Tactics and problems with the game

ALJ · 12-18-2009 07:55

Hello

I've just bough the deluxe version of DaW and I really like the idea of the game. I've been playing games like IL2:Sturmovik for some time and it's really funny how DaW captures so many aspects of air combat (while leaving out the really boring ones). It's also funny how people not into flight combat can never remember the name of the Immelmann maneouvre. So far we've heard hilarious names such as Irmelmann, Himmelmann, Mimmelmann, Bimmelmann, Heimlich and even Murmelmann. Those who understand german will probably have an even bigger laugh.

Anyways, I've been playing a handful of games with my friends and while it's a funny game most of the time, it just feels very weird sometimes. We usually play a 2vs2 fight but it always starts dragging out once we reach 1vs1. The big problem here seems to be that the new way of planning cards does not allow for much luck or at least surprise. I have not tried the original WoW game but as far as I understand, in that version you pick 3 manouvre cards and place them. Then when all 3 are used, you plan and pick 3 new cards.

1. One of the problems with DaW compared to the WoW method seems to be that you only actually plan 1 card at a time. This makes it extremely hard to do any kind of surprising move. Once you get in a circle fight, the other person will easily counter any try to do something else because the reaction time is much too short. If you turn right in a left-going circle fight, so does you opponent and then you simply move the circle a bit. Except for a very, very few maneuvers, all the planes have pretty much the same movement. There are very few "Hah! Gotcha!"-moments in my opinion and a vast amount of "I tried to outsmart you but now the situation is exactly the same as 15 minutes ago"-moments. How can we prevent this from happening?

2. Who really wants to fly the Wildcat? All axis planes handle much better, climb faster and have more firepower. The only maneuver the Wildcat can surprise with is probably the Immelman. However, in our experience the C+C+A damage of Axis planes usually deal much more damage than B+B so when the Wildcat does an Immelman, the Axis players simply line up a head-to-head short-range combat. How are you supposed to use the Wildcat?

3. How do you counter an Immelman when chasing somebody? My first idea from my IL2 background would be to simply shoot him. However, as mentioned before, in our experience Axis seems to have an edge in head-to-head combat so for allies this is not really an option. If we take an example of me being at around 4-5 o'clock of the guy I'm chasing but not in range, my best idea is currently to try and figure out the Immelmann and turn hard right when I sense he is about to use his fast straight. Then I sideslip even further to the right (or stall, depending on the angle/range) - this should leave me flying at his 4 o'clock but with my plane flying in parallel to his. I can then turn a hard left when he plays hes slow straight and hopefully I will turn towards him and hit him, while having passed his cone of fire. However, very often you end up in his cone anyway, overshoot or collide with him, as the planes move quite long even with slow movement. Does anybody have other tactics regarding this?

4. Will new planes come out with more different characteristics? Honestly, the planes handle almost exactly the same but have different levels of firepower. This, combined with the very low level of surprise because you only plan one card at a time, leads to unnessecarily long and boring fights, in my opinion. Could new planes make up for this with different movement?

This ended up with a very long post I guess. I'd like to hear if anybody has suggestions on all of this or have the same experiences? I'm thinking about buying the WWI version instead as the dogfights might be more random, but seemingly also more unpredictable and fun. I've not given up on WWII as we still need some more games and optional rules tested but I just wanted to hear if anybody had the same problems.

**krolik** · 12-18-2009 21:24

We haven't played as much WW2 as WW1, but a few things stand out. DoW is more of a hit & run game than a turning dogfight game. The B+B is not as underpowered as you think vs C+C+A (or B vs C at long range). The C damage can be severe, but there are alot more zeroes in the C than in the B. The B will usually cause damage, not as much as the C, but it is more reliable than the nearly 40% zeroes in the C.

**Scoop** · 12-19-2009 02:44

Quite a long post, that's right, but I experienced almost the same things. And, yeah, I definitely like the "Bimmelmann" maneuver

I think that dogfights are a lot more tactical and so they could lead to a boring chasing around. I'm looking forwad to the stuka minis, cause I think it's a lot more fun with actual mission targets. I also tried out an observing mission which was much better, because the Wildcats were forced to stick to their mission, which left the Zeros better chances to hit.

**kombofink** · 12-19-2009 06:14

You are right that the game is boring with one vs one. Should it end at that, hopefully one of the planes have more damage, or damage capacity, and should risk going front to front with the immelmann.
2. The f4f3 wildcat is rather poor. use the f4f4 instead. The problem is that the wildcat has too few hitpoints. It should have at least 20 or maybe 22.
3. You should not counter the immelmann. If you are tailing someone, playing the same maneuver as your opp. did two turns ago (you just plan the same as the opp. is currently playing), will give you the edge and more shots than the opp. This off course presumes identical decks. This leads to the assumption that when you are being tailed, you should play the maneuvers your opp. don't have: e.g. the wild cats being chased by a zero should go for the Low speed, as the zeros high speed maneuvers is identical to the wildcats.
4. The planes are rather equal. As you mention, the damage is often the most different factor. The decks are different, but I think they should have more varying hitpoints, as mentioned concerning the wildcats. The spread when including the dauntless is 16 -19, which is only about 19%.

basically: play some scenarios. This is where the game really shines in my opinion.

**Scoop** · 12-19-2009 06:21

Originally Posted by kombofink

basically: play some scenarios. This is where the game really shines in my opinion.

Exactly

**ste_marthe** · 12-19-2009 09:45

Originally Posted by kombofink

basically: play some scenarios. This is where the game really shines in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Scoop

Exactly

I must also say the senarios are way cool to play! Cant wait for the Stuka minis!!

ALJ · 12-21-2009 16:34

Just had a game with Tailing, AA, Special Abilities, Altitude and other optional. AA can really help on the boring circle fight aspect. Special abilities can change the characteristics of the planes quite drastically. Certainly recommended to try out, a lot more fun.

**Dimetri1** · 12-30-2009 17:45

I play WoW WWI. Bought Deluxe WWII game ( my instruction manual came with a ripped cover) and played a for about half a day. Played one on one and scenario. I do not care for it. I need to play some games with more aircraft but I do not think game mechanics translated very well from a historical aspect. Especially in the maneuver category. I don't see any reason to play the Allied aircraft that are out now. For instance the Wildcat should be able to take more damage than a Zero. And what is up with the damage chits. The nice looking damage cards added to the game. The chits just seem cheap. The aircraft do not look as nice as the WWI planes. I could keep going on and on but I already sound like a "Negative Nancy". I will only play this game if I am out voted. Waste of $70.00.

**Oberst Hajj** · 12-31-2009 00:04

I also thought the WWII game felt a bit "choppy" my first few times playing it. After you get used to the new mechanics, you will find it is quite fun. On the surface, the planes do not seem to maneuver much differently from each other, but again, after a little air time, you really start to see the subtle differences.

**Scoop** · 12-31-2009 03:54

@Dimetri1: I definitely understand you and felt like this as well. I still think that the new game system adds to the fun, because the WWII planes "feel" completely different as the old ones. I think WWII needs a lot more tactic and good planning. I also think that the first bombers will add to the fun very much. It is good fun to fly some serious missions and forget about the dogfights. Maybe you should also add the fuel option.

**Bigman** · 01-07-2010 09:45

i agree that WW2 games can involve a lot of flying in circles when 1 v 1 but with more planes and mission based scenarios it can be hectic.
We have tried picking and playing both maneuver cards before picking a new one. It makes things more random but also cuts down the impact of tailing which can be deadly.
In the end if we are playing a quick air deul then WW1 is more fun but the mission based scenario with multiple fighters and bombers can be very absorbing

**Pooh** · 01-07-2010 10:47

In our WW2 games we added fuel usage. It makes a big difference. Instead of blasting around at high speed all the time, you have to plan your moment to strike or you'll find yourself limping home on fumes. Then the other side has you.

As far as the wilcat goes, I agree it should have more more hit points compared to the Zero. The Zero can already turn inside the Wildcat but its low speed turn ought to be even tighter and its hit points less.

We've also found when it gets down to 2 planes, it gets boring. Comming to grips with only 1 opponent is tough. One of the things we're doing more of to counter that is senarios. Particularly ones in which number of aircraft downed are not the victory conditions.

Pooh

**Bigman** · 01-08-2010 03:08

just another thought on this. dont judge to quickly. I have played a loose france 1940 campaign, after six scenarios the kill ratio was 6 - 0 to the allies 5 kills coming as a result of very early explosions(also a lot of accidental flying off the board).
this seemed very unrealistic so we decided to replay the scenarios so far losses are even with no explosions!

So it is worth playing scenarios more than once

The key I think to WW2 is missions with clear objectives that once completed end the game and not fight to the last man.

Just my view of course

**Arendal** · 01-19-2010 08:27

Hi!

I had the same impression in my first games...

But a lot of these problems dissapear when you use altitude rules, for example, where you can loose your prosecutor changing the altitude...

**BD Ford** · 08-20-2010 01:28

yep have to agree with some of the comments, the WW2 game has a different feel to Ww1 but I am drawn to the WW2 game because its the planes are ones I identify with. Still love the WW1 game as well.
WW2 was not, despite what movies may portray, about round and round dog fighting as much as it was about pouncing, blasting and zooming away. The planes were so much faster than Ww1, and heavier, and different tactics apply.
I find the best way to get a closer approximation to real combat is make the game faster and deadlier. My preferred house rules are:
Random start positions.
Remove most zero damage chits from the stack.
Play one card at a time rather than one played and one holding.

works for me! I have also made some tight turns cards - spitfire A deck gets 1 and Zeros get 2, but with Zeros hit points reduced to 10 or 12.

feel free to modify the game to get the game play you want.

BD

**Bartman** · 05-08-2011 16:32

Originally Posted by Col. Hajj

I also thought the WWII game felt a bit "choppy" my first few times playing it. After you get used to the new mechanics, you will find it is quite fun. On the surface, the planes do not seem to maneuver much differently from each other, but again, after a little air time, you really start to see the subtle differences.

This is what I have heard time and again from the more experienced players, and I am hoping to have the same experience.

I think back to all the folks who had negative things to say about WoW WWI over on BGG. It kept me from buying the game for so long because I just couldn't be sure if I'd like it, and the different box sets and boosters made it hard to understand just what to buy.

I finally couldn't resist the RDE WoW and bought it on a whim. Man! I wish I would've bought it long ago (although i am glad I started with miniatures).

Now I am anxiously awaiting my entire collection of DoW minis and the deluxe set and despite some of the folks that don't care for the mechanics of this, I hope that I will be pleasantly surprised again.

**Max Headroom** · 05-08-2011 16:43

While I agree with many comments, I had been playing WoW for about 5 years til DoW came out. I immediately preferred the DoW card play which really gives the feel of split second constant pressure of outmaneuvering your opponent! I find the 3 card placement a bit slow feeling which does reflect the slow WWI craft. One on One dogfights in either game is to be avoided in my opinion unless your both flying 2 or 3 planes each.