This topic contains 484 replies, has 35 voices, and was last updated by 
madman1960 5 years, 7 months ago.
-
Thanks very much, @rastamann – I know you’re setting up for “Cold War goes hot in Europe,” but regarding C21 / Falklands, I see you have some Harriers in your force! You’re halfway there! AirWar C21 originally plays with model aircraft, using anywhere from 1:144 – 1:600. Since 6mm roughly translates as 1:285 / 1:300 depending on who you ask, you’re right in the middle of the range. 😀 Get some Mirages or A-4 Skyhawks for your Argentinians and you’re there!
Looks like you have your infantry pretty well sorted as well.
Yeah, Air War C21 is shaping up pretty well. I definitely made some mistakes in that first game, both rules-wise and in regards to tactics. Rules goof: The lead Sea Harrier shouldn’t have been able to use his guns on that last pass, you can’t fire weapons in a phase in which you use Hard Break. And tactics wise, I should have kept the Harriers at a longer distance for as long as I could, firing off American AIM-9L Sidewinders (those are definitely the “silver bullets” for the British, both in the historical conflict and in the game). Knock down at least one of those Mirages before you get in close and mix it up in a dogfight.
Also thinking of playing with everyone having “Good” +1 pilots. With “Average” +0 pilots, we were failing at least 60% of our special maneuvers, and the game threatened to devolve into a comedy of errors.
Second try at Air War C21 for 1982 Falklands, this time with some improved player aids I re-designed for easier use on the virtual tabletop.
Also tried playing with +1 “Good” pilots instead of +0 “Average” pilots.
Went a little more smoothly. Still made some serious goofs with the special maneuvers (do not rely on these too heavily in this game), I straight out destroyed two Harriers on one re-done turn by attempting … and failing … a Split-S maneuver at too high a speed, I literally ripped the wings off these things and probably killed both pilots. Re-did that turn, only to blow a couple of Immelman maneuvers and quite literally “fell off the table” and inadvertently disengaged.
So still learning. Clearly this game is aiming for a “realistic” look at flying combat jets, where it is possible to “crash and burn” without the enemy even doing you the courtesy of firing at you.
That said, Argentinian guns are still a very real danger, and Harriers are getting the hang of the AIM-9L Sidewinder. And the game is very quick. This introductory scenario was about 45 minutes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Board set up. In this scenarios, one of the first things you do is determine approach vectors, via a 2d6 roll. A result of 12 = you get to come on from anywhere you want. The Argentinians are coming hard out of the southwest, the British from the south. Argentinians lose initiative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Argentinians opt for an Immelmann maneuver, and all three of them make it! Sweet! So they pull up, go ballistic and roll, and corkscrew level with basically any facing they want. The good news is I applied power before the move, so I come out with respectable speed of about 650 knots (13″). The Harriers, having won initiative and with “Extreme” rated maneuverability, don’t have to resort to such aerobatics. They simply bank right, lock on with Sidewinders, and fire. Now these American AIM-9L Sidewiders, despite being IR-guided, CAN lock on from any target aspect. Not so with the Argentinians and the R.530 Magics. So they have to try and launch their larger R.550 Mystra medium-range air-to-air missiles (MRAAMs). These are SARH (semi-active radar homing), so can attack from any angle. However, they have to use the Mirage III’s onboard radar, which isn’t great. Out of three, only one locks on and launches.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Things get very hairy on the beginning of Turn 2. I thought I could get the Harriers on the lead Mirage’s tail, or at least behind his right wing, with a High Yo-Yo maneuver. I misjudged the distance, however, and overshot. An Immelmann probably would have been better here. Anyway, the two missiles hit the lead Mirage anyway, and basically blow him out of the sky. Meanwhile, the other two Mirages were able to perform a power-up and gentle S-turn, starboard then port, and make a gunnery approach behind the Harrier’s left wing. Using extended bursts (triple ammo expenditure) I was able to put some holes in the Harrier, but because it was just coming out of that High Yo-Yo, there wasn’t enough to shoot him down outright. Did flame out one of his engines, though. And that Argentinian Mystra predictably missed. SAHR missiles fired against enemy front arc get a -1 for bad deflection, -1 for the High Yo-Yo maneuver, +1 for pilot skill. So that’s a net -1 bonus and the base to hit is poor, 7+ on 1d10 (these Mystras are old French missiles from the early 1960s). So no joy on that, either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sadly, the game ends right there. The Harriers are about to “fall” off the edge of the edge of the table. SO I try two Immelmanns, both fail (the damaged Harrier had a penalty for this check). They wind up moving half their speed forward, then facing in a random direction. They both wound up facing OFF the table, so they literally “fell” out of the battle. BUT TECHNICALLY – a British victory, with one Mirage III shot down and no Harriers lost.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So yeah, still got a little learning to do on this, but not too much. Will try this one more time before moving to the next scenario in the Operation Corporate scenario booklet, Argentinian bombing attack on Royal Navy outside of Port Stanley, HMS Glamorgan (County Class DLG) and HMS Plymouth (Rothesay class FF)
Absolutely, @rastamann – I was just saying you’d need an army about the size of yours to do MOST hex-based command-scale tactical games in miniature. Now to be fair, I haven’t seen Storming the Gap in person, so I could be wrong. And the table would look amazing … it would just have to be one hell of a table (and miniature collection).
I’m definitely a BattleTech fan, but agree, there are some very seriously derp-y looking designs in that ‘verse. I shamelessly admit that my lists / collections are built more or less along the lines of how the miniatures / mechs look. There are hard-core purists who raise an eyebrow regarding why I choose certain mechs that might not have the best game values/ abilities and shun others despite their objective superiority … Also when I pick the newer re-designs that old-school 1980s fans see as “heresy.” It’s because I think they look dumb. Nuff said. Who cares, it’s sci fi. Background? Tactics? Context? That what Historicals and Moderns are for. 😀
Still not 100% sold on the idea that putting ALL the data on the counter makes for a better H&C game. It crowds the counter design, or makes the counter too large, (which in turns limits the number of hexes in the battlespace, oversimplifying / abstracting terrain), limits the mechanics of the game … But hey, I’m just glad there are other H&C players out there.
And +100 “SitRep Points” for the mention of Steel Panthers. Especially the Main Battle Tank moderns version – I still play that game once in a while to this day. Maybe we should stream it? 😀 There’s something you don’t see on Twitch every day. Maybe get some of the “hipster retro” crowd into our viewership. 😀 😀 😀
Totally agree @rastamann , about the platoon “command-level” game. That’s where it’s at, at least for conventional battlefield wargaming. 😀
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
