Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
21 Posts

Conflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel! – Kursk 1943» Forums » Rules

Subject: New Rules: Airplane Question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chris K.
Germany
Berlin
Berlin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The mechanics seem very nice and I am looking forward to trying them out. However I am not sure wether I understood one bit correctly:

The rules state, that the first impulse of an activation has to be used for forward movement and that it can then either fire or pivot. It also says, that after a forward movement, the plain may attack once or pivot once.
Also there may be only one change of altitude per Hex moved.

So which of the following would be legal for a plane that has 4 Impulses and 1 AP cost to fire?

1. Forward Movement, Attack, Attack, Attack (Total of 4 APs)
2. Forward Movement, Attack, Forward Movement, Attack (Total of 3 APs)
3. Forward Movement, Change altitude, Pivot,Forward Movement (Total of 1 AP)
4. Forward Movement, Change of Altitude, Attack, Change of Altitude (2AP)
5. Forward Movement, Change of Altitude, Attack, Forward Movement (2AP)

I think
1. should be illegal, as it is more than one attack after the forward movement
2. should be legal,
3. I am not sure about 3 but would lean to legal as the rules don't give an "either/or" for Changing altitude and pivoting after a move.
4. should be illegal, as it is two altitude changes for one hex moved
5. should be legal, as the rules don't give an "either/or" for Changing altitude and firing.

Is this correct?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fen Yan
United States
La Mirada
California
flag msg tools
I agree with your conclusions, with the addition that each climb costs an extra 1AP.

The rules state:
--Attack OR Pivot 1 hex side after moving forward 1 hex
--Change altitude by one up or down per hex moved

So it looks like, for each moved forward, you can move + attack + change altitude OR move + change altitude + attack OR move + pivot + change altitude OR move + change altitude + pivot.

...Fen

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Buttridge
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
This is an absurd level of air rules for a squad level wargame....elevations? Are you kidding me? WTH.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Gunar
United States
Ringwood
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I am tempted to agree with the previous post. What is the point of such air maneuvering rules in a game of this kind? Is "Wings of War" going to be grafted onto the system? If this was a game modelling modern warfare with the inclusion of attack helicopters I could understand the addition. But the maneuvering of airplanes that are moving at a speed that would have them traversing the map from edge to edge in a matter of seconds makes no sense.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Carlton
Australia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Pretty sure if it's too complicated you could just remove elevation all together and use the default FP/DR for the lowest altitude if you wanted to.

Personally I don't see it being that hard, not as though there will be more than a couple of planes on the board at any one time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fen Yan
United States
La Mirada
California
flag msg tools
The air rules, like the other systems in the Conflict of Heroes, are simple. I'm looking forward to trying them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris K.
Germany
Berlin
Berlin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi!

Actually the air rules seem very simple, once you've wrapped your mind around the basics.

And they feel like they have been very closely modeled to the feeling of dive bombing and strafing by giving it a very simple system of altitudes and their effects. It will make for some interesting choices in using your planes. (high&save, vs Low&Deadly, Divebombing with one or two tough attacks vs strafing with a nice stretch of a lot of attacks)

I am really looking forward to trying them out in some firefights.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
michael kneis

New York
msg tools
OMG --- I want the game already :)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dean halley

Oregon
msg tools
designer
mbmb
I am all for air rules of this nature, as CoH will eventually get to Vietnam where elevation of helicopters will be important.

Dean Halley
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Gunar
United States
Ringwood
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Well, to repeat, I can understand having such rules when it comes to helicopters that hover.

In any event, I loved the first game and I'm sure the next one will be dynamite. So I am certainly going to give the benefit of the doubt. Let's just say that I do have some doubts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wulf Corbett
Scotland
Shotts
Lanarkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nick Warcholak wrote:
Elevation changes are represented by tokens stacked under the plane.
So, fewer unit counters.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Buttridge
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Now don't get me wrong, so far I love the rules and expect I will like the expansion, however I figure this game to be about ground squad level tactics. I'm not worried about how many artillery pieces I have off map, just on how they effect what is happening on the map. The same with airpower, it should be abstracted out. It's not that it's going to be overly complicated I just don't see the point of including this in this type of game. I'm going to try to play this with some grognards, and I am already cringing when I try to convince them this is a good squad level wargame and then have to explain why we are concerned about elevations and maneuver of aircraft. Hopefully it won't be as bad as all that, but I really don't see the point...again........

waiting patiently for my pretty new rules!

Ian
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Phil Hobson
United States
Charlotte
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
With just a few new ideas and tactics thrown in, the airplanes add a great deal to the game, both tactically and as far as fun. As far as grognards, one might hope they would expect airplanes given their role historically at the battle itself.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Fortune
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I love the airplanes being added to the game. In fact, I am also going to include artillery models to the games we play. Is it realistic, no. But I like having the models on the board for the battle.

For me this is more of a game - not a simulation. It is cool that the tanks and units have reasonable stats to how they performed in the actual war, but I am not too hung up on trying to make all of this a too realistic - for my group - it is a fun war game.

I am working on some stands for my 21st century ariplanes now. They will look cool on the table!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Palmer
Canada
Ayr
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played with the airplanes, and they are FUN. I do not believe they are that unrealistic - you're probably only going to be able to attack one or two targets on an activation, but those attacks will be very deadly. But most of all, the airplane rules are very fun.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Palmer
Canada
Ayr
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wulf Corbett wrote:
Nick Warcholak wrote:
Elevation changes are represented by tokens stacked under the plane.
So, fewer unit counters.


There are significantly more unit counters in Storms of Steel than there were in Awakening the Bear. I doubt you will be disappointed.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wulf Corbett
Scotland
Shotts
Lanarkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Felkor wrote:
There are significantly more unit counters in Storms of Steel than there were in Awakening the Bear. I doubt you will be disappointed.
I'm always disappointed. That's why I keep buying new games.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Palmer
Canada
Ayr
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chrisdk wrote:

1. Forward Movement, Attack, Attack, Attack (Total of 4 APs)
2. Forward Movement, Attack, Forward Movement, Attack (Total of 3 APs)
3. Forward Movement, Change altitude, Pivot,Forward Movement (Total of 1 AP)
4. Forward Movement, Change of Altitude, Attack, Change of Altitude (2AP)
5. Forward Movement, Change of Altitude, Attack, Forward Movement (2AP)

I think
1. should be illegal, as it is more than one attack after the forward movement
2. should be legal,
3. I am not sure about 3 but would lean to legal as the rules don't give an "either/or" for Changing altitude and pivoting after a move.
4. should be illegal, as it is two altitude changes for one hex moved
5. should be legal, as the rules don't give an "either/or" for Changing altitude and firing.

Is this correct?


I don't think you got an official answer on this. Yes, you are correct. Fen Yan is also correct to add that increasing altitude costs 1AP.
 
 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.