side......
I agree Chris.
There are only a couple of instances that I can think of where pilots continued to attack the enemy whilst on fire and that may well be because those who did seldom returned to tell the story. I have often felt that we should not be able to attack whilst on fire, unless we have a special ability, say "Sheer Bloodymindedness."
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Personally I've always thought the A penalty for illegal maneuvers was not harsh enough. Early in a game a SPAD pilot could easily risk making a turn following an Immelmann with out much worry of serious damage. I'd have to revisit the C damage deck percentages, but I'm more inclined to use those than an A damage card. And no shooting while on fire is a great house rule.
No shooting while on fire would take away the temptation to keep maneuvering and fighting while on fire. If you can't do damage one will minimize one's own damage taken.
Yes Herr Oberst, I totally agree with the illegal move being more painful. It would certainly make one think twice before flying a straight whilst on fire.
There is also smoke, which I think is a bit of a joke. Apart from the tailing rule, which has never actually coincided with my aircraft smoking in six years of gaming, it does nothing save making your aircraft stand out in a crowd.
I like the idea that if you draw another smoke whilst smoking it becomes a fire.
Oh no! What have I just said? Even more chance of Kyte catching fire!
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
And for realism, that's what we want.
Yep, the C deck would make it very risking to intentionally do illegal maneuvers. One could still pull them off and they would be even more spectacular when it happens, but woe to the pilot that does not do it correctly! lol
Very lucky indeed!
Our group has talked about a house rule which would allow illegal maneuvers, but for a higher penalty, perhaps two C deck cards and take the highest. Do you do something like that, Herr Oberst?
I would guess (without having run the percentages) that such a penalty would not only strongly discourage people from doing such a thing, but would also make it a statistically unfavorable decision in nearly every circumstance. Still, might be kind of fun.
My C deck house rule as intended for groups/games that allowed a pilot to make illegal maneuvers... so the "replace with a straight" does not apply. After all, the first pilots to try and use a spin as an evasive maneuver was in fact doing "illegal maneuvers" in real life. lol So, there is precedence to allow pilots to try and push their planes beyond reasonable limits. They just have to pay the price if it does not work
But as Rob pointed out, a stiffer penalty would help keep people honest.
I do support Rob's point of view about the smoke damage. A joke damage indeed.
Something has to be done with it: draw an A damage card at the beginning of every turn. Ignore damage points, but if there is a special damage, change it to fire damage and start regular fire damage procedure.
What about making a set of official unofficial set of R (like Realism) rules containing all the ideas above?
"We do not stop playing when we get old, but we get old when we stop playing."
That's a good point... tailing is such a rare occurrence, smoke rarely impacts game play. Smoke + smoke = fire seems like a nice way of upping the ante, so to speak.
Another thought is to treat it as fire, at least in terms of maneuvering. Prohibiting a pilot from firing if they played a straight maneuver (while suffering the effects of smoke special damage) would give smoke more punch... and I can rationalize the rule (can't see to shoot if you've got smoke/oil in your face).
I missed Rob's post earlier in this thread but I couldn't agree with this more. Maybe it's just the people I play with, but tailing happens very rarely in our games - perhaps once every two or three games or so - and has never coincided with someone "smoking" in 6+ months of heavy play.
I love your suggestion, Andrzej. I'll make a note to try that out in my next game.
Yep, smoke is worthless as written. Smoke + Smoke should equal fire or Smoke + special if you want fire to come up more often. But on those lines, fire + fire should equal explosion. lol
Yes, smoke + smoke is pretty rare (or maybe we just don't notice them since we pretty much just ignore smoke anyways. lol). I have seen fire + fire on lots of occasions though.
Looks like I've missed a great discussion going on here. I've been playing it smoke + smoke = fire for a little while now (can't remember it actually happening YET though). I've also been playing fire + fire adds another fire token on (which HAS happened IIRC.)
Yes. It's in the rules, smoke + smoke does equal fire.
And in the rules, fire + fire = top up to 3 fire counters.
Rules reference from the Ares website....
http://issuu.com/aresgames/docs/wgf0..._np_web/19?e=0
Bookmarks