Korean Air War- Rough Test

[Eric Farrington]

I have been interested in creating a Korean Air War game for some time. It is an interesting period to me due to the transition from Prop to Jets, and the fact that missiles have not become a big factor. Dogfighting with guns was still the way to dogfight, but Ground Attack and bombing was still a major part of the air war. Plus, control of the air was still contested during this conflict unlike more modern air wars. I am not an expert on this period by any means, so lots of research needed! Fun!

All that being said, my natural Baseline game is Forgeworld's V1 Aeronautica Imperialis from Warwick Kinrade because I really like it and enjoy playing it. I find it simple to learn, but actual play is fun and tactical. However, after reading some thoughts on the Delta Vector Blog for Air Combat, it got me thinking about things a bit differently. This thread is intended to just be a place to talk about various mechanics and hash them out.

Design Goals are:
1. Scale and model agnostic
2. Pilot skill plays a big role
3. Unique aircraft
4. Minimal tracking
5. Fast and furious play with constant movement/action
6. Players make decisions through out the game

Into the wild blue yonder!

This game will not use Hexes so this will be a free form game. Measurements will be generic in the form of Measurement Units that the player can set based on the scale of their craft.

First off, I was thinking of using Action Economy to differentiate between Pilot skill similar to Zona Alfa. These Dogfights are supposed to represent seconds of time, so any hesitation from a Green pilot can be exploited by more experienced pilots. Therefore, Rookie get 1 activation, Vets two, and Aces 3 activations. Activations will include moving and any available shooting. All Planes will have alternating activation, once all Rookies have moved, Vets and Aces activate again alternating, and then Aces alternate activation for their third activation. The player with the most aircraft on the board always activates first. No idea if this will work.

My plan is to be using three height bands only..... At The Deck, Combat, and High Altitude. I also used this in my Space Game with Altitude Bands. However, I may change this to d6 for easy tracking, and this could allow for more maneuver and craft differentiation. We will see. Thoughts?

Speed will be a set amount with planes having to go that distance in a turn, I assume all planes are going at their best combat speeds. I am planning on getting rid of adding or removing thrust. With Jets having a potential "Full Thrust" style sprint move for a straight line speed boosts and height changes. Turns and Height changes will move the set speed up and down immediately when they happen.

Planes will have a maximum turn radius in their profiles based on the maneuverability of the plane. A b-29 Super Fortress will have a different turn radius than a Mig-15. The highest will be a 90 degree turn, with the lowest being closer to 30 degrees. I was thinking of making a maneuver card with turn style numbers listed on the card..... but I am really open to different ways to do this as I am not a fan of the turning card A single turn or height change can be made in an activation.

Shooting will have two ranges, Long Shot and Combat Range. Shooting will be a straight line from the nose of the plane, while bombers will have a simple 360 degree radius. There will be set range bands of 0-6 and 7-12 Measurement Units at the same height band only (open to change if I use 6 height bands instead of 3) . Most planes will be able to fly Combat Range or farther in a turn so Dogfights will mostly be knife fights. Rookies roll 1 shooting dice, Vets 2, and Aces 3 dice with a Target Number based on the Aircraft's firepower. Tailing will allow an extra dice, but must be behind the enemy target, with behind being a 180 arc to the rear. Thoughts?

Related, I like that there is limited ammo in AI v1. However, I want to eliminate tracking it so am thinking of some sort of Ammo roll that can vary by weapon. This means people won't just open fire with low opportunity shots and instead hold on until they have a better chance. Other thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Most escorts, fighter, interceptors etc. will be one hit = one kill. However, I am thinking of giving planes a "Maneuver" save to avoid getting splashed. This will vary based on the plane. Therefore, the targets can "do" something instead of just dying. Open to thoughts on that as well.

The thing I am struggling most with is "detection". Part of me thinks that the straight from nose LOS might be enough of a restrictions to abstract detection. I do not want to use "blinds" as I find them cumbersome. I also find a detection/spotting roll before firing to be unsatisfactory for this situation. I am leaning towards detection possibly being a pre-game roll. Rookies, Vets, and Aces (Say 4+, 5+, 6+) might have a Target Number. Prior to the game, each player rolls a D6. If the D6 is higher than the pilots TN, then the plane is deployed on the board at the start of the game. A plane that is not detected can be placed in "reserve" and they can "deep strike" in anywhere on the board later in the game. Essentially, as a player, you know they are out there but not when or where they will strike.

This will be a combined "arms" incorporating bombers, fighters, fighter-bombers, etc. It will be scenario driven with a variety of different historical based missions and situations. The Game will end at X Turns, with a randomization for a next turn that gets harder per turn past X. The final turn is always a disengagement turn to try and escape or wrack up some extra kills. If a force loses 50% of their starting aircraft, then the next turn will automatically be the "Disengagement Turn". Victory will be based on Kill score with non-aircraft or other objectives (Ground targets, getting a plane off board, etc) worth X amount of Kills. The most "Kills" wins.

That is the rough outlines of my thinking. I am open to ideas, suggestions, tweaks, better ideas, etc. Thoughts and feedback?

Next will be a rough playtest of these ideas using some proxies.

[Eric Farrington]

I placed two Mig-15s against a pair of P-80 Shooting Stars. Both sides had a rookie, and an experienced pilot.

The initial pre-game roll had the Mig-15s detected, but the Migs did not see the P-80s. Therefore, they were placed in reserve. The Migs were at high altitude.

Turn 1:
Migs go first and are placed on the board. The Rookie Mig goes ahead straight, but a P-80 appears in his six. Seeing this, the lead Mig breaks right and drops a level. The Inexperienced P-80 appears, shadowing the Veteran Mig.

The Experienced p-80 pilot easily dusts the Green Mig, but runs out of ammo in the process. He will need to disengage and head for home!

In the second activation the experienced Mig pilot cuts back and gains altitude and buzzes past the rookie p-80 pilot. The Experienced p-80 pilot goes to pursue.

Turn 2:
P-80s have the initiatvie since there are more of them.

The Rookie P-80 pilot dives to the hard deck and races away at full speed.

The Mig Veteran turns and gives chase but is perpendicular to the target and moving away, and one level too high. Meanwhile the Experienced P-80 pilot tries to disengage by going the opposite direction of the Mig.

In the Experienced turn, the Mig manages to chase up to the Rookie p-80, but overshoots the speed and can not fire. The P-80 Vet disengages successfully and heads back to base.

Turn 3:
The P-80 Rookie tries to break right but and climb to avoid the Mig. However, the experienced Mig matches him easily and opens fire. The more experienced pilot easily ices the Rookie P-80, but also runs out of ammo doing it.

In the Experienced Activation, the Mig disengages and heads for China.

Conclusion:
Both groups lost their rookies, so an even trade in blood.

Some Notes:
- Need rules for how far forward you need to go before initiating a turn, dive, climb (Half move, immediately, X inches per height change or degree of turn? Not sure.) Immediate leads to tight maneuvers.

- Perhaps a rule that if you are more than X inches from an enemy plane you can auto-disengage?

- Very little difference in the planes at this point. In actuality, a P-80 could not go as high as a Mig so would be unlikely to ice one the way we did in the game. Also, the dive and climb advantages of the various planes played little role as they all did it the same.

- Both experienced planes running out of ammo seemed ok.

- Need to define turn, dive, and climb costs/gains to movement better. I jury-rigged it for the playtest when I realized they were missing.

- Not sure about the Detection mechanics yet. Detection did prove pretty decisive as the P-80s got the drop on the Migs and were able to capitalize early.

- The additional activation and shooting bonuses to Experienced pilots seemed ok to me, but it was a limited play-test.

[Eric Farrington]

Tried another playtest with 4 Migs doing a bomber intercept against 3 B-29s and 4 Thunderjets of the USAF.

Good:
- Quick play- less than 1 hour
- Minimal tracking/record keeping- Only altitude and Out of ammo
- Historical outcome and performance
- Worked well with all Experienced pilots

Bad
- Detection allowed a Mig Alpha Strike that the USAF could do little about. Historical but not fun.
- Deployment needs to be more interesting
- Needs terrain/clouds to add flavor and tactical play options

Needs Work
- Some rules about intermingling/touching units, no collisions
- Narrow Tailing rules for more play

Result was 3 Bombers destroyed, for 2 Migs lost.