What makes a wargame 'exellent'? - Page 2 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
Other Systems For the discussion of non GW games such as Malifaux, Dystopian Wars, Flames of War, AT43 and Secrets of the Third Reich.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 14 (permalink) Old 10-23-14, 02:41 PM
Senior Member
ChaosRedCorsairLord's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,007
Reputation: 17
Default

Ah nice, I completely forgot about tokens and book keeping.

Less is more, and all that.

When I was a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball...
ChaosRedCorsairLord is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 14 (permalink) Old 10-23-14, 06:43 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Warhawk's Avatar
Warhawk's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 72
Reputation: 6
Default

Currently the primary bookkeeping method is a master list that each player uses I'm (cheekily) dubbing an ATO, or Air Tasking Order. The only tokens I had planned for the board itself were whenever countermeasures were dispensed (to keep track of whether or not missile launches from different angles could still hit as well that turn) and the occasional special ability (like Chaos aircraft being daemon-possessed, which is treated like "additional equipment" which is few and far between). The name label also incorporates altitude, and speed is irrelevant since the scale doesn't require concepts like acceleration. With this in mind, would it be worth it to have tokens indicating out-of-ammo and low fuel? Technically those should already be seen on the ATO sheet, and too many tokens attached to playing pieces might clutter things.

Furthermore, I currently have no indicator of morale. Since each piece is a squadron made up of at least a dozen aircraft, and since it's mostly impossible for slower aircraft to disengage without the enemy's consent, is a morale system even worth using? It's already such that a highly skilled squadron can "bounce" an enemy from behind and above and roll an experience check, doing an absurd amount of damage and virtually eliminating an entire squadron in one hit. At this rate, would pilots even have time to consider "fleeing to cover" that isn't there? In my own studies and discussions about fighter aviation, such a thing doesn't really occur; everything is really cold and calculated, because if you die, chances are you died without knowing it, in an instant.


"There are old heretics and bold heretics, but there are no old, bold heretics. How do I know? Because I make sure of it myself."

Wing Commander Silo Barstad, Imperial Navy 3355th Fighter Wing

Last edited by Warhawk; 10-23-14 at 06:48 PM.
Warhawk is offline  
post #13 of 14 (permalink) Old 10-31-14, 03:37 PM
Senior Member
 
Roninman's Avatar
Roninman's Flag is: Finland
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 507
Reputation: 3
Default

What is scale of map? Dont think fuel should be something that is needed, its just another record keeping stat.

Phantom and Hornet leader used counters for payload which you choose for mission. Like bombs, for example. You ditch counter from your plane card after it is used and there is multiple selection of armaments to choose from.

Also morale is made easier since planes/squadrons are predetermined by planes you choose for mission. Those games are campaign based so morale gets affected between missions mostly on what happened on earlier game. Things like friendly casualties and getting fired upon alot makes people go stressed and will affect their future mission unless they have been put to rest.

If this is squadron based game, dont put too many tiny little recordkeeping details into it. Less rules are usually better than bog game down on small details.

You might wanna check out following titles for some reference:
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/6...air-operations
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1...-apache-leader
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/41490/phantom-leader

Last edited by Roninman; 10-31-14 at 03:45 PM.
Roninman is offline  
 
post #14 of 14 (permalink) Old 10-31-14, 08:22 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Warhawk's Avatar
Warhawk's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 72
Reputation: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roninman View Post
What is scale of map? Dont think fuel should be something that is needed, its just another record keeping stat.

The smallest possible map that is worth playing with fighters is 2,300km across, or 30". Lightning fighters are currently the shortest-ranged fighter I have written up, which can travel 35" before returning to base (minus 2 turns for take off and landing included). Some aircraft have shorter legs, namely Valkyrie gunships, but bombers and transports just get longer and longer. This is a game that will make full use of forward airbases and mobile mass carriers, making fuel a very relevant issue, especially between races. As it stands, fuel consumption is simply a running tally: For every turn you just add a tally slash for a squadron in the air. The one current exception is if you use afterburners, in which case you add two slashes. It takes all of 2 seconds, and since it's based on a tally you can readily see what you've used in blocks of 5, without having to re-write a number like "13", "14", "15" etc.

Quote:
Phantom and Hornet leader used counters for payload which you choose for mission. Like bombs, for example. You ditch counter from your plane card after it is used and there is multiple selection of armaments to choose from.
So far the weapons work on a similar principle, but using the tally on the player's organization sheet. Primary weapons like forward-firing guns have ammo, but all secondaries come in "slots" which average around 2. A Lightning, for example, will have Lascannons with 2 shots, autocannons with 3 shots, and 2 secondary slots which can be mixed and matched with missiles and bombs. On using the latter, you just strike the name of the weapon off on your sheet. All secondary payloads are determined before the game starts as they use up points, but you can change payloads mid-game after landing so long as you have excess points left over (exchanging numbers for utility).

Quote:
Also morale is made easier since planes/squadrons are predetermined by planes you choose for mission. Those games are campaign based so morale gets affected between missions mostly on what happened on earlier game. Things like friendly casualties and getting fired upon alot makes people go stressed and will affect their future mission unless they have been put to rest.
Currently the only crew-related stat is a very basic experience level ranging from 1 to 5. I suppose it could be dropped from one game to the next as part of a campaign, but there's something to be said for how air warfare works: It's not that cut and dried when it comes to the psychology of it.

For starters, pilots of single-seat fighters rarely "break and flee" simply because they hardly see any carnage with their own eyes. If the rest of their squadron bites it, they can simply turn tail and burn away at high speed, leaving most threats behind. Most of their in-battle stress comes from the notion that sometimes (like during escort missions) you MUST go head first into the enemy to protect others, where your speed cannot necessarily save you. As for panicking over damage and death, even in today's world most munitions can wipe out a fighter in a single hit. If you're lucky enough not to die in the blast, your training/guts immediately have you punch out from the burning wreckage. There's no time to grouse over wounds and the like; it's not that dramatic in the air itself.

That changes on the ground, when you get to see with your own eyes just how many didn't come back, and after sharing stories, how some people could have done better and saved teammates/escorted friendlies, but didn't. That said, it's only in the most melodramatic fiction that squadrons are made up of 12 people, 24/7. In reality, the only reason any airforce had 1 pilot for 1 aircraft was when they were absolutely desperate, like Soviet Union 1942 kind of desperate. Otherwise, multiple aircrews for the same airframe spreads the fatigue and morale "damage" around much better than a squad of boots on the ground. Requiring squadrons to land due to fuel explains this away in an instant: That's when they swap out crews.

As for aircraft with larger crews, I would say that 'this' is where it becomes tedious, since there are slightly different rules at work. Even then, the crew swap on the ground would still happen.

Quote:
If this is squadron based game, dont put too many tiny little recordkeeping details into it. Less rules are usually better than bog game down on small details.
Aside from knowing values such as speed and damage dealt, and since payloads are established before the game begins and merely counted from then on out, these are the only pieces of record-keeping required so far:

- Base (where the squadron is landed and how long it has been, when 2 turns rearms and 5 turns rearms and refuels; acts as a tally, is erased when airborne)
- Strength (with an emphasis on the half-way mark since hitting it halves the damage dealt)
- Endurance (again, just a simple tally)
- Countermeasures (for aircraft with limited amounts, usually a tally of 1 slash only)
- Primary weapons (a tally for each, usually no more than 8 max)
- Secondary weapons (you cross it out)
- Land unit/building hitpoints (also a simple tally, and mission specific)

There are a myriad of details I could have included. Strength could have been actual number of aircraft matched to armor/durability values and adjusted for damage accordingly, but instead it's just simple HP, bloated for numbers and durability. Damage dealt could have been scaled with every loss of HP, but instead it only halves at the half-way mark. Endurance could have been an ungodly fuel calculation based on chosen speed and altitude, but instead it's just turn by turn. This means that actual endurance is a function of both speed and endurance points, but it allows aircraft with little range to still stay in the game for meaningful periods. Likewise, secondary weapons were abbreviated into roughly "pairs" and "bomb loads," so instead of tracking every single missile on all 4 pylons of every Lightning, you simply have 2 slots, or 2 wing pairs for missiles, which act like barrages.

I've been looking at games like these as much as possible without seeking out and buying expensive out of print sets, but the common theme is that many of them are nowhere near the scale I'm gunning for. What I'm doing is something like Epic 40k for Aeronautica Imperialis, and since it's 'aircraft' that balloons the scale to continent-wide proportions. I've been trying to streamline the gameplay such that having 20 squadrons in the air at one time is no big deal, but your management of their skill, fuel and mission capabilities 'is'. And since every faction plays its own way, no one strategy will work all the time.


"There are old heretics and bold heretics, but there are no old, bold heretics. How do I know? Because I make sure of it myself."

Wing Commander Silo Barstad, Imperial Navy 3355th Fighter Wing

Last edited by Warhawk; 10-31-14 at 08:35 PM.
Warhawk is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Tabletop Wargames > Other Systems

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome