Two seater Rear Gunner Effectiveness - another idea

[Malibumax]

Effectiveness of rear gunners in WG1 (and WG2)

Hi all

I have just started playing WoG with my friends after a break of a couple of years following a house move, a busy year at work and various lockdowns.

Rather than our usual WW2 games we have been playing WW1 instead. After several games of WG1 we have come to the conclusion that the rear guns on the two-seaters are too effective under the standard rules, particularly when they can fire every turn regardless of what the aircraft is doing.

After reading through several threads about this, and reading the various solutions proposed, I noticed that the consensus seemed to be on limiting what the rear gunner can do rather than on what is affecting his ability to fire.

My group has come up with the following solution.

The rear gunner many not fire if the aircraft has made a steep manoeuvre or any manoeuvre other than:

A straight
A gentle turn (left or right)
A gentle side slip (left or right)

This rule requires no book keeping, is compatible with the existing rules and the flight cards can easily be checked to see if the aircraft is permitted to fire. To put it simply, if the pilot throws his plane all over the place then its ability to fire the rear gun is reduced. However, if two or more two-seaters fly together and stick to simple manoeuvres then the rear gunners can do their job more effectively and protect the formation.

The reasoning behind the rules is based on the problems faced by a rear gunner when trying to operate a typical gun mount in the back of an aircraft when subject to sudden changes of speed, sudden changes in G forces, and the general buffeting experienced in the back of such aircraft, all of which will reduce the effectiveness of any firing.

We have already used a similar rule in our WW2 games with regard to the Stuka and Me110. In both cases it was reported by RAF pilots that the rear gunners were only able to fly when flying fairly straight and level. As soon as a Stuka or Me110 took any evasive action the fire from the rear gunner became much less effective and even stopped as the gunner had to hold on or was thrown about by the G forces.

This was confirmed by the RAF's Air Fighting Development Unit report on a captured Me110, which stated:

“If the Me110 is taking evasive action it has been found that due to the limitations of the free gun mounting and the effect of 'G', accurate shooting is extremely difficult.”

The effects of G forces on gunners can also be seen in these two modern videos showing dogfights with replica WW1 aircraft. It's interesting to see that the two seater pilot does not fly the aircraft like a fighter but keeps his aircraft fairly steady to allow the rear gunner gunner to shoot. I would imagine that many of you will have already seen these but they are worth a second look.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2ZzSRUyhL8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ERvun6wzhQ

Another effect of G forces can also be seen in the 1969 film “The Battle of Britain”, when a close up of a Heinkel He111 cockpit in a tight turn while under attack clearly shows the nose gunner is not lying down manning his gun but is instead braced against the sides of the cockpit to prevent himself being thrown around. Check this clip at about the 2' 45” point:

Heinkel nose gunner - Battle of Britain film

The historical evidence suggests that it is the effect of G forces which limits the effectiveness of a rear gunner and simply applying a limit to which manoeuvres can be performed while still allowing the two seater to fire the rear gun will replicate this without requiring any new rules or book keeping.

[Bishop33]

Sounds reasonable.

[flash]

See what you're going for Max but it doesn't work for me.
Most tandems, including the Roland, have pretty standard decks with only straights, turns & sideslips so won't be much affected. They have stalls and alt cards which are steeps, which using this ruling they won't be able to fire on... Then if you pick up engine damage it effects your rear gun ? I don't think that's right.
The tandems it will really impact are the Hannover, the Brisfit, the Strutter & Halberstadt - W, S & V deck's respectively. The Hannover has sharp, steep turns and all these decks have Immelmann turns but an official optional rule already exists restricting the use of the rear gun in reversals.
Ways to make the gunners less effective would be to not allow +1 Aim bonus, if you use it, and/or, draw two cards & the recipient receives the lowest. Make use of the blindspot optional rule too, if you aren't already.
Blindspot, Observer & Immelmann optional rules on p.23 & 24 RAP(2014)

[Malibumax]

Thanks for the reply Flash. Something to think about.

You are obviously more knowledgeable than we are regarding the WW1 flight decks (we mostly play WW2). We have a game laid on for this evening so we'll have another look at the decks and have a rethink.

BTW we already use the Blind Spot rule.

I'm sure we'll figure something that suits us.

Max

[Ken at Sunrise]

Hi,

Another thing to consider is that Rear Gunners/Photographers are disabled (out of the game) after a single injury. On the other hand pilots require two injuries. With this, and the ones Flash mentioned, there are several limitations already.

[Nicola Zee]

See what you're going for Max but it doesn't work for me.
Most tandems, including the Roland, have pretty standard decks with only straights, turns & sideslips so won't be much affected. They have stalls and alt cards which are steeps, which using this ruling they won't be able to fire on... Then if you pick up engine damage it effects your rear gun ? I don't think that's right.
The tandems it will really impact are the Hannover, the Brisfit, the Strutter & Halberstadt - W, S & V deck's respectively. The Hannover has sharp, steep turns and all these decks have Immelmann turns but an official optional rule already exists restricting the use of the rear gun in reversals.
Ways to make the gunners less effective would be to not allow +1 Aim bonus, if you use it, and/or, draw two cards & the recipient receives the lowest. Make use of the blindspot optional rule too, if you aren't already.
Blindspot, Observer & Immelmann optional rules on p.23 & 24 RAP(2014)

I, also, think two-seaters are too powerful.

Impacting on the planes like the Brisfit makes historical sense. When flown like a two-seater, most of the first flight was shot down. It was only became effective when flown as a fighter. This implies throwing it around did make it hard to use the rear gun. So, I may add this house rule.

To make two seaters less effective, I made the optional blind-spot more of a weakness by not restricting it to short range.

To make fighters more effective and two-seaters less effective I added deflection for shooting.

[flash]

Thanks for the reply Flash. Something to think about...

Another option is limited ammo forcing a reload which takes 3 phases.
The Lewis gun had 47rd pans (mags) early on & 96rd pans after Nov '16. The rof would give 3 phases of shooting early on, 6 phases later, 2 spare pans carried. Germans MG's had 200 rd belts with similar rof so were a lot more dangerous, I tend to use 9 phases of fire with 1 reload. The Germans rarely use a belt but the allies regularly run out - you can adjust to what suits though.

[Naharaht]

If we ever get F.E.2 models, it will be interesting to see whether there are any special rules about manoeuvres when the observer is standing up firing the rear gun over the top wing. Aithough I seem to remember an account where an F.E.2 observer told his pilot off for not throwing the plane around saying, "It is my to hang on."

[Flying Helmut]

Another option is limited ammo forcing a reload which takes 3 phases.
The Lewis gun had 47rd pans (mags) early on & 96rd pans after Nov '16. The rof would give 3 phases of shooting early on, 6 phases later, 2 spare pans carried. Germans MG's had 200 rd belts with similar rof so were a lot more dangerous, I tend to use 9 phases of fire with 1 reload. The Germans rarely use a belt but the allies regularly run out - you can adjust to what suits though.

Excellent food for thought - I'll go for this instead!

[Nicola Zee]

Excellent food for thought - I'll go for this instead!

Yes the point mentioned about limited ammo with the lewis gun (and presumably) other non-fixed guns is a good one. I think I mentioned a long while back the problem with drums is there is a limit to the number of drums that can be practically carried and are to-hand. The drums are both bulky and heavy.

But the option is 'another option'. It will help but it may not be enough. For example, if a fighter armed with a lewis gun attacks a two seater, it won't help to make the two seater less of a challenge. It will result in the fighter having an even tougher time!

[Flying Helmut]

For example, if a fighter armed with a lewis gun attacks a two seater, it won't help to make the two seater less of a challenge. It will result in the fighter having an even tougher time!

Good!
It'll help to balance the ridiculously-over powerful "Higher Machine Gun" game-changing rule!

[Nicola Zee]

The issue with two seaters being too powerful compared to fighters is made worse with altitude because it makes the blind spot rule less of a restriction.

I found (with new rules for diving and climbing) it was a rare event for the fighter to end its move in the blind spot.

If any kind of modified altitude rules are used, I suggest considering extending the blind spot so it is no longer restricted to short range. This has the added advantage that it means players no longer have to check the range.

[flash]

Rendering a tandem defenceless to a 60° arc to its rear on the same level seems an extreme solution but would resolve the issue... Not for me though, takes all the fun out of it.

[Teaticket]

Taking away any +1 aim bonus for the observer is an easy way to weaken the tandem without taking out all it's claws.

[Nicola Zee]

Rendering a tandem defenceless to a 60° arc to its rear on the same level seems an extreme solution but would resolve the issue... Not for me though, takes all the fun out of it.

It does depend on the house rules. Mine allow for up to two levels dive in a turn. As long as the two seater does not run out of height usually it is still very much a challenge. Which seems to me matches the historical records fairly well. The slow less agile two seater tended to head downwards to prevent the fighter getting behind and at the same or lower level.

Having over-powered two seaters is not for me or my group. But each to their own.

[milcoll73]

after reading period accounts of attacking 2 seaters, id say theyre about right as is. i remember in "diary of an unknown aviator" the author says something to the effect that a pursuit attacking a 2 seater solo is one of the quickest routs to the great beyond. and he specifically mentions the "new hun biplane tail job" not having a rear blind spot.

[Nicola Zee]

after reading period accounts of attacking 2 seaters, id say theyre about right as is. i remember in "diary of an unknown aviator" the author says something to the effect that a pursuit attacking a 2 seater solo is one of the quickest routs to the great beyond. and he specifically mentions the "new hun biplane tail job" not having a rear blind spot.

Attacking a two seater is a challenge and often they were attacked by fighters in a group but many were shot down by single fighters.
The whole raison d'etre of fighters is to shoot down two seater planes. It was not unusual for aces to build up their score by hunting the relatively easy meat. Now the smartest would try to achieve this was by stealth but often the hunter would be spotted and the first shot would, of course, give the game away.

First hand accounts are great but I would not rely on any account from an unknown source. I do not know of any German two seater without a blind spot downwards. But the fact he mentioned the blind spot does indicate he thought it was usually important. There are multiple accounts that stress the importance of the blind spot.

[milcoll73]

Attacking a two seater is a challenge and often they were attacked by fighters in a group but many were shot down by single fighters.
The whole raison d'etre of fighters is to shoot down two seater planes. It was not unusual for aces to build up their score by hunting the relatively easy meat. Now the smartest would try to achieve this was by stealth but often the hunter would be spotted and the first shot would, of course, give the game away.

First hand accounts are great but I would not rely on any account from an unknown source. I do not know of any German two seater without a blind spot downwards. But the fact he mentioned the blind spot does indicate he thought it was usually important. There are multiple accounts that stress the importance of the blind spot.

well, i suspect the author was talking about later, more potent 2 seaters as opposed to the earlier "easy meat" hence the description of them as being a tough target.
and the pilot isnt unknown, thats just the name of the book as published. the author was later identified as an american pilot flying with the british. dont recall the name atm. but as far as 1st hand accounts; they were there, we werent.
and he wasnt speaking of the lower blind spot (obviously), he was speaking of directly astern at the more or less same level. ie he was speaking about the hannover clIII. which is why we house rule it to have no rear blind spot at the same level in our little group.

[Nicola Zee]

well, i suspect the author was talking about later, more potent 2 seaters as opposed to the earlier "easy meat" hence the description of them as being a tough target.
and the pilot isnt unknown, thats just the name of the book as published. the author was later identified as an american pilot flying with the british. dont recall the name atm. but as far as 1st hand accounts; they were there, we werent.
and he wasnt speaking of the lower blind spot (obviously), he was speaking of directly astern at the more or less same level. ie he was speaking about the hannover clIII. which is why we house rule it to have no rear blind spot at the same level in our little group.

I agree, late war there were potent 2 seaters. For instance, flown aggressively (and perhaps due to upgraded engines?) the Brisfit became so feared that all but the bravest German pilots would flee. German pilots would, also, tend not to go after the DH4 partly because (with the right engine) it was so fast and could fly so high. But these were exceptional examples. The rule for the Hannover clIII make sense but this plane is, also, unusual.

Much of the war consisted of lumbering slow two seaters doing the glamorous (but critical) grunt work while being hunted by fast agile and dangerous fighters. Although Wings of Glory is a great game, IMHO it does not really cover this well. Maybe this is a good thing. It's a lot more fun flying a Brisfit than a BE2! I understand the marketing reasons for not including a BE2 in the official range of planes!


Written accounts are great and well worth reading. All the pilots deserve our respect and admiration but with recorded encounters it is important to identify the author and the context and sometimes take things with a pinch of salt. Some pilots were maybe not completely honest in their accounts. The controversy over Billy Bishop comes to mind. And it is a well known problem that witnesses may see the same thing in completely different ways. One book I recommend for describing the hard and vital work done by the two seaters is Bloody April by Peter Hart. In it there is the personal account written by Richthofen on one of his attacks on a two seater. There is, also, a personal account of the same attack from the perspective of the pilot of the two seater. To say the two accounts do not tally is an understatement!

[Malibumax]

Hi chaps

Thanks for your input, some interesting comments.

My group tried out the following rules last week and they seemed to satisfy us.

The two seater in the game was able to hold its own against a single opponent but was much less effective against two or more attackers. The house rules made the two seater player plan his manouvres far more carefully to maximise the effectiveness of his guns, in this case flying to keep his aircraft out of the line of fire of the enemy scouts while trying to keep the enemy in the rear gunners arcs of fire. We'll try these rules again over a few more games.

The following rules apply to two-seaters when firing:

The model may not fire both front and rear guns in the same turn. The player must choose to fire either the front gun or the rear gun.


Rear Gunners

May not fire during steep manourvres
Only receive the +1 bonus if the aircraft is flying straight and level
Must use the Rear Blind Spot rule

Photo-Reconnaissance or Bombing Missions

The model may not fire in any move phase if it is taking photographs or dropping bombs

[Nicola Zee]

I'm glad you've developed a set of house rules that work for your group. One of the great things about Wings of Glory is the base system is so solid it is easy to add to it.

[Ken at Sunrise]

Another option is limited ammo forcing a reload which takes 3 phases.
The Lewis gun had 47rd pans (mags) early on & 96rd pans after Nov '16. The rof would give 3 phases of shooting early on, 6 phases later, 2 spare pans carried. Germans MG's had 200 rd belts with similar rof so were a lot more dangerous, I tend to use 9 phases of fire with 1 reload. The Germans rarely use a belt but the allies regularly run out - you can adjust to what suits though.

Aren't there ammo rules somewhere? Do you have a link?

Rendering a tandem defenceless to a 60° arc to its rear on the same level seems an extreme solution but would resolve the issue... Not for me though, takes all the fun out of it.

I'm not sure what you mean, can you elaborate for me. Sorry not enough caffeine yet and I seem to be struggling.

[flash]

Aren't there ammo rules somewhere? Do you have a link?

These are rules I developed years back and use for OTT, Ken. They're posted as optional rules for the campaign in the rules. There are other ammo rules out there but I have no links.

I'm not sure what you mean, can you elaborate for me. Sorry not enough caffeine yet and I seem to be struggling.

If you're extending the blind spot so it is no longer restricted to short range it 'renders a tandem defenceless to a 60° arc to its rear on the same level..' as it can't shoot anything behind it. Hope you've managed more caffeine input now. :cuppa:

...First hand accounts are great but I would not rely on any account from an unknown source...

War Birds: Diary of an unknown aviator is a book by Elliott White Springs based, in part, on the diary of John McGavock Grider who flew together with 85 Sqn in 1918, so the sources are known in this case. Grider was KIA with 85 but Springs went on to fly with the USAS & command 148th Aero Sqn.
The "new Hun biplane tail job" was likely that of the Hannover, which had a much reduced blindspot because of it & the higher placed rear gun - something Andrea produced optional rules for that can apply to the Brisfit & Halberstadt Cl.II as well. To assume that tandems are slower and less agile than scouts as a basis for a house rule applied to all of them is flawed when many in the game are as fast, faster, and/or, as agile than their opponents.

[Nicola Zee]

These are rules I developed years back and use for OTT, Ken. They're posted as optional rules for the campaign in the rules. There are other ammo rules out there but I have no links.


If you're extending the blind spot so it is no longer restricted to short range it 'renders a tandem defenceless to a 60° arc to its rear on the same level..' as it can't shoot anything behind it. Hope you've managed more caffeine input now. :cuppa:


War Birds: Diary of an unknown aviator is a book by Elliott White Springs based, in part, on the diary of John McGavock Grider who flew together with 85 Sqn in 1918, so the sources are known in this case. Grider was KIA with 85 but Springs went on to fly with the USAS & command 148th Aero Sqn.
The "new Hun biplane tail job" was likely that of the Hannover, which had a much reduced blindspot because of it & the higher placed rear gun - something Andrea produced optional rules for that can apply to the Brisfit & Halberstadt Cl.II as well. To assume that tandems are slower and less agile than scouts as a basis for a house rule applied to all of them is flawed when many in the game are as fast, faster, and/or, as agile than their opponents.

To assume most tandems were faster and more agile than scouts is also flawed.

[Nicola Zee]

In any case with a fast agile two seater surely the rear gun is not its primary weapon.
So nerfing the rear gun will not render it defenceless.
I'm off for a nice cup of tea.

[Nicola Zee]

So after a nice cup of tea, I'm back!


To be honest I was a bit worried about extending the blind spot. I did think it might cripple two seaters. I came up with the change because players started to prefer to fly tandems than single fighters. I don't think I'd use this extra restriction if I was using just the base rules. I have for several years played using altitude and my own dive and climb rules. A number of experienced groups who play using altitude tend to play house rules of some sort. As I mentioned my dive rules allow for diving up to two pegs in a turn - even for two seaters. In plays, I found this made the extra restriction for the blind spot much less crippling.

But even without diving I found even the slow two seaters were a real challenge as long as there was some kind of escort. To test this out I devised a simple scenario. A harry tate just does a set circle one side of the lines and near to one edge of the map. A rumpler does the same on the other side of the lines and near to the other edge. Three fighters on both sides fly in and the players choose where they head. There are extra bonus points for shooting down the AI enemy tandem. The result of this scenario was (at least to me) interesting.

As long as an enemy fighter was near by the tandem it was hard for the attackers to line up for the blind spot - even though every one knew exactly what the next movement card for the tandem was. Despite flown on automatic and no diving or climbing neither of the two seaters were shot down! I suspect this was because the players were too busy trying to shot each other down to worry about the actual objective!


[Added]
The other thing which I found interesting was how good some players are in placing planes and how some players are not quite as accurate. I let the players choose who on their team moved their tandem. One plane, throughout the game, kept to a perfect circle. The other not so much! To prevent it ending up drifting too far to the other side, I had to encourage a little more precise placement.

[flash]

To assume most tandems were faster and more agile than scouts is also flawed.

I don't make that assumption, just pointing out the fact that in the game tandems are as fast or faster with the same agility as the scouts they face. You only have to study the manoeuvre decks they use to see that.
eg the Alb C.III is a fast as many of the contemporary early scouts with the Y deck and later slower than most - it is the slowest tandem by Ares. The Roland C.II is faster than many of the contemporary early scouts with the K deck and as fast as the later ones which is as it should be. They lack the immel & thus the agility but if you lose touch with them, they're gone.

[Nicola Zee]

I don't make that assumption, just pointing out the fact that in the game tandems are as fast or faster with the same agility as the scouts they face. You only have to study the manoeuvre decks they use to see that.
eg the Alb C.III is a fast as many of the contemporary early scouts with the Y deck and later slower than most - it is the slowest tandem by Ares. The Roland C.II is faster than many of the contemporary early scouts with the K deck and as fast as the later ones which is as it should be. They lack the immel & thus the agility but if you lose touch with them, they're gone.

And that is a point we can agree on. It does depend on the era and the planes specific to the era. Which is why I try to avoid mixing and matching.

As you know, the Fokker scrooge is a period where the mediocre EIII out-classed the BE2.
It was ended by nimble fighters that were relatively slow but had difficulty keeping up with some of the two-seaters.
Then along comes the relatively superfast Alb DIII and Bloody April.
And so on.

But until late war, fighters usually had the edge in being fast and\or nimble and even then a surprising number of obsolete two seaters were still trundling along. The Harry Tate was obsolete but over 4,000 were made and it kept flying until the end of the war. There is nothing wrong with flying planes like the Brisfit and the DH4. They are great fun. I just wish Ares included more planes like the BE2.

And for me and my group (and I stress this is just for me and my group) we prefer to nerf two seaters.
Maybe we've being misled by the glamour of myths and stories of the intrepid ace and really two seaters were just all round better.
At the end of the day the game is not a simulation.
Each to their own.
That is the great thing about the game. The base system is such a clever solid design it is easy to tailor to the player's preferences. One thing I really like about the rulebook is how it carefully separates the basic rules from optional advanced rules.

[Stumptonian]

One thing I really like about the rulebook is how it carefully separates the basic rules from optional advanced rules.

I wish more designers would do that in rules with different levels of complexity.

[Ken at Sunrise]

This was just posted over at BGG

Andrea Angiolino said:
In dogfights, I found that a B/B firing normal two seater is quite balanced against A firing fighters. For "normal" I mean those having no Immelmann turn, while German Cl planes, Bristol Fighter and Sopwith 1 1/2 have it.

[Teaticket]

One problem with our game is it cannot replicate true tactics. A key tactic is not possible. How can we sneak up from below into the blind spot of a tandem when all planes are visible on the table?

We can handcuff tandems with a scenario rule to have mission planes fly straight for x# turns to try to simulate the tandem not knowing a scout is hunting it from below. Who will want to then fly the tandem?

Of course tandems that were set up as fighters like Bristols and Halberstadt Cls are a different ball of wax.

[flash]

One problem with our game is it cannot replicate true tactics....

True, like aiming to take the gunner out on the first pass !

[Flying Helmut]

True, like aiming to take the gunner out on the first pass !

"Chuck-the-Cheat" always managed it!

[flash]

"Chuck-the-Cheat" always managed it!

And he used a full ruler blindspot so actually didn't even have to...!

[Nicola Zee]

And he used a full ruler blindspot so actually didn't even have to...!

I don't make fun of other people's house rules or tell people how to play the game.
How about you show the same courtesy?

You play the game however you like and I will do the same.
Or is that too much to ask?

[Nicola Zee]

Considering how few folks now visit this forum, I would have figured you'd want to keep some.
I only came here to check out T&T because I asked for it for Xmas because it was cheap on sale.
But it looks like that system is fairly dead.
So, I'm off.
I may come back in a couple of years.

[flash]

Well, I guess you won't see it for a couple of years, Nicola but you jumped to a conclusion and got the wrong end of the stick, again. Chuck actually did use a full ruler blindspot many years ago and therefore didn't have to shoot the gunner. He posted fantastical tales of what a great pilot he was and how many kills he got, stories that my late mate Barry and others used to refer to as Chuck's Luck. You're right in a way though, I do find the full blindspot suggestion laughable but I did give my reasoning clearly which at one point you seemed to agree with. Still, there you go. Turns out it's not all about you.

[milcoll73]

yeesh, lighten up folks. its just a game. a great game. a fantastic game. an addictive game.

[Hedeby]

Good!
It'll help to balance the ridiculously-over powerful "Higher Machine Gun" game-changing rule!

I seem to hear the world's smallest violin playing somewhere.... lol

[Hedeby]

House rules are just that, whatever works for your group is 100% fine, its all about having fun at the end of the day.

[Blackronin]

I think that everyone should play the way they want. If a movie like Flyboys can be made, hey!, you can fly in reverse if you can convince someone to play that way.

I love to go against 2 seaters and I don't really like to play with them unless it is in a given scenario.

I use the following house rules combined with official rules to make it spicy and interesting:

Ace gunners:
+1 Aim bonus
Blindspot
Notes: They are scary and they should be. You put your fighter in the crosshair of this gunner and you're sealing your fate.

Veteran Gunners
+1 Aim bonus only during non restricted maneuvers
Blindspot
Immelmann restriction
Notes: These gunner are experienced and they know what to do.

Standard Gunners
+1 Aim bonus only during straight maneuvers
Blindspot
Immelmann restriction
Notes: Typical gunners. You can fire against their two seaters and still be out of their danger zone.

Rookie Gunners
never has +1 Aim bonus
Can only fire during non restricted maneuvers
Blindspot
Immelmann restriction
Notes: If you're playing a campaign they should stop being rookies after a couple of missions. Very useful for specific moments of the war when pilots and gunners were pressed into service with minimal training.

[Hedeby]

Some nice ideas there Joaquim

[Blackronin]

Some nice ideas there Joaquim

Thanks for the REP Chris. You're too nice.

[OldGuy59]

I think that everyone should play the way they want. If a movie like Flyboys can be made, hey!, you can fly in reverse if you can convince someone to play that way.

I love to go against 2 seaters and I don't really like to play with them unless it is in a given scenario.

I use the following house rules combined with official rules to make it spicy and interesting:

Ace gunners:
+1 Aim bonus
Blindspot
Notes: They are scary and they should be. You put your fighter in the crosshair of this gunner and you're sealing your fate.

Veteran Gunners
+1 Aim bonus only during non restricted maneuvers
Blindspot
Immelmann restriction
Notes: These gunner are experienced and they know what to do.

Standard Gunners
+1 Aim bonus only during straight maneuvers
Blindspot
Immelmann restriction
Notes: Typical gunners. You can fire against their two seaters and still be out of their danger zone.

Rookie Gunners
never has +1 Aim bonus
Can only fire during non restricted maneuvers
Blindspot
Immelmann restriction
Notes: If you're playing a campaign they should stop being rookies after a couple of missions. Very useful for specific moments of the war when pilots and gunners were pressed into service with minimal training.

This is not likely to be in the Campaign and Scenario Pack, but it looks terrific. Using the Over-the-Trenches experience rules would work well with this, too.

For my current campaign, I am using the following rules. Please note these have not been play-tested, as we haven't played enough games to get any one pilot to even elite level.

Gaining Experience (CVGG - Optional)
For the current campaign, players will start with one Veteran and one Rookie. The Veteran will have one Ace Skill (chosen by player, but only basic level Ace skills).

Rookies
Rookies will follow the Wings of Glory Optional Rules, and progress using the WGS “Rookies in a Campaign” Rules. Each Rookie crewman keeps his status until he achieves one of the following:
- he personally hits targets (airplanes, troops, AA guns, etc…) a total of 5 times;
- he personally shoots down a plane;
- his plane successfully completes a mission where it must hit one or more ground targets, or take pictures of it;
- he survives through his third game.
Starting the next game, he is considered to be a Veteran.

Veterans
Any pilot not a Rookie is a Veteran. Veterans are subject to all normal rules. After 5 Victories, they are able to select an Ace skill. Veterans cannot select the Super Ace skill, nor any Level II skill. On acquiring five Ace skills, the Veteran becomes a Class Three Elite.

Elite Crews
Elite crews are pilots or observers with five or more Ace skills. Only Elite individuals can select the Super Ace skill (meaning they can select it only on attaining their sixth Ace skill or later), or Level II skills

Elite Crews are divided into three Classes:

- Class Three Elite: Any crew having five or more Ace skills is a Class Three Elite. Class Three Elites use damage decks with four Zero cards removed (Special Damage cards must remain in the deck). Upon achieving 11 Ace skills, the pilot is elevated to Class Two.

- Class Two Elite: Any crew having eleven or more Ace skills is a Class Two Elite. Class Two Elites use damage decks with all but three Zero cards removed (Special Damage cards must remain in the deck). Upon achieving 15 Ace skills, the pilot is elevated to Class One.

- Class One Elite: Any crew having fifteen or more Ace skills is a Class One Elite. Class One Elites use damage decks with all but three Zero cards removed, and all but three One cards removed (Special Damage cards must remain in the deck).

There are no additional experience ranks above Class One Elite.

Now, I will be adding in Joaquim's [Blackronin] Gunner/Observer skill levels to this list.

[Killer Moth]

My girlfriend (Lady Moth) and I use the Blindspot and Immelmann handicaps, in the rule book.

Blindspot: Observers can't draw lines of fire through their base's trailing edge to airplanes within close range.
Immelmann: Observers can't fire in the same phase as an Immelmann turn, nor the preceding or succeeding phase.

From our experirence, single seaters can hold their own against planes that have an A/B or B/A configuration.

[Killer Moth]

I should mention that we don't play with Altitude rules. Altitude rules can come in handy for planes like the Roland C.II, Bristol F.2 Fighter, etc, that have a 360-degree tailgun arc against higher-altitude planes.

My girlfriend (Lady Moth) and I use the Blindspot and Immelmann handicaps, in the rule book.

Blindspot: Observers can't draw lines of fire through their base's trailing edge to airplanes within close range.
Immelmann: Observers can't fire in the same phase as an Immelmann turn, nor the preceding or succeeding phase.

From our experirence, single seaters can hold their own against planes that have an A/B or B/A configuration.