VDP E-Game #5

[kirkh]

Now that e-games 1 and 2 are complete, I'd like to moderate an e-Game using some of my modified rules. The four changes I'd use would be:

1) no dive movement bonus
2) reduced gun jam chances (3% base chance, +-3% per turn of use/cooling respectively, 6% for long bursts)
3) revised deflection modifiers
4) separate damage rolls for each gun - we'll use two damage charts (single deck gun (unmodified) and single wing gun)

My plan is to have a pair of Nieuport 17's (with deck Vickers and wing Lewis) face off against a pair of German twin gun aircraft.

If anybody would like to give it a try, lemme know.

[kevan]

I'm in, and looking forward to it. Could we try a climbing penalty too?

[kirkh]

I wasn't sure what to do with regards to altitude changes. I figured either do bonuses for diving and penalties for climbing or just eliminate them both. In my opinion the game should ether have both or neither so in this case I went with neither. If the majority feel differently and/or want to try other things then we can make changes.

[kevan]

Personally I liked the idea of reducing the diving bonus to 10mph per 200', along with the climbing penalty. I think we would then see dogfights descending more often.

[kirkh]

That would be fine. My house rule is one square of movement added or subtracted for every 200' of altitude change, and fractions greater than 50' are rounded up. In other words, if you climb/dive 50' there's no movement change, but for 100' and 150' the change occurs.

[kirkh]

BTW, for anyone wondering I am assuming this game still counts as an offical game should we get the required four participants. Even though it's an experiment with some rules, since each group that plays the boardgame version has their own "house" rules I disagreeumption is that this is no different.

Oh, and instead of Nieuports on the Allied side, I'm thinking of using the venerable SE-5a. I have two reasons. First, Nieuports came with varied armament so in this game the German knowing ahead of time what the Allies have may give them an advantage they normally wouldn't have. SE-5s always had the two guns so are a known quantity. Second, this opens up greater variability for what the Germans might fly. If I had used the Nieuport 17 chances are the opponent would have been Alb's. This way there's a greater chance of it being something else.

[Orion]

I am in and I will play whatever rules you choose as long as everyone is clear at the start.

[kirkh]

Definitely. I'll send out an e-mail with all the details once (if) four or more players sign up.

[AP]

I am willing to join in on the 'experiment', but let me add my 'veteran' experience before we begin. I understand the desire to make the combat more realistic & have it descend instead of ascend... having said that, as far as playability of a game, climbing penalities really take away from the game play, especially early war aircraft. Remember that the stall speed on most of these aircarft is 60mph. This means any combat over 10,000 most pre 1918 aircraft are going to stall early, in fact, Alb D2 * 3s wouldnt be able to climb above 10,000 which right away removes the 'realistic' aspect.
Also, it will turn into a defensive battle really quickly with planes attempting to maintain altitude, so the game is going to go on an even longer time because you sacrifice a shot for gaining altitude, or you cant turn much because you climb so you get a lousy shot... I would suggest attempting it in a live game over email, or trying this late war with aircraft that can handle it, OR just removing dive bonus.but thats just my 2 cents...i will still try it

[kirkh]

I originally suggested removing the dive bonus thinking it would be simpler. Adding penalties for climbing can add confusion. As an example, if you're at a speed of 9 and your turn speed is 8, are you at turn speed if you keep your throttle at 9 but climb 100'? It can open up a whole can of worms regarding throttle position vs. airspeed vs. ground speed that probably would take a while to resolve during an e-game. In thinking about it again, the best way to keep the game moving along will probably be to just eliminate the dive bonus.

[kirkh]

I'm still looking for a 4th player to try out an e-game using some experimental "house" rules. If interested, please post here or let me know via e-mail. If the use of some different rules is keeping anyone away, please let us know and we can always use the traditional rules. I just thought it might be something a little different and I definitely don't want anyone to feel apprehensive about playing.

[Rex]

sure sign me up.

[kirkh]

I'll get everything set up tonight and send everyone an e-mail detailing what rule change experiments we'll use for this game. If anybody has any suggestions, please feel free to post them here and we can discuss them.

[Orion]

Time for the frickin' lasers!

[kirkh]

Those will be next game, along with shields and cloaking devices.