Well, there you go.

Air rules annoy some people. In fact they annoy most people, but how much we tolerate them depends on our personalities I suppose.

Here is my thought after listening to all this:

We should have two alternate air rules, for a total of three. Before anyone freaks out on me, just hear me out.

Method A: Classic rules. The existing air rules work okay and since they are the familiar should be retained. Clarified, sure, but retained.

Method B: Streamlined rules. Some version of the Alternate Air Rules that Neal posted. Immediate disengagement being the key here.

Method C: Enhanced rules. Hot Zone Hopping, VTOL, etc. These rules would be for the aeronautica-philes, scenario gamers, or anyone looking for a more detailed inclusion of air units in Epic.

Since they are independent methods, each set of alternate rules can be developed on their own without affecting the other. It opens up options for players and avoids discluding people. Neal's comments above (plus the previous six pages of off-and-on-topic discussion) tell me the same thing: we're not going to get a consensus. But I personally would like to see Method B ironed out.

Method C I am going to work on regardless of interest just because we're building a giant scenario and Method A will not work in such a case. Anyone else interested in helping out on Method C is welcome to.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Happy to help with version B.

I'm happy to help test version B, because if it does turn into something interesting then who knows where it might go... though I have massive reservations about the "instant disengage for transports dropping off troops" (Instead of staying until the end of the turn), and the "evacuated troops are removed from the game" nuggets.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

You know what? Method C and similar things could be put into a supplement for more detailed rules/stats/etc.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

SEAD/Iron Hand missions?
ECM and ECCM?

i dont mind flak-rush, but loathe the very idea of bomber AA umbrellas. aside from that, and the whole "marines can cycle into a new thunderhawk but not their old one" i think the air rules are pretty much fine as is. (the marine thing, why should having an empty thunderhawk allow the marines to depart, when having a thunderhawk right there already, does not? it should be either "they can go" or "they cannot" and i think cannot is a better way to balance things out (and will probably help with the "marines only ever air-assault" problem)

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~