Burning Skies: dogfights in Warhammer 40000

Burning Skies is official rules supplement for Warhammer 40000 found in GW book Campaign: Crusade of Fire. This 92 hard-cover full colour book have been released, as a limited edition, back in 2012 when Flyer's have returned to the game. The book itself is not a subject of this post but its worth mentioning that it gives a groundwork for any Game Master willing to create and run its 40k campaign.

As your truly keeps working on RPG campaign for Thunderbolts, I looked into this book for inspiration. So allow me to share what have been discovered: Burning Skies is a relatively simple game-inside-the-game system which could be used in most 40k games. Simply put it add a mechanics similar to challenge mode in 6th edition of rules, but with added layer of complexity. Rule set is comprised of Burning Skies section described on 3 pages, Special Manoeuvres described in 4 pages, and Fighter Aces on additional 4 pages.

What these rules are about?

Burning Skies revolves around idea of micro combat during the Shooting Phase. As players end their Movement phase, they roll d6 to see if Dogfight mode could be initiated. Result could be modified by position of the aircraft toward each other. If that succeeds, then players roll for 3 stages of dogfight on special tables. Stages of dogfight are Pursuit, Lock-on and Destroy.  Each stage imitates its description and players roll for tactics used during this micro fight.

Three avaliable tactics are assigned by roll of d6 and rolls are grouped into 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 results. Both Attacker and Defender apply rolled tactics on table with 9 possible outcomes. Each of the dogfight stages have its own unique table, where results could be quite surprising.

Uff... Tired? Me too. However if you played 40k long enough you may be adjusted to mentality of many dice and extra tables. The pay-off for all these suffering and rolling is an extra Victory Points for killing enemy aircraft, as well as promised extra VP which could be generated during dogfight.
One of the biggest reservations on my part against it, is why should I give an enemy an extra chance of survival against my Shooting attack? Or even give an enemy a chance to fire back at me? The results on some of those tables allow for that to happen. When if I play simple-stupid mechanics I manoeuvre and blast the enemy out of the sky. Period. The biggest and saddest part of it for me, that Burning Skies does not change the way models actually manoeuvre or act towards other models in the game, and all this dogfighting is happening only in your imagination.   

On a bright side, these rules are supplemented with Special Manoeuvres part. This is where things get hot and interesting. Each major faction of W40k universe gets two special manoeuvres which could be used during one of the stages of dogfight or during normal Movement, Shooting and Assault phases. To use any of these manoeuvres player must pass either Leadership, Initiative or Toughness test. Should they succeed then aircraft may either gains and extra cover save, re-roll outcomes of dog-fight stage, gains extra attack, smash and ram enemy units, give allied tanks re-rolls to hit or perform a psychic attack.

From my little gaming experience with Burning Skies, if used in time and skillfully those manoeuvres make a great difference. However the biggest downside is that W40k is clunky and rigid game as it is and adding an extra complexity to it does not improve gameplay at all.  

Speaking of complexity... Third part of Burning Skies called Fighter Aces brings the pain to your brain. In its essence it is an extra roll on another table, similar to your Warlord table. Luckily there is only 3 results which modify your pilots chances of engaging in dogfight, hitting the target, inspiring allies or getting a re-roll. The price you pay is 50 points for an Ace.  

To give an overall verdict to this rules supplement is difficult. If you are an experienced player looking for more micromanagement in addition to number of shots you fired, attacks generated, number of inches moved and charged, you will find these rules easy to adapt and give your games an extra level of epicness.

If you only starting to grasp the foundation of 40k, then you may want leave it for later, as it is your decisions as player will not have a significant impact on outcome of the dogfight. That area is ruled by dice and chance, though authors do insist that we should trust our pilots to make decisions, rather than take control ourselves. Then again, why should I?

Sincerely yours,
Mark-Paul Severn

Aeronautica Imperialis: review

After some time of chasing and locating this rulebook I have succeeded. Despite being made in now long gone 2006 and not supported any more by GW, it still an interesting game. Aeronautica Imperialis have in many ways influenced many of following “hits” of gaming industry. X-wing is one of them. How to summarize the overall impression if this game in brief sentence?

Peculiar dogfight.

Lets try to break it down in smaller points and elaborate on high and low point of this definitely interesting game.

1. Stand alone game.
2. Dogfight
3. Peculiar details
4. Juicy extras and balance

Stand alone game.

Aeronautica Imperialis is a Warhammer 40k spin-off specifically dedicated to aerial dogfights. Period. It ignores the huge amount of 40k inconsistencies and “holy bolter” of its game system WS and BS. It simply puts us in the sky and gives some flying lessons in style of World War 2. As it was written prior to modern Storm Talons and Sunsharks it has relatively small, but balanced amount of aircraft for each race, but our main workhorse/opponent is Imperial Navy Thunderbolt. Fighters and Bombers are the only types, but these classes have small influence on the gameplay. Flyers characteristics are much more important. Addition of Advanced rules makes for more in-depth games, but at the same time makes it even slower. Things like limited ammo, pilots skill, weather, terrain do affect combat, but if you mastered this relatively complicated game it will make it more tactically challenging.

Dogfight.

Well... put it this way, Imperium of Man is dying and backwards, just for the sake of Space Marines being cool dudes of entire setting. In case of Aeronautica Imperialis this put an emphasize onto close aerial fighting, without Space marines on a main roles. Instead Imperial players fly with Navy. On a technical side, in time of Imperium, Thunderbolt fighters can fly to the orbit of the planet but they have no radar and heat-seeking missiles have less firepower than autocannon. So pilots main activity is to get on enemy's tail and pepper it with bullets. All other missions like Bombing raids, troop insertion, Air patrols are added on top that sweet adrenaline of “dakka-dakka”.

Peculiar details.

The sweet sound of “dakka-dakka” comes at a price. Main idea of game is to predict position of enemy's aircraft, put your plane into firing range and roll 5+ or 6+ if you are higher or lower than target. To do so, you change following: Speed, Altitude, Thrust, then you play Manoeuvre cards to do Barrel rolls, High-g turns, Dives, Climbs and Turns. For each plane! Then you have 3 set ranges for weapons with variable effect on firepower. Book states that game with 2 planes may take an hour to complete and game with up to 12 planes several hours. In my small experience dogfight of 2 vs 2 planes took approximately 40 minutes.

Luckily we were not using advanced rules, but still some small things like overshooting enemy because your speed is higher than his, firing loads of shots and not scoring anything because you needed 6+, hitting but not damaging plane (similar to roll to wound), makes Aeronautica Imperialis a very detailed game. This in my opinion is both strong and weak point of it.

On a strong side: it really delivers a shot-by-shot dogfight experience.

On the other side: the very complexity of it slows it down.

Game system written by Games Workshop veteran Warwick Kindrade is as simple as it gets for a aerial combat simulator (though book insists that it is not a simulator). But to make it's gameplay faster and even more easier to grasp and master it would have to lose many of its detail which make it so rich. For example 4 vs 4 game of X-wing takes an hour to complete, Axis and Allies: Wings of Victory is similar in speed.

Juicy extras

On top of well-tested and balanced game book contains colour schemes for all aircraft, technical specifications, fluffy descriptions, in-game data sheets, “historical” missions, campaign rules (which are easy and based on 3 tables), some special rules, couple of pages dedicated to painting and terrain.

Overall book is high quality hard back with typical Forgeworld glossy paper. Currently sold together with supplement for 40k games for £30. Probably while stock lasts. Since GW discontinued its Specialist games in 2012, this book would be a collectors, not gamers buy. For now there are much faster and more competitive games on a market. But of coarse, they are not in Warhammer 40000 universe. 

New Tau Codex: biggest changes

Tau Pathfinders. Source: http://eastern-empire.com/gallery/urban-tau-cadre/

New Tau is finally here! The shiny hard-cover codex book is written by Jeremy Wetlock, who runs the column in White Dwarf and apparently been with GW for a long time. Codex itself is full-colored 100 or so pages book with easy navigation, plenty of images and background on each old and new units, heroes as well as new influx of background information on Tau Empire itself, their Septs and Heroes. Book is priced at £30 in Uk, and well worth buying just to have it on the shelf or battlefield.

So what are the biggest changes from the old codex:

1. Hammerhead and Sky Ray are BS 4.
2. Fire Warriors and Pathfinders are Initiative 2 
3. Drones may mix and match between Shield, Markerlight and Heavy Guns in one unit.
4. Drones are Initiative 4. 
5. Snipers are BS 5 and may have up 6 Marksmen with up 3 Sniper Drones each. Oh, Their weapon is a Rapid fire AP5. Did i mentioned the markerlight and Support fire?
6. Vespid are Initiative 6 and will ignore difficult or dangerous terrain. 
7.  Support Fire special rule allows you to fire Overwatch from friendly unit in 6" as well as from unit being assaulted. With certain abilities or Heroes Support fire may be fired by vehicles!  
8. Markerlight will grant one of the following: +1 to BS, Ignore Cover saves, fire a Seeker missile without reducing the amount of weapons vehicle can use, add +1 bonus for each markerlight to Overwatch BS.
9. Kroot finally got an armor. 6+ armor is a Kroot dream come true :) 
10. Most Battlesuits pack twink-linked weapons, but majority is still BS 3. 
11. Fire Blades are nasty! Veterans of Fire Caste they almost rival Space Marine Captains. They are 50+ points upgrade for Fire Warrior and allows extra shots or re-roll 1 to hit. 3 Wounds. 
12. Rippertide Battlesuit is a Mounstrous Creature with Toughness 6 and loads of weapon choices. Main bonus Nova Reactor: allows you either extra shots with twin-linked weapons, 4d6 evasion maneuver, overload with big "kaboom", or improved AP.
13. Flyers are here. Bomber and Fighter both at BS 3, 2 HP and ability to take 4+ invulnerable save against incoming fire. 
14. Heroes: as well as Farsight, Shadowsun and Aun'Va (last one is even more useful than ever), there is a master Pathfinder, super tankman at BS 5, Tank hunter, Support fire and Overwatch, and Ethereal with WS:5, I:5 A:4. He either goes Rending or chopping, especially against the Orks. 
15. Last but not least: Warlord Traits. 6 unique Traits, with 3 out of them may be used once per battle. They demand and intelligent play and understanding of your army. Traits may give your units Skyfire rule, extra shots, extra move or morale bonus.                           

In conclusion: most of the units remained as they were, or even less hard, but the difference is army cohesion, support and firepower. Tau will demand intelligent play, careful positioning and support from each other. Only then they will be victorious.  
   

Yamamoto Isoroku: book critique

I was not  planning to expand my little blog into the area of historical publication and analysis but during research for one of my projects a came across this book: Yamamoto Isoroku by Mark Stille, published Osprey publishing in Leadership-Strategy-Conflict series. The reason behind this purchase was lack of English printed source on this famous admiral. The result of reading through this book is a really mixed feelings about book and the way in puts an information an facts. 

Perhaps it was my expectations were a bit too high, for I wanted to see and in-depth analysis of Yamamoto's past, turning points, important influences, positions on key events in World War 2, analysis of strategy and tactics used by him, and perhaps even reflection on his actions and overall Japanese strategy in WW2. That was not to be. 

"Mark E. Stille (Commander, United States Navy, retired) received his BA in History from the University of Maryland and also holds an MA from the Naval War College. He has worked in the intelligence community for 30 years including tours on the faculty of the Naval War College, on the Joint Staff and on US Navy ships. He is currently a senior analyst working in the Washington DC area. He is the author of numerous Osprey titles, focusing on naval history in the Pacific." 

So naturally, reader would succumb to the weight of authority and expertise. Well why shouldn't you? Author stands his position in the beginning of the book that: "as with any famous military commander there is always reality and myth. For Yamamoto they stand in stark contrast." After that author goes in lengths about how overestimated, under planned and with how many gross mistakes Yamamoto went through his career until his death by heroic American interceptors. He pinpoints and emphasizes Yamamoto's weakens, sins and mistakes puts a label on them and then describes how Americans were superior to Yamamoto.

One of the few label author puts are: gambler, womanizer, indecisive and political admiral. Only by the end of the book, he gives a voice to people who served under Yamamoto's command to mention that he was a very humble person, disliked the "aura of heroism" around him and was loved and obeyed without question by his men. His major achievement: the attack on Pearl Harbor is portrayed as work of one man in charge of planning Commander Genda Minoru and his attempts to persuade reluctant Naval General Staff as behavior of capricious and moody gambler not a calculated risk of an admiral. Mark Stille rejoices in scrutinizing mistakes, but gives no clue of whatsoever under what conditions, intelligence, resources and strategy Yamamoto was operating. By the end of the book he gives a portray of Admiral Nimitz, who (as you might expect) is decisive, aggressive and dedicated to the victory of his nation. To make matters even more propagandistic, he is compared to Yamomoto, suffering from illness, stress, fatigue but still enjoying good food and luxurious quarters and his flagship Yamato. 

The strong and positive sides of Yamamoto's character are generally mentioned in the descriptive manner: like his mastery of kendo, skill in appointing the right people for the job, or mentioned in diminished manner: like Yamamoto's service in aviation and impact of his activities on creation of Japanese naval aviation are mentioned as non-sufficient, despite the fact that he lobbied creation of G4M bombers and creation of carrier fleet in opposition to battleship-emphasized navy. The fact that he actually succeeded to influence that policy is not even mentioned. 

To make matters worse author shows complete lack of understandings of Japanese culture, it "yes" and "no", its obvious differences from American culture and approach. To be frank, there is not even an attempt to do so. To illustrate that, author emphasize that Japan's supply lines suffered heavily from American submarines, while Allies enjoyed relatively undisturbed shipping and suppl lines. Author does not notice the fundamental difference in psychology and means of waging the war: Japanese saw conflict as battle of two equals, two samurais if like, while American approach emphasizes production numbers and undisturbed supply line. 

"Liberty ship" - the famous transport was an epitome of this thinking: build more than they can sink. While Japanese preferred (and frankly were capable) of building less ships, but with better capabilities.Yamato - is a one of kind (plus its sistership) example of this thinking.  

In conclusion, should anybody consider buying this book? If that is your first book on Admiral Yamamoto, then avoid it. Wikipedia with its article on him http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoroku_Yamamoto does similar job and largely unbios towards him. If you already have a strong opinion or looking for it then you may try it. Even if you will find it lacking analysis (as i did) book still provides an overview of Yamamoto's life and biographies that followed on him. 

Sincerely yours,

Mark