Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: OTTDYM - Mission 12 - “Ending with a Bang” 27th March 1916 by Mikeemagnus

  1. #51

    Default

    How about this to simplify the rule and I think is what Mike intended.

    Forget about altitude, range, etc. and use this rule:

    When photographing a crater a plane takes two 'A' damage cards (i.e. on the turn it plays the stall). While photographing a crater a plane is considered at a lower altitude for other planes. That's it.

    If I play it again I will do it that way.

  2. #52

    Default

    I see the problem now I think The penny just dropped, but its taken around three years to do so. You see, right from the start of my participation in the OTT programme (and I really was very green at that stage: probably still am compared with you experts) I adopted the use of the OTT House rules, like a good little beginner should. That included Flashes simple altitude rules, where you can jump up and down pegs at a time on just about any manoeuver card you like. Problem is, I equated pegs with altitude and until this little fraca arose, have continued to do so, merrily, for the past 36 missions Which means , of course, that my climbing out of range of AAMG fire on a single left or right hand turn is quite illegal, in terms of altitude climb rate, if we count the climb rate of various aircraft as applicable, which, of course I had assumed it wasn't, because the rules had been simplified - the title said so. Hence all of the confusion. Its down to my mis-interpretation of the Simple altitude rules which would appear to be less simple than I thought.

    Now some kind person can put me right on the above, which no doubt is also incorrect Oh I give up

    PS I just looked at those rules again and I'm still none the wiser

  3. #53

    Default

    Muppet.

    "He is wise who watches"

  4. #54

    Default

    Many tend not to use WoG Alt rules hence:
    OTT House Rule: Altitude: Scenario will be written without altitude in mind - those who wish to play with altitude may add that dimension to their game if they wish to using whatever altitude rules they prefer.

    Mike has never grasped my simple altitude even in spite of my attempts to explain them face to face on a couple of occasions, Pete doesn't understand them either having read his comment on the AAR !

    You can move up or down a peg on manoeuvre cards, you can go up or down multiple pegs on a climb, dive or immel card.
    A peg is not a level of altitude in the WoG sense - more like a climb token ie part of a level of altitude.
    Shooting ranges are unaffected on the whole.

    So you can start a game where you like - eg at level 4 - on as many pegs as you like
    on a manoeuvre card you can lose a peg & dip into level 3.
    on a manoeuvre card you can gain a peg & pop back up to level 4.
    On a dive card you can lose more than 1 peg into level 3
    On a climb card you can gain more than one peg, possibly into level 4.
    It must be simple - I wrote it !!

    So Mike had it right in the sense of you can go up and down 'dipping' in and out of range he just misunderstood the basic idea of it being an increment not a full level.

    Mike also misrepresented the alternate suggestion regarding AAMG - quoting
    "As for AAMG - effective range of a Vickers is 6500 feet (2000m), indirect fire is double that so they too will be well within range....." and stating they give two A cards damage which is incorrect.
    The rest of that passage is "... It has been suggested that perhaps you should draw 2 damage cards & apply the lowest for targets at such altitude."
    Well we know how that worked out last time !
    Last edited by flash; 01-23-2020 at 02:37.

    "He is wise who watches"

  5. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    Many tend not to use WoG Alt rules hence:
    OTT House Rule: Altitude: Scenario will be written without altitude in mind - those who wish to play with altitude may add that dimension to their game if they wish to using whatever altitude rules they prefer.

    Mike has never grasped my simple altitude even in spite of my attempts to explain them face to face on a couple of occasions, Pete doesn't understand them either having read his comment on the AAR !

    You can move up or down a peg on manoeuvre cards, you can go up or down multiple pegs on a climb, dive or immel card.
    A peg is not a level of altitude in the WoG sense - more like a climb token ie part of a level of altitude.
    Shooting ranges are unaffected on the whole.

    So you can start a game where you like - eg at level 4 - on as many pegs as you like
    on a manoeuvre card you can lose a peg & dip into level 3.
    on a manoeuvre card you can gain a peg & pop back up to level 4.
    On a dive card you can lose more than 1 peg into level 3
    On a climb card you can gain more than one peg, possibly into level 4.
    It must be simple - I wrote it !!

    So Mike had it right in the sense of you can go up and down 'dipping' in and out of range he just misunderstood the basic idea of it being an increment not a full level.

    Mike also misrepresented the alternate suggestion regarding AAMG - quoting
    "As for AAMG - effective range of a Vickers is 6500 feet (2000m), indirect fire is double that so they too will be well within range....." and stating they give two A cards damage which is incorrect.
    The rest of that passage is "... It has been suggested that perhaps you should draw 2 damage cards & apply the lowest for targets at such altitude."
    Well we know how that worked out last time !
    Your altitude rule is clear, at least to me. It's relatively simple but not as simple as the standard rules which is what one would expect since your rule is a 'higher fidelity' rule in that it provides greater differentiation of altitude differences between dogfighting aircraft. As it's written somewhere, it's to capture the 'bubble' of 3-dimensional dynamics of air-to-air combat. I may try it out some day as it allows for some of the standard tactics (e.g., zoom dive) that can't be represented in the standard rules.

    However....

    I don't think the house rule is that appropriate for air-to-ground combat simply because 'dipping in and out of range' of ground fire is that easy as it's not easy to determine if you are or are not in range. The range in the game is an artificial construct. In reality is far fuzzier. For example, in the Falklands war UK air defence units fired their Rapier missiles when Argentinian aircraft were out of range and the Argentinians turned back in response. In a game no player would do this. In reality it makes sense since the purpose of air defence is to protect which it can do by deterring enemy aircraft just as easily as by destroying enemy aircraft. Self-preservation is a much bigger deal in reality than in games.

  6. #56

    Default

    Pete doesn't understand them either having read his comment on the AAR !
    So you can start a game where you like - eg at level 4 - on as many pegs as you like
    on a manoeuvre card you can lose a peg & dip into level 3.
    on a manoeuvre card you can gain a peg & pop back up to level 4.
    On a dive card you can lose more than 1 peg into level 3
    On a climb card you can gain more than one peg, possibly into level 4

    I guess what I don't understand is how you are keeping track of the 'actual' altitude while popping up and down one or two pegs.

    That's part of the reason I developed my own 'virtual chit' method where you know exactly what level you are at, and each climb rate is handled, rather than 'one size fits all'.

  7. #57

    Default

    See, I told you !

    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    ... I guess what I don't understand is how you are keeping track of the 'actual' altitude while popping up and down one or two pegs.
    Well it's quite simple really - For example - If the model is required to start a scenario at level 4 and is sat atop, lets say, 6 pegs that is its starting position.
    If it chooses to lose altitude on a turn you remove a peg. It is now at level three (point something). If in the next turn it gains altitude replace the peg & it's now back on 6 pegs at level 4. It ain't difficult. It's called counting.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stumptonian View Post
    ...That's part of the reason I developed my own 'virtual chit' method where you know exactly what level you are at, and each climb rate is handled, rather than 'one size fits all'.
    If you read the rules there is an advanced option based on climb rates and the version in the OTT is not the most up to date variation, that's in the files.

    If you have to cross multiple altitude levels it gets harder but that's fairly unusual and can be fudged.
    I find it provides me (at least) with a more dynamic altitude game sans tokens/chits/dials.

    This is a demo AAR I did when I first started developing them, it may,or, may not make things clearer.
    https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sh...ing-the-Moves-!
    Last edited by flash; 01-23-2020 at 10:27.

    "He is wise who watches"

  8. #58

    Default

    I retrofitted Mike’s intended AA fire on to my game without AA fire. The results are added as a comment to the post.

    https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sh...ng-with-a-Bang
    Last edited by ShadowDragon; 01-24-2020 at 06:44.

  9. #59

    Default

    I still have yet to run this mission...everyone around me in the hospital or dying, things have gotten crazy-busy around here. I WILL get to it...someday. And I even ended up, considering "temporary" replacements, with three full two-seater crews.

  10. #60

    Default

    I've not been around for a while so just caught up on this discussion very interesting and totally confusing, I'll read the aar's later and see if I can make a bit more sense out of it.
    The overarching premise that scenarios "should be written without altitude but this can be used by the players if they wish" seems good advice as most seem to have a different version of how altitude movement works.
    I do hope to get to the game soon because I'm really looking forward to the 3 on 3 two seater dogfight. I think I'll stay clear of the craters until thats resolved.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Missions

  1. Mess of The Daring Young Men !
    By flash in forum Over the Trenches
    Replies: 541
    Last Post: 02-21-2020, 02:29
  2. AAR OTT Daring Young Men Mission 2, 14th January 1916, Coming and Going
    By mikeemagnus in forum Over the Trenches
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-22-2019, 09:34
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-19-2019, 07:27
  4. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-22-2019, 15:09
  5. AAR OTT Daring Young Men Mission 1 Luftwachdienst – Sperrflug - 5th January 1916
    By Flying Officer Kyte in forum Over the Trenches
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 01-21-2019, 11:34

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
  •