Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 251 to 287 of 287

Thread: Mess of The Daring Young Men !

  1. #251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    I guess it’s the “let’s fix it and make it better” side of me, Dave.

    A simple fix would be to place the bomb behind the plane in the Declare Bombing phase.
    First turn use the actual movement (straight or stall) and subsequent use stalls.
    Pete, I've thought it over and realized that the bombing rule compromises on both speed and time to fall. Yes, we could come up with a more realistic speed but we would also need a more realistic time to fall, which as calculated for 3,000m would be > 0.5 minutes taking air resistance (terminal velocity) into account. Given the 1-2 seconds per phase that means at least a dozen phases - perhaps 2-3 X that - before the bombs hit. Is that worth doing?

    I took the SPAD XIII maximum speed and using the 1-2 second per phase to calculate that the ground scale is between 1-to-500 and 1-to-1000 in order to be consistent with the speed and time per phase. Okay...with that I calculated that a SPAD XIII dropping a bomb while travelling at top speed (crazy - but just to use the maximum case) from altitude 8 (3000m) takes 4 phases and travels (using the ground scale) of 250-500m horizontally. Yes, that's unrealistic for 4-8 seconds but it's equally unrealistic that it reaches the ground in 4-8 seconds. As we both calculated it would 24 seconds (in a vacuum), so longer with air resistance. Let's say it really takes 4 X the 4 phases (i.e., 32 seconds using 2 seconds / phase) that equates to less than 50 kph even though in terms of game mechanics it looks like the bomb is going 200 kph - all so that the bomb reaches the ground in a reasonable number of turns for game play.

    With respect to placing the bomb in front of the plane, don't forget that at altitude 2 the bomb hits immediately but using physics it should be > 10 seconds (5 phases).

    If we're going to 'fix' the speed of the bombs we also have to 'fix' the time to fall. To me it seems the game exaggerations cancel each other out (i.e., if your travelling in an aircraft and your dropping your bombs it will hit a target ahead of where you release and given the altitude quite a ways ahead of where the aircraft is at that instant. That's the important part of a game....is the game modelling the decisions the player has to make.

    Does that make sense?

    Apologies for beating a dead horse - you can blame my military operational research career where I spent a lot of time thinking about such things has how to model this or that.

  2. #252

    Default

    We can stable the horse for a while, Paul.

    It really boils down to oversimplification by the game designers.
    When they added altitude to a simple card game there were a lot of things swept under the rug for the sake of playability.
    In the same way that Dave and Zoe came up with better ways of handling altitude (which I am also pursuing) I think there are better ways to handle bombing. The original simple one works for low level trench attacks but falls apart with altitudes over 4000ft. I think the confusing visual is why I have always had trouble with it in our scenarios (hence my Excel attempt)
    I will backburner this and look at it down the road as ideas come to mind.

    Cheers

  3. #253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    ...A simple fix would be to place the bomb behind the plane in the Declare Bombing phase....
    If you place the bomb card behind the plane on the 'declare bombing phase' (stage 1 on the diagram) you'll struggle if you want to play a turn next phase !
    If you placed it behind the plane on the release phase (stage 2 on the diagram) that would make some sense as the bombs could be let go at any point along that manoeuvre and the plane could then break off and let the bomb card run freely in the next phase.
    I'd still go with my ED special rules, or, a version of them, for bombs dropped from on high.
    As you say, worth revisiting in the future
    Last edited by flash; 06-04-2019 at 11:57.

    "He is wise who watches"

  4. #254

    Default

    My Italian front variant of Scenario 6 is now up in the AAR section:

    https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sh...292#post504292

  5. #255

    Default Uncle's spot of Leave...

    Uncle will be away on leave as of Friday - he will be in deepest darkest Kernow with memsahib so communication will be fairly limited.

    He won't be able to do anything on rosters during that time, or vet any tallies so if you want any services like that get the request in 'toot sweet', otherwise leave them on the corner of his desk and he'll deal with them when he gets back.

    "He is wise who watches"

  6. #256

    Default

    Bringing this into the Mess to avoid cluttering up John's BRF:

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    What this points out to me is we need to stick with low level bombing
    The rules as written are pretty sparse.
    I think using dice to determine accuracy might actually be better than what we have....

    ...Another thing I thought about would be having different size markers determined by altitude.
    Bombing from very high altitude would be a counter the size of most wargame counters.
    i.e. Very difficult to get a direct hit.
    Using a die as the decision maker would not feel very rewarding to me. You'd have to have a range and line involvement too otherwise you could drop bombs without aiming them, roll a die & get lucky. Subbing that with flying over the target as some people do doesn't work either as currently you can release the eggs and turn away immediately.
    Chopping about the card order would be better. The bomb shooting forward has never set well with me either but 'them's the rules', though I'd happily improve on them with a minor change.
    Maybe if you left the straight or stall arrow of the 'release' manoeuvre in place instead of removing it at the end of the movement phase then on the next manoeuvre move the plane and put the bomb card on the arrow of the 'release' manoeuvre; then on the next manoeuvre play the bomb cards as given in the rules. Not perfect still but stops the bombs shooting ahead & it would look and feel better ?

    So something like this:
    1. declare bombing;
    2. manoeuvre plane & leave manoeuvre card in place;
    3. manoeuvre plane & place bomb card on manoeuvre card of previous phase;
    4. manoeuvre plane & place a card and manoeuvre bomb card to target if at level 2.
    5. If above Alt level 2 - place another manoeuvre card for bomb card as required for altitude in use (and maybe mess about with that mechanic to achieve a parabolic drop ?!)

    As to adjusting targets etc for altitudes - perhaps making red rings around the red dot would suffice - small centre dot for highest altitude, biggest ring for the lowest to attain a direct hit ?

    Well enough from me - time for tiffin

    "He is wise who watches"

  7. #257

    Default

    I am sure we can come up with something better.
    Your suggestion sounds good. I still think the bomb card should only move with a stall (or maybe a straight for just the first move)
    Another issue I ran into was keeping track of the movement card needed for a bomb once the plane has moved on.
    Need spares to place with the bomb. Or custom combination movement/bomb cards.
    I know Ares mentions placing markers at the front or back of the bomb card to indicate Straight or Stall but that added to the ‘fiddliness’ for me.

  8. #258

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    I am sure we can come up with something better.
    Your suggestion sounds good. I still think the bomb card should only move with a stall (or maybe a straight for just the first move)
    Another issue I ran into was keeping track of the movement card needed for a bomb once the plane has moved on.
    Need spares to place with the bomb. Or custom combination movement/bomb cards.
    I know Ares mentions placing markers at the front or back of the bomb card to indicate Straight or Stall but that added to the ‘fiddliness’ for me.
    I was thinking of something along the lines that Dave suggests (i.e., the first play of the bomb card is such that it's behind the plane). In terms of further movement for higher altitudes I'm not in favour of a stall card for all further movement beyond the first move as this would mean all higher altitude bombing is the same for all planes whether flying at a slow (stall) or fast (straight) speed. The very small difference in movement rates for the first card is less than the length of the bomb card. In fact the stall movement is so short you might as well just go with moving the bomb card one card length.

    Keeping in mind that Dave's suggestion - the bomb card would almost always be behind the plane unless the plane dropped on a straight and then had two or more stalls in a row (possible for some planes). I'm not sure any further adjustments are needed, but one option that's more complicated is that if the plane drops a bomb on a 'straight' the bomb card uses a straight for the next slowest class, but that as problems. Just thinking 'out loud' or 'on the keyboard'.

  9. #259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowDragon View Post
    ...Keeping in mind that Dave's suggestion - the bomb card would almost always be behind the plane unless the plane dropped on a straight and then had two or more stalls in a row (possible for some planes). I'm not sure any further adjustments are needed, but one option that's more complicated is that if the plane drops a bomb on a 'straight' the bomb card uses a straight for the next slowest class, but that as problems..,.
    Your suggestion to use the next lower class did cross my mind, but not everyone has the luxury of having all the cards, so I tossed that aside.

    I think having the bomb card(s) behind the plane satisfies my original beef that referenced Hawker Typhoons and rockets.
    Speaking of ... I have not looked at how bombing is handled in WGS....

    Probably the same, but maybe not?

  10. #260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    Your suggestion to use the next lower class did cross my mind, but not everyone has the luxury of having all the cards, so I tossed that aside.

    I think having the bomb card(s) behind the plane satisfies my original beef that referenced Hawker Typhoons and rockets.
    Speaking of ... I have not looked at how bombing is handled in WGS....

    Probably the same, but maybe not?
    Using the next lower speed class should only ever be an option for the reason you cite. I'd also add that it doesn't make a lot of difference - about 15-40 mm over three phases in flight which is about 10% plus/minus of the total difference. So not a lot of value added.

    It makes sense that when you announce the bomb release and then position the bomb at the planes location for the 1st phase is about right. Of course, all of this is mixing apples and oranges when it comes to movement phase time and time for the bomb to fall, but we'll leave that aside for what looks about right....and rocket shooting doesn't quite look right.

    As for using a stall card for subsequent movements, I looked at your movement chart. it's probably okay for the slower speeds but makes a much bigger difference maybe too big a difference for faster planes.

  11. #261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowDragon
    ...As for using a stall card for subsequent movements, I looked at your movement chart. it's probably okay for the slower speeds but makes a much bigger difference maybe too big a difference for faster planes.
    Those faster planes would never be using high altitude bombing.
    More like low altitude dive bombing. The altitude 2 setting is about it for them.

  12. #262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    Those faster planes would never be using high altitude bombing.
    More like low altitude dive bombing. The altitude 2 setting is about it for them.
    Agree, but that's because it's too difficult to hit the target and not because the can't drop a bomb from high altitude. Good rules discourage bad tactics versus forbid them. Using a slower card increases the likelihood of hitting the target since longer distances are harder to estimate plus the bomb card length is a far smaller % of the total distance travelled.

    Anyway, I found this - which as WWII bomb charts with impact velocity and angle of impact for speed of aircraft and altitude.

    https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/thread...t.39410/page-2

    I used the charts to estimate various factors for a bomb dropped at 8000 ft (altitude 7) at 100 and 50 mph (about speed A / B and a stall). The time to fall was about 22 seconds and the vertical impact speed is just over 95% what one would expect from falling in a vacuum. So not much affect from air resistance - I was surprised by that. Also, not much reduction in horizontal velocity either (computed from the angle of impact) - again I was surprised.

  13. #263

    Default

    For the detailed calculations - if you don't hate math and instead of watching that traffic light change colours....

    Estimates from the chart for 8000 ft:

    For a 50 mph aircraft: Angle of impact = 5 degrees (actually slightly less) and the speed of impact = 675 fps
    For a 100 mph aircraft: angle of impact = 11 degrees and the speed of impact = 685 fps

    The vertical speed at impact is 672 fps for both cases. The horizontal speed at impact is 59 fps (40 mph) and 131 fps (89 mph).

    In a vacuum it would take 22 sec to fall and would reach a vertical impact speed of 715 fps instead of the 672 fps. So, air resistance reduced the vertical speed by 6%.

    Solving for a reduced, equivalent constant acceleration = an effective vertical acceleration of 28 f/s2 versus the 32 f/s2 in a vacuum. The time to fall is then 23.8 s which is 6% longer than in a vacuum.

    Using the average bomb speed - i.e., half it's initial speed (aircraft speed) and it's final speed (impact speed) yields average speeds between 5% and 10% for the 100 mph and 50 mph aircraft. Note - it's likely the same difference for both bases but the error estimating from the chart would affect the lower speed aircraft case more due to the smaller impact angle. So a 5-10% reduction in average horizontal speed for the duration of the bomb falling, which is also a 5-10% reduction in horizontal distance travelled.

    In case you were interested.

  14. #264

  15. #265

    Default

    I've given up bombing for Lent.
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  16. #266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    My brain hurts
    Sorry about that Pete, but I've kept at trying to compute reasonably accurate bomb trajectories from 1st principles...and here goes.

    Not that anyone has to read this, but this is internet and normal rules don't apply so I expect some people will read despite the 'trigger warnings'.

    No formulae and math, I'm hiding that stuff (if anyone wants it I can provide links data and explain) but I'll just give the results. I calculated the time to fall and horizontal distance for a 40lb conventional bomb, taking into account air resistance as well as how air resistance change according to altitude. The following are for a K deck aircraft at cruising speed (160 kph / 147 fps) for altitudes 500m, 1000m, 2500m and 4500m to represent altitude bands 1, 2, 3 and 4 for bombing. (Note that the vertical distance doubles for each band, so the trajectory does become more vertical with each move for high altitude bombing.)

    Altitude Band 1:
    Time to fall = 10 seconds. Horizontal distance moved = 1300' / 400m. Average velocity = 138 kph (86% of aircraft speed at the time of bomb drop)

    Altitude Band 2:
    Time to fall = 14 seconds. Horizontal distance moved = 1800' / 550m. Average horizontal speed = 130 kph (81% of aircraft speed)

    Altitude Band 3:
    Time to fall =24 seconds. Horizontal distance moved = 2750' / 840m. Average horizontal speed = 123 kph (77% of aircraft speed)

    Altitude Bank 4:
    Time to fall = 36 seconds. Horizontal distance moved = 3600' / 1100m. Average horizontal speed = 112 kph (70% of aircraft speed)

    Note that stall speed is approximately 100 kph.

    It's hard to convert this to the game scale because the time to fall does not compare to how time is used otherwise in the game (i.e., supposedly one move = 2 seconds which would imply 5 to 18 moves for a bomb to fall depending on the altitude band).

    It's also hard to determine internal consistency of the bombing rule since it's not clear if the bomb is dropped at the start of the plane's bomb drop move or at the end of the move as these respectively imply 2 moves (plane / bomb card + manoeuvre card) or 1 such move (just the bomb card plus manoeuvre card move).

    In terms of the relative horizontal moves calculated, the 2nd band is 1.4 X the 1st altitude band, the 3rd band is 2.1 X and the 4 band 2.8 X. The relative time to fall for the 2nd band is 1.4 X the 1st band, for the 2nd band it's 2.4 X and for the 4th band it's 3.4 X.

    If the bomb drop is at the end of the plane's move then the relative distances are 2X, 3X and 4X for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th altitude bands compared to dropping from altitude band 1.
    If the bomb drop is at the beginning of the plane's move then the relative distances are 1.5 X, 2 X and 2.5 X since the bomb gets the plane's move plus an additional bomb move for the 1st phase.

    Make of that what you will, but other than the jarring visual of the bomb ahead of the plane, I'm not sure how one would fix things. It looks to me like there's internal consistency for the bombing altitude rule but that rule isn't consistent with the rest of the rules with respect to how it treats time (i.e., 5 seconds per phase would seem to be used by the bombing rules versus 1 or 2 seconds for the basic rules).

  17. #267

    Default

    In a Nutshell: Time is not consistent throughout the rules.

    A while back I found a post in the forum concerning climb rates.
    For example, Albatros D.II with 160hp Mercedes
    2,000 meters 10 min
    3,000 meters 19 min

    Converting that 3000 meters to roughly Level 8 per our previous examples (3350 was used for C.III)
    Ares Climb rate for the D.II is 5, therefore it would take 5 phases to climb One Level (but there is only one climb card in any given deck, so that equates to five turns, therefore 15 phases) X 8 for level 8 = 120 Phases. (40 turns!) i.e. a very, very, very long game by our standards.
    120 x 2 seconds per phase = 240 seconds = 4 minutes. Still nowhere near as long as is actually required.

    I think the 2 seconds per phase must have been calculated based on actual speed compared to length of straight on the various cards.
    Apples, Oranges and Lemons (or Grapefruit) depending on what aspect we are looking at as far as time is concerned in the game.


    Personally I think the 2 seconds per phase is far too short when you start taking other things into consideration.
    A 10 Turn game certainly feels longer than 1 minute of elapsed time.
    Last edited by Stumptonian; 06-12-2019 at 06:04. Reason: Fixed the climb calculations

  18. #268

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    In a Nutshell: Time is not consistent throughout the rules.

    *****************************Snipped**************************************

    Personally I think the 2 seconds per phase is far two short when you start taking other things into consideration.
    A 10 Turn game certainly feels longer than 1 minute of elapsed time.
    You are not wrong there Pete!

    "Its a fine line indeed between going out in a Blaze of Glory or having Crashed & Burnt!"
    Member Australian Society of WW1 Aero Historians

  19. #269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    In a Nutshell: Time is not consistent throughout the rules....
    Nothing seems consistent throughout the rules Pete !
    The main issues from the bits we're looking at come from being bolt on mechanics to what started off as a card game involving only scout planes, with no mats to play on. There was no altitude, there were no bombers, no flak, they've had to be made to fit around what was already there.
    To me it has always been a straight forward skirmish game - the end play of a ten minute stalk, so a five/six second game turn fits the bill; fudging the rest to make it playable is a reasonable compromise.

    "He is wise who watches"

  20. #270

    Default

    As I was waking up this morning (funny how Juan's mind works) I realized the calculations I posted to do with climb time were wrong. I had it all worked out but skipped the bit about there only being one climb card per deck when posting, so the time is much longer (120 phases, not 40) but still much less than would actually be required.
    But who has time to play 40 turns?

    To me it has always been a straight forward skirmish game - the end play of a ten minute stalk, so a five/six second game turn fits the bill; fudging the rest to make it playable is a reasonable compromise.
    I think that's it. The quick card game, as you stated, did not originally have even 2-seaters, nevermind the Giants that came later.
    Or flak. etc. etc.

    I never played the original game or the subsequent add-on expansions (although I have multiple copies of each now), so I don't have a good feel for how things like balloons and giant bombers worked in that format.

    As has been said many times throughout this forum, this is a game, not a simulation.
    I tend to forget that.

  21. #271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    ...As has been said many times throughout this forum, this is a game, not a simulation. I tend to forget that.
    We all have our moments - it is fun to tinker with rules & mechanics though.

    "He is wise who watches"

  22. #272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    We all have our moments - it is fun to tinker with rules & mechanics though.
    We do - one of mine was getting far too interested in the physics of objects falling out of airplanes. Still I was amazed that with a small amount of internet effort I could find the info I needed for reasonable 1st order estimates. I had thought it would be more difficult...at least not for a windless and cloudless day.

  23. #273

    Default

    I always think of games as flexi time/ distance scenarios. Some of it in slow-mo, some speeded up much as pilots reported their own impressions of a skirmish amongst the clouds.
    I was once trying to relate 20 soldiers bases representing a regiment of 600, all being able to hide behind a cottage which itself was only twice as high as a six foot figure, with trees of 100 feet towering above it, whilst a track through this forest was seemingly 100 feet wide.
    This was when the nightmares started. Then a guy at a show picked up one of my 25 mm soldiers and told me the buttons were grouped wrongly for that Regiment. I decided at that moment to stop being a button counter.
    That's why I don't mind aircraft which pull Immelmann turns on four pegs only the height of three aircraft above the ground, or get upset when my favourite pilot goes down in the inevitable ball of fire.
    This saves me a lot of money on my Psychiatrist's bills and I can then spend it on buying even more plastic planes and ships to sail on coloured mouse mat material or fly through cushion filling clouds.
    I'm not mad I tell you! Well no more than most.
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  24. #274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Officer Kyte View Post
    I always think of games as flexi time/ distance scenarios. Some of it in slow-mo, some speeded up much as pilots reported their own impressions of a skirmish amongst the clouds.
    I was thinking the same thing.
    Kind of like video game versions of combat that allowed the player to speed up time to get through long, boring bits to the heat of the action.

    I will try to keep that in mind while thinking things through.

  25. #275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post





    As has been said many times throughout this forum, this is a game, not a simulation.
    I tend to forget that.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVUxK1mNups

    2.27 time clip.


    I'm learning to fly, but I ain't got wings
    Coming down is the hardest thing

  26. #276

  27. #277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikkifriend View Post
    ... 2.27 time clip.
    Brilliant, just need that sound bite over a video of us playing !

    "He is wise who watches"

  28. #278

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Officer Kyte View Post
    I always think of games as flexi time/ distance scenarios. Some of it in slow-mo, some speeded up much as pilots reported their own impressions of a skirmish amongst the clouds.
    I was once trying to relate 20 soldiers bases representing a regiment of 600, all being able to hide behind a cottage which itself was only twice as high as a six foot figure, with trees of 100 feet towering above it, whilst a track through this forest was seemingly 100 feet wide.
    This was when the nightmares started. Then a guy at a show picked up one of my 25 mm soldiers and told me the buttons were grouped wrongly for that Regiment. I decided at that moment to stop being a button counter.
    That's why I don't mind aircraft which pull Immelmann turns on four pegs only the height of three aircraft above the ground, or get upset when my favourite pilot goes down in the inevitable ball of fire.
    This saves me a lot of money on my Psychiatrist's bills and I can then spend it on buying even more plastic planes and ships to sail on coloured mouse mat material or fly through cushion filling clouds.
    I'm not mad I tell you! Well no more than most.
    Rob.
    You are very sane Rob. The main thing is for us all to enjoy Wings game to the utmost & come back for more.

    "Its a fine line indeed between going out in a Blaze of Glory or having Crashed & Burnt!"
    Member Australian Society of WW1 Aero Historians

  29. #279

    Default

    Right, off for brekkers then final packing & jump aboard the tender for the lift to Blighty. See you chaps in a few days - I will try and keep up with events in the papers.

    "He is wise who watches"

  30. #280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gully_raker View Post
    You are very sane Rob. The main thing is for us all to enjoy Wings game to the utmost & come back for more.
    Thanks for the vote of confidence Baz. I am not sure that Mrs K would agree with you about my being sane.
    As for enjoying the game I am with you 100%
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  31. #281

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    Right, off for brekkers then final packing & jump aboard the tender for the lift to Blighty. See you chaps in a few days - I will try and keep up with events in the papers.
    Enjoy your holiday, it's going to be quiet in the mess without you for the next few days.

  32. #282

    Default

    Give Cornwall my regards.


    I'm learning to fly, but I ain't got wings
    Coming down is the hardest thing

  33. #283

    Default

    I've not been reading all the later stuff about high level bombing because I didn't want to spoil my game, it's played now but it seems there have been some problems with the trickiness of having multiple bombs in the air, probably travelling at different speeds. I've just added a bit to my original posting to show how I did it for my trial set up and it worked reasonably OK. I didn't post this originally because I know you've all been playing much longer than I and didn't want to appear to be teaching my grandmother to suck eggs. (never understood that phrase)

    Anyway if you've not played the game yet then it may help, and if you have played and it would have helped - my apologies.

  34. #284

    Default

    John, Your numbers look like a good way to track the flight of the bombs.
    I tried Ares suggestion of markers on the cards. I also alternated the actual bomb cards between light coloured Nexus ones and the dark Ares ones. That did help a bit.

  35. #285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    John, Your numbers look like a good way to track the flight of the bombs.
    I tried Ares suggestion of markers on the cards. I also alternated the actual bomb cards between light coloured Nexus ones and the dark Ares ones. That did help a bit.
    Is this where you put a marker on one edge and move it round the card, that maybe for reloading AA, either way it seemed a bit convoluted to me. Anyway where's your game report, I'm looking forward to reading it.

  36. #286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond View Post
    Is this where you put a marker on one edge and move it round the card, that maybe for reloading AA, either way it seemed a bit convoluted to me. Anyway where's your game report, I'm looking forward to reading it.
    No. They suggest putting counters at the front of the bomb card if dropped using a Straight, or at the rear if dropped with a Stall.
    I hope to get time to write it up this weekend. As long as SWMBO does not have other plans for me.
    Perhaps I will play the “Fathers Day Card”

  37. #287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    No. They suggest putting counters at the front of the bomb card if dropped using a Straight, or at the rear if dropped with a Stall.
    I hope to get time to write it up this weekend. As long as SWMBO does not have other plans for me.
    Perhaps I will play the “Fathers Day Card”
    Hahaha, they've not tried that with 3 cards in flight at the same time, some cards over lapping and a plane trying to overtake the lot.

    Anyway, I've finished my mammoth hunting and should have my game posted tomorrow.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456


Similar Missions

  1. OTT Daring Young Men Campaign 1916
    By flash in forum Over the Trenches
    Replies: 250
    Last Post: 05-13-2019, 16:41
  2. Sticky: OTT Daring Young Men (DYM) Campaign Rules
    By flash in forum Over the Trenches
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-16-2018, 03:06
  3. Daring Woman saves a Plane.
    By Naharaht in forum Officer's Club
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-06-2017, 11:30
  4. What goes on in the mess, stays in the mess.......
    By Guntruck in forum Officer's Club
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-23-2013, 02:34
  5. KoTA 7B The Daring Rescue.
    By Flying Officer Kyte in forum WGF: Campaign Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-19-2012, 11:51

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
  •