Air support

Hello, RichardC!
Lately, we actively tested air support in our club and there are a lot of questions about it.

1. «Close Air Support aircraft» rules and Warsaw Pact Attack helicopters.
We understand that you want to show special doctrine of using helicopters by countries of Warsaw Pact. But therefore players devoid Attack helicopters as type. There are only a lot of selection options “Close Air Support aircraft”.

2. Strange cost for «Timed Strike» for Attack helicopters.
We don’t understand why Timed Strike option for Attack helicopters more expensive then Timed Strike for Jet Aircraft? Timed Strike Mi-24 costs from 70 to 120 pts., although Timed Su-25 Air Strike costs only 20 pts.!
That price difference seems odd.

3. AIRCRAFT always hits top armor.
When top armour where introduced in Northag, air support begun to destroy tanks too effectively. Bombs and Air-to-Surface Missiles have too high value of Armour Penitration while max value of top armor is 3. So practically any bombs and Air-to-Surface Missiles will destroy any tank (even the most armored) on 4+.

4. Repeat Attacks and Attack Helicopter Another Attack Run.
Can’t say much, just overall feeling that this rules aren’t fun enough. Helicopter or aircraft usually last only for 1 or 2 turns, fires only 1 ATGM or rocket salvo per turn and that’s it.

Best regards from the heart of the Mordor,
Sailor Moon.

Hi SailorMoon

1. «Close Air Support aircraft» rules and Warsaw Pact Attack helicopters.
We understand that you want to show special doctrine of using helicopters by countries of Warsaw Pact. But therefore players devoid Attack helicopters as type. There are only a lot of selection options “Close Air Support aircraft”.

Not 100% sure I understand the question - but if I get what you are saying, your players are avoiding using WARPAC Attack Helicopters as there are so many other options? Fair enough, but I don't really understand why they are avoiding using attack helicopters.

2. Strange cost for «Timed Strike» for Attack helicopters.
We don’t understand why Timed Strike option for Attack helicopters more expensive then Timed Strike for Jet Aircraft? Timed Strike Mi-24 costs from 70 to 120 pts., although Timed Su-25 Air Strike costs only 20 pts.!
That price difference seems odd.

The posts cost does need further thought, but here is the main reason for the cost difference. A Timed air strike by a jet fighter is a one off event. It flies in and if it doesn't get pinned or shot down, it dumps its ordnance where ever the player has previously decided is the target point. It then leaves, never to return again.

A time helicopter strike is a lot more flexible. There is no fixed target point. You can use it to target whatever you want. I may have not made it as clear in the rules as I should have, but it was my intention that the helicopter involved in the timed helicopter strike does not necessarily leave the table after that turn. Obviously if shot down it's gone, and if hit but not shot down it rolls on the Aircraft/Helicopter Unit Morale Table to see if it returns to base, and if not hit at all it rolls on the Attack Helicopter Another Attack Run Table. There is a good chance the Attack Helicopter will remain and will have plenty of ordnance to make another attack.

Hope that makes it make a bit more sense.

3. AIRCRAFT always hits top armor.
When top armour where introduced in Northag, air support begun to destroy tanks too effectively. Bombs and Air-to-Surface Missiles have too high value of Armour Penitration while max value of top armor is 3. So practically any bombs and Air-to-Surface Missiles will destroy any tank (even the most armored) on 4+.

Not sure have such an issue with this to be honest, but I'm pretty sure top armour won't be in the final version of the rules anyway.

4. Repeat Attacks and Attack Helicopter Another Attack Run.
Can’t say much, just overall feeling that this rules aren’t fun enough. Helicopter or aircraft usually last only for 1 or 2 turns, fires only 1 ATGM or rocket salvo per turn and that’s it.

Again - I don't have an issue with that I'm afraid. I think it represents a "game reality" that I'm comfortable with. Sure, it might be awesome to have fleets of Hinds roaming the tabletop like some other other gaming systems but that's not what I was trying to achieve.

I'm sure Warwick will have his own take on this aspect of WW3 gaming and that we'll all be happy with the end result.

Richard