Seeking feedback on an event I'm running

[RCastro]

After a year of trying I finally convinced a local shop to let me run a game. My plan is to run a 10-player game, 5v5, three missions.

First mission: 5v5 dogfight, all scouts, three mats with the No-Man's Land mat in the center, 2 trench cards and a B machine gun card on each side of No-Man's Land. Each player will have an objective which will score points for success: Two scouts are to recon opposing mat, one scout is tasked to strafe the B machine gun, and the other two scouts are assigned to intercept enemy fighters on the friendly side of the line.

If either or both teams successfully recon enemy territory in the first mission the second mission will be a photo recon mission. The successful team(s) will get 3 scouts and 2 observation aircraft and try to recon any of a number of targets across the line. 2 scouts will be tasked to photo recon, one scout either escorts or strafes enemy trenches, and the other 2 scouts are assigned to defend.

If the photo recon succeeds, the final mission will be to bomb the targets reconned in Mission 2. One bomber, 4 scouts for the attacking side, 5 scouts for the defending side.

I think the shop is going to offer store credit as prizes for any "winners", so I'm planning to use the scoring system from the Knights of the Air campaign for individual and team scoring, awarding points for kills, completing individual objectives, but also penalizing players 1-4 points for sustaining damage to their own aircraft.

Any thoughts or suggestions?

[Setarius]

In the recon mission I'd use two seaters to do the recon and photo. The pilot can concentrate on flying and the gunner can do the looking.
Check out mission 1 & 2 in the Bitter End Campaign under the WWI section, the Over the Trenches AARs, Mission 1 was a photo recon and Mission 2 was bomb what was spotted.
If you are going to dogfight, don't give the players any other objective other than shoot down the opposition. This will give beginning players a chance to see what their planes can do maneuvering and get used to the combat system.
What you are suggesting with the additional objective is a separate mission all together.
If it were me I'd make Mission #1 a 5x5 dogfight. Mission #2 Photo recon and strafe the mg. Mission #3 Bomb the targets and again Strafe the mg.
Are you going to use altitude or not? MGs can only shoot to a certain level while AAMgs can shoot higher.

[RCastro]

Thanks, Dale, I will check out those files. The owner of the shop is the one who wants an additional objective for each player. I was also hoping that the objectives would keep everyone from bunching up in a big furball in the center of the map.

We won't be playing with altitude or explosion cards. And I'm thinking about modifying the AA rules a bit, I posted my idea in the House Rules section.

[zenlizard]

If you're going to end up using altitude rules:
My experience is that most ground machineguns are at a disadvantage when confronted with aircraft at altitude. In consequence, there should be a scenario-driven reason to bring the aircraft close to the deck. An absolute requirement to target the machinegun is one such reason; or another is to include ordnance which requires low-level flight (example: most of the German CL-series aircraft carried modified grenades as their primary air-to-ground ordnance: these, to have any accuracy, had to be dropped from a fairly low level).

So, yeah, if you're going to use altitude in your proposed scenario, keep the strafing requirement (and/or include trench-strafing as requirement, rather than option, since you have the trenches there anyway).

ETA: Ah, essentially, messages crossed. But if you're *not* using altitude, then yeah, there are other game-related reasons to bring the aircraft withing range of the machinegun.

[Setarius]

I would not let them know how many points a person gets for accomplishing their objective versus shooting down or damaging multiple aircraft. Some people will weigh the advantages of shooting down multiple aircraft rather than accomplish the objective if it will be more beneficial points wise.
I would more than likely try to shoot down planes then go after my objective in a 5x5 scout mission. The ground fire from MGs and infantry is more miss than hit in this game. Anti-Aircraft guns on the other hand can be deadly, check those out.

[Setarius]

By the way, what planes are you thinking about using in your 5x5 mission?

[RCastro]

I would not let them know how many points a person gets for accomplishing their objective versus shooting down or damaging multiple aircraft. Some people will weigh the advantages of shooting down multiple aircraft rather than accomplish the objective if it will be more beneficial points wise.
I would more than likely try to shoot down planes then go after my objective in a 5x5 scout mission. The ground fire from MGs and infantry is more miss than hit in this game. Anti-Aircraft guns on the other hand can be deadly, check those out.

Dale, my experience has been almost exactly the opposite: Ground fire can be devastating to the point where I don't even have to engage an enemy near my trenches and MGs; I'll just hang back and let the special damage rack up. Anti-aircraft, on the other hand, is completely ineffective and involves too much record keeping to be worthwhile.

And the aircraft for the first mission will be 3 Albatros D.III, 2 Halberstadt D.III vs 2 Nieuport 17, 2 SPAD S.VII, 1 SPAD S.XIII. I'm open to suggestions though.