Pilot/Plane reaction time in Battle of Britain

Started by Last Hussar, 07 January 2025, 12:53:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Last Hussar

07 January 2025, 12:53:17 PM Last Edit: 07 January 2025, 01:06:50 PM by Last Hussar
Hi

Thinking of a slight rejig to my Battle of Britain rules.

This is really only about the planning of the turn.

When I first wrote it you planned what was effectively 10 seconds. 3 phases of 3 seconds-ish to 1 Bound
 
QuoteDive/Turn Left/Straight

I rewrote this to plotting 3x3 seconds; the original was always 3 x seconds, the 10th second was 'slippage/phases were slightly over 3 seconds/stuff/etc - I wanted 10 seconds as it makes the timing/maths simple. The 3 seconds was chosen as that was the typical length of a RAF burst.

After each 3 second Phase - 1st and 2nd editions - you could fire. At the end of the 3 Phase Bound you did the book-keeping to take account of throttle/gravity/turns - turning loses you height or speed - I can't remember which as I don't have the rules in front of me, but it was based on the histories I read.

I used the Spitfire as the basis, maximum speed of 9. Bf109 max of 10, Hurricane max of 8 (different turning templates - not important to the question.)

I am now wondering whether to wrap this all up in one - get rid of bounds, and just book keep after each move.

Each point of speed moves you 5 on the table.

Turn order would then be
Everybody marks action except 'Tailing'.
Planes move (Tailing aircraft get to order After the tailed aircraft has revealed their order to them)
Everybody fires
Book-keeping.

I don't think this will be much extra player work on the book-keeping. What I am asking about is it reasonable that the planes would be given very violently opposed orders every 3 seconds?

QuoteDive then Climb then Left then Dive WHILE Turning Right

Can you throw a BoB fighter around like this? (Don't worry about the game maths - I know I'll have to rewrite movement if I do this)
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

steve_holmes_11

I can't back this with any references.
But I've watched a fair bit of footage of WW2 fighters, then an now.

I get the impressing that the responsive handling you describe.
Also presented by games like Check Your Six.
Is really for the last of the biplanes.
Gladiators and CR-42s.

Further (this is more about Check your Six and relatives).
I've never read an ace pilots memoirs describing anything like

"I performed an Immelmann and was fortunate to have a Hun drift across my sights".

It's all about spotting the enemy and plotting an interception.
(whether that's 2 miles and 30 seconds away, or 200 yards and 3 seconds away).

Evasive manoeuvring seems to be picking one from tight turn, roll or dive with throttle through the gate.

Last Hussar

The game is really that dogfight bit, one assumes the 2 mile plotting is why they are on the same table!

I'm trying to work out where to pitch the move plotting for. I think the rules are for the next three seconds, with book keeping on the 3 turn/10 second boundary; I need to dig them up, I wouldn't mind giving the Spits another run out.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Last Hussar

Further thought.

A directly opposed order may not be given for the movement after. So if you turned Left, you can't get a Right immediately next phase, same with Dive/Climb.

Explanation/Rationale: The pilot IS turning 'Left', but it takes a few seconds for this to become obvious in the actual direction of flight - although the pilot has moved the stick 'Right' it takes time for the physics to catch up.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Last Hussar

Still on this (sorry).

Found the rules*

Now wondering about this particularly.

As written you do have to plot the whole 10 second/3 phase turn.

Is this too much for a dogfight? Should I let players just plot each 3 second phase?

The alternative is write the NEXT phase, then resolve THIS phase.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Ithoriel

Jim Duncan (of this parish) wrote some WW1 dogfight rules that were lots of fun and were played a lot at SESWC back in the day.

Movement was done with pre-plotted cards. You added one to the stack each turn and played the oldest. Crew quality altered the depth of the stack. You had a limited hand of cards so manouevering was limited by what you had in your hand.

It worked really, really well.

There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

jimduncanuk

Not me Mike, maybe you're thinking of Wings of War or whatever it is called.

My rules used a deck of cards with one for each player/aircraft, shuffled and played in order.

Jim

PS

My rules are still in use today with a whole new bunch of aspiring aces.

My Ego forbids a signature.

Last Hussar

QuoteYou added one to the stack each turn and played the oldest.

I am now considering this as well - you place NEXT turn's move, then reveal THIS turns move.

Nice to know somebody has tried it and it has approval.

For the -2 pilots they have to plot 2 turns ahead, not 1, and the +2 pilots they can react on the turn.
If tailing then you get to see what the tailed aircraft has put before putting your own.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Ithoriel

Quote from: jimduncanuk on 10 January 2025, 12:19:45 PMNot me Mike, maybe you're thinking of Wings of War or whatever it is called.

My rules used a deck of cards with one for each player/aircraft, shuffled and played in order.

Jim

PS

My rules are still in use today with a whole new bunch of aspiring aces.

Evidence of my declining mental  powers, Jim.

Dug out the rules and guess what .... turns out I wrote them and credited you as the inspiration :)

Glad to hear yours are still in action. I have fond memories.
There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

Last Hussar

Lol,

While we have a discussion going...

Found my original rules (on my blog!)

The turning rules are different to my memory. Which do you think are better

1) move forward half, then turn the degrees permitted,  then move the other half.

2) turn immediately, then move the full amount.

?
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Last Hussar

I'm rewriting the rules into a new edition with various edits and tweaks (such as this discussion). I am using this as an opportunity to put photos of game mechanics in. These are now being illustrated by that Brave Chap Pilot Officer 'Binky' Blenkinsop, and his constant foe, Hauptmann Ewe Wrotter.

(The illustration for turning has the caption "Binky heroically turns right.")
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Last Hussar

Any ideas about reloading the cannons in a Bf110 - how long? Did the 110 have be flown level? etc

Thanks
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

steve_holmes_11


QuoteAny ideas about reloading the cannons in a Bf110 - how long? Did the 110 have be flown level? etc

Thanks
I've seen a YouTube of a chap stepping through the process.


the Rear gunner has to turn around and fumble with cannon magazines.
It's unlikely to be practical inverted or rolling hard.

Especially if tail-gun Tomas has targets of his own.

Orcs

LH, why not just purchase Wings of Glory WW2, where its all done for you? the models come already painted with nice stands.
The cynics are right nine times out of ten. -Mencken, H. L.

Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well. - Robert Louis Stevenson

Last Hussar

I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry