Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2017-04-17 13:54:48
Going Around for a Second Bomb Run and Bombing the Secondary Target are a part of the Core Game included in the Advanced/Optional Section. Should these two events be deleted from the Core Game and be available either as expansions or included in other expansions instead? It will make the Core Game Flight Manual somewhat shorter...
I'd like to have this in the Core Game because it often happened on missions that bombers went around for another try or bombed the secondary.
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2017-04-09 12:20:41
I may add this on TZ-4a:To Release or Not To Release?
If your final modifier is low you may elect to not drop your bombs and Go Around or Bomb the Secondary Target.
I imagine that this simulates how the Lead Bombardier looks through his sight and can see how his aim is and thus can decide if to release or not. After all, he is in charge during the bomb run. Even though he has identified the aim point he may still judge his aim to be off.
To add this or not to add this, that is the question!
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2017-02-21 09:46:28
Here's is something that I wanted to add because it is a situation which often occurred. I did not know how to reflect it before, but here's a suggestion (which will be added as a note on Z1-b and a reference on MP-6, Fighter Cover to Z1-b)):Close Escort with Forward Support:
With Forward Support you may roll on TZ-1, Weather Conditions when you are two Zones away from the Target. If the weather is unfavorable to you you may elect to abort the mission or go the Secondary Target (see A.8.12.0). If the weather is Very Bad, the Forward Support Commander will order you to bomb the Secondary Target or abort if no other target has been assigned. Do not roll on TZ-1 again in the Target Zone.
AND... not sure about this, but may also add:
You will be without Forward Support until you reach the Target Zone.
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2017-01-28 13:39:24
Skip Bombing is something I am working on now, trying to come up with a good idea that will work. It will be used in the MTO and the PTO.
I could simplify it, in which case it is finished, or make it more complicated by trying to figure out a way that will work to reflect the skipping.
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2016-12-18 13:42:24
Here's another Optional/Advanced suggestion:
If your formation is Loose or Normal increase IP by 2 and change to Tight. IF IP is 6 Increase MT-2 +1 and FLAK +1/+1. Your formation will be Tight Box and Flight on the Bomb Run. Roll on MT-1b, Formation after MT-1a if MT-1a is not Formation in the first after the Bomb Run.
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2016-12-09 13:53:50
On some missions the Mission Commander decided to try to go below the cloud cover to find the target. I wanted to include this as a rule in B-26 but here's another rule that will make it more complex, so it will either be a house rule, add-on or optional.
If the weather in the target zone prevents you from finding the aim point, you may try to go around and descend to a lower column. On your next bomb run, roll on TZ-1, Weather using the weather result from your first run. If the result is equal to or worse condition, it is equal to your first result. You may try again, but in the core game you cannot go lower than Column A on MP-2, Altitude.
See also #6 in the post below...
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2016-12-09 13:40:38
The B-26 formations usually flew evasive action on the bomb run to avoid flak. This is not obvious in B-26. I did not include this maneuver in B-26 as I thought it would be another step to complicate the game flow. (Well, it is included, but it is used before the IP.) However, I think that I will make this an optional rule, and also another decision you can make in B-26, there are already some and I'd like to see even more. If you have any suggestions, please let me know.
Flak Evasive Action Suggestions:
1) You can fly Evasive Action in the Target Zone to avoid flak. If your IP is longer than IP1, you can shorten it by setting a new IP, eg., from IP6 to IP2.
2) No change in AP, but Flak Intensity/Accuracy is -2/-1 and the bomb run on TZ-4a & b is -2.
3) Change IP (see suggestion #1). Before TZ-2, Flak Intensity/Accuracy, your bombardier must roll on MT-1d, Navigation, Flak Zone. If Flak Zone! Roll on TZ-2. If No Event, TZ-2 is (well, I was thinking "No Flak," but...) Intensity/Accuracy -3/-2. If there's no flak radar MT-1d is +1. Bombardier skill 16+ missions is +1 on MT-1d.
4) No, evasive action vs flak is not based on the IP, it will be based on the intensity. MT-1d then if no event flak intensity will decrease by 2 levels and/or accuracy will be inaccuarate.
5) ...and another no, evasive action must be decided before TZ-2, Intensity/Accuracy.
6) ...there's no room for another table or rule expansion...
7) Evasive Action on the Bomb Run to Avoid Flak
a) You must decide to use Evasive Action or not before rolling on TZ-2, Flak Intensity & Accuracy.
b) If you use Evasive Action your Bombardier must roll on MT-1d, Flak Zone, add his (and the Pilot's?) skill.
b1: If No Event roll for Flak normally.
b2: If Flak Zone, Flak is evaded. TZ-2, Intensity/Accuracy is -4/Inaccuarte (or-2?)
c) If you use Evasive Action on the Bomb Run to Avoid Flak the modifications for the Aim Point and Bomb Run is always IP1 (-1/-2).
...this could work... (see also #6.)
This maneuver will be used by the Window Ships flying infront of the Pathfinder. The Pathfinder will always use IP6. The formation may stay behind the Pathfinder or fly Evasive Action and form up behind the Pathfinder when it is time to drop the bombs. Both tactics were used on PFF missions. Not sure yet how Window will affect the Flak Radar yet...
Suggestions & IdeasPosted by Magnus Kimura 2016-09-25 15:00:57
I was going to test the B-26 in the Med expansion, but I felt that I had to decide how to bomb ships and damage them. No problem for a single B-26 or A-20, but the problem is how to reflect the entire flight's or box's result.
If you have seen the sea sweep play-test counters on another forum you may have an idea of what I would like to see. That version might too large and I am working on something on a smaller scale and it must be easier to understand and use the rules.
The other rule I had to create was regarding smaller B-26 formations from only a few ships, 4 to 9 perhaps, to only one box. You'll see 2 or 3 ships in the PTO. I have to decide how MT-2 should be changed and also how the fighter pilot status modifier will be affected. More fighters may attack. A small formation could be more difficult for the enemy to locate so a larger negative modifier on MT-2 could work, but if your formation is found more fighters could attack.
Before I can play-test both the MTO and PTO I must have these two rules more or less finished.