- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Below are three different alternatives for possible rules regarding pilot hits in head-on attacks (excluding from ground fire, which we’ve already covered). Please use this forum topic to express your opinion on these potential alternatives. You can say which one you like and why you like it, what you don’t like about an alternative, you can suggest clarifications/enhancements, or you can even suggest another alternative. We’ll entertain (friendly) discussion of the topic on this thread before we vote at a later date. Please restrict your comments on this thread to this rule — other rules up for debate will get their own threads.
Item E – Pilot Hits in Head-On Attacks
E.1 Probable pilot hits in head-on attacks are rolled normally per Dawn Patrol 7th edition rules; a hit is scored on a 1 or a 2 on a d6; certain aces may hit on a 1, 2 or 3 per the rules for ace / experienced pilots.
OR
E.2 Probable pilot hits in head-on attacks score a hit on a roll of 1 on a d6, not a roll of a 1 or 2. Aces that would hit on a 1, 2 or 3 per the 7th edition rules score a hit on a 1 or 2 only.
OR
E.3 Probable pilot hits in head-on attacks are rolled normally per 7th edition rules if the range is 200’ or less. If the range is 250’ or greater, the roll needed to hit is reduced by 1. Most pilots need a 1 to score a hit. Aces that would hit on a 1, 2 or 3 at 200’ or less need a 1 or a 2 at 250’ or more.
If we’re going to seriously look at changing the rules for head-on attacks, I would like the option of making head-on attacks possible rather than probably pilot hits:
E.4 All probable pilot hits in head-on attacks will instead be considered possible pilot hits and resolved accordingly.
Head-on attacks are the only angle in which a pilot actually has a significant mass of metal between him and the incoming fire. Plus, the closing speed of between 120 and 240 or more mph doesn’t give a pilot much time for centering his aim or correcting his fire. I’ve never understood why these attacks are so deadly in Dawn Patrol. If anything, tail attacks should be probable and all other angles should be possible.
I’m for staying with the edition 7 rules. Attacks from longer distances are already less effective due to lower odds of hitting and fewer hits. Should we also reduce normal angle pilot hit chances too?
A player is not rolling for a pilot chance on ‘engine hfs’. You roll for pilot hit chances on ‘centerwing hfs’ from the HO angle of attack. Not a lot of room from the top of the engine deck to the top of the top wing. And the pilots head is squarely in the way. But I also think range of attack makes a difference. Because of ambiguities in the 5th edition rules , we have always played that probable are in effect at 200 ft or less, based on the pilot experience rules.
Dan
The same argument could be made for other angles that provide possible instead of probable pilot chances, especially from the tail.
The same argument could be made, that ” the engine is a big chunk of metal protecting the pilot ” can be used for tail attacks ? Huh?
Dan
No, I was referring to your argument regarding the proximity of the pilot’s head to the CW. To me, comparing the size of the pilot’s head and shoulders to the silhouette of the CW is similar to comparing the silhouette of his entire body to fire from other directions that provide possible hit chances. I may be in the minority, but I’ll never be sold on probable from the front and the resulting aversion to head-on attacks amongst many Dawn Patrol players. I feel that there are good reasons to avoid head-on attacks, but probable pilot hits shouldn’t be a factor.
Brisfit Ace wrote:Item E – Pilot Hits in Head-On Attacks
E.1 Probable pilot hits in head-on attacks are rolled normally per Dawn Patrol 7th edition rules; a hit is scored on a 1 or a 2 on a d6; certain aces may hit on a 1, 2 or 3 per the rules for ace / experienced pilots.
OR
E.2 Probable pilot hits in head-on attacks score a hit on a roll of 1 on a d6, not a roll of a 1 or 2. Aces that would hit on a 1, 2 or 3 per the 7th edition rules score a hit on a 1 or 2 only.
OR
E.3 Probable pilot hits in head-on attacks are rolled normally per 7th edition rules if the range is 200’ or less. If the range is 250’ or greater, the roll needed to hit is reduced by 1. Most pilots need a 1 to score a hit. Aces that would hit on a 1, 2 or 3 at 200’ or less need a 1 or a 2 at 250’ or more.Because this is such a contentious issue it must be approached carefully. My opinion is that the rules as written give us E.1 and everyone everywhere should stick to that. I’d support a switch to E.2 when the 8th Ed comes out, or as soon as we can persuade Mike to publish it as an official alternate in the Aerodrome. I’ve spoken to Mike about this before and will again.
What if the target does not return fire when attacked HO ? He is not “flying” at his attacker which is the reason for the deadly attack in the 1st place , as opposed to other angles of attack. In Kalamazoo, the pilot hit chance would be probable in this case. We also differentiate be ‘defensive’ and ‘offensive’ observer HO shots. An offensive observer HO is always possible pilot hit chances unless the target returns fire.
Dan
I agree with your sentiments, but for the online games, I think it is simpler to stick with the standard 7th edition rules. The observer won’t be up a table, but will hit with a probable even if the target isn’t firing back. Flying at the attacker is the reason for pilots going up a table.
Noski wrote:What if the target does not return fire when attacked HO ? He is not “flying” at his attacker which is the reason for the deadly attack in the 1st place , as opposed to other angles of attack. In Kalamazoo, the pilot hit chance would be probable in this case. We also differentiate be ‘defensive’ and ‘offensive’ observer HO shots. An offensive observer HO is always possible pilot hit chances unless the target returns fire. DanIf I’m shooting at you head-on it’s a head-on shot and the same rules for pilot hits should apply regardless.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.