Review: Skyhawk: Rolling Thunder 1966

 

When I was a kid, I was into planes and flying. I would pour over the few books I owned on the subject, and borrow what others I could find from the library. To be honest, the fighters of the Second World War held my attention, but if it flew, I had a keen interest. Of the “modern” era jets, probably the one I liked the most was the McDonald Douglas A4 Skyhawk, purely for the ascetics of the design. It was compact and versatile. It couldn’t break the sound-barrier, but it could carry a ridiculous weight of munitions and make it look easy. It had sleek lines, with a bit of a hump behind the cockpit that on another plane might have made it look ungainly, but on the Skyhawk it looked right. This isn’t the sole reason I’ve been looking forward to the release of Skyhawk: Rolling Thunder, 1966 (Legion Wargames; designers Steve Dixon and Bob Best, 2022), but if I'm honest, it was probably a contributing factor.

Skyhawk is actually my first solo flight game. It’s only in the last two years or so that I’ve been taking my first tentative steps into the world of solitaire wargaming. I own a handful now, but I couldn’t call myself an expert, much less a veteran. As such, this review may lack some of the depth of a seasoned player, but I’ll try to do the game justice.

Appearance

Skyhawk is an attractive game. The box-art is evocative, the mounted 11”x17” board, while schematic in nature, captures the flavour of the game with a military map of the region as its backdrop. The templates for the mission load and recording damage to your plane are simple illustrations that do the job without fuss. The player’s aids and other records sheets are well laid out and very easy to use. The rules, as well, are very clear and easy to follow. There is sometimes in picking up a new game in an established oeuvre that some short-hand or jargon exclusive to that game-style can creep in and become a potential roadblock for unfamiliar players. This isn’t the case here; the rules are clear and erudite, with good examples and a healthy bit of redundancy. Overall, the presentation is elegant and functional.

Play

Skyhawk is what I’d call a procedural game. The style of play should be familiar to anybody who has played a solo mission-oriented game like Gregory Smith’s The Hunters (GMT, 2013) and its siblings, or Dixon’s own Target for Today / Target for Tonight (Legion, 2017 / 2020). The game allows you to conduct a single mission, or in the case of a campaign, a sequence of bombing missions over several weeks or months, over North Vietnam. The mission is chosen for you randomly by rolling on a rather extensive table of actual missions flown by the US Navy pilots participating in Operation Rolling Thunder. You have control over your load-out (different munitions being more or less appropriate for various types of mission), but, as was the case historically, you may be restricted in this by unavailability of some munitions, or even by political interference.

As you resolve your mission, you move your plane counter through a path of locations on the map, representing mid-flight refuelling, avoiding or taking damage from ground and air defences, making your run at the target – this can even be done several times if you’re feeling lucky – then the return trip to the carrier and (hopefully) landing.

From take off to landing, your mission is resolved by a combination of player decisions and rolls on a whole manual of tables. On the face of it, this sounds dry and tedious, and I know that this style of game isn’t for everyone. But the combination of the mission playing out on the board and the measured randomness introduced by the tables creates a tense narrative for the player from before you’ve even taken off. The game provides a multitude of decision points for the player; you’ve not just along for the story – every choice you make will have an impact on the unfolding mission. Success is measured by the effectiveness of your bombing mission and other factors, like whether you bring your bird back in one piece. Rules for bailing out over land and water, rescue and capture are included for a more complete mission experience.

The game offers two shorter campaigns – a month over August and September, 1966 (up to sixteen missions), or from late October to the end of that year (maximum 34 missions), or you can combine the two for a full tour of duty. Optional rules also allow for running a whole four-plane flight each mission, although, with the exponential increase in bookkeeping involved, I think I’m happy to stick to a single plane. On that though, while there is a certain amount of record-keeping involved in Skyhawk (or any game of this style), it isn’t an arduous thing. Your load-out is handled with counters on a plane template, there is a table for keeping notes of your missions, and damage collected during each foray is marked on a separate template (copies of which are, of course, provided with the game, but if your like me and want to keep your components pristine, all the records sheets are available for download (PDF) from the Legion Games website (https://www.legionwargames.com/legion_SKY_GS.html).

Appraisal

I really like Skyhawk. As I mentioned earlier, I know this kind of game isn’t for everyone, but they know who they are and if you’ve read this far, you’re probably not them. This game provides such a rich narrative experience. I found myself getting emotionally invested in the outcome of each stage of the game, and it richly rewards this kind of investment; I was genuinely worried whether I was going to make it back to the carrier on “bingo fuel” after taking a second run at the target on my third mission. I really appreciate how the game doesn't have to remain set up between missions to play through a campaign, with everything logged and reset for a new mission, although you may want to complete any repairs and pilot recovery details before packing up, so you can go straight into your next mission when you can break the game out again.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, this is my first seat-of-your-pants flying game, so I can’t really compare apples with apples, but if you want to take the plunge and try this type of solo game, I think Skyhawk would be a good starting place.