How to deal with two-seaters?

[flash]

....Any hit from a single-seat scout with fixed forward firing guns vs. a two-seater* counts those hits as "+1" hits, exactly the same as the optional aiming rule. *Notable two-seaters, the Bristol for example, may need to be exempt..... Feedback and observations welcomed!

It's not such a big deal as for consecutive shots the scout would get the aim bonus anyway so this method would only affect the first or a single shot of each pass, like when diving on the target. I don't understand why a Brisfit or certain others should be exempt if this is implemented.
Reducing speed using a stall card when carrying a bomb load is ok but if you have the cards then reducing them to the next speed band down works better as the flying characteristic is smoother, it travels about the same distance & doesn't involve a stall card which may bring its own problems.
Not all scouts have a manoeuvre deck that already makes them more agile than two-seaters - some of them are only more manoeuvrable because of the Immel card, otherwise their move sets are the same, give or take a side slip, and some are slower or only as fast as their two seat opponents which can give them real problems getting to grips with them (also an issue when creating scenarios).
If you do apply this to the two-seaters then you should apply it to the much slower, bigger, clumsier bombers.
Personally, like Phillip, I think they are as tough as they should be; spped, ammo, altitude, blindspots, even things up a little more but this tweak wouldn't upset the (im)balance that much either.

[fast.git]

Reducing speed using a stall card when carrying a bomb load is ok but if you have the cards then reducing them to the next speed band down works better as the flying characteristic is smoother, it travels about the same distance & doesn't involve a stall card which may bring its own problems.

[emphasis added]

Well that's just brilliant. Hadn't even occurred to me to do it that way...

[Flying Helmut]

Nor me - MUCH better than a compulsory stall!

[flash]

As the two seater's fall into the 4.7 & 3.5 speed bands in the main you can cater for most this way - the earlier, slower types in the 2.9 band would be harder to cater for as the X decks below them don't move in the same way - but then that may be the right resolution for those types.
I've used the K deck for a loaded DH4's - slows 'em enough for the Alb D.Va to catch them - when they shed some/all of their bombs revert to the H deck and run away, or, on to the next target !

[Prodromoi]

... but if you have the cards then reducing them to the next speed band down works better as the flying characteristic is smoother, it travels about the same distance & doesn't involve a stall card which may bring its own problems.

I like this approach for when one has the correct spare 'slower' deck to swap out for.

However, is there a consensus or a file already in existence that maps every deck to its 'slower' equivalent?

For example, the DH4 flies with an H-deck when not loaded, but would use which deck when loaded? A slower deck, clearly, but it would need to be one that matched the manoeuvres available from the H-deck.

Indeed, a comprehensive chart of the deck fast/slow equivalencies would be handy when using single-seaters in bombing roles too (the Camel's C-deck would map onto which deck when carrying bombs?)

[flash]

Try this Alex - http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/dow...o=file&id=2043 - it won't give you a direct answer but you should be able to work out what you need with what you have - and you don't have to use a full deck when playing down, just the cards you need - for H deck a K deck will be the ideal but D, I, J, V decks with appropriate cards dropped out will work; for K deck trending down & dropping cards an E, R or T deck will do the job.
Haven't tried it with scouts yet but for the Camel I wouldn't let it do the sharp turns when bombed up so the E,R,T decks should get the job done if you have them. If you are solo playing you won't need a deck for each aircraft - use its own deck to plan and the alt deck to move the model.

[Prodromoi]

Try this Alex - http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/dow...o=file&id=2043 - it won't give you a direct answer but you should be able to work out what you need with what you have - and you don't have to use a full deck when playing down, just the cards you need ...

Thank you. The file that links to is interesting, but I actually found this file to be better for these purposes:
Tools for Working out Statistics

The "movement decks agility" section on the right maps the decks in exactly the way that's needed to deal with this situation. (Although I have not yet compared the decks on the table to confirm.) However, the file probably needs updating as it seems not all decks are included. It doesn't resolve the Camel, as a particular example, as there is no mapping to a slower/less agile deck.

I'm happy to use a different deck (assuming one has the correct deck!) for the loaded plane, then replacing it with the 'normal' deck once the plane has dropped its payload (K-deck as a slow version of the H-deck for example). However, swapping out individual cards to build a deck, then replacing certain cards part way through the game is a level of fiddliness beyond that which I think I'd be happy with for such a light and quick game.

The ideal world solution (and perhaps one that Nexus/Ares may have though of with the benefit of hindsight) would be to include two decks - normal and reduced speed- with specific planes for which they would be appropriate. Alternatively to make (for either official release or as home-made decks) a pack of decks for the 'laden' version of existing decks that don't have a direct match.

[flash]

That file is the basis of the unofficial stats & is good for a broad stroke but won't give you the individual deck detail ie those that have steep and or broad side slips or the numbers of each in a deck which may affect their selection for this purpose. Having said that, if dropping a couple of cards from a deck is a level of fiddliness beyond which you won't go then that could pretty much scupper the idea for you.
There is no mapping to slower decks I know of but there a few obvious ones I can think of that may help you:
A to S to V to T; B to J to R; H to K; Q to W; U to D.