MAS: WW2, MTO Questions

[Gareth_Perkins]

A couple of questions about the interactions of Superior Flying, Intense Dogfighting and Defensive Fire for you,

First off, does a Defensive Fire rating of 0 ever provide any benefit? (It seems unlikely, but by letter of the rules would allow defensive fire on a tied engagement roll),

Secondly,
If an engagement roll fails, Intense Dogfighting switches the two sides over (the defender gets an attack). Does he benefit from Superior Flying based on the roll just made? Does he have to make another engagement roll? Does he also get to perform defensive fire if it is applicable? Do I get to use defensive fire if applicable? If the target is a bomber (with no "attack" ability - just defensive fire) does it get to attack after any defensive fire?

Example:
I attack foe 1 (with defensive fire 2). I roll a 3, he rolls a 4.
Can he now make a defensive shot?
If he then follows it up with an attack on me do I get a defensive shot (using my defensive fire 1 ability)?
Does either of his shots get the +1 to his attack roll for Superior flying?

[Charles Lewis]

Today has just been put in the blender. I am hereby installing a placeholder to acknowledge your question, and I'll get back to you tomorrow.

[Charles Lewis]

A couple of questions about the interactions of Superior Flying, Intense Dogfighting and Defensive Fire for you,

First off, does a Defensive Fire rating of 0 ever provide any benefit? (It seems unlikely, but by letter of the rules would allow defensive fire on a tied engagement roll),

No. A rating of 0 indicates no Defensive Fire capability. This would be an Official Clarification

Secondly,
If an engagement roll fails, Intense Dogfighting switches the two sides over (the defender gets an attack). Does he benefit from Superior Flying based on the roll just made? Does he have to make another engagement roll? Does he also get to perform defensive fire if it is applicable? Do I get to use defensive fire if applicable? If the target is a bomber (with no "attack" ability - just defensive fire) does it get to attack after any defensive fire?

Example:
I attack foe 1 (with defensive fire 2). I roll a 3, he rolls a 4.
Can he now make a defensive shot?
If he then follows it up with an attack on me do I get a defensive shot (using my defensive fire 1 ability)?
Does either of his shots get the +1 to his attack roll for Superior flying?

Superior Flying does combine with Intense Dogfighting. Essentially, Intense Dogfighting determines who actually gets the shot, and Superior Flying determines the bonus, if any, applied to the shot.

Note that Superior Flying is modified (under MAS-WWII 2.2.1) to not apply to Loaded aircraft. They would still get the shot, but no bonus to the roll.

Defensive Fire would also apply, as it kicks in regardless of the success or failure of the dogfight roll. If using Superior Flying/Intense Dogfighting, after making it's Defensive Fire roll, the original defender could then make a an attack roll with any of its weapons (i.e. guns controlled by the pilot).

The interaction between Superior Flying and Defensive Fire is not spelled out in the MTO book, so consider this part an Official Clarification: Superior Flying does not affect the Defensive Fire roll even when the aircraft is not loaded.

[Gareth_Perkins]

Thanks - that helps a lot,


Just to be absolutely clear about defensive fire,

Only the eventual defender gets defensive fire or can both parties use defensive fire? And if both parties, then what is the sequence of shots?

(I mention this because the defensive fire text implies that you get the shot whether you win or lose the engagement test, and so it could be inferred that both sides get defensive fire if the engagement roll is close or tied. This could be intended for those which do not use the intense dogfights rule however)


Generally I'm finding MAS: MTO much much more forgiving than MAS. Loss of an aircraft and/or pilot or failing at any single mission in MAS often spells doom for a squadron using MAS (as money is tight, and both munitions and aircraft are extremely expensive),

Having said that, campaign two in MTO is a tough one for the allies - requiring carrier-based aircraft only is very restrictive.

On that note, I notice that carrier-based aircraft have a ship icon in their title bar. However the Gladiator does not - an omission, or is the table wrong?

[mwaschak]

Having said that, campaign two in MTO is a tough one for the allies - requiring carrier-based aircraft only is very restrictive.

I suppose you could allow them to launch from the carrier, they just couldn't land again .

-Jay

[Charles Lewis]

Thanks - that helps a lot,


Just to be absolutely clear about defensive fire,

Only the eventual defender gets defensive fire or can both parties use defensive fire? And if both parties, then what is the sequence of shots?

(I mention this because the defensive fire text implies that you get the shot whether you win or lose the engagement test, and so it could be inferred that both sides get defensive fire if the engagement roll is close or tied. This could be intended for those which do not use the intense dogfights rule however)

The rule was written originally without full integration into the intense dogfight options, so the intent was only for the original defender. Upon reflection, I could see both planes getting a shot off if they have turrets. This is really one of those odd situations as, with the exception of the Defiant, there aren't really any planes with a Defensive Fire trait that are going to be aggressive against other planes. A few of the biplane attack craft, like the Swordfish, have both capabilities, but really, if you're having success dogfighting with a Swordfish, power to you.

Generally I'm finding MAS: MTO much much more forgiving than MAS. Loss of an aircraft and/or pilot or failing at any single mission in MAS often spells doom for a squadron using MAS (as money is tight, and both munitions and aircraft are extremely expensive),

Having said that, campaign two in MTO is a tough one for the allies - requiring carrier-based aircraft only is very restrictive.

On that note, I notice that carrier-based aircraft have a ship icon in their title bar. However the Gladiator does not - an omission, or is the table wrong?

That's an omission - the Gladiator is a carrier-capable aircraft. In any event, the capability is noted on the plane lists in the back of the book.

I wanted to give a foretaste of PTO with carrier operaitons, and the situation for Campaign 2 allowed me to do that. I didn't want to completely tie players' hands, so we came up with the modification available under 1.2.2.5. Essentially, for a -1 to Climb and Fuel, any single engine aircraft (i.e. Activation Cost of $1) can be modified to be carrier-capable. There's no cost associated with the option.

And you're right, MTO is a little more forgiving than MAS in that you generally survive any one pilot loss, mission failure, etc. However, it still doesn't take much early on to completely derail a squadron.

[Gareth_Perkins]

A few of the biplane attack craft, like the Swordfish, have both capabilities, but really, if you're having success dogfighting with a Swordfish, power to you.

Heh, it may be a torpedo bomber, and restricted to very low altitude, but the swordfish has +2 maneuver - that makes it a pretty good dogfighter (especially since they're really cheap even in the early war),

I didn't want to completely tie players' hands, so we came up with the modification available under 1.2.2.5. Essentially, for a -1 to Climb and Fuel, any single engine aircraft (i.e. Activation Cost of $1) can be modified to be carrier-capable.

Aha - I had forgotten that,

And you're right, MTO is a little more forgiving than MAS in that you generally survive any one pilot loss, mission failure, etc. However, it still doesn't take much early on to completely derail a squadron.

I quite agree - and in general I think the change is an improvement.

Any game has to have the possibility of failure (otherwise there's little point in playing), but the balance is I think much better - as it's possible to recover from a bad mission or two (especially if you can net a couple of good bounties along the way),

[Charles Lewis]

A few of the biplane attack craft, like the Swordfish, have both capabilities, but really, if you're having success dogfighting with a Swordfish, power to you.

Heh, it may be a torpedo bomber, and restricted to very low altitude, but the swordfish has +2 maneuver - that makes it a pretty good dogfighter (especially since they're really cheap even in the early war)

But the Very Low Altitude restriction is pretty tight and pretty much gives up the Dive bonus to any opponent. Any of the biplanes will have a good maneuverability - it's a function of lots of wing area and low speed. So if you are depending on Swordfish as fighters, things must be desperate!

If you're having success with that, though, feel free to write it up and submit it. Sounds like good fodder for a Victory Track.

[Charles Lewis]

And you're right, MTO is a little more forgiving than MAS in that you generally survive any one pilot loss, mission failure, etc. However, it still doesn't take much early on to completely derail a squadron.

I quite agree - and in general I think the change is an improvement.

Any game has to have the possibility of failure (otherwise there's little point in playing), but the balance is I think much better - as it's possible to recover from a bad mission or two (especially if you can net a couple of good bounties along the way),

Not having to manage ordnance stockpiles is a big difference. I don't know that I'd say that MTO is better balanced, so much as you can hit a stable point with your MAS much sooner. But then I'd also say that squadron management is quite a bit tougher now than then, too, so that's probably about right.