I wasn’t saying that your idea was bad.
But yes, that makes sense.
New flak rules for AA gun
-
- Each AA gun now fires AFTER the bomber performs its SBR run.
IN reality only 10% of all total plane sorties resulted in damage from flak artillery during the war. This is a total of all nations, so to model this in a game not more than one out of ten planes of all the times you fly over a AA gun should a loss occur.
First option for flak artillery:
Each AA gun is now rolling one die for each flak level you have (represented by chips under the AA gun). The first level costs 3 IPC, each additional level equals one additional roll for an investment of 2 IPC each level. The maximum number of levels is 4, which would cost you 3+2+2+2= 9 IPC investment and get you 4 rolls.examples: you fly 7 bombers over Berlin and Germany has a 4 level flak getting 4 rolls trying to get a one. This will encourage larger SBR campaigns, while minimizing small half efforts with one bomber going against 4 potential flak rolls.
Alternative SBR bombing schedule:
Under this system we have 5 levels with the first level at 3, each additional level at 2…so a full AA gun would cost you 11 IPC if built from scratch.
1 Die for every 5 bombers= level 1
1 Die for every 4 bombers= level 2
1 Die for every 3 bombers= level 3
1 Die for every 2 bombers= level 4
2 Die for every 1 bomber= level 5drop all fractions in calculations
example: you fly 7 bombers over a flak gun that is a level 3, so the owning player will roll 2 dice AFTER the bombers perform SBR
all starting AA guns have a flak level of one.
- when a SBR attack occurs the defender has the option of allocating the damage to your flak defense taking one chip for every two points of hits.
-
I like
-
I agree that AA Guns need modification for the historic reasons you pointed out, I like you’re ideas even though there seems to be alot of varitable calculations. It all seems well thought out, bravo.
How about this one…
Each anti-aircraft gun receives only one dice, regardless of how many enemy aircraft attack however, they now hit @2. Territories may also have multiple guns, this way players might actually buy them. -
@Trisdin:
I agree that AA Guns need modification for the historic reasons you pointed out, I like you’re ideas even though there seems to be alot of varitable calculations. It all seems well thought out, bravo.
How about this one…
Each anti-aircraft gun receives only one dice, regardless of how many enemy aircraft attack however, they now hit @2. Territories may also have multiple guns, this way players might actually buy them.Even if they cost 6 firing @2 would be overpowered unless their was like a limit of 2 or 3 per terriotory. IL’s rules are better beasue you can have more AA guns and their is more varity in AA defence.
and IL, what if your AA Guns could also be taken as causaulties, so that they also represent general civil defence and fortifictaions
-
having more than one in a territory supposes that these are organized like armies… rather these are fixed deployments of batteries of grades of high density flak or weak defenses. The game treats them like some kind of ON/OFF light switch, but in each case the number of these emplacements fluctuates greatly. This is why to model them you need ‘LEVELS’ of defense… look at them like how Rommel wanted to fortify the beaches of france to prevent invasions… the idea was how much commitment of resources would be allocated by the Todd Organization to develop the various traps, barbed wire, gun emplacements, mines…etc. I view flak artillery defenses similarly, where you make investments over time to develop these. If they are cheap players will really buy this and build up the flak levels over time, rather than chuck out 5 IPC for another roll.
I think you want something more simple… rather than 1 die per 3 planes, 2 die per 4 planes thing.
Perhaps a hybrid of both is possible:
planes roll out SBR results first, then flak rolls are performed…
level 1 = 1 roll @1 (plane returns to base but is not destroyed-considered damaged)
level 2 = 1 roll @1
level 3 = 1 roll @2
level 4 = 2 rolls @2<
level 5 = 3 rolls @2< -
and IL, what if your AA Guns could also be taken as causaulties, so that they also represent general civil defence and fortifictaions
the same principle would be for fortifications, except these would have special rules for invasions and if airborne were used.
-
If we want a historical 10%, why not just use a d10 instead?
-
If we want a historical 10%, why not just use a d10 instead?
Why not use a d12 and double everything except AA guns. ex. tanks attack @6, bombers defend @2, Battleships attack @8 but AA guns stay @1.
-
D10 is better. remember only 10% of planes were damaged or destroyed in total by ground based guns.
-
Hey, maybe we could ask FMG to make those elusive AA gun dice d10.
Although, would that leave enough room for a cool picture? When the d6 discussion was still up, I thought having a picture of 2 radar dishes on the 2 side would be cool to signify radar.
-
Well since AA lethality is the issue how about the AA rolls “against” each of the bombers and compares it to the damage they rolled 1:1 looking for doubles.
For each double, one bomber aborts etc., no damage inflicted on that IC.
Except the dreaded double 1s - Bomber down in flames.
I think that’s like a 3% lethality.Too low?
Make it double 3s and 4s so you end up with damage possibly occurring at either extreme.Anyway, its an idea for pondering. What the hey we’re rolling dice like crazy on SBRs anyway…
-
I think you’re overlooking something here:
Doesn’t AA gun damage vs SBR actually represent a combination of flak AND fighter defence?
Limiting AA damage this way only makes sense if you allow defending fighters into SBR combat in their own right.
-
I think you’re overlooking something here:
No we haven’t. AA Guns have always just represented AA Guns. The only reason Fighter Intercept isn’t a standard Rule is that some of the makers think Intercept makes a 10 IPC unit too powerful.
-
I think you’re overlooking something here:
Doesn’t AA gun damage vs SBR actually represent a combination of flak AND fighter defence?
Limiting AA damage this way only makes sense if you allow defending fighters into SBR combat in their own right.
I can’t speak to whether or not it was written to include some inherent element of fighter interception BUT if the players aren’t using the intercept rules for SBR I’d say they shouldn’t tinker with the 1:6 AA in isolation and call it more historical or whatever…
but that’s me.
-
Doesn’t AA gun damage vs SBR actually represent a combination of flak AND fighter defence?
no just the flak guns. The 10% is just ground based defenses.
-
@Imperious:
Doesn’t AA gun damage vs SBR actually represent a combination of flak AND fighter defence?
no just the flak guns. The 10% is just ground based defenses.
hmmm I’m thinking you speaking about two different things. :-D
Flashy is speaking about the game mechanic.
And IL, I think you’re speaking about the historical stat. -
In the game the AA gun IS not ‘planes’
Thats like the old often defeated argument that “transports are also warships and not just transports”
or “Battleships are also cruisers”
Each piece is what it is and not a hybrid of different types of units.
Only the artillery could also include tanks in terms of self propelled artillery.
-
@Imperious:
In the game the AA gun IS not ‘planes’….
Each piece is what it is and not a hybrid of different types of units.Only the artillery could also include tanks in terms of self propelled artillery.
Well, actually all of the land units are hybrids or combined arms formations. :-)
But hey, I’m a big fan of interceptors so I’ll leave it to Flashy to support his take on AA -
@Imperious:
This will encourage larger SBR campaigns, while minimizing small half efforts with one bomber going against 4 potential flak rolls.
Do you think this helps the game when it becomes a “bomber-fest”?
I guess (as flashman brings up) we need to see how this works in conjunction with the ftr escort rule you would implement.
-
Id keep the same rule as in AAE. Attacking bombers bring in fighter escorts rolling 1, Defender gets fighters at 2
Bombers at 12 and these increased IPC totals for UK make these tactics much more viable. The flak rule is an attempt among other things to address the concern of people who like the AA gun to be more realistic and not be too luck based and potentially wipe out too much. The defender @2 is getting enough of an advantage in the dogfight and i feel these new flak rules balance out the math.
The other thing is how the AA gun in the game is always considered the same strength no matter what. You can have 20 AA guns but only one working in a zone. IN the war some areas had greater protection than others, and these rules allow a smaller investment to get some defense going, which makes the AA gun more viable than just keeping the ones you got and never buying them.
Suggested Topics
