So, now what?

[Pseudotheist]

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61739&d=1349064321
New standard rules...

While I'm at it, a couple more questions from my read-through of the new ruleset:
1. 2-seaters can now Overdive?
2. It's now legal to Climb & Immelman in the same turn (even though it's still illegal to Split-S & Dive)?

[Oberst Hajj]

Over dive ;)

1. Yes
2. Would have to check that one.

[HTRAINo]

I would recommend a bucket of water for that fireball ;)

[jbmacek]

I've wondered the same. My thought would be either the plane crashes, or ignore the new rule about fire damage.

[Pseudotheist]

I suppose you could plan stall-straight-stall, declare the straight as an illegal maneuver, replace it with a straight and recieve an A damage card...

[Flying Officer Kyte]

I've wondered the same. My thought would be either the plane crashes, or ignore the new rule about fire damage.

I intend to ignore the new rule about fire damage anyway. The dive to put it out seems to be what most pilots who have survived to write about it did but one I read about said he turned to port to keep the flames away from the side of the plane. He survived!
Rob.

[Doug]

Both in the old and new rule I think that the fire damage rules are not in line with what is happening, I would surggest that you get one chance to conduct an Overdive, if that does not put out the fire then the plane crashes, my reasoning is based on the flamable materials the planes of WW1 were made of.

[Willi Von Klugermann]

Is there anyplace to peruse the new rulebook without buying the accessories pack ? They don't appear to be in the files section currently.

[MoonSylver]

Is there anyplace to peruse the new rulebook without buying the accessories pack ? They don't appear to be in the files section currently.

Nope, no PDF. Don't think there will BE one either, in the foreseeable future. From my understanding, this is what Ares considers "the game", so you can imagine they are reluctant to give it away per se. :(

[Flying Officer Kyte]

To be honest, I was always suprised how free Nexus were with allowing access to their published materials.
It did make it easier to involve people with only a passing interest in the game. Not sure if it encouraged sales or not. It certainly got me buying multiples of boxed sets for the extra manouver decks.
Rob.

[robdimeglio]

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61739&d=1349064321
New standard rules...

While I'm at it, a couple more questions from my read-through of the new ruleset:
1. 2-seaters can now Overdive?
2. It's now legal to Climb & Immelman in the same turn (even though it's still illegal to Split-S & Dive)?

Actually, two very good questions.
- You can't overdive if you don't have a Immelmann in the deck.
- And you can not Climb/Immelmann in the same turn.

I think we've finally found what to put in the official FAQ/Errata which was empty until now :-(

Regarding the original question. Planning a straight would be illegal, so what happens afterwards is up to the rule you apply to illegal maneuvers.

If you use the "forgiving" version of the rule, you will take one A damage, if you use the "harsh" version you would be destroyed. But you CAN do a Straight as a part of an Overdive maneuver. I must admit it's not very clear in the rules (it's implicit in the advanced "Fire" rule on page 16) and probably also deserves an Errata/FAQ entry.

In any case, I think the plane in the subject deserves to crash :-)

[Flying Officer Kyte]

- In any case, I think the plane in the subject deserves to crash :-)

I agree Roberto.
Just like in Chess, if you can no longer carry out a legal move you're toast.:guns:
Rob.

[AlgyLacey]

you're toast.:guns:
Rob.

Poor taste that man. Your round

[Kaiser]

1. The above plane has to perform an Overdive (Stall-Dive-Straight). As the final Straight isn't a voluntary manouver it doesn't have any ill effect.

2. Regarding to fires: It seems that quite a lot of you think that the fire damage turns the plane into a burning comet of flames. This is NOT the case.
It is more that something in the engine nacelle leaks burnable fluit which catches fire. The pilot will see smoke coming out of the engine and the occasional flame licking out of it.
The fire will slowly destroying the engine. If the fire turns the plane into the burning comet of flames then this is the point where the fire damage reduces it to 0 Damage Capacity.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Poor taste that man. Your round

I'll drink to that Dave.:FOK:
Kyte.

[Oberst Hajj]

1. The above plane has to perform an Overdive (Stall-Dive-Straight). As the final Straight isn't a voluntary manouver it doesn't have any ill effect.

2. Regarding to fires: It seems that quite a lot of you think that the fire damage turns the plane into a burning comet of flames. This is NOT the case.
It is more that something in the engine nacelle leaks burnable fluit which catches fire. The pilot will see smoke coming out of the engine and the occasional flame licking out of it.
The fire will slowly destroying the engine. If the fire turns the plane into the burning comet of flames then this is the point where the fire damage reduces it to 0 Damage Capacity.

That's one way to think of it, but then why does flame damage ignore the special engine damage? Instead, each flame counter burns away at the planes structure (hit points). In my mind, the Smoke special damage reflects what you are describing above, while the Fire special damage is the flaming comet version ;)

[Angiolillo]

The dive to put it out seems to be what most pilots who have survived to write about it did but one I read about said he turned to port to keep the flames away from the side of the plane. He survived!

So don't you think that avoiding to go straight as by the new rule fits with the experience of that pilot who turned to port?

[Flying Officer Kyte]

I do agree that this is a conceivable plan to extinguish the fire in an odd case Andrea. Just that the norm would seem to be the overdive rather than the turn. To execute a turn every move for the next three turns would virtually take one out of the game as would the climb back up from an overdive. The length of our average game would probably mean that you got back into play just before the end, depending of course on when you took the fire.
That is the sole reason that I am going to stick with the old rule for on fire.
Rob.

[David Manley]

To execute a turn every move for the next three turns would virtually take one out of the game

Not necessarily. a port turn followed by 2 starboard (for example) shouldn't put one too far out of position. In fact many gamers in my experience can do far worse simply by forgetting left from right when plotting movement, and they only seem to be out of the action for a turn or two :)

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Not necessarily. a port turn followed by 2 starboard (for example) shouldn't put one too far out of position. In fact many gamers in my experience can do far worse simply by forgetting left from right when plotting movement, and they only seem to be out of the action for a turn or two :)

But Dave, a fire burns for nine cards!
Rob.

[David Manley]

True, true, but one should never be flying straight and level in a combat zone anyway :)

[Baldrick62]

The dive to put it out seems to be what most pilots who have survived to write about it did but one I read about said he turned to port to keep the flames away from the side of the plane. He survived!

I think 'diving' to extinguish a fire is actually more about side-slipping (to keep the flames away from the cockpit and its soft, pink and flammable contents) rather than power-diving to (at least initially increase the spread of the flames by fanning them with additional 'wind' speed (slipstream).

[steel_ratt]

This problem may be more common than just the fluke of getting two opposing rudder jams. It will also occur if you receive the fire damage on the same turn that your last move is an Immelmann. In this case you don't even have the option of any other maneuver. You MUST play a straight (Immelmann) and you MUST NOT play a straight (fire).

[Pseudotheist]

Actually, two very good questions.
- You can't overdive if you don't have a Immelmann in the deck.
- And you can not Climb/Immelmann in the same turn.
Wow, didn't expect this thread to get replies from two official game representatives... What's the justification for the Climb/Immelman restriction anyway?
And while we're on FAQ, is are you going to put the 360 degree Roland Line of Fire in there, or wait to re-release the mini?

In any case, I think the plane in the subject deserves to crash :-)Hey, that's my plane you're talking about... :(

Both in the old and new rule I think that the fire damage rules are not in line with what is happening, I would surggest that you get one chance to conduct an Overdive, if that does not put out the fire then the plane crashes, my reasoning is based on the flamable materials the planes of WW1 were made of.
Not gonna argue your rationale from a real world standpoint, but from a gameplay perspective if fire is going to be that brutal, I feel you might as well just replace them with explosions.

[Angiolillo]

I do agree that this is a conceivable plan to extinguish the fire in an odd case Andrea. Just that the norm would seem to be the overdive rather than the turn.

That is also true in the spirit of the rule. If you overdive, you extingush fire quicker. Not turning, you just save yourself from flames going straight into the cockpit but you do not discard more cards than usual - the fire extinguish (or burn the plane) at the usual speed.


To execute a turn every move for the next three turns would virtually take one out of the game as would the climb back up from an overdive.

Not exactly, IMHO. Being able to sideslip or turn alternately right and left, you can do without the straight and keep a direction. You just miss Immelmanns, but you still have 180° turns with 3 60° ones. Not as bad as


What's the justification for the Climb/Immelman restriction anyway?

You can climb once each three cards, having only one climb card in the deck. So the quickest way to gain altitude is climb - card - card - climb - card - card - climb - card - card- climb and so on. It would be awkward and innatural to have planes doing climb - straight - Immelmann - straight - climb - straight - Immelmann - straight - climb - straight - immelmann to gain a climb counter every two cards instead than every three.

[gully_raker]

So don't you think that avoiding to go straight as by the new rule fits with the experience of that pilot who turned to port?

:thumbsup: Andrea I think the new Fire rule is "spot on"!
If a pilot finds his aircraft in flames he would NOT fly straight but weave to try to keep the flames away from his face. If things got too hot (forgive unintentional Pun :D) then he might try a dive which some pilots actually did but there was a very good chance of a big crash, hence the A Damage card if you try that.;)

We recently had a game at our club & it was I who caught fire. Had no problems using just the turns etc to stay in touch & in fact survived the Fire & kept on fighting so Rob its not "Certain Curtins"!

[Doug]

The problem is that there is no one left to ask what was the norm, as there are lots of questions I would dearly love to ask my Grandfather a WW1 pilot. However the next best thing would be to get an Air crash Investigator team on the case it would be interesting to see what results they would get:serious:

[Angiolillo]

The grandfather of a friend of mine was a Regia Aeronautica pilot (from the '20s/'30s) who used to train rookies and always told them never to go straight with an engine on fire. He lost a plane of his school (with both people on it) when a young pilot panicked and forgot that.

[steel_ratt]

This sounds like a job for... MYTH BUSTERS!!

[Flying Officer Kyte]

:surrender:Right chaps. Your arguments have convinced me enough to give the new rules a chance at any rate.
I will give it a go and see what happens, starting with my KoTA game against Stormkahn tonight, and then with my Over the Trenches game tomorrow. Let's see how the AIs cope with it.
Rob.

[flash]

Is anyone collating these new rule gems ?! ;)