Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

RAF: The Battle of Britain 1940» Forums » Rules

Subject: Damage Markers on Airfields and Industry? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Rick Yarto
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Raining down board gaming fun since 1985!
badge
Play DVG's Field Commander Nimitz!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Other than when an airfield gets a light damage marker when it's control room takes damage, it appears as though both airfields and industry targets do NOT get a damage marker placed on them. Is this correct?

Damage against these targets cause reductions to the aircraft replacement points, but it doesn't appear that actual damage markers are placed...

Just want to verify that!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrzej Fiett
Poland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ravenbro wrote:
Damage against these targets cause reductions to the aircraft replacement points, but it doesn't appear that actual damage markers are placed...

You're right. Remember also to subtract VPs and (in case of airfield bombing) to shift squadrons from sector and re-arm box to land box.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick Yarto
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Raining down board gaming fun since 1985!
badge
Play DVG's Field Commander Nimitz!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks Andrzej- and I have remembered to move aircraft from patrols and re-arms down to landing boxes as well when applying damage points to airfields.

What I just realized that I wasn't doing was applying a 1 VP penalty when I didn't respond to raids that contained bomber gruppen. This leads a follow-up question if you would be so kind:

I had an uncontested raid that ended up with part of the bombers hitting the secondary target. Both the primary and secondary took damage. Do I apply the 1VP penalty for each target or just once for the entire raid?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Butterfield
United States
Fremont
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmb
Good question Rick. If two targets suffer damage in an uncontested raid, you lose the VPs for bomb damage to each target, but only lose 1 VP for not responding to the entire raid.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick Yarto
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Raining down board gaming fun since 1985!
badge
Play DVG's Field Commander Nimitz!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks John - but I just went back through my game records (which thankfully I keep when playing RAF) and had to assess myself -6vp for not contesting raids over a three raid-day period...so much for that +12 lead I was enjoying!

soblue
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
+ 12 - 6 is still +6 WOW! I am happy if I am right around -5, what kind of RAF Fighter Command Ninja are you?!!ninja
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick Yarto
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Raining down board gaming fun since 1985!
badge
Play DVG's Field Commander Nimitz!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ha! Much the like the original, it comes down to some well-timed gambles when deciding which raids to intercept and through three raid days, I was coming up with some good victories and my first Ace Spitfire from the mighty 6/11 sector.

BUT - the fourth raid day has proved disastrous so far. The time has not advanced for three straight targets and the +6 lead has evaporated into a -4 deficit. Combat rolls have all gone against me and it's only 0800 in the morning! The RAF ninja has disappeared...

shake
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keiron
United Kingdom
Sittingbourne
Kent
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've just finished my first run through of 'Prelude to Eagle Day' and I have a similar question:

If you are unable to respond to a raid i.e. you have no squadrons available to intercept, do you still deduct the 1 VP?

In my run through I decided against it as I didn't 'choose' to not respond.

Either way the British took a pasting in what would have been a long day; the final result being -18 VPs. There were 3 major raids on Hornchurch airfield(!) and Portsmouth took a heavy beating also. The Germans suffered only 3 light losses while the RAF took 5 light losses.

I think my biggest mistake was putting too many squadrons on patrol and expecting a 0 or 2 time advance on the forthcoming raid, only to be scuppered by a 1 time advance that left Britain severely lacking in any defence while the majority of the Royal Air Force were re-arming.

I'm sure there must have been some unlucky die rolls in there for the RAF too.

Anyway, great stuff and looking forward to one of the longer scenarios now.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The -1 VP must apply if there is at least on Bomber Gruppen in the bomb box. 7.2 does say if you choose not to. Kinda iffy if you just plain can't! I still take it to mean, if you can't get there then -VP no matter the choice or not.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Butterfield
United States
Fremont
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmb
To clarify, the -1 VP for not responding to a raid including one or more bomber gruppen is applied if you are unable to respond or if you choose not to.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keiron
United Kingdom
Sittingbourne
Kent
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JohnButterfield wrote:
To clarify, the -1 VP for not responding to a raid including one or more bomber gruppen is applied if you are unable to respond or if you choose not to.


Thanks for that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.