Use of altitude rules

[Tallyho]

For me, personally, the greatest weakness in the entire game is the set of altitude rules. It really is a travesty that the only way an aircraft -- any and all of the aircraft in the game -- can climb is by flying straight ahead. And since the climb maneuver is a Steep maneuver, you can't plan a climb maneuver twice in a row -- but since all the Maneuver Decks (or at least the ones I have, which is not all of them) only have one climb maneuver card you can only try to climb once every third planned card.

Awful.

An aircraft combat game that doesn't feature a dynamic set of altitude rules that allow the planes to dive and swoop in all directions is severely hamstrung. Nothing is more exciting than turning to engage an enemy plane and then breaking away to fly straight so I can climb up to meet it. Really gets the blood pumping. :P

The idea of mixing in climb speed counters is a good one, and I've used a similar thing in a small tests before. Not all planes could climb through every maneuver they have access to (Sideslips, for example, cause you to lose altitude), but the game would greatly, greatly benefit from an expanded and improved altitude system.

[CappyTom]

For me, personally, the greatest weakness in the entire game is the set of altitude rules. It really is a travesty that the only way an aircraft -- any and all of the aircraft in the game -- can climb is by flying straight ahead. And since the climb maneuver is a Steep maneuver, you can't plan a climb maneuver twice in a row -- but since all the Maneuver Decks (or at least the ones I have, which is not all of them) only have one climb maneuver card you can only try to climb once every third planned card.

Awful.

An aircraft combat game that doesn't feature a dynamic set of altitude rules that allow the planes to dive and swoop in all directions is severely hamstrung. Nothing is more exciting than turning to engage an enemy plane and then breaking away to fly straight so I can climb up to meet it. Really gets the blood pumping. :P

The idea of mixing in climb speed counters is a good one, and I've used a similar thing in a small tests before. Not all planes could climb through every maneuver they have access to (Sideslips, for example, cause you to lose altitude), but the game would greatly, greatly benefit from an expanded and improved altitude system.

I made a house rule that you might like. On the speed cards I put a orange dot. One on the high and low speed. If you use a high speed with an orange dot then you dive one token. If you use a slow speed token with an orange dot then you climb one token. Now the zero can do a climb card and a climb speed token and climb two tokens. And the wildcat can do a dive card and a dive speed token and dive two tokens. The wildcat can also do a climb card and climb token right after the power dive to gain two tokens but can only do a power climb only after doing a power dive. So each plane would have a blank two high speed and low speed tokens and a high and low climb speed tokens.

Thomas

[Lino22]

All the players play the same set of rules. I mean once they've dove they all have troubles to climb so they stay at the same level unless they dive again. That sorts it out. I agree though that a non-straight climb card would be a great improvement.

[Tallyho]

I made a house rule that you might like. On the speed cards I put a orange dot. One on the high and low speed. If you use a high speed with an orange dot then you dive one token. If you use a slow speed token with an orange dot then you climb one token. Now the zero can do a climb card and a climb speed token and climb two tokens. And the wildcat can do a dive card and a dive speed token and dive two tokens. The wildcat can also do a climb card and climb token right after the power dive to gain two tokens but can only do a power climb only after doing a power dive. So each plane would have a blank two high speed and low speed tokens and a high and low climb speed tokens.

Thomas

That's a very interesting solution. If I understand this correctly, do these rules still apply only to straight maneuvers? In any case, I think it adds to the altitude- iness of the planes and that's a good thing in my log book.

[Bobit]

Actually, this makes perfect sense in world war one, at least.
Climb straight up=leave most of your kite's canvas behind

[CappyTom]

That's a very interesting solution. If I understand this correctly, do these rules still apply only to straight maneuvers? In any case, I think it adds to the altitude- iness of the planes and that's a good thing in my log book.

No any non steep <> move. So if you do a turn and want to climb you would use the slow speed marker with the orange dot on it, to show your climbing, and make the turn as a slow turn and climb one climb token.

Thomas

[Flying Officer Kyte]

As I am new to WWII I am sticking to the rule book for now, although the only serious dives I have made so far is with the Stuka.
Rob.

[Nightbomber]

Welcome to WGS system, Rob I am curious how do you find it, especially two-card movement and speed counters.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Speed counters are OK Andrzej, as long as you remember that dive and climb automatically change your status.
The two card selection is harder than the three, but you can teach an old dog new tricks. It just takes a bit longer.Ask Stormkahn about that. He is the dog trainer. Poor chap.
Rob.

[Lino22]

Speed counters are OK Andrzej, as long as you remember that dive and climb automatically change your status.Rob.

and Immelman and Split-S ...
Welcome to the world of machine guns that cannot get jammed.

[CappyTom]

Speed counters are OK Andrzej, as long as you remember that dive and climb automatically change your status.

Rob.

You are right Rob. Most people forget that if you split-S or Immelmann, climb or dive you must adjust speed accordingly.

Thomas

[Captain Chum]

I haven't used them "yet". I probably will once I get more used to the game.

I have not used them yet either but did pick using the rulebook....as a rookie flier, I think its best.....at least for me, to stick to the rule book for now.

[mik]

Only used the altitude rules once. Liked them, see no need to modify them. Will always use them unless opponents are not confident due to inexperience.

[Thomatchef]

Karl I'm going to be trying out a new house rule;
For DoW or WoGII each player will be getting an extra speed token. One high speed with an orange dot and one slow speed with an orange dot. You can only use one climb or dive token every two cards so its the same as using the straight climb or dive but now you can climb or dive as a turn. You can still use the Immelman or split S as well. To Climb you would use the slow speed token with the orange dot and dive with a high speed token with an orange dot.

So what do you think. I guess you could use the climb counters for WoW or WoGI. Make an orange line under the arrows showing one going down and one going up. Then give each player 5 climb tokens with 2 being the actual climb and dive token. Just place one token on each of the three cards like you do with WoGII.
Any thoughts about this Karl?


Tom

Have you had more playtesting Thomas?

I didn't read this thread in the past and now it seems that we had the same idea only I came a few year later .

Would be nice if you could post your findings here or in the other thread!

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...123#post264123

[BobP]

Haven't used them in the games I play at home but have used them at a convention with a game run by someone else. Didn't have any trouble understanding them.

[Kleebatch]

WWI: rulebook rules, only addition is on collisions: when conditions for a collisions are met we roll a D4 for each plane, the collision happens only if both rolls give the same result
(started using it in 8+ planes games and expecially after gettin bombers, too many fighter pilots sprouted kamikaze bandannas at the sight of an enemy bomber)

WWII: rulebook rules, 2 additions:
1) D4 roll on collisions (see above)
2) we added another 3 card sequence we call steep climb to allow players to convert speed into greater altitude gain, the sequence can only be executed by planes that have an immelman card in their maneuver deck and works as follow
1st move: High Speed Straight (the pilot level off and open full throttle to gain energy)
2nd move: Climb (gains 1 altitude counter, changes speed to low)
3rd move: Stall (gains a second altitude counter)

[fast.git]

...2) we added another 3 card sequence we call steep climb to allow players to convert speed into greater altitude gain, the sequence can only be executed by planes that have an immelman card in their maneuver deck and works as follow
1st move: High Speed Straight (the pilot level off and open full throttle to gain energy)
2nd move: Climb (gains 1 altitude counter, changes speed to low)
3rd move: Stall (gains a second altitude counter)...

That's interesting... I suppose something like that could work for WWI kites as well, but maybe only if a 4th card were added to the sequence (Dive, Straight, Climb, Stall). Lots of straight, but could model Boom and Zoom tactics.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

WWI: rulebook rules, only addition is on collisions: when conditions for a collisions are met we roll a D4 for each plane, the collision happens only if both rolls give the same result
(started using it in 8+ planes games and especially after getting bombers, too many fighter pilots sprouted kamikaze bandannas at the sight of an enemy bomber)

A very similar idea to the collision cards in the Files section then.
Rob.

[RichJ]

For collisions we have nicked the Angels 20 idea:
Both roll a d6 - on a one take damage (A chit) but it both rolls a '1' then both are either destroyed (or take a D chit if we aren't playing with many planes).

As a newbie I have found it hard to replicate what I have seen (on real footage and in films or read about in personal accounts etc) with the altitude rules as are. Found some good ideas here though and going to try a few of them out. So far figured I may try out this first:
Planes can drop an altitude chit (or level if playing with the high flying rules) on any turn or straight.
Gain an altitude chit on any slow turn (figure the plane would be moving less if turning and climbing) and any straight
Dive stays the same (we tend to use chits and change pegs to 4 for the visual result (we found the actual difference between this and the flying high results to minimal to worry about; although I can see the appeal and reason).
Climb - keep changing minds between allowing 2 chits and 1 for this (ideally probably should be based on the actual climb performance of the plane)

At the moment between us we are just doing this as we declare the cards by revealing card and saying if it is gaining or losing. I am just making up some separate little counters though to keep it 'unknown'.

Might work, might not

[Kleebatch]

That's interesting... I suppose something like that could work for WWI kites as well, but maybe only if a 4th card were added to the sequence (Dive, Straight, Climb, Stall). Lots of straight, but could model Boom and Zoom tactics.

in my group we debated this, in the end we decided that adding it only to wwII would better represent the climb ratios gap between the airplanes of the two conflicts.

p.s. about the D4 rule i originally printed the collision deck from the files section, then had to improvise on one game because i forgot to bring the deck and it sort of stuck

[Zoe Brain]

The CANCON House Rules at http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/dow...o=file&id=1367 have been extensively playtested, and appear to be a very real improvement on the official rules. Simpler, you can instantly tell which aircraft are at different heights, the only issue is that you may need a packet of additional pegs (or have a few aircraft you're not using to provide the extras).

The CANCON 1-page summary also includes the basic rules of the game, everything but AA, bombing, balloons etc. They are complete rules of only playing with single-seaters and two-seaters.

[RichJ]

After a bit of fiddling and thinking we are trying (WWII):
You can lose/gain an altitude chit on any turn or bank and straight so long as you use the slow speed line for climbs and the fast speed line for dives.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

So simple it may be just what I have been looking for.
I will try it in my next game.
Rob.

[RichJ]

So simple it may be just what I have been looking for.
I will try it in my next game.
Rob.

Cool... Let me know what you think.

[das Phantom]

I'm putting a comment here and in modeling. It is critical to your Gimbal mount that you "Rough Up" your ball bearing with emery cloth or something similar. Lightly roughing up the ball will ensure your planes hold their position and not be flopping around each time you do a maneuver. Another positive, if you have left any glue it should remove it as well. It's a small step that will make your playing with Gimbal mounts much more pleasurable. "Das Phantom" aka Wayne

[Flying Officer Kyte]

Well I finally got around to trying it Rich, and it brings a greater sense of realism to the whole maneuver system in my opinion.
The aircraft move just as you see them in the films. I especially like the side slip dive.
Rob.

[richard m schwab]

Wayne

You are correct. I have a very course emery board for that very purpose!


Rich

[Teaticket]

I like the altitude rules as written. When I run a game at a show I don't use them as most people prefer not to. One of these days I'll not give them the option and I'll make them learn altitude. Its not all that difficult, minor record keeping and makes it a 3d 'air' game.

[Пилот]

...3d 'air' game.

And that's the point. Everything else is just 2D speedboat game. Fun, but not aerial fight.

[Bobit]

And that's the point. Everything else is just 2D speedboat game. Fun, but not aerial fight.

On the other hand, taking 20 minutes to do every 6 seconds doesn't feel like an aerial flight either, and that's what you end up doing if you add a lot of cool rules.

[STEPHEN NAPIER]

Hi Zoe,
Like you examination and ideas. Does a spin lose an altitude level per move/spin....?
I draw a recovery/damage card at end of each turn when an AC is spinning.
I think a spin should losing altitude quite fast....currently dropping a level per move.....3 levels over a whole turn.
Use spins for "Illegal move" penalty and an alternative result when drawing the boom card...

Stephen in the West.

[STEPHEN NAPIER]

HI, Introduction games do not include altitude at all,. .......then with more experienced players, we move straight to full altitude rules in our games.
I call a level 1,000' just for convenience......whens is really about 500m/1,500'.
The use of altitude does slow the game, but adds to the aspect of the game and allows more realism.
Love the pegs......except when they are stuck/loose!!!

[CappyTom]

Have you had more playtesting Thomas?

I didn't read this thread in the past and now it seems that we had the same idea only I came a few year later .

Would be nice if you could post your findings here or in the other thread!

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...123#post264123

It works great for the Pacific. The planes fit the bill. Thomas AKA Redcoon really out flew me with a Zero and me in a Wildcat. But I don't see why it wouldn't work for the others.

Thomas

[Zoe Brain]

Hi Zoe,
Like you examination and ideas. Does a spin lose an altitude level per move/spin....?
I draw a recovery/damage card at end of each turn when an AC is spinning.
I think a spin should losing altitude quite fast....currently dropping a level per move.....3 levels over a whole turn.
Use spins for "Illegal move" penalty and an alternative result when drawing the boom card...

The CANCON rules don't cover spins, though they do cover descending "out of control" as well as wingovers and overdives.

I've been experimenting with spins as follows:
Play turn card, then reversal (lose 1), then dive(lose 2). At the end of each spin, draw from the A deck. If 0, then there's no restriction. If >0, you must play a spin sequence next turn too.

It's a variant on a wingover - the main difference being that a wingover is controlled, a spin not so much. You lose 3 levels per turn in both.

This still doesn't cover flat spins, but may be an optimum compromise that retains simplicity, and doesn't violate the "no 2 consecutive steeps" rule.

So - in summary:

Basics
Climb* - up 1
Dive* - down 2

Advanced:
Out of Control - One card must be a stall, another a dive. Down 2 in the dive.
Half loop up* - straight, reversal (up 1), stall
Immelman* - straight, reversal, straight
Split S* - stall, reversal(down 1), straight
Overdive* - stall, dive (down 2), straight (down 2). NOTE: Breaks the "No 2 consecutive straights" rule so take an A damage unless a Pfalz, Spad, or SE5
Wingover - stall, reversal (down 1), dive (down 2)

NEW
Spin - turn(any), reversal (down 1), dive (down 2). Pick A deck at end. If >0 damage, repeat the three cards next turn. Ignore damage.

* - similar or identical to existing rules.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

That spin rule looks a very simple way to show the effect Zoe.
I will give it a try.
Thanks.
Rob.

[Пилот]

On the other hand, taking 20 minutes to do every 6 seconds doesn't feel like an aerial flight either, and that's what you end up doing if you add a lot of cool rules.

That's why WoG is a game, and not a simulation. It never took me 20 minutes per maneuver, or even turn (including multiplayer games), although we usually play with all the rules. WoG is designed to encourage playing in different complexity levels. But, somehow it seems O.K if one plays airplane game also uses altitude. And using altitude makes game more fun, and also gives the edge. Of course, everyone plays as he likes. And I like to play with altitude.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

That's why WoG is a game, and not a simulation. It never took me 20 minutes per maneuver, or even turn (including multiplayer games), although we usually play with all the rules. WoG is designed to encourage playing in different complexity levels. But, somehow it seems O.K if one plays airplane game also uses altitude. And using altitude makes game more fun, and also gives the edge. Of course, everyone plays as he likes. And I like to play with altitude.

I agree Heмaњa.
That is why I like Zoe's rule. Quick and easy to implement without any fuss.
Rob.

[Gotham Resident]

I have played on and off for about a year. We had a WWI edition at our Thursday Night Game Night in the NJ part of Philly and I really enjoyed it. So much that I asked for the WWII starter set for my birthday a few months later. My now 10 year old also likes the game. We haven't added in altitude yet, but we have found that it takes about 30 minutes to play on a table top as it is so making it longer doesn't seem great, but I like some of these simpler ideas, the climb counter and the "basic up a peg" seem like good compromises.

[Flying Officer Kyte]

I have played on and off for about a year. We had a WWI edition at our Thursday Night Game Night in the NJ part of Philly and I really enjoyed it. So much that I asked for the WWII starter set for my birthday a few months later. My now 10 year old also likes the game. We haven't added in altitude yet, but we have found that it takes about 30 minutes to play on a table top as it is so making it longer doesn't seem great, but I like some of these simpler ideas, the climb counter and the "basic up a peg" seem like good compromises.

First of all let me welcome you to the Drome Mischa.
you will find the game very easy for a ten year old to pick up. Do expect to get frequently hammered by any children. we have learned this the hard way.
Rob.

[Gotham Resident]

My son has beaten every time we have played (like 5 times). It's brutal.
He got me a B-17 for Christmas. We add in a few new rules each time and he has no problem with them.

I guess teaching him Ticket to Ride and Dominion at age 8 really help kids to appreciate games!

[fast.git]

Hi Mischa, welcome to the 'Drome! It's great to hear that you and your son are enjoying the game... of course, Rob has the right of it... prepare to go to school. It seems that, more often than not, it's the young ones that display a knack for this game.

As for altitude, you've got the right idea. Do what feels right, and adopt the rules that keep the game enjoyable... altitude can be a needless complication, especially in big games and with new players.

If you ever have any questions, our wish to solicit game advice (whether about altitude or whatever), don't hesitate to ask. This is a friendly & knowledgeable community.

[THECCRICH]

The altitude rules are what make this game so great... From what I have read about dog fighting, you always must preserve you altitude if able... I believe the game captures how altitude is something you really have to earn at the expense of maneuvering...

[Hedeby]

Tend not to use altitude often at shows, but locally - all the time, original rules mostly, although if hosting a dogfight where all planes have the same rate of climb then go for the one prg up one peg down method, makes for a faster game

[Gribble]

Andrea,

I host Wings of Glory at my friendly game shop. Our 1 Patrol was with one other pilot than me. 2 Patrol was 3 pilots. So we're just getting started. We're just playing for the fun and gathering more pilots who want their own aircraft.

My pilots vote to use four (4) pegs for simplicity at this time. Soon they will want to include clouds and altitude rules.

Best wishes!

Mel

/PS
I intended to type our 3 Patrol is scheduled for July 31, 2015. Maybe we'll have 9 pilots (if the maths hold true)

[grumpybear]

Reading these posts I am so far behind I think I am ahead, Got a lot of rule catch up to do

[Marechallannes]

We play WoW I & II mostly after a bigger strategic bordgame.

We don't use altitude rules.

I have to correct my statement from 2011.

Now we use altitude rules in most of the games.

[Zoe Brain]

We always use the simplified altitude rules - climb up 1, dive down 2.

As below:

[THECCRICH]

I feel like there are 2 types of gaming preferences; those that don't prefer additional detail (I believe this is the vast majority), and those that don't mind the extra detail (this is me, but I tend to go overboard with it [just look at my game mods in the download section if you want to know what I mean {overboard }]).

Both types of preferences are good, because gaming is all about what that person finds fun.

I like how the rules accommodate both types of interests (Basic rules vs. Advanced); but, maybe future rule releases could include an official intermediate use of altitude to provide middle ground.

As for me, I believe that once the altitude rules are learned (as written), they become second nature and fun, because your opponent has to earn his altitude (easy diving, but harder to get that altitude back).

[LOOP]

I use the rules in the rulebook with one additions. A four card loop which in some cases affect the altitude

[Flying Helmut]

As for me, I believe that once the altitude rules are learned (as written), they become second nature and fun, because your opponent has to earn his altitude (easy diving, but harder to get that altitude back).

I agree.

Two reasons I don't like the "1 up, 2 down" rules;
a) it is much too easy to quickly regain lost altitude
b) all planes climb at the same rate