Ares Games
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 108

Thread: How to deal with two-seaters?

  1. #51

    Default

    I would think that dealing double damage would be a little over powerful. Any reason you did not just go for giving them +1 to all damage cards shot from a tailing position?

  2. #52

    Maxdeth
    Guest


    Default Tailing gives Double Damage cards

    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Hajj View Post
    I would think that dealing double damage would be a little over powerful. Any reason you did not just go for giving them +1 to all damage cards shot from a tailing position?
    I didnt think of it.

    However, we've played with the double damage rule and it doesnt seem that powerful. Sometimes you can pull out some zero's and sometimes some high numbers.

    Thinking about your idea its seems quite good because it means that not as many cards are pulled. We only have one "A" damage deck in our group and frequently run out of cards so this might be a better idea.

    Doing the math:
    A "B" damage card causes an average of 1.1 damage points.
    That means 4 cards will do 4.4 damage on average.
    Your +1 bonus would have 2 cards causing 3.3 damage on average.
    An "A" damage card causes an average of 1.6 damage points.
    That means 4 cards will do 6.6 damage.
    Your +1 bonus would have 2 cards causing 4.6 damage.
    With only 2 cards there is a higher probability of causing heaps more or no damage. The chance of drawing specials and jams is doubled with 4 cards though and this can be exciting.

    hmmm... can only put it to the test and see. I'll play some games and would like to hear what others think too.

  3. #53

    Default

    Just thinking it through, I would say pulling more special damages would not be realistic. The point of drawing more cards was to show the benefits of shooting from the tailing position. You are not actually shooting more, just causing more damage from bullets hitting home.

  4. #54

    Default How to deal with two-seaters?

    We have that problem too. We use altitude but its made simple cus we have a lot of youngsters. All fighters use one climb to move up a peg or an immelman. To dive just use a dive card or a split S. A two-seater has to do a climb and then a stall to move up one peg or a dive and a straight to go down a peg. In short the two-seater has to double the moves to climb and dive. This way a fighter can move in close and dive on a two-seater and then climb. Don't know about the realism but it seems to help even the playing field. And it doesn't slow the game down.

  5. #55


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    David
    Location
    Xinzo de Limia (Spain)
    Sorties Flown
    51
    Join Date
    Nov 2009

    Default

    Since the first time I saw the two-seaters planes I found them devastating.

    Altitude rules and the blind spot help the fighters (always attacking in same or lower altitude). Anyway it seems that insn't enought. I'll try to test all of your ideas.

    I think that the two-seaters rear gun never could use the +1 rule cause is hard to have aim while the pilot tries to evade other planes.

  6. #56

    Default

    I regularly fly two seaters and find the the opposit happening as every man and his dog wants to shoot down the two seater as it is considered an easy kill. I have only limited success in the Rolland C11 and the RE8. I have used the DH4 with 2 guns at the back and 1 forward, as it is the rear guns I use all the time (as with the other two seaters) so for me don't change the rules as I am only just surviving.
    On another point raised by Imac my Grandfather started in RE8's and then was posted to a Camel squadron. On that note the one surgestion I have is if as a pilot you get several kills (3 perhaps) then you are automaticly posted to a fighter squadron and cannot fly in two seaters for the rest of the campagin

  7. #57

    Default

    I'll give the Altitude rule and rear gunner blind spot rule first to see how that goes. We haven't had an issue with the two seaters. [so far]

    They get gunned down as often as the single seaters.

    I guess time will tell which will work better for us. Not sure if I'd want to move decks around at the moment. maybe if I get frustrated I might change to Col. Hajj's way. but for now will try to use the current rules.

    Cheers
    GW

  8. #58

    Default

    I don't play with altitude but do use the blind spot, I am also going to try an idea which came up somewhere here that the tailing rule is used every move, not just at the beginning of a turn. This I think will make it more realistic and easier to keep on the tail of a target, which otherwise is pretty hard to do.

  9. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belis4rius View Post
    I don't play with altitude but do use the blind spot, I am also going to try an idea which came up somewhere here that the tailing rule is used every move, not just at the beginning of a turn. This I think will make it more realistic and easier to keep on the tail of a target, which otherwise is pretty hard to do.
    so what would you do for the above rule regarding the Tail?

    each maneuver card you would check to see if you meet the tailing rules? or would you have an automatic tail due to the slow and ponderous movement of the two seater?

    Cheers
    GW

  10. #60

    Default

    It is quite hard to fly close to the rear of an aircraft in WoW and remain in the blind spot for any length of time, so that rule will be played as per the book.

    The tailing rule will be played as normal but with a check at the end of each move not turn, therefore giving a good pilot after a two-seater for instance a chance to slow himself down and remain behind and therefore the target of only one gun rather than having to take another hit from the front gun as he flies by.

    Mind you the DH4 and Halberstadt CLII's I have are no slouches in the speed race and would leave a poor N17 or DrI standing. In fact the only really slow two-seater in WoW I would say is the RE8.

    I have a game on tonight and will let you know how the tailing thing works out.

    Anyone ever use the suggested rule that only the rear gunner or pilot can shoot at the one time, and did it work out?

  11. #61

    Default

    I thought about using the tailing rule after each maneuver card an Ace Skill before.

  12. #62

    KirkH's Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Kirk
    Location
    Alabama
    Sorties Flown
    152
    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default

    I've thought about revising the tailing rules as well because I've played about fifteen games so far and we have yet to have a single case of tailing. Many times the planes were in position mid-turn, but never at the end of the turn.

  13. #63

    Default tailing rules

    Hello all, Maybe I'm reading the rules wrong but any one can start tailing on any flip of a card if the conditions are right. That's how we understood them when we read them. I will be going over them again as soon as I unpack my stuff. As the family and I are moving in this week.
    Tom

  14. #64

    Default

    The two airplanes plan their turn as normal, but before revealing the first maneuver, the tailed player has to show his first card to the tailing player. The latter can rearrange the order of the three planned maneuver cards for the tailing plane. Then the maneuvers are revealed and planes are moved. After firing is resolved but before revealing the second maneuver, check the position of the two planes: If tailing is still possible, the tailed player has to show his second card to the tailing player and the latter can rearrange the order of the two remaining maneuver cards.
    a quote from the WoW mini rules regarding tailing. So yes as far as I can understand you check at the beginning of each maneuver to see if your tailing.
    hope this helps.

    Cheers
    GW

  15. #65

    krolik's Avatar



    Name
    Victor
    Location
    Freedonia
    Sorties Flown
    209
    Join Date
    Oct 2009

    Default

    The group that I'm in has amended the tailing rules to check after every card, and the player doing the tailing may re-choose any cards, not just rearrange them. The only stipulation is that the player may only go after the plane he is tailing, not use the re-chosen cards to attack a different plane.

  16. #66

    Default

    The two airplanes plan their turn as normal, but before revealing the first maneuver, the tailed player has to show his first card to the tailing player. The latter can rearrange the order of the three planned maneuver cards for the tailing plane. Then the maneuvers are revealed and planes are moved. After firing is resolved but before revealing the second maneuver, check the position of the two planes: If tailing is still possible, the tailed player has to show his second card to the tailing player and the latter can rearrange the order of the two remaining maneuver cards.
    I've changed the bold emphasis to where it needs to be in that quote. You only check for tailing at the end of a turn. If tailing is possible, you can continue to check for tailing after every card is revealed. If at any time, you do not meet the conditions to tail, you can not check again for tailing until the end of the turn.

  17. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by krolik View Post
    The group that I'm in has amended the tailing rules to check after every card, and the player doing the tailing may re-choose any cards, not just rearrange them.
    I would think that this house rule would make it very easy to get on someones tail and stay there. I mean, how can the plane being tailed ever get away from the attacker if the attack can match him move for move every single card?

  18. #68

    Default

    Yep I was wrong. Wow I guess my reading comprehension is starting to slip.
    Tom

  19. #69

    Default

    No worries Tom, I find I've "mis-read" the rules a time or two before

  20. #70

    Eserchie
    Guest


    Default

    Regarding two seaters in general.
    Our group generally fears them, or at least fears the DH4 (That and Mannfreds Roland are all we have minis for) That said, Once we started using altitude and Blindspots, they don't perform significantly better than most fighting scouts.
    We do however always try and balance the forces, and usually only take the DH4 on bombing or recon scenarios that generally involve barrage balloons and/or Flak. So you get a DH4 escorted by a nieuport or a camel going up against a pair of Fokker D.VIIs backed up by aa guns to keep the two seater off the deck. In a straight dogfight we just give the side without a two-seater an extra plane (D.III, B-gun Nieuport etc)
    Additionally, something you might like to try is one of our House rules - All the big two seaters cannot make steep dives like a fighter, so rather than losing all climb markers and an altitude level, they have to remove climb markers 2 at a time until they get down. With only one dive a turn, this means that the two seater can't just scream for the deck. nd once it is down there, it as always, takes it forever to get back up out of reach of the trench mgs. also seems more realistic - a Spad or Fokker with small well braced wings could dive far better than a RE8, and with less risk of the wings detaching due to excessive airspeed.

    On Tailing.
    We no longer even bother to check for tailing. It never seemed possible to get one aircraft behind another for long enough to recieve the bonus- mostly because the first thing anyone does when an enemy gets behind them is plan a manouver the oopponents plane simply cannot replicate.

  21. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eserchie View Post
    Regarding two seaters in general.
    Our group generally fears them, or at least fears the DH4 (That and Mannfreds Roland are all we have minis for) That said, Once we started using altitude and Blindspots, they don't perform significantly better than most fighting scouts.
    We do however always try and balance the forces, and usually only take the DH4 on bombing or recon scenarios that generally involve barrage balloons and/or Flak. So you get a DH4 escorted by a nieuport or a camel going up against a pair of Fokker D.VIIs backed up by aa guns to keep the two seater off the deck. In a straight dogfight we just give the side without a two-seater an extra plane (D.III, B-gun Nieuport etc)
    Additionally, something you might like to try is one of our House rules - All the big two seaters cannot make steep dives like a fighter, so rather than losing all climb markers and an altitude level, they have to remove climb markers 2 at a time until they get down. With only one dive a turn, this means that the two seater can't just scream for the deck. nd once it is down there, it as always, takes it forever to get back up out of reach of the trench mgs. also seems more realistic - a Spad or Fokker with small well braced wings could dive far better than a RE8, and with less risk of the wings detaching due to excessive airspeed.

    On Tailing.
    We no longer even bother to check for tailing. It never seemed possible to get one aircraft behind another for long enough to recieve the bonus- mostly because the first thing anyone does when an enemy gets behind them is plan a manouver the oopponents plane simply cannot replicate.
    Two-seaters: Agreed. If you balance both sides two-seaters are no issue.

    Tailing: We also had no case of tailing up to now. We would have if tailing could occure afterthe first maneuver is played...

  22. #72

    Default

    Going back to the blind spot, it is a good idea to cut out a piece of card in the 'slice of cake' shape of the blind spot and when the point comes up during a game, simply put the template down and hey presto, a result.

    I played several games the other night using the tailing rule every move rather than turn, the number of tailings was no worse or better than when using the rule as per the book, but it did give an incentive to manouvre more and try and get that elusive drop on the other guy, so we will be continuing with it every move now.

  23. #73

    krolik's Avatar



    Name
    Victor
    Location
    Freedonia
    Sorties Flown
    209
    Join Date
    Oct 2009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Hajj View Post
    I would think that this house rule would make it very easy to get on someones tail and stay there. I mean, how can the plane being tailed ever get away from the attacker if the attack can match him move for move every single card?
    No one can tail though an Immellman.

    Then again, being tailed was a pretty dire situation. Our house tailing rules make tailing more effective, but not an automatic kill. It's hard to shake a tail, but it can be done. Planes like the Camel that have a hard 90° turn can usually shake a tail pretty easily.

  24. #74

    Default

    In our group we also think the 2 seater rear gunner is too effective. However, one thing that a member of our group pointed out is when 2 seaters are caarying a bomb load they are slowed.
    We have proposed a rule that laden 2 seaters use the next slower speed range. We have most of the planes and enough card decks that his isn't a problem. The slowest 2 seaters won't be effected but their already pretty easy targets anyway.
    The idea is that slower planes have more difficulty evading scout attacks. It doesn't make the guns less effective but it Should make the target more vulnerable.

    We haven't tried this out yet but I'll give it a try on our next WoW outing.

    Pooh
    Last edited by Pooh; 11-22-2009 at 11:27. Reason: spelling

  25. #75

    colneher
    Guest


    Default

    I've not read the campaign rules, so i won't touch on that ... but i will say this:

    points should be accumulated per individual. Fighter pilots rarely (if ever) jumped planes unless they were awarded a new one ... gunners couldn't improve pilots and vice versa. So, i would suggest tracking fighter pilots, sporrte pilots, and gunners seperately.

    We play with ALTITUDE and BLIND SPOTS ... i would think these (combined with the "B" deck) would be a balancing force ...

  26. #76

    Default Use the real tactic

    Hi guys,

    I'm really new to this game so I need your advice. I've read all of these inputs and I want to see if this works according to the rules.

    The real tactic used was for the scout to close in directly up the 6 o'clock at the same or slightly lower altititude. No defliction firing is required. Just shoot at close range. When the 2 seater turned the scout would side slip in the opposite direction causing the scout to be below and staying on the outside of the 2 seater's turn with the same relative heading or slightly off but not by much. Since the 2 seater has commited to the turn the 2 seater now has his belly exposed to the scout and the observer is unable to shoot. At the same time the scout pulls in harder than the 2 seater is able and again no deflection firing is required. End of 2 seater.

    I think this can be possible if you use the trailing rules and altitude.

    What do you think?

    Volant Gun
    Last edited by Volant Gun; 02-07-2010 at 01:54. Reason: spelling

  27. #77

    krolik's Avatar



    Name
    Victor
    Location
    Freedonia
    Sorties Flown
    209
    Join Date
    Oct 2009

    Default

    That'd work, to take the sting out of two seaters you have to use altitude, tailing and blind spot rules.

  28. #78

    Default

    Thanks,

    I wonder what the "Old Heads" think about it. Reality is one thing playing the game is another.

    You can make the turn a little more predictable by flying up the blind spot and being slightly off center. More than likely the 2 seater will turn to the side presenting an easier shot.

    Fight your fight. Not his.

    Have Fun,
    Frank.

  29. #79

    Default

    We've been using the deflection optional rule (+1 damage to shooting from/through the front/rear of the base), 2-seater blind spot, tailing, but no altitude (novice players). No-deflection shots coming in from the rear, especially when in the 2-seater's blind spot, have been devastating.

  30. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Hajj View Post
    I would think that this house rule would make it very easy to get on someones tail and stay there. I mean, how can the plane being tailed ever get away from the attacker if the attack can match him move for move every single card?
    We have tailing rules in effect as an Ace skill, no one has used them yet in a League game.

    However we have used them in testing, and I agree. Once you begin tailing, as long as your plane flys nearly the same speed, it is difficult to be shaken when you get to look at your opponents card and change the order of yours.

    I remember playing a flight game years ago (don't remember the game title) If you were tailing the opponent had to give you a general idea which way he was going to move by telling you if he was going to perform a straight, right, or left maneuver. This could be used at the beginning of the game turn for the tailer to better GUESS what his target is going to do, but not have a Psychic vision of the next move.

  31. #81

    Default

    I think that game might have been Ace of Aces, the book game.

  32. #82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belis4rius View Post
    Anyone ever use the suggested rule that only the rear gunner or pilot can shoot at the one time, and did it work out?
    Yes our group uses this rule all the time, it keeps the plane from attacking more than one target at a time, however it does not keep them from shooting at an attacker as they pass from front to rear gun fire arcs. Which is why we try to attack from the sides and pull in to the blind spot. You are almost never able to stay there more than 1 or 2 maneuver cards, but any respite from the hail of bullets is an advantage.

    We also do not allow our observers to do anything else when they fire, and the pilot cannot fire if they are making a bomb or photo run. This makes them very vulnerable at crittical times.

    All this being said, the two seaters are formidable opponents, but they don't go down or stay in the air anymore often than our fighters. If the players use them properly they do well, if they try to use them like fighters they go down.

  33. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Hajj View Post
    I think that game might have been Ace of Aces, the book game.
    You got it! Don't know why I forgot.

  34. #84

    Default

    I am beginning to think that the idea that these planes are more dangerous in the game than the real planes is a falsehood.

    I think they had the potential to be as dangerous as they are in the game, but in real life they were at a disadvantage when a plane dove on them un-noticed. Getting in close and firing on a plane before it can react or shoot back is a HUGE advantage. If however the attacking plane were nice enough to fly near well in sight like we do in this game where everyone knows where things are all the time (it is a game after all) I think the two seaters would have been just as devastating as they are in the game.

    We have found that one on one, the two seater does have an advantage, (extra guns) However in a multi-plane dogfight, we still only go with an equal number of planes to a side as much as possible. The two seaters don't seem to survive any better in a large fight due to their inability to perform any tight maneuvers.

    If your players use a two plane attack from the same firing arc of the target plane, the two seater can't fire at both, and they can both fire at him. This usually means the target is taking 2 to 4 damage cards at one time and they build up fast.

  35. #85

    Default

    Another possibly solution: Long-range observer shots get a -1 penalty. IF that's too much, long-range observer shots >1 get a penalty (a hit is still a hit, like a 0 is still a 0)

  36. #86

    Default

    Here's another thought; have the observer/gunner draw two cards and use the one that does less damage. It's hard to aim a gun when the plane is dodging back and forth. The gunner would have his back to the pilot and wouldn't be able to anticipate the movement.

  37. #87

    Default

    For photo recon missions have the 2 seater fly straight and level from point a to point b (a to b being the area to be photographed), or within 1/2 ruler distance. Measure point a to point b. Every 1/2 ruler is 1 photo that must be taken So if the distance was 2 rulers thats 4 photos. Any firing from rear of 2 seater, unjamming guns at rear etc then no photos allowed. Each 1/2 ruler traveled aircraft gains a photo token. Once all 4 have been collected mission complete and home you go.
    See you on the Dark Side......

  38. #88

    Default

    If it's not too late for Problem 2, track each crewmember's progress up the Ace ranks and allocated abilities separately. GIB gets five kills but pilot only has 2, GIB gets to pick a gunnery Ace skill only available in the back half. Pilot gets five but GIB only two, he can choose any ability that fits but gunnery only benefits in the front fire-arc.

  39. #89

    Default

    Im not sure if it has been mentioned but how about reducing the damage points? This will do two things, make them a bigger target to the scouts/fighters and force the two seater to fly more defensively. Both of these will actually add to the realism of the game. This added to the "Blind spot" rule will help balance it out without effecting any of the house rule mechanics.

  40. #90

    Default

    The difficulty in dealing with two-seater's in game is that, unlike in real life, a scout pilot can't sneak up on them and be pumping hot lead through them before they know he is there. The only way to emulate this is to start the game with the scout in gun range and not allow the rear gunner to react until after the scouts first shot. It has been done and it works, however, unlike real life you can't target the crew, you're relying on pulling a decent card from the damage deck and a zero is more likely than a kill shot !
    I've heard that Rickenbacker likened taking on two-seater's to being as dangerous as taking on a Fokker D.VII which says a lot, an indication that at least some two-seater's were pretty hard to take on. The DH4, for instance, didn't require escorts as it was quick and pretty handy in a fight - there were a number of ace pilots amongst their crews to support that.
    I think Keith resolved his issue - some four years ago now - by introducing altitude rules to his games and using the blind spot rule. If you don't play altitude then things will be harder. My suggestion would be limit the ammo of the rear gun ie X number of shots then a 3 phase reload. That might provide an opportunity to get in and cause some damage but if you really want to make a two-seater easier meat I know that Chuck uses a full ruler blind spot house rule in his games as his solution and you can't make a two-seater much more vulnerable than that !

  41. #91

    Default

    Playing with ammo, reloads, altitude and rear blind spot is a nice leveler.
    See you on the Dark Side......

  42. #92

    Default

    Also, pay attention to the firing arcs. For example the Aviatik C.I (my favorite early war victim):

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Aviatik C.I.JPG 
Views:	67 
Size:	26.5 KB 
ID:	147161

    A full ruler blind spot!

  43. #93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skafloc View Post
    Playing with ammo, reloads, altitude and rear blind spot is a nice leveler.
    I use all the above, and add a compulsory stall card each turn if carrying bombs (treat exactly the same as engine damage - if the plane draws the engine damage card, it must jettison all bombs immediately or crash, even if that means "bombing" its own side's trench line!) and also no firing +1 is EVER available to an observer, owing to lack of knowledge of pilot manoeuvres.

    Full ruler length blind spot is ridiculous, and is NEVER used. You might as well chalk up a kill for the enemy scout and not play the scenario at all.

  44. #94

    Default

    regarding 2 seaters in the real world. heres an excerpt concerning 2 seaters from a book i read recently, "war birds, diary of an unknown aviator" c1926.

    "I hear that Mathews is now a member of the sadder-but-wiser club. He dove straight down on a two-seater and the observer didnt do a thing but shoot the front end of his plane full of holes. He got back to the lines but cracked up and lit on his neck. These boys will learn some day that one two-seater can lick one scout any time unless the scout can stick under his blind spot. But these Hun two-seaters havent got any blind spot. The long ones have a hole in the bottom of the fusilage and they can shoot down at you and these new ones have a double tail and are so short that the observer can stand up and fire right down at you while the pilot simply pulls up in a stall. And you cant take them from a front angle because the observer can traverse his guns over the top of the upper wing. Of course, if theres two of you, that is another story, but it takes two scouts to lick a good two-seater. These Bristol pilots say they can lick two scouts. They fight them like scouts and the observer simply guards the tail. If you want to go to heaven, the easiest way i know is to dive on a two-seater. We all do it and take a chance but the percentage of gentlemen who got cured of it is rising."

    reading this thread i think the difficulties players are having accurately reflect what pilots back in the day were reporting. seems like andrea and peirgorgio got it right historically.

  45. #95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Helmut View Post
    I use all the above, and add a compulsory stall card each turn if carrying bombs (treat exactly the same as engine damage - if the plane draws the engine damage card, it must jettison all bombs immediately or crash, even if that means "bombing" its own side's trench line!) and also no firing +1 is EVER available to an observer, owing to lack of knowledge of pilot manoeuvres.

    Full ruler length blind spot is ridiculous, and is NEVER used. You might as well chalk up a kill for the enemy scout and not play the scenario at all.
    Look real close at the card; this particular aeroplane has a full ruler blind spot. That was all that was stated.

    but, as far as a fuller ruler blind spot goes if any chose to use such a house rule; constant turns left and right tend to give the observer amble opportunity to shoot back. There are no automatic "chalk up a kill" in this game...

  46. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by milcoll73 View Post
    regarding 2 seaters in the real world. heres an excerpt concerning 2 seaters from a book i read recently, "war birds, diary of an unknown aviator" c1926.

    "I hear that Mathews is now a member of the sadder-but-wiser club. He dove straight down on a two-seater and the observer didnt do a thing but shoot the front end of his plane full of holes. He got back to the lines but cracked up and lit on his neck. These boys will learn some day that one two-seater can lick one scout any time unless the scout can stick under his blind spot. But these Hun two-seaters havent got any blind spot. The long ones have a hole in the bottom of the fusilage and they can shoot down at you and these new ones have a double tail and are so short that the observer can stand up and fire right down at you while the pilot simply pulls up in a stall. And you cant take them from a front angle because the observer can traverse his guns over the top of the upper wing. Of course, if theres two of you, that is another story, but it takes two scouts to lick a good two-seater. These Bristol pilots say they can lick two scouts. They fight them like scouts and the observer simply guards the tail. If you want to go to heaven, the easiest way i know is to dive on a two-seater. We all do it and take a chance but the percentage of gentlemen who got cured of it is rising."

    reading this thread i think the difficulties players are having accurately reflect what pilots back in the day were reporting. seems like andrea and peirgorgio got it right historically.
    Yes indeed. It was mostly the early war two-seaters that were vulnerable; Aviatik C.I, Albatros C.I, etc with their huge blind spots or slow ponderous movement. The Aviatik C.I was improved in early 1916 to C.Ia with the observer being moved to the rear seat and eliminating the huge blind spot. Others were phased out in favor of faster aircraft.

  47. #97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WWIflyingace View Post
    Look real close at the card; this particular aeroplane has a full ruler blind spot...
    This particular (unofficial) card has a full ruler blind spot, the aircraft not so much. To be more accurate the red dot would be better placed in the pilots lap, the front arcs should be at least twice the size they are and the rear arcs should extend more or less from the trailing edge of the wing to at least parallel with the aircraft's fuselage, if not to the fin itself or further. They could fire to the rear but the gunner couldn't follow/track an aircraft if it switched to the other side of the tail without dismounting and moving his gun, that's what made them vulnerable. Of course you'd find out where the gun was as you roared in then, if needed, switch to the other side to press home your attack. I would imagine the C.Ia variants came as a very nasty surprise when first encountered !

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	01-Aviatik_B1-2.jpg 
Views:	55 
Size:	69.8 KB 
ID:	147418
    The gun was set on a mounting that slid up and down the rails situated both sides of the front cockpit.

  48. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    I would imagine the C.Ia variants came as a very nasty surprise when first encountered !
    VERY NASTY INDEED!

  49. #99

    Default

    I realise that this thread has been around for a while to say the least; having read through it this morning another suggestion for balancing the 'two-seater problem' occured to me which I don't think - to my surprise - has yet been suggested.

    Before coming to that suggestion though, I'll set out my pitch!

    • Any changes/amendments to rules are best kept simple and easy to remember. While improving historical accuracy is of course desirable, it's a light game that doesn't want to get bogged down.
    • Using the existing rules for altitude and blind-spots, to me, seems like a 'must'.
    • The recommendation for planes carrying a bombload to have their speed reduced (Flying Helmut's suggestion I believe, on page 2 of this thread) requiring a stall manoeuvre each turn seems extremely sensible. (Why isn't something like that in the official rules?)
    • Fixed forward-firing guns were the most effective method of scoring hits, making more agile planes particularly dangerous in this regard. (It was Maxdeath's post on page 1 regarding this point that gave me this idea.)



    So, this is the idea I'm putting out for consideration:

    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.

    Pro:
    It potentially reflects the scout's superior agility and aiming ability when attacking a slower, less manoeuvrable target.
    It does not increase the chance of incurring special damage effects.
    It does not cycle the deck faster.
    It is not a guaranteed bonus; as per the aiming rules zeros would still be zeroes.
    It slightly increases the damage that scouts would be inflicting, but not by a large amount.

    Con:
    Attacking scouts would not gain separate benefit from the aiming rule (although effectively they have it from the first shot).

    Concerns and considerations:
    Scouts have a manoeuvre deck that already makes them more agile than two-seaters. Theoretically this would result in a well-flown scout being able to have more opportunies to shoot/aim/tail when flying against a (typical) two-seater. So is this "fix" necessary? The different manoeuvre decks address this, but do they do so sufficiently?

    What about bombers? Would one consider the same rule equally applicable against bombers, or just use this suggestion against two-seaters? Do bombers feel 'imbalanced' with the existing rules/stats? Would this make bombers too vulnerable? Or would the attacking scout pilot be using the superior manoeuvrability of his plane to try to avoid the more dangerous multiple fields of fire from the bomber's guns, thus foregoing the aiming bonus?

    Feedback and observations welcomed!
    Last edited by Prodromoi; 03-17-2015 at 08:57. Reason: Typo

  50. #100

    Default

    Hi Alex! Some interesting ideas... the +1, if utilized, is a simple mod to apply. In fact, it might make me more likely to remember the +1 for aiming I always forget! I've done something similar, btw, with two-seaters... observers/gunners cannot benefit from the +1 for aiming rule.

    Additionally, I've found that a scout's superior agility really shows itself when altitude rules are in effect. Once the vertical is added, the two-seaters become much more cumbersome and it's more likely that you'll be able to find their blind spot.

    I'd be interested to see if this "fix" feels right during play... I'll give it a go this evening if I can get a game together.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


Tags for this Thread

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
  •