Ares Games
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 87 of 87

Thread: Optional rules for specific planes

  1. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fast.git View Post
    [Emphasis Added]

    This I really like... especially considering the amount of time I spend clearing jams.
    To be clear-- I was only suggesting this as a plane specific change for planes like the Pfalz D-III, where the guns weren't accessible to the pilot. Instead of "every jam= 3 turns to clear", for those planes with inaccessible guns, a green jam counter means "Misfire, cleared in one turn", while the red one means "Jam- can't be cleared in flight."

    But I can see where it could also be applied across the board to all planes, perhaps as a house rule:
    red= take 3 jam counters
    green= take 1 jam counter

  2. #52

    Default

    Siemens-Schuckert D.IV's exceptional climb rate

    Somehow I missed the whole topic until now...

    So, by the new rules. S-S D.IV has climb rate 2. Maybe (just a thought) it should be always be counted as firing from above (+1 aim bonus):
    If S-S D.IV and it's target are on the same level with no climb counters, S-S D.IV is firing from above.
    If S-S D.IV and it's target are on the same level with any climb counters, S-S D.IV is firing from above.
    If S-S D.IV and it's target are on the same level, but target has climb counters, and S-S D.IV has not, nothing changes.

  3. #53

    LOOP
    Guest


    Default

    I have another thought regarding two- and multiseaters. When two plane are so close that their bases overlap they can't shoot at eachother. All fine.
    To my point. If one (or both) of these plane is a two- or multiseater and have a flexible gun. If they don't collide the flexible gun should be able to fire (if the other plane are in the fireingarc). Nothing strange there.
    But if you consither the overdive rule. You could argue that the passing aircraft, flying by in close range and high speed, is hander to hit just as if it had made an overdive.

    So...

    If 1 peg apart - take 2 damagecard and keep one.
    If only a cc apart - (take 2 damagecard and keep one) x2

    Thoughts anyone....

    P-G
    Last edited by LOOP; 05-15-2014 at 02:34.

  4. #54

    'Warspite''s Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Blog Entries
    4
    Name
    Barry
    Location
    north west Norfolk
    Sorties Flown
    760
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    We already have some in the game, as the broader firing field of the Roland or the impossibility for observers of the Bristol Fighter to fire after certain maneuvres. Multi-engine bombers also have several ones.
    snipped for brevity
    !
    Early Airco D.H.2's flexible machinegun - unworkable and quickly disregarded

    Airco/De Havilland D.H.4's fuel tank exposure - all fuel tanks were vulnerable, wherever they were mounted. The DH 4 is not exceptionally vulnerable In fact top-wing fuel tanks like the DH2 and DH4 puts the fuel away from the crew and increases survival chances.

    Dec. '17/Jun '18 Aviatik D.I's unreachable machineguns - makes for a short and unsatisfying game

    Fokker E.IV triple machinegun prone to jamming - was it exceptional? My understanding is that few EIVs were flown anyway because of their poor performance and ammunition had to be greatly reduced to lighten the load.

    Siemens-Schuckert D.IV's exceptional climb rate - already factored on the latest climb rate chart

    twin machineguns Sopwith Triplane's additional weight (the 2nd mg seemed not to give relevant penalties to other planes as the HD.1) - the common suggestion is that the twin gun machines were all 130hp engines, not 110hp. The 130 hp engine allowed the Nieuports to carry twin guns without too much effect. Only five or eight Sopwith Triplanes carried twin guns and it is doubtful they saw much service.

    - wing failures on Nieuport 11, Albatros D.III/V/Va, early Fokker Dr.I up to nov 1916 - November 1917, not 1916 Wing failures on Nieuports were not as widely reported as the Albatros. The Albatros was a worst-case scenario, sesquiplane AND a poorly positioned lower spar.

    - different cklimb rates and top altitudes for different engines of a few planes - see the latest official performance chart which covers just that

    Not mentioned: Scalded faces. Pilots of Albatros DII and DIII with centre-mounted radiators suffered facial scalding if the radiator was hit by gunfire. That is why the radiator is off-set onto the right wing in late DIIIs and all DVs.
    Last edited by 'Warspite'; 06-03-2014 at 21:21.

  5. #55

    Default

    Fokker E.IV triple machine gun prone to jamming
    Short range 3 B cards, long range 2 B cards. Maybe allow player's discretion to use short burst instead: Short range 2 B cards, long range 1 B card, as usual.
    Also, to consider limited ammo.
    What do you think?

  6. #56

    SHVAK's Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Perry
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Sorties Flown
    58
    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default

    Chiming in late, and don't have the latest Rules and Accessories pack, but here are some of my enhanced house rules which pertain to this link:

    MANEUVER

    Overdive damage (representing wing stress in a high speed dive) - draw one damage card with each overdive (use only points or explosion results):
    A-damage: MS-N, Nieuport 11,16,17,21, Fokker A.II,A.III,E.IV, SSw D.1, Albatros D.II, D.V.
    B-damage: Airco DH-2, Nieuport 23,28, Sopwith Triplane, Sopwith Pup, Halberstadt D.II,D.III, Albatros D.Va, Fokker DR.1, Roland C.II.

    Aircraft with Payloads (Bombers with Bombs, Fighters with Rockets) +1 to climb rate until payload is expended

    Collision As per current rules, plus current maneuver cards on overlapping planes must be normal or steep mirrored (ie L vs R, Dive vs Climb, or Steep L vs Steep R)

    Engine Destroyed Second engine hit (on single engine AC) forces plane to glide and land (must play 1 dive card each turn, no climbing, no other steep)

    On Fire In addition to not flying straight, it cannot stall or climb. Pilot of single-engine plane cannot unjam/reload guns whilst on fire.

    GUNS Noting that twin-barrels = A-damage, single-barrel = B-damage

    Pivot/Flexible Mount Guns (Foster Lewis, Revelli). Can shoot at an aircraft if bases overlap, but only if target is at a higher altitude (or target has climb counters vs none for firing plane).

    Overgunned Aircraft (ie A-damage Sopwith Tripe, A-damage Fokker E.IV, AB damage Pfalz D.IIIa, A-damage Nieuport 17, A-damage SPAD VII and AB/A Brisfit). Overgunned AC add +1 to climb rate.

    Rigid Lewis, Parabellum and Schwarzlose Guns +1 to unjam and reload (I use limited ammo and reload magazines in my games)

    Cannot Unjam (Pfalz D.III (but not D.IIIa), Aviatik D.1 (Schwarzlose until end of 1917), and some early Albatros D.III (but not D.IIIa)

    -1 Bonus to Unjam Albatros D.V and D.Va, due to Force Trim Control Stick

    DH.4 Observer has +1 to unjam/reload (and cannot transfer photo duties to pilot)

    SAML S.2 Only Observer can unjam/reload forward gun

    Wounded Crewmember +1 to reload/unjam

    UNJAM Green jam card only jams one barrel of a twin-gun; red jams both barrels. Partially jammed twin-gun can still shoot but with B-damage. Crewmembers cannot shoot and unjam in same maneuver.

    And yes, the SSw D.IV should have a climb rate of 1, but this would make it near unbeatable in the game - perhaps rightly so!
    Last edited by SHVAK; 06-04-2014 at 06:51.

  7. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Пилот View Post
    Fokker E.IV triple machine gun prone to jamming
    Short range 3 B cards, long range 2 B cards. Maybe allow player's discretion to use short burst instead: Short range 2 B cards, long range 1 B card, as usual.
    Also, to consider limited ammo.
    What do you think?
    Personally, it should not be allowed in play.
    Never used in action, and from all indications any sustained attempt to use 3 synco guns in 1916/17 would result in shooting off your own prop.
    And the flight characteristics were reported to be abysmal.
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  8. #58

    Default

    I say let him use it. But...at long range the 2nd card drawn he takes for his EIV triple gun plane and at close the 3rd drawn similar. That way if he draws a zero he's got away with it otherwise he will, eventually, succumb to his own bullets. As a final insult to injury make him fly an XA or XB or XC deck even an XD deck!
    See you on the Dark Side......

  9. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    Personally, it should not be allowed in play.
    Never used in action, and from all indications any sustained attempt to use 3 synco guns in 1916/17 would result in shooting off your own prop.
    And the flight characteristics were reported to be abysmal.
    Karl
    Personally, I agree about E.IV, but I tried to give some help to those who want to play with it (as in "What if" scenario).

    Scafloc, I guess it could use longer straights, but shorter turns, with no sideslips or fancy Immelman. And, let's say, green jam means gun is jammed. And red jam means he shot own peopeller and all damage is alocated to him. If two reds are drawn, it's immediately destroyed.

  10. #60

    Default

    My friends and I have been using a house rule that may be helpful for two of your inquiries.
    It’s a three cards maneuver we call “Steep-Climb” and it’s a mirrored maneuver to “Over-Dive”:
    sequence is: Straight-Climb-Stall. The airplane earns a climb-counter after the ‘climb’ and the ‘stall’ cards. Additionally, plane steep-climbing receives a +1 damage penalty if shouted during the ‘climb-stall’ part of the maneuver – since it’s flying slowly.
    How to apply this to specific planes?
    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    - Siemens-Schuckert D.IV's exceptional climb rate
    Siemens-Schuckert D.IV can ‘steep-climb’ without playing the mandatory straight card first. So a SS D.VI pilot can just pull a “climb-stall” sequence and gain one altitude level right there.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    - different cklimb rates and top altitudes for different engines of a few planes
    ‘steep-climb’ maneuver is really cool to gain altitude fast, especially for scenarios when planes start the battle landed and have to take off to engage the enemy.
    Keeping this in mind, you can forbid ‘steep-climbing’ for certain planes after a given altitude level.
    So, say SE5 can seep-climb from altitude 0 to 6, but Sopwith Camel can only do it from altitude 0 to 5 – I’m giving this just as an example.
    [QUOTE=Angiolillo;242090 Any more suggestions for any WoW/WGF plane?
    [/QUOTE]
    I would like to see a way to improve SPADs diving performance

  11. #61

    'Warspite''s Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Blog Entries
    4
    Name
    Barry
    Location
    north west Norfolk
    Sorties Flown
    760
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default

    If you want real special rules for specific aircraft… if a Sopwith Camel plays three tight (smallest) right-hand turns in succession then it drops a plastic level and takes two height counters. The Camel was notorious for losing altitude in a tight right-hand turn.

    Has no effect if only two cards are played. 'In succession' includes cards played over two moves so if it takes two tight right-hand turns in one move and starts the next turn with another tight right-hand, that counts for height loss.

  12. #62

    'Warspite''s Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Blog Entries
    4
    Name
    Barry
    Location
    north west Norfolk
    Sorties Flown
    760
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default

    If you want real special rules for specific aircraft… if a Sopwith Camel plays three tight (smallest) right-hand turns in succession then it drops a plastic level and takes two height counters. The Camel was notorious for losing altitude in a tight right-hand turn.

    Has no effect if only two cards are played. 'In succession' includes cards played over two moves so if it takes two tight right-hand turns in one move and starts the next turn with another tight right-hand, that counts for height loss.

  13. #63

    Default

    Very interesting, thanks!

  14. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gallo Rojo View Post
    ....
    I would like to see a way to improve SPADs diving performance
    The simplest way of sticking exactly to the official rules and to make the Spad XIII and SE5a super-divers is to add an additional Dive card without a Steep on it. That way, the plane can dive 2 levels and can do a dive followed by a dive, a dive followed by a climb and a climb followed by a dive. Personally, I'm going to stick to my own house rules for diving as I like a bit more realism but this enhancement would be better than nothing.

  15. #65

    'Warspite''s Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Blog Entries
    4
    Name
    Barry
    Location
    north west Norfolk
    Sorties Flown
    760
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SHVAK View Post

    MANEUVER

    Overdive damage (representing wing stress in a high speed dive) - draw one damage card with each overdive (use only points or explosion results):
    A-damage: Albatros D.II
    B-damage: Airco DH-2, Sopwith Triplane, Sopwith Pup, Halberstadt D.II,D.III, Roland C.II.
    I would doubt that these aircraft were at dive recovery risk. Modern New Zealand experience with their FE2 replica shows that pusher-engined types dived slowly due to high drag from the frame work and the lack of a heavy engine at the front 'pulling' them downwards.
    The Albatros DII should also not be on the list at all as it was not a V-strutter design and had a very good reputation as a diver, possibly one reason why the older DIIs remained at the front as long as they did. There were still a few DIIs in service at the end of 1917.
    The Triplane and the Pup were also slow going down, the Triplane had one extra wing (extra drag) while the Pup had a light engine.
    Not sure about the Roland. It was big and heavy (good diver) but there are sources which suggest the wings were 'thin'. It is the bracing issues which affected the Albatros V-strutters and the Nieuports. The Roland appears well braced and I have heard no reports of break-ups. Albert Ball and the young McCudden both rated the C-II Roland highly as an enemy combat type. They never mentioned break-ups.

  16. #66

    Default

    id add an increased rear firing arc to the halberstadt clII. its clear from pictures that a deflector "hoop" was added to the top wing to prevent the rear gunner from shooting the propeller tips. my house rule is the rear gun can fire the rest of the 360 degrees not encompassed by the front arc but never at the same target as the front gun since jockeying the front guns into position on a target would bring the deflector in line with said a/c and prevent the rear gunner bringing his gun to bear. while this makes the halberstadt that much of a dangerous foe i think it balances nicely the ever increasing fire power (in game, anyway) of later allied 2 seater types.

  17. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pseudotheist View Post
    ...

    - twin machineguns Sopwith Triplane's additional weight (the 2nd mg seemed not to give relevant penalties to other planes as the HD.1)
    I think it's pretty simple to make A firing Triplanes use the D deck (and +1 to their climb rate). It may not be 100% accurate, but it most easily reflects loss of performance due to added weight.

    ...
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGuy59 View Post
    ...
    Sopwith Triplane twin machinegun - Collishaw's assessment of the Sopwith Triplane was that it was good up to 10,000 ft, IIRC. I don't have the book reference, just things posted on this forum. So, for the few planes (three?) used for two or three months (most optimistically) in 1917, before the Camels replaced all triplanes, why should we have any adjustment to the Sopwith Triplane, unless at high altitude?

    ...
    Quote Originally Posted by wargamer View Post
    ...

    Sopwith Triplane, perhaps best fix is to just use the D maneuver deck for dual guns?

    ...
    Quote Originally Posted by rcboater View Post
    ...

    Performance impacts of extra MGs: As others have noted, rate of climb and performance at altitude are two of the most glaring results of the performance hit caused by extra weight. There is a third-- loss of maneuverability. Overweight planes need to fly faster to generate the necessary lift, and that means they have a higher stalling speed. Takeoffs and landing are trickier, but we really don't care about that in game terms. In combat, it shows up in maneuverability-- as you can't turn as tightly in heavy plane as you can in a lighter one, all other things being equal. In the game mechanics, perhaps you could simulate this by taking away some sharp turn cards from the maneuver deck, and also add 1 to the climb rate.

    ...
    All other things being equal, yes, there should be a performance hit to a plane with extra weight.

    However, in the dual-gunned Sopwith Triplane, they equipped it with a bigger engine to counter the weight. And from the person who flew it in combat, leading single-gunned triplanes, there was little lose in performance below 10,000 ft. Check the discussion and book quotes on this thread: Sopwith Triplane Armament
    Sopwith Triplane Aces of World War One, Norman Franks
    Raymond Collishaw and the Black Flight, Roger Gunn

    So, for a mini in the game, using the pilot who flew it, I'm going with the plane as provided, no reduction in ability. To really stir the pot on this, Collishaw should have, at least, three ace skills at the time of flying this particular plane, as well (He had his 37th and 38th victories flying this plane, all the rest in a Camel).
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  18. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicola Zee View Post
    The simplest way of sticking exactly to the official rules and to make the Spad XIII and SE5a super-divers is to add an additional Dive card without a Steep on it. That way, the plane can dive 2 levels and can do a dive followed by a dive, a dive followed by a climb and a climb followed by a dive. Personally, I'm going to stick to my own house rules for diving as I like a bit more realism but this enhancement would be better than nothing.
    Wouldn't this be appropriate for Spad VII as well?

  19. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mau Fox View Post
    Wouldn't this be appropriate for Spad VII as well?
    Maybe but it's debatable. The Spad VII was good at diving compared to other planes of its era but that's not saying that much - considering that several planes of its era tended to shed their wings in a prolonged steep dive. I think it's generally agreed that the SE5a and Spad XIII were superior in a dive than the Spad VII.

  20. #70

    Default

    Future airplane packs will feaure a few of these special rules.

  21. #71

    Default

    Thanks for the information Andrea. If Ares reprints any more Nexus planes (SE5a, Nieuport 17) would these rules be included for them?

  22. #72

    Default

    That is good news, Andrea!

  23. #73

    Default

    Yes for sure. Ares is doing that for Nieuport 17 & Albatros D.III. Re8 and Ufag C.I in same series do not seem to have any specifioc rule.

  24. #74

    Default

    Still good to hear that some of the more obvious attributes are being addressed Andrea.
    Thanks for this extra bit of information.
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  25. #75

    Default

    Trying to keep things simple and fun anyway...

  26. #76

    Default

    "Rules" for games are not much more than "how to do this in the context of this game". So, yeah, specific rules for outliers to the general rules are all to the good.

  27. #77

    Default

    I realise that this is a WW1 House rules thread but since you are currently monitoring this one, Andrea, may I ask whether there will be similar modifications for WW2 planes, please?

    I am thinking particularly about the 'tight turns for the Zero' issue with a connected reduction in hit points. Perhaps Ares might consider including two aeroplane cards with a Zero model, one for an A6M2, which has lower hit points and is allowed to use special added tight turn and sideslip cards, and one for a later mark with more hit points but is not able to use the extra maneouvres.

  28. #78

    Default

    Zero shall be revised in the next release.
    At the same time, next WW2 minis also will have special rules cards and/or one/a couple of skills in each Airplane Pack.

  29. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    Zero shall be revised in the next release.
    At the same time, next WW2 minis also will have special rules cards and/or one/a couple of skills in each Airplane Pack.
    Very interesting and welcome news! (Also the earlier post regarding this becoming a feature for future WWI releases.)

  30. #80


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Keith
    Location
    Canterbury, New Zealand
    Sorties Flown
    31
    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    Zero shall be revised in the next release.
    At the same time, next WW2 minis also will have special rules cards and/or one/a couple of skills in each Airplane Pack.
    Will there be some way to support the existing Zero miniatures? That is the Nexus models that players have already purchased?

  31. #81

    Default

    I doubt. They are not wrong - they are a different interpretation of the same airplane, in a different edition by a different publisher.

  32. #82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    We already have some in the game, as the broader firing field of the Roland or the impossibility for observers of the Bristol Fighter to fire after certain maneuvres. Multi-engine bombers also have several ones.

    Which one could be worth adding to the game?

    I am working on somes linked to these plane characteristics:
    - Early Airco D.H.2's flexible machinegun
    - Airco/De Havilland D.H.4's fuel tank exposure
    - Dec. '17/Jun '18 Aviatik D.I's unreachable machineguns
    - Fokker E.IV triple machinegun prone to jamming
    - Siemens-Schuckert D.IV's exceptional climb rate
    - twin machineguns Sopwith Triplane's additional weight (the 2nd mg seemed not to give relevant penalties to other planes as the HD.1)
    - wing failures on Nieuport 11, Albatros D.III/V/Va, early Fokker Dr.I up to nov 1916
    - different cklimb rates and top altitudes for different engines of a few planes

    Any more suggestions for any WoW/WGF plane?

    Thanks a lot!
    Where are the rules for the observer in the Bristol Fighter to be found? I get quoted these a lot (as I spend an awful lot of time flying Bristols) and it would be good to read them for myself so not to incur the 'Wrath of Tim' which is only mildly worse than 'The Wrath of Khan' ? lol
    Thank you

    Never Knowingly Undergunned !!

  33. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hedeby View Post
    Where are the rules for the observer in the Bristol Fighter to be found? I get quoted these a lot (as I spend an awful lot of time flying Bristols) and it would be good to read them for myself so not to incur the 'Wrath of Tim' which is only mildly worse than 'The Wrath of Khan' ? lol
    Thank you
    "From Hell's heart, I stab at thee.........................."


  34. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    I doubt. They are not wrong - they are a different interpretation of the same airplane, in a different edition by a different publisher.
    This however would be a good case for Ares selling manoeuvre decks independent of models so that owners of the original Nexus models can bring their kit in line with current thinking.

  35. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
    This however would be a good case for Ares selling manoeuvre decks independent of models so that owners of the original Nexus models can bring their kit in line with current thinking.
    Top point there, David ("Patient Zero" loving the Zero - how appropriate!)

  36. #86

    Default

    I'd recommend a 60 degree slow(only) turn for the Zero, a 60 degree fast(only) turn for a Spit I. Maybe a 45' right + climb too, as the climbing right turn was a maneuver the Spit used that other planes couldn't follow.

  37. #87


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Keith
    Location
    Canterbury, New Zealand
    Sorties Flown
    31
    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
    This however would be a good case for Ares selling manoeuvre decks independent of models so that owners of the original Nexus models can bring their kit in line with current thinking.
    That would be a very useful option.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Missions

  1. Optional Advanced Solo Rules
    By Blackronin in forum WGS: House Rules
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-07-2012, 05:19
  2. Newbie Optional Rules Question
    By Pope in forum WGF: General Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-30-2010, 15:47
  3. Speed rules/cards for WWI planes?
    By Gallo Rojo in forum WGS: General Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-01-2010, 13:32
  4. Dawn of War: What optional rules do you use?
    By Oberst Hajj in forum Polls
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-31-2010, 04:16
  5. Plane Specific Cockpit Boards
    By Oberst Hajj in forum WGS: General Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-22-2010, 05:46

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
  •