Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => The Conflicts that came in from the Cold => Topic started by: von Lucky on February 25, 2020, 08:06:25 AM
-
Seeking assistance of the collective minds for a semi-simple air combat rule set, set in the early jet age (Korean War, etc), that I want to use in a (small) game with only a handful of aircraft. Needs to cater for F-86 Sabres (with Sidewinders), MiG-17s and Il-10s.
Is there a rule set out there that caters for these aircraft?
I know 'Check Your Six!' has the stats and scenarios that can be adapted, but I don't want to make/buy a hex mat if I can help it.
At the moment I'm thinking of modifying X-Wing, but looking for other suggestions of what others like to play.
-
I a. Guessing you use 1:300 or larger as if you used 1:600, you would probably be aware of the Tumbling Dice “Wings At War” rules:
http://www.tumblingdiceuk.com/product-category/1600/wings-at-war
They are simple but elegant. You would need to modify them for Indo-Pakistan, but that is easy enough. However, my club recently used a system based on X-Wing for a show participation game. We used cards instead of dials. It was Cavaliers versus Mustangs in Central America ‘69, so Limited parallels, but it worked well!
-
Yes, they're 1/300 in scale. And I wasn't aware of 'Wings at War', so thanks - keep 'em coming!
-
My recommendation for jet combat is always Bandits by David Redpath:
https://www.wargamevault.com/product/135038/Bandits-2
A wonderful set of air combat rules that totally eliminates the need for the hideous flying stands that blight pretty much every other set of air combat rules without losing anything in the feel of the combat.
The Mig17 and the F86 are included in the provided list of aircraft stats and the Ilyushin would be a simple one to stat yourself by comparison with others.
-
There’s also Target locked on rules, or even Bag the Mig from toofatlardies
-
Wessex Games did a set called AirWar C21? There is a free version that you can try with SU17s and F14s. Not sure if the rules cover the aircraft you want, but I'm not an air gamer
-
Thanks all. I have 'Check Your 6!' (hex mat) and 'Airwar C21' (too modern).
I will do some reading on reviews, as all are easy to get, but 'Wings at War' is grabbing me initially.
-
https://www.wargamevault.com/product/232769/Missile-Threat-Modern-Air-Combat
Missile Threat at Wargame Vault has mostly everything you want, mostly. lol Seriously, no hexes, almost every aircraft from Korean War onward (titles says 1960-2000, but since every Air Force and air war during that period is covered, all the Korean War a/c are accounted for), extensive campaign and solo rules, and the system itself handles maneuvering in a unique abstract manner.
-
My recommendation for jet combat is always Bandits by David Redpath:
https://www.wargamevault.com/product/135038/Bandits-2
A wonderful set of air combat rules that totally eliminates the need for the hideous flying stands that blight pretty much every other set of air combat rules without losing anything in the feel of the combat.
The Mig17 and the F86 are included in the provided list of aircraft stats and the Ilyushin would be a simple one to stat yourself by comparison with others.
I rather like flight stands! Each to his own.
-
Thanks all. I have 'Check Your 6!' (hex mat) and 'Airwar C21' (too modern).
I will do some reading on reviews, as all are easy to get, but 'Wings at War' is grabbing me initially.
I should point out that flight stands are recommended for WaW, but I have used dice to mark the 4 altitude bands.
-
If you don't have model then you might want to look at MIG alley by warlord. The rule system is actually quite fun.
https://store.warlordgames.com/products/mig-alley
-
Didn't even know Warlord Games had released 'Mig Alley' - miniatures look good.
What I have is a small project I did a few years ago of a Sabre, a MiG-15 and 3 Il-10s from odds and sods 6mm miniatures in my lead pile. I have South East Asia terrain and sampans, so I got some PLAAF and ROCAF roundels from Dom's Decals to do the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis (because, why not?). So 'Missile Threat (Modern Air Combat)' with its bonus material might be perfect too. mjkerner - what are the solo mechanics like?
-
Just want to say thank you everybody, and particularly mjkerner for the discussion.
I was in the process of both searching for a set of rules, and writing my own (the search wasn't going well), and I think Missile Threat (which I was unaware of) will work for my needs. You just saved me at least another six months of rules development.
Many Thanks!!
-
A bit late to the party, but Clash of Sabres by QRF Games is a great set.
Worth seeking out.
It uses curved turning templates for maneuvers, and is quite good for smaller dogfights.
-
Thanks for the recommendation.
-
Wessex Games did a set called AirWar C21? There is a free version that you can try with SU17s and F14s. Not sure if the rules cover the aircraft you want, but I'm not an air gamer
I think they cover early (Korean War) Jets too. I have painted two Vietnam era Starfighters for it, but not yet tried the rules.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-z5gsNKojQi0/XMalNLfj1UI/AAAAAAAAKiI/NPI9eRKcmy0D_5FuBZjEd19U1U2PzrGJgCLcBGAs/s1600/FWEL1856.JPG)
-
Nice painting.
Trying to remember the GDW rule set we used in the 'eighties.
-
Nice painting.
Trying to remember the GDW rule set we used in the 'eighties.
Air Superiority. Greatest modern air combat game ever. If you understand how energy works in real life it is not as complex as people fear.
Altitude= potential energy
Speed= dynamic energy
thrust=energy
Drag=negative energy
Trade one for another and balance and you get speeds. Turn harder loose more energy but don't turn so hard you stall.
-
I used to own Air Superiority and played it a fair bit, though not with the full rules, as far as I remember, and not with more than two a/c per side. There is a newer version - dating to 1992, but still in print - called The Speed of Heat, published by Clash of Arms Games, which, unlike the earlier game, is specifically for Korea and Vietnam.
-
I have “the speed of heat” board game and I wouldn’t recommend using it with figures.