Tornade wrote:
BlueMax is no simulation...just a game based on an historical situation
i wasnt suggesting that it is historically accurate to not reward damaging an enemy plane...certainly it was...a damaged plane took resources, time and manpower to repair and counted almost as much toward victory as a destroyed aircraft...historically, shooting down enemy aircraft was not always the object of a mission...more often it was to destroy an observation balloon...or to do reconaissance of enemy positions...to attack ground units and installations...the destruction of enemy fighters was not overly relevant to the overall war effort...
Von Richtofen who destroyed 80 enemy planes really had NO impact on the war at all...despite his fame and media hoopla...one single bombing raid to destroy a railway yard had FAR more effect on the war than ten Richtofens
that said...the game is about fighter combat and that is what we are playing at...
some have said that the number of shots is a measure of the skill and for them that is what makes the game fun...they dont care about the kill...well thats fine...they dont care about the kill and only the shooting then they also shouldnt care about the score of the game as it is the playing that is the fun
the point i made was that the victory conditions in this game are not what was designed in the actual game...in the board game there are no points for flying so many turns or for shooting at the enemy...the only points come from shooting down the enemy planes
the changes made to the victory conditions here have given us situations in which a player can hammer away at an enemy for several turns...scoring maybe 30 or 40 points and then end up being shot down by that same enemy and yet still win the game...that is just completely wrong
i personally think its time to address the victory conditions and bring them back in line with the actual game
Let's make a little test: how can we change Blue Max so to make a perfect game where clever and skillful people always wins, and stupid and incapable people always lose ?
Well, we could start removing the "Pilot Killed" and "Plane EXPLODES!" chit.
Infact, why should we allow a stupid but lucky player the possibility of winning over a very good player, that already fired on him half a dozen times, only by scoring one little red chit at the first shot ? Away these chits!
And better: why give the various aircrafts peculiarity like "Tail" or "Fuselage" points? Do you think it's right that a player that had already scored 20 damages on the opponent fuselage or wings can be shot down by the opponent that scores 5 damages on his/her tail? Away all chits! We can decide that the aircraft will have only one general resistence number of points: once finished them, the aircraft is down!
Still better: why have so many different planes, with so many different characteristics?Do you think it's sporting attacking a SpadVII with a Halberstadt, or a FokkerDr.I with a Sopwith Snipe? We can have only one type of aircraft for both sides, with same number of resistence points, number of guns, fuel endurance, manoeuvering possibility and fire stability.
And now? Why should we keep all those different, multicoloured tokens for the various aircraft? We have just one type. We can represent it simply with an arrow that indicates the direction: blue arrows for Allies, red arrows for the Germans. And no more useless distractions!
Then, what about dice? Why I score always only 1 or 2, while my opponent always scores 5 or 6 ? Away the dice! Next firing table will consider only distance and deflection, and maybe if you have already tailed or fired the opponent in the last turn, giving always the same, fixed result for the same, definite parameters.
At the end, why keep the original name? We could change it too. I think that something like "Chess" would be appropriate...
(A little digression: I'm having breakfast while writing this, and a few moments ago, while I was biting it, my toast has broken in three pieces: of course, all the three of them have landed on the table with the jam-covered side. I hate Murphy! I want to change its rules!)
OK, what have we here now? A perfect game, where only the clever will survive, and the stupid will die. Enjoy it! It's all yours!
Infact, I prefer go back playing Blue Max, that imperfect game where also the most inexpert and ingenuous newbie has always one little possibility to win against the best expert and skilled ace.
I have the best respect for Manfred von Richtofen, but:
Long life to Arthur Roy Brown!