Does anyone have any thoughts about the accuracy of scheduled air attacks? Given the many historical examples of air attacks missing their intended geographical targets I wondered if perhaps there should be some variability introduced?
Quote from: LittleGreenMan on 14 June 2024, 01:03:08 PMDoes anyone have any thoughts about the accuracy of scheduled air attacks? Given the many historical examples of air attacks missing their intended geographical targets I wondered if perhaps there should be some variability introduced?
The idea behind buying Scheduled attacks (air or artillery) is to reflect their accuracy. That is primarily what you are 'paying points' to achieve.
If you want true variability you can always go for commanded attacks brought in by FACs & FAOs.
However, if you wanted an 'optional' variability process - then I'd suggest that you roll 1 x D:6 for each unit delivering the scheduled attacks. If the difference between the first dice rolled and any of the others is 3 or greater, that particular attack can deviate off target.
e.g. 4 artillery units in the attack - 4 x D:6 rolled scoring 1 3 4 6 (the 1st dice and the 2nd dice are 2 difference so they are on target, the 3rd and 4th dice are both at 3 difference or over 3 so they will deviate). 2 units in an attack might both deviate if the scores on the dice are 3 or more apart.
If you just have 1 unit in the attack the I suggest that you roll a single D:6 and on a score of 6 it deviates (see below).
Then you roll another D:6 and a directional dice for each unit that is deviating and each pip equals 10mm deviation. The challenge is that each deviation would then require its own separate template, but I am sure you can cope with that :)
But as I say, it does rather defeat the objective of a Scheduled attack
Cheers
Mark
I think the question from LGM was specifically about scheduled air attacks, rather than artillery.
So if you have a single aircraft in a scheduled air attack, using your suggested optional alternative process Mark, that would be a single D6, throwing a 6 to deviate (16.6% chance) then throw 1D6 deviation so from 10cm to 60cm deviation.
LGM does this optional process reflect the inaccuracy of scheduled air attacks enough or should it perhaps deviate on 5+ rather than a 6, i.e 33% inaccuracy?
Rgds
Chris
Quote from: Superscribe on 14 June 2024, 09:19:40 PMI think the question from LGM was specifically about scheduled air attacks, rather than artillery.
So if you have a single aircraft in a scheduled air attack, using your suggested optional alternative process Mark, that would be a single D6, throwing a 6 to deviate (16.6% chance) then throw 1D6 deviation so from 10cm to 60cm deviation.
LGM does this optional process reflect the inaccuracy of scheduled air attacks enough or should it perhaps deviate on 5+ rather than a 6, i.e 33% inaccuracy?
Rgds
Chris
10mm - 60mm Chris
Thanks Mark
I'll discuss with Superscribe. I'm erring on the side of some risk of variation in air attacks. Perhaps 1D6 per attack with a 1 or 2 revert to usual deviation.
Thanks
You can get into a fair amount of complex detail on the accuracy of air strikes.
US & NATO FACs in the Balkan Wars were using laser designators (especially with air-launched Copperhead munitions specifically) with a very high degree of accuracy.
Earlier, during the Cold War and in a massed battlefield situation, it might have been more problematic. There is also the whole issue of a aircraft delivering 'stand-off' munitions using a 'lofting' technique. Is that an air-strike or a munitions strike?
As most army lists actually have a fairly low number of scheduled attacks available to buy, I must admit I'd never seen this as an issue, and in all my own games it hadn't caused any problems.
But I'd be interested to hear how you get on with it.
Cheers
Mark
Thanks. I guess it's arisen as a query because of the sheer size of the games Superscribe organises! So lots of Soviet air strikes as scheduled activity at the start of the game for example. We tend to play 1983/84 time so less of the really high tech stuff available later. So I would expect variation in the relative capabilities of different types of aircraft and pilots . And recognising this is a game and not a simulation! :)
It's been a while since I last played BKC and I've never played CWC, so treat these comments with whatever degree of scepticism you feel is appropriate!
These are games where the effect is more important than the real world mechanisms that produce it. top down, not bottom up, if you will.
So what's important is not how often did air attacks miss their target but how often did those misses cause some other significant effect.
Does the fact that one rolls for hits and for saves, for those elements that have them, account for munitions that are simply way off target?
Did munitions that missed the target cause significant damage to other units, friendly or enemy?
Or did most of them, to steal a thought from G W Bush, just use a $2 million missile to destroy $10 empty tent?
I can't pretend to know what your answers to those questions would be but I would ask you to consider them before making significant changes to the rules in a potentially fruitless quest for "historical accuracy."