AIR Rules?

[afilter]

How many use the air rules as written?

One of the biggest and maybe only negatives for NT that I have heard is the AIR rules. I will admit to being one that has raised that concern in the past myself.

IMO NT is the best for surface actions and all the scenarios historical/hypotheticals we have played have not included air. In fact the majority of the games I have played in the past are Pre-WWII so air power is not even and issue.

My WWII model collection is all the 1/1800 War at Sea CMG models that WotC did a few years ago. War at Sea (WAS) is a very simple beer and pretzel which is historical themed game with air power as a key component. So when I encourage WAS players to give NT a try their chief concern is they do not get to play with all their toys (carriers and planes).

I just re-read the Air rules and they seem to make a lot of sense and are fairly simple. In reality though they are more of a paper dice rolling drill as opposed to getting models on the table especially for the two pre-battle sorties. The one during battle airstrike could be fun, but still does not really get the carrier models involved.

Just curios if any one has come up with some creative air rules with NT that translate well without adding a bunch of new stats.

My initial thought is to let airpower come in on any turn the player desires, but each flight can only be used once per game and resolve the air attacks rules as written. Also have the planes come from a specific direction/Attack angle on the turn prior to attacking (maybe give them movement) so the 12" range AA is more specific to model location of the planes.

Thoughts/ideas?

[warchariot]

This has been the "elephant in the room" since the rules first came out. Harry of course has answered this by pointing out the game is naval based and the air is abstracted so the focus is on naval action. I get all that, and as you have already pointed out, pre-WWII it makes little to no difference. This is the main reason I play pre-WWII and because surface engagements are plentiful and necessary. I've never been one to mess with air/naval.

I think your approach to the problem makes sense in that it doesn't change the rules, just adjusts them for a more realistic timing. There are some easy air rules that could be used with the system, but that would take away from the focus of naval gaming.

Having said all of that, we are big air gamers also. We played CY6! for the last five years or so, but have been looking for a game that had less paperwork, could handle more aircraft for each of us, and was quick. We found Luftwaffe 46 as our answer. There is almost no paperwork (must track hits and ammo along with maneuver points), we can each handle 12-18 aircraft with little effort and we have played out some games in under 45 minutes. The Kamikaze 46 rules include naval surface targets and AAA. I have not try to cross over games, but have had that in the back of my mind...

[afilter]

AH, not familiar with those rules. My air games have been Wings of Glory and CY6. Thought about using the simple mechanics from War at Sea or even looking back at AH Midway,

Ideally, I would like to keep it in the framework of NT and use the data cards as they are with some tweaks to movement or ranges such as giving aircraft movement on the table to line up attacks.

Will do some play testing as let you know what we come up with.

[twhistoria]

I have a question regarding AA fire in the third sortie. AA fire can be provide only by ships which are 12" from the ship which is a target of the aircraft attack. What about case when this ship in 12" range from two targeted ships? Should her AA value be splitted between two attacking group or she can join AA fire twice with her full AA value?

[TheDreadnought]

I would say you can split your AA as you choose between the two.