_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lHas anyone put any
thought or effort into modifying Full Thrust for use as a fighter combat game?
It shouldn't be that difficult, using the standard capital ship templates for
light, medium, and heavy fighters. Fighters should probably get more thrust,
and I would probably consider adding
something in to give a benefit for the individual pilot and/or gunner's
skill.
Am I reinventing the wheel here?
--
Derek A. Rogillio derek at rogillio dot net
> Has anyone put any thought or effort into modifying Full Thrust for
> Am I reinventing the wheel here?
It was thought of long ago......
http://www.homegame.org/siefert/uftwwwp/files/fighter.zip
I know I've seen adaptations attempted, or at least discussed, for aircraft,
in case that's what you're thinking, as opposed to space fighters, It don't
remember any details. Likewise, dashing this off in the odd second, so can't
do a proper Google crawl.
Must say that the folks doing the adapting, like the folks trying wet navies,
were less than enthusiastic with their results. I think they were a bit hard,
mind you.
Is anyone else having trouble deciphering some of the space fighter icons?
The_Beast
Derek wrote on 04/25/2006 10:15:24 PM:
> Has anyone put any thought or effort into modifying Full
Where can the wet navy variants be found these days? I may be blind, but I
couldn't find 'em on the unofficial FT page.
> At 06:13 AM 4/26/2006, Doug Evans wrote:
Number one, Mark has been through some rough periods of late, and hasn't given
the attention he loves to to the page, and two, I'm not certain I ever saw
full write ups on naval adaptations. I think Mr.Goodall mentioned some work in
this area, but if I've got the right culpr... poster, felt it was a bad fit.
Now, my admittedly cloudy recollection was that this was for a particular
naval period, so I'm assuming he tried to get a wee bit fiddly.
Anyway, instead of Mark's still invaluable resource, branch the search to the
list archives in particular, and the web in general, which is what I'd be
doing if, in case of this incredibly rare circumstance, I wasn't a bit busy at
work, and can't do the searching myself, which I will REAL SOON
(tm). ;->=
The_Beast
Sake'-san wrote on 04/26/2006 09:43:20 AM:
> Where can the wet navy variants be found these days?
> From: Doug Evans
Correct--that was for the Russo Japanese war. Other people have done
age-of-sail--Mike the Hudak did a pirates game at ECC for instance.
You can easily convert FT into a "fighter" game.
The only thing I'd add (to start) would be individual crew positions to the
core systems block. There would be a symbol for the pilot,
co-pilot, weapons officer, signals officer, etc. Then, of course, you
have to apply the magic "the scale of the game now deals with fighters and not
ships..." sponge.
I have a set of racing rules online that goes into this somewhat. The short
version: very high thrusts, ships are allowed to "double their output" but
burn out their engines, individual gunners, pilots, and engineers....
http://home.comcast.net/~damosan/rr1.htm
--
Damo
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Derek Rogillio" <derek@rogillio.net>
> Has anyone put any thought or effort into modifying Full Thrust for
Fighters
> should probably get more thrust, and I would probably consider adding
--NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_29931_1146224972_1
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_9636_27792292.1146021324733"
------=_Part_9636_27792292.1146021324733
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Has anyone put any thought or effort into modifying Full Thrust for use as a
fighter combat game? It shouldn't be that difficult, using the standard
capital ship templates for light, medium, and heavy fighters. Fighters should
probably get more thrust, and I would probably consider adding
something in to give a benefit for the individual pilot and/or gunner's
skill.
Am I reinventing the wheel here?
As I was thinking of a Blue Max to Full Thrust port, I realized the complexity
of the manuvers didn't match up. Either you break up the FT movement with
extra mid point course adjustments, or you break up the Blue Max movement into
multiple FT game turns.
With multi-turn pre-plotting, and 'tailing' represented by partial
revealed plots, the latter might not fall under it's own weight, and still
work for SOME period of fighter combat.
Blue Max's basic form can be found in FASA's Top Gun movie spin off, but
the BG and Last Starfighter boxes used pre-plots that allowed
multi-turns.
Also, altitude?
Thoughts?
The_Beast
Ah, Blue Max. I only played it 3-4 times, but it was fun. It was
nearly five years ago that I'd heard RAFM had tasked Ottawa's Scott MacGregor
with drafting rules for a new edition of the game. I suspect it never went
further than 'draft'.
Can't speak to that, but I know that if you will look for 'Canvas Eagles', you
should find a downloadable version that is supposed to be free until a new
Blue Max can be produced REAL SOON(tm).
Sorry, can't remember names involved, and, no, can't do the search this
minute. ;->=
The_Beast
TomM wrote on 04/28/2006 10:40:00 AM:
> Ah, Blue Max. I only played it 3-4 times, but it was fun. It was
I'm always curious why so many gamers think that future engineers would design
control systems that allow pilots to '"double their output" but burn out their
engines' when no engineer now would be allowed to create such a design. Same
with ships with insufficient power to run all their guns unless they risk burn
out, et al.
> At 04:49 AM 4/28/2006, damosan@comcast.net wrote:
> the core systems block. There would be a symbol for the pilot,
Fighters
> > should probably get more thrust, and I would probably consider
> should probably get more thrust, and I would probably consider adding
I always love the techno-babble of "we'll just reroute power from X to
Z"
with out massive work being required. Not many engineers in Hollywood.
Michael Brown mwsaber6@msn.com
[quoted original message omitted]
Sake'-san wrote on 04/28/2006 11:36:47 AM:
> I'm always curious why so many gamers think that future
No matter how good the govenors, some damn fool will try to override them.
;->=
Also, the original design was a racing game; 'Jerry was a race' boat
'driver...'
As an aside, I do recall the WWII Japanese capital ships that used a special
load in the main guns against fighters. When tried, a) ineffective, b) tore up
the barrel linings as to almost make the guns worthless. Or so I've read. I
can be, and often am, corrected.
Michael wrote on 04/28/2006 11:45:48 AM:
> I always love the techno-babble of "we'll just reroute
Fair's fair, occasionally this line is delivered to a shocked-faced tech
holding massive numbers of wire ends.
The_Beast
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: TooMuchSakeMan <gzg-l@toomuchsakeman.org>
> I'm always curious why so many gamers think that future engineers
You don't think a Thing is built for Range A-C in Real Life but has the
capability to be pushed a bit further? I can tell you that back in my
Arty days our guns were designed for a typical charge -- but there were
allowable charges that would extend the range quite a bit. The side affect?
The gun would be locked backwards and have to be sent for repairs.
Anywho my stuff was simply for racing purposes -- giving players a
chance to "turbo" about. Redlining and all that...
> From: TooMuchSakeMan
Instead of giving them an "engine burnout" chance, just give them fuel
boxes and say that doubling the thrust costs 3-4 fuel.
> McCarthy, Tom (xwave) wrote:
> Ah, Blue Max. I only played it 3-4 times, but it was fun. It was
You can play Blue Max as a play-by-web game for free at www.youplay.it
> From: ~ On Behalf Of TooMuchSakeMan
> I'm always curious why so many gamers think that future
Early comment on fly-by-wire from some .mil group; bonus
points to anyone who can dig up the original quote:
"<if I pull the stick in such a way as to> bend the plane, I don't want some
voice in my ear telling me I might bend the plane, I WANT TO BEND THE
<fscking> PLANE!"
If your opponent has missile lock, what are your alternatives?
Nathan
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lMartin Connell & I
used a Full Thrust & FMA variant to run a fighter game at ECC VIII. Although a
little more in depth than what you all are talking about it worked very well
for our Attack on the Death Star scenario. We also had a great time just
getting into some dog fights during play testing.
Here is a link to Martin's page w/ picks of the con game, SSD's and a
rules review:
http://www.geocities.com/mxconnell/GZG8/deathstar.html
-Steve
[quoted original message omitted]