Alternate Universe Dawn Patrol

[Stephen]

Got my first taste of it last night and wow, does the flight model ever replicate way-cool dogfighting!

Forget rolling "numbers" and hoping you don't go first... this is an entirely new concept for DP that replicates movement far better than the current system. DP won't change nor is anyone trying to change it, but this is way cool fun that really opens your eyes to new movement strategies.

Me like.

[albpilot]

It was interesting, and helped me see a couple of things I'll need to tweak for the GenCon scenario. Thanks for helping out Stephen.

[albpilot]

Bart and I were talking this over Saturday evening and he came up with an idea that I think will solve the diving issue.

[Stephen]

That part got boring... everything else I considered an improvement. The close dogfighting was especially amazing. I know it won't change the game, but everyone should try this just to see the difference.

[albpilot]

This seems to work pretty well, and has the advantage of letting a player track altitude per impulse, which is needed.

[albpilot]

Hey, Stephen. Want to get together at some point during the week? I'd like to run through this system at least one more time, because I need to work through the dive portion. You can come over to my house, and that way we'd have 4 (if I make Olivia play). Let me know.

[Stephen]

albpilot said:

Hey, Stephen. Want to get together at some point during the week? I'd like to run through this system at least one more time, because I need to work through the dive portion. You can come over to my house, and that way we'd have 4 (if I make Olivia play). Let me know.

I'm really tight for the next few weeks. July 8 is even in doubt at the moment... how bout we try to hold a game at our next gaming day? We'll try to work one in for sure before GC. Does that work?

[albpilot]

Not sure I'll make the next gaming day unfortunately.

[Stephen]

Same here. We may have to cancel and wait til Gen Con. But let's get closer and take a poll the week prior and we'll see.

[albpilot]

My preference would still be a weeknight sometime.

[bergovoy]

How about a game report?

[albpilot]

I've been swamped. I'll try to whip something together this weekend on this game.

[albpilot]

Ok, a summary of the experiment:

First off, what was the purpose of this? It was to determine whether or not realism was attainable without losing playability. Or, to put it another way, is a turn a 20 second 'snapshot' or is it supposed to be a 20 seconds of continuous movement? Just about every discussion or argument I have seen over 6 years of playing this game can come down to the answer to this question.

To try to simulate a more 'realistic' air combat, I had to change several basic premises of the game. First, initiative - how many of us have been torked off because our initiative rolls were less than steller over the course of a game? To get around that, I basically eliminated them by making movement be based on the planes announced speed for the turn with the slower planes moving first (this logic being based on the fact that a person in a better performing plane can actually wait LONGER to commit to an action and still have the same result as a person in a slower plane choosing earlier. I'm open to debate on this). Next, I had to try to figure out how fancy manuvers would work in the course of play. Then I had to try to figure out firing, cooling, and jamming...might have been easier to create a whole new game! And damage allocation led me to come up with a revised HO chart.

Now, obervations from the game:

1) Al C had to get out the CHART to see how to move a plane through all squares of a fancy...funny irony from a player with Al's years of experience.

2) The planes moved toward each other head on, and then ALL the Allies started an Immelman immediatly as the Germans passed over

3) Two of the Germans, seeing Allied planes going nose up in impulse 7 (start of the Immelman) started Immelmans themselves in impulse 8

4) The need for revised record keeping charts became almost immediately apparent due to the amount of altitude fluctuation and fancy manuvers.

5) As it turned out, all the Allies picked planes that moved 10 in the bracket. The Germans had 8,9,10, and 11. The end result of that was that the slow plane (Pfalz d3) became the target of choice and was hammered (sorry Dan Racke). Some felt that this should be addressed, but in all honesty, I think this was really no different than rolling a high initiative multiple turns.

6) We had a situation where one of the two seaters had an impulse during an Immelman where the observer took a shot at an opponent while INVERTED. No real reason it shouldn't have happened under the rules as they were set up (and in my opinion should have been an allowed shot at any rate) but it caused quite a bit of discussion.

7) The poor Pfalz took the engine crit that causes a fire to start very early on, like impulse 8-10. Therefore, I had to make a snap ruling that the fire would actually begin at the beginning of the next turn. Questionable, but it seemed to solve the problem. I'll have to rethink this sort of thing if I run this again.

Overall impressions:
1) The fight stayed bunched up and did not climb. There was firing from angles not normally chosen and at distances that were more realistic, usually 150-250 feet. To me, this was the epitome of what a real dogfight looked like.

2) The way the players seemed to welcome some of the ideas was fun, the discussion provoked was also good, albeit a bit heated in spots.

3) There was none of this diving away after a retreating plane stuff that is so prevalent. As the Pfalz and Bart's Bristol started to dive off, no one started to follow them. A little later, Aaron had a situation where he was on the tail of a plane that started to dive away. The resulting manuvering left Aaron about 700 feet behind and a bit above. In my mind, this is exactly how it would really be - the chase pilot would lose a bit of ground initially but regain it as the chase went on.

4) We played 30 impulses of action - 30 seconds of time simulated. That was one turn and 1/2 a second turn. In that time, planes got hit, observers fired at targets of opportunity, and gun jams happened. I feel that we actually achieved a more 'realistic' simulation of WW1 aerial combat. However, it also became apparent that this sort of realism caused playability to suffer. Part of that I'm sure is due to my adapting DP with another game inefficiently, but another part is illustrative of something I've said since I started playing. That is, "If we make it more realistic, we kill the playability and enjoyment" Here are some comments handed to me by a new player that had sat in on the game....

"I liked the interaction, but the system used is a bit tedious due to movement and jams = 2.5 hours for 30 seconds of combat. realism vs playability? It MUST be PLAYABLE 1st, realistic second"

I think that sums it up pretty nicely. As a result of this experiment, for any 8th edition I think the basic rules need to say specifically that the game is supposed to be a SNAPSHOT during 20 seconds of time in the basic rules. Eliminate any sort of discussion about whether or not there is a 20 second continuous movement, get back to having a game that is fun to play, quick to learn, and is playable 1st, even at the expense of realism.

The opinions expressed above are solely the authors and are not reflective of the Indy Squadron as a whole.

I'd invite anyone who played to chip in with their impressions. What didja like, what didja hate?

To all those who played or took the time to read this, I thank you.

Rick

[albpilot]

I came up with another alternate universe variation for GenCon (although this one doesn't involve impulse movement for those who didn't like that). It is based on two seaters. Should be fun.