Interesting addition in Series 9

I am sure many of you have gotten your recent order and, after drooling profusely, unpacked it all lovingly. Among the usual (plane, stand, maneuver deck, etc.) I found a little something extra. An ace card for the pilot of the particular plane model but what intrigued me most was the plane-specific special rule card included with most. Whether using these optional rules works for you and your group is entirely up to you but I would not like to use them without some thought as to other variations should be included for previous planes we might wish to use.

Example:
The rule for the Phonix makes it impossible to clear a jam whereas the Nieuport allows fire upon an overlapping base. One gives an advantage, another could be a real handicap. All this is fine, just makes scenario design a bit more interesting.

This post is not about the pros and cons of these rules but to solicit ideas for other aircrafts' foibles from you all out there in the Wings world.

Looking forward to new rules. Should make things interesting flying those planes.

Jonathan, I just posted some pics of these cards:

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...l=1#post419232

I feel that if one plane has to use them then to be fair, all planes will have to. I don't know how we are going to accomplish this with the older series planes at this point. Regardless, they are neat little side notes to make a game more interesting.

Interesting topic, I'll be interested to see what suggestions are given. It seems like Andrea has been thinking about special plane-specific rules like this for quite awhile and there was a post he made once where he pointed out that the special rule idea for the Roland C.II actually became official (with the wider firing arc). I do prefer this format of making the special rules optional however. It seems like in my local game group the young players always buy two-seaters, especially the Roland :)

I look forward to being able to add "Schrage Musik" to my repertoire of Staaken-killing talents. >:)

:D Strictly speaking the Pfalz D.III could not unjam its guns for the same reason as the Phoenix. This was rectified with the D.IIIa. :thumbsup:

If Ares ever does an F. E. 2:
Given the hazardous exposure of the gunner, and the fact that he can't be strapped in, there really does need to be special rules about the rear machinegun, restrictions on maneuvering, things of that nature.

The SE-5/5a and two gunned Nieuport 17s ability to fire upward also but with the "B" deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john snelling

The SE-5/5a and two gunned Nieuport 17s ability to fire upward also but with the "B" deck.

---

And anything else with a Foster Mount.
Sad thing is I can see this being abused in head on overlap passes rather than what it should be - from below and behind..
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...c71056b3ba.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flash

And anything else with a Foster Mount.
Sad thing is I can see this being abused in head on overlap passes rather than what it should be - from below and behind...

---

Good point.

I love the shake up that this adds to the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flash

And anything else with a Foster Mount.
Sad thing is I can see this being abused in head on overlap passes rather than what it should be - from below and behind..
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...c71056b3ba.jpg

---

That could be covered by the Aircraft Card stating just that!:D

The optional rule for the Phoenix that does not allow it to clear gun jams, though probably historically accurate, is pretty harsh. You might shoot one time, get a jam, and you're done.

But it is optional. Do you think you'll use this rule? Might it keep you from using the Phonix at all?

Also, is it possible for only one gun of a pair of synchronized guns to jam? That might make it a bit more playable if you went from A damage to a B damage on the first jam, only losing the ability to shoot on a second jam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tuladin

The optional rule for the Phoenix that does not allow it to clear gun jams, though probably historically accurate, is pretty harsh. You might shoot one time, get a jam, and you're done.

But it is optional. Do you think you'll use this rule? Might it keep you from using the Phonix at all?

Also, is it possible for only one gun of a pair of synchronized guns to jam? That might make it a bit more playable if you went from A damage to a B damage on the first jam, only losing the ability to shoot on a second jam.

---

There has been a bit of discussion about guns, jams and optional rules. Reading Raymond Collishaw's biography, he stated a few times that his single gunned tripe had a jam, and he turned for home. Yes, a game-ender, but historically accurate. For scenarios, it would be fitting to use the optional rules. For dogfight pick-up games, not so much.

One of many gun jam threads: Reducing jams - green jam only jams one gun, red jams both?

Another extensive thread: Limited Ammo and Unjamming Rules
This one proposes the "Only the first damage card drawn at short range can jam an opponent's guns". This could cut down on jams, too. The logic in the linked thread makes sense. You draw two damage cards at close range, not because more bullets are fired, but because the shooting is more accurate at close range. So, jamming possibilities shouldn't increase, just damage.