Airframes with superior dive

[RudeReality]

I continue to mull over what began in my previous post about the climb rate/max altitude chart and been stuck on the idea of getting more use from altitude, and in specific, planes with better dive ability. Currently there are small additions for such aircraft, like the stall dive of the Phoenix D.I, or the extra stall added after a dive for the Pfalz, but am I wrong in feeling these are both not significant enough on gameplay nor reflective enough of being able to dive harder/slower?

I posted my thoughts on this in the aforementioned thread, but as it’s actually a different subject, deserves its own posting, methinks. So to reiterate, my proposal is to change the dive to non-steep, or even better, add an additional non-steep dive, to such planes, giving those with better dive abilities more options than their less gravity bound counterparts, and giving further usefulness and strategy to the vertical elements of the game.

Not exactly an easy fix, as it necessitates changing already ingrained decks, but thought it worth discussion nonetheless.
(Likely I’m just resurrecting an already long dead and beaten horse…but I’m new in town, so…)

[Killer Moth]

Here was an idea that I had to do the SPAD XIII justice...

During phase 2 or 3 of an Overdive, instead of discarding 1 damage card per phase, the SPAD XIII can discard 2 damage cards for both phases.

[flash]

... Not exactly an easy fix, as it necessitates changing already ingrained decks, but thought it worth discussion nonetheless.
(Likely I’m just resurrecting an already long dead and beaten horse…but I’m new in town, so…)

Of course, this is a horse that gets beaten from time to time, Rudy, but well worth another try - though we'd be at risk of getting reported for animal cruelty!

The 'stall dive' (as you call it) of the Phoenix D.I is a card to represent it's ability to dive vertically, so that sort of deals with that, maybe that's a card that needs to be added to the SPAD & Pfalz decks as well as other renowned divers too.. ?
The extra stall added after a dive for the Pfalz, is an optional rule that many may nor recall or be familiar with ? I'll add the content here for clarity but again, it's something that should/could be added for all the recognised good divers:

High Speed Dives: If this optional rule is in use a Pfalz D.III/D.IIIa can plan an extra stall directly after another stall or a dive, even if they are two steep manoeuvres in a row.
If the pilot has no ace skills he must draw an A damage card. If there is any special damage symbol the airplane spins out of control and is eliminated.
If there is no special damage symbol ignore the card and shuffle back into it's deck.
If the pilot is an ace, no A card is drawn and the manoeuvre is safe.
In any case if altitude rules are in use when the second stall is executed the airplane loses an altitude level
(s.4a WGF123A - Pfalz D.III Voss) in the FAQs & POI sticky thread here

As this and the over dive rule allow steeps to be played together, so I'm not sure there's a need that the Alt cards to be made non steep and that would require changes made to every deck, whereas adding a card would be relatively straight forward.

For gain of speed you were looking at in the other thread I'd suggest playing another straight off the dive card (ie two cards together, rather than card, base, card, base) to give that boost - that could apply to all planes perhaps. We will have to do some testing to see.

I do recall there was once a misprint of the WoW B deck that produced a shorter than expected dive card, that might prove useful in this experiment for those who might still have one..

[flash]

Here was an idea that I had to do the SPAD XIII justice...
During phase 2 or 3 of an Overdive, instead of discarding 1 damage card per phase, the SPAD XIII can discard 2 damage cards for both phases.

Take it you mean fire damage cards - removal of which depends on the draw of a B damage card on the straight card of the the overdive, it's not an automatic removal.
Maybe you could allow a draw of a B card on the dive and the straight of an overdive for recognised good divers ?
If we utilised a short dive card for these planes you'd have to use that card to do the double draw ?

We previously considered the Phoenix D.I's special cards with the overdive that maybe could be applied in this case.
Some of the previous threads on overdives:
https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sh...-a-Phoenix-D-I
https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sh...e-in-Overdives

[Le Piaf]

French Ace René Fonck described his favoured tactic on Spad several times in his Memoirs, for example : ‘As usual, I climbed very high in order to dive on the enemy. This tactic, instinctive to birds of prey, always seemed to me to be the best strategy’.

It actually seems the best tactic for the Spad, known to be one of the fastest but not as maneuverable as its counterparts.

My main issue, when applying it in game, is my inability when I am one or two altitude levels above my ‘prey’ to be able to quickly face it to trigger the dive (especially after a previous dive and climb in straight line). I only have at my disposal the loooooong turn cards of the A-deck that surprise nobody (but someone already felt asleep) and that make it hard to target the enemy plane.

This long-turn card is logical as a turn made after the long fast straight maneuver card of A-deck.

But can’t I slow down my plane, turn (quite) tight, lose speed/energy when alone at my altitude to be able to face my enemy, then regain speed either by diving or letting it accelerate on level flight ?

Was the Spad a bad turner ? It is said to be irl 'tricky to handle at low speeds and had to be flown on to the ground during landing with the engine power on, unlike the SE.5 which could be ‘floated’ on.' (C.F. Andrews, The Spad XIII, p. 6, 1965). But a bad turner ? Maybe posters on this forum may have data about that. Here is what I found :





(Source : http://brenthugh.com/flightgear/cata...s-2005-119.pdf)

imho one card of ‘tighter/shorter’ turn (or two : one to the right, one to the left), usable only when unreachable 1 or 2 altitude level(s) higher, could be helpful to apply this tactic.

Of course, an Immelmann or a Split-S allow turns but with other constraints (180°, the 3 cards, +/- 1 climb counter).

Not sure the Spad XIII needs more diving capabilities btw.

[Killer Moth]

I'm referring to this rule:

FIRING AT OVERDIVING TARGETS

An overdiving airplane is harder to hit. If an airplane has been shot after the dive or the straight of an overdive, the owner may choose to ignore a single damage card per turn, immediately after drawing and seeing it. The ignored card is shuffled back into its deck and then another card from the same deck must be taken in exchange.

So, yeah, my memory is very foggy. I need to rethink what I said earlier...

Take it you mean fire damage cards - removal of which depends on the draw of a B damage card on the straight card of the the overdive, it's not an automatic removal.
Maybe you could allow a draw of a B card on the dive and the straight of an overdive for recognised good divers ?
If we utilised a short dive card for these planes you'd have to use that card to do the double draw?

[Killer Moth]

Try this on for size...

When this airplane has been shot after the dive or the straight of an overdive, the owner may choose to ignore 2 damage cards per turn, instead of 1.

[RudeReality]

All the above ideas are solid (not that I have the experience to really judge, but still…) but leave the most important aspect of the dive unanswered- namely the extra speed that sacrificing altitude is all about. This is what what my original idea of an extra dive card was hoping to address, however unrealistic it may be to actually implement. Best I’ve got with just becoming acquainted with this fantastic game (after having been aware and passing it by, for whatever reason, for several YEARS.) Perhaps this is just something that cannot be properly handled in this game, with the rules we have to play around with. Maybe so, but damnnit…I want a viable STRATEGIC reason to play my Pfalz…sue me, lol

[Killer Moth]

I want a viable STRATEGIC reason to play my Pfalz

The Pfalz D.III has tighter Bends (not Turns—those are 90-degrees) than most, if not all, of her Allied contemporaries: Nieuport 28, Hanriot HD.1, SPAD XIII, Camel, SE.5a, Brisfit, etc. She also has an additional pair of Narrow Slides (3), and no scout's hitpoints exceed hers.

[Killer Moth]

My Seven Competitive Planes* exclude the Pfalz D.III because the only difference between her and the Phönix D.I is the latter's non-Steep Stall (and -1 hitpoint). The Phönix does what the Pfalz does, but better.

*This is the widest array of planes that can be chosen from without anyone having an unfair advantage, in my opinon:

1. RAF SE.5a
2. Sopwith Camel
3. Fokker Dr.I
4. Macchi M.5
5. Phönix D.I
6. Hanriot HD.1 (Coppens)
7. Fokker E.IV (Parschau)

[Le Piaf]

All the above ideas are solid (not that I have the experience to really judge, but still…) but leave the most important aspect of the dive unanswered- namely the extra speed that sacrificing altitude is all about. This is what what my original idea of an extra dive card was hoping to address, however unrealistic it may be to actually implement. (…) Perhaps this is just something that cannot be properly handled in this game, with the rules we have to play around with.

Unfortunately I am not an expert about aerodynamics and planes. And/So I tend to trust the designer of WoG. I expect him to have conducted research, to know better than me and, on the other hand, to have also made decisions about game design that are abstraction of reality, not pure realism, but are also made for fun and balance.

You’re talking about the ‘extra speed that sacrificing altitude’. But what extra speed ?

Looking at the Spad XIII, speed at level flight is say 210-230 km/h. But what is the diving speed ? Speaking of the Spad, René Fonck, who was an expert in diving, says in his Memoirs : ‘The speed of our planes reaches 300 km/h sometimes’ (!). Reports mentioned 350 km/h. Modern stress tests speak of a max speed of 450 km/h the structure of a Spad could withstand without breaking.

300 km/h is ‘only’ 43% faster than 210 km/h and 30% faster than 230 km/h.

I’ve already posted this pic. In game, the extra speed of the dive is fully used to cover the extra distance of diving :




Is it the best abstraction of the reality of diving ? I don’t know.

Are there other special cases, such as :



Should the dive arrow of some planes be longer than the arrow of their straight card ? I don't know.

The Spad is already (one of) the best diver in game as its dive arrow is the longest. Maybe it could be longer. Maybe not. I don’t know. I played a bit simulation games such as Rise of flight or the Flying Circus. In these games, max speed of the Spad is 330-350 km/h iirc. The plane didn’t appear to keep energy/extra speed for long and to accelerate as much as WWII planes would.

[monse]

If you shoot at your opponent who is at one lower altitude level, you must shoot at half a ruler (resolved at long range, one damage card).
After a descent, the two planes being at the same altitude level, the shot can be made at up to one ruler (long range) and even at short range (2 damage cards).

The interest of the level change is therefore real (and effective if you aim right!)

Indeed, you gain half a ruler with the descent : you immediately get closer to the target.

[predhead]

Looking at the Spad XIII, speed at level flight is say 210-230 km/h. But what is the diving speed ? Speaking of the Spad, René Fonck, who was an expert in diving, says in his Memoirs : ‘The speed of our planes reaches 300 km/h sometimes’ (!). Reports mentioned 350 km/h. Modern stress tests speak of a max speed of 450 km/h the structure of a Spad could withstand without breaking.

300 km/h is ‘only’ 43% faster than 210 km/h and 30% faster than 230 km/h.

I’ve already posted this pic. In game, the extra speed of the dive is fully used to cover the extra distance of diving :

In the example here, the SPAD's dive line is most likely neither 30% or 43% longer than its straight line, which backs my thought that one could use a stall card and move the aircraft forward the additional amount to increase the speed. There are numerous accounts on which attacking aircraft dive to the attack, easily closing distance, on planes that are relatively fast. Going to give the extra stall distance a try, either with the plane base or the card in front of the dive card without the plane base.

[RudeReality]

“There are numerous accounts on which attacking aircraft dive to the attack, easily closing distance, on planes that are relatively fast.”

With the inverse also being true and a regularly used strategy, to use the extra speed from a dive to escape an attack. Methinks that aircraft with better than normal dive ability should not have JUST the same options as every other aircraft, the overdive or standard dive. They should have some kind of bonus to differentiate this, be it an extra stall move granted after a dive or overdive, as mentioned above, or an additional dive card added to the maneuver deck…SOMETHING. A Spad or Pfalz should not have only the same dive options as every other airframe in the game, let alone sharing said abilities with aircraft NOTORIOUS for wing failures and/or wing shredding in a steep dive.

Admittedly, I have not played enough with the additional rule of the high speed dive found in the Voss version of the Pflaz, allowing a stall to be played after a dive or overdive, and the resulting additional altitude loss after this stall move- it might be significant enough to make it a regularly viable strategy choice, and enough to reflect a superior diving airframe. This thread is more a discussion than anything else, and perhaps someone here HAS used said high speed dive often enough to weigh in. Never hurts to have a friendly argument, lol

[Bunnyman]

This thread has a lot of interesting ideas that I still want to wrap my head around, but I wanted to share an altitude rule modification that I'm tinkering with. It involves expanding the use of the climb and dive cards. I'm looking at making the dive card also a gradual climb card; and the climb card an extra steep dive card (where the plane can descend two altitude pegs using one maneuver card - that would be super fast!) Planes built to take the stress could get out of enemy firing range while less well built pursuing planes would shred their top wings trying to chase them. I really like the idea of recognizing the unique strengths/weaknesses of individual planes.