|
Post by scottwashburn on Aug 21, 2016 22:24:37 GMT
Boxholder: I am assuming that the Martians have some sort of system which allows them to know what the heat ray device is pointed at. With no need to lead the target, worry about a ballistic path of a fired projectile, or setting a fuse delay like in conventional AA fire, the Martian simply needs to wait until the ray projector is pointing at the aircraft and then turn it on. With their 'sweep' feature it gets even easier. Just turn it on and sweep it across a whole formation of aircraft. Considering the ray is capable of melting through armor plate, even the briefest exposure would set a wood and canvas aircraft ablaze.
Conjack: You are right, but the Martians typically respond to a specific need. Until human aircraft become an actual threat, they might be slow in developing their own.
|
|
|
Post by boxholder on Aug 22, 2016 11:52:45 GMT
As many of you probably remember from the old forum, I was always a strong voice against the utility of aircraft on the tactical battlefield. I insisted that the aircraft of the era were too slow, too lightly armed, and too vulnerable to have much hope of accomplishing anything against the Martian forces at a tactical level. Recon & high altitude bombing were the only logical role for aircraft. You can assume anything you want in your work. However, the constellation of a long-ranged, lightspeed, high lethality, line-of-sight weapon with an unerring aiming system totally devalues aircraft for humans. It removes one of their only asymmetric technical advantages. That gets us back to your originally stated position (above) and even calls into question the feasibility of the recon and bombing roles.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 22, 2016 12:24:12 GMT
Hmmm lots of good stuff here - nice to hear from conjack as well. I've worked quite abit on the ideas of aircraft in AQ - see my numerous attempts to date - and have two observations to this thread. First, the humans would definitely develop air power as a tool against the invaders. As with water borne forces, it is one area they have a superior advantage in and would push it as they have naval forces. There are a host of things air power gets you on the battlefield; intelligence, surprise, long range spotting, actual projection of attacks. So the development of air planes as well as dirigibles/zeppelins would certainly become a top priority. In addition to the considerable Martian pressure, other enemy world powers are also developing air power and none of the 'Allied' nations would let this go unchallenged. Second, despite the Hover Drone, there aren't any well developed counters to the human air power. I'll add a couple of suggestions under the Martian rules tab, as a ground based tripod with the appropriate type of weapon systems would be faster and easier to construct than a true flying machine. Although a 'Hover' tripod might be conceived, its doubtful the Martians would put much into its development. I suspect by 1918, when the naval and air forces had made their major impact in denying advances, the Martian would try and develop the flying tripod. They would face some big obstacles. First, I suspect the Hover drone engines require a huge amount of power, as the atmosphere here is considerably more dense than Mars. Second, the sheer mass of a tripod would require more engines than the much smaller drone and would tax the limited supplies of Martian metals available. The big push for a flying tripod would be the ability to bypass waterways, overfly defense systems, and strike at naval assets off coast. In sum, I think the Martians would stick with ground-based solutions for a very long time. Both the amount of materials they brought from Mars and the ability to target heat rays (and missiles) limit them to solutions. Current Mars tech allows them to counter the majority of air threats, at least until the later 1917 or 1918 periods.
PS: I can't find my notes from the old forum on my two Rebel Miniature based AA tripods. I'll reconstruct at least the smaller one ($14.95), but won't redo the larger ($29.95), as too expensive dollar wise for such a small side show part of the game (few people do the air stuff; of coarse Scotts new plane model might change that).
|
|
|
Post by scottwashburn on Aug 22, 2016 12:30:07 GMT
Morgan, a very nice summary. I agree with pretty much all your points.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Aug 22, 2016 17:42:19 GMT
Lasers/heat rays: I don't need to see the fall of shot with a heat ray. It will hit where I aim it. I don't need to calculate a lead, like a duck hunter. The martian heat rays will be devastatingly accurate. Get the aircraft in my sight, pull the trigger; the craft with crash and burn. Every time.
Martian Flying Machines: Humans have been studying aerodynamics since ancient times. Model ornithopters go back to ancient Greece and Ancient China. Leonardo Da Vinci helped start the very, very long empirical research that lead to the first flight by humans. Humans may not be as intelligent as Martians , but it took humans hundreds of years of research and development to learn to fly. How long will it take the Martians? There is not enough water on Mars for the Martians to have developed boats or a knowledge of buoyancy in water. Balloons, buoyant in air, are a complete mystery to the Martians. Dynamic lift would literally be an alien concept to the Martians.
The Martians have not attempted to communicate with humanity. They have no way of stealing human ideas via espionage.
Humanity will endeavor to destroy aircraft rather than let the martians capture and try to reverse engineer them.
Even with intact aircraft to examine, how long will it take the Martians to learn so alien a technology? 20 years? 50? They must develop and understanding from nothing.
In the 5 years of WWI, aerial technology of earth went from essentially powered kites to actual, useful war machines. In 5 years of WWII, the world went from the Bf. 109 to the ME 262 (there were some Horten Brother's Flying wings that were more advanced but not in production) Bombers went from the B-17 to the B-29. Human capacity to weaponize the skies was limited by funding (government interest.) As air power shows itself to be useful, humanity will devote its full industrial might to advance this technology. Exploitation of a millennia of research. Humanity has a big lead in a technology race.
Mars and Earth will probably achieve a technological some sort of state of equilibrium. Humans will have control of the Sea, and of the Air, but Mars will stay master of the Land. (Well, some of the Land... all areas will be in dispute.)
Then it becomes a test of wills. I see no clear advantage, as humans are a stiff-necked race, and Martians have no no neck to bend.
It's going to be a long war.
|
|
|
Post by scottwashburn on Aug 22, 2016 19:51:44 GMT
I'm thinking that game-wise, if the aircraft are cheap enough--think 60 points for a flight of 3, maybe-- they can be used simply to soak up Martian fire. Don't send them in right away, when the Martians can afford to waste some fire on them, send them in when the Martians are fully engaged. Then the Martians are faced with the choice of firing at those MK III steam tanks, or at those aircraft that just entered the board.
Or, again, wait until the battle is joined and then send your aircraft out to pick off those pesky Grenadier Tripods, which would have no weapon at all to fire at aircraft.
Possibilities!
|
|
|
Post by mikedski on Aug 22, 2016 23:08:20 GMT
I think there needs to be special rule(s) that would take into account difficulty of air ground coordination. Maybe all aircraft are reinforcements and targets are randomly determined.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 23, 2016 10:39:00 GMT
Interesting ideas. I'll have to think about that (due to added complexity).
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Aug 23, 2016 15:15:25 GMT
I don't like the idea of rules that are intended to make the game more complex. Things can get hot and heavy really fast.
I can understand and desire keeping things limited and simple.
A single aircraft or dirigible or balloon can be used for forward artillery control. It does nothing else. Its effect is to allow a single pre-designated unit of artillery the ability to "see," and therefore have the range of, the board. The FAC plane is unarmed, it has traded its guns and ammo for a radio.
Aircraft may be assigned for a ground attack mission. Prior to the start of the game, they are assigned priorities of type of tripods to attack. First Scientists, then Slavers, then Reapers, then Grenadiers (as an example, in this case take out the drone controllers then the Grenadiers; the owning player makes the list.)
Aircraft should have minimum movement and use "turning circles," but I hesitate to suggest this because it really muddies things up.
The Assault Tripods will now have to double up on their tactical utility. They have the weapons with the range to be a threat to the aircraft.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Aug 23, 2016 19:24:39 GMT
I'm thinking that game-wise, if the aircraft are cheap enough--think 60 points for a flight of 3, maybe-- they can be used simply to soak up Martian fire. Don't send them in right away, when the Martians can afford to waste some fire on them, send them in when the Martians are fully engaged. Then the Martians are faced with the choice of firing at those MK III steam tanks, or at those aircraft that just entered the board. Or, again, wait until the battle is joined and then send your aircraft out to pick off those pesky Grenadier Tripods, which would have no weapon at all to fire at aircraft. Possibilities! The combat pilots I have known are a special breed of crazy. I have no doubt that they would risk their lives for a small chance of success. I also think that pilots will figure out a way to defeat the Martians without getting killed. After all, If I was coming home to June Allison I'd sure figure out how. Having watched the Youtube video, I'm pretty sure Airplanes as mobile machine gun units would be a significant threat.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 24, 2016 9:22:51 GMT
Okay, how about a comment on my current XYZ rules for using aircraft. I think they're simple enough to work in the game and have an impact relative to their cost. The MG armed machines are better for drone clearing and the tripods start to be targets with bombs or rockets on board. Overall, I think the Bristol F2b is the best machine available to the USA/BEF forces for sheer flexibility of its loads and sports enough MG power to recon if with a radio. In any case, comments are welcome.
|
|