Star Wars Models ...

If anyone out there has any of the star wars fighter snap together kist from
Return of the Jedi that they would like to sell, please let me know. I play a
game of Star Warriors (star wars fighter combat) with them and am having a
hard time finding the ones I need. I am ESPECIALLY
desirious of B-Wings and Y-0Wings!

In a message dated 96-07-27 17:01:13 EDT, starwarsnut@juno.com (Paul A
Neher) writes:

> If anyone out there has any of the star wars fighter snap together kist

As part of the 'master plan' for the Star Wars universe (don't you love
corporate universes?), ERTL and?MCE? are planning to rerelease all of the
plastic models before the next movie comes out. So I wouldn't spend a lot on
any of the old model kits.

Regards, Steve Gibson

Yes, it has been a long time since the Star Wars movies were on the big
screen. I've seen some of the new screen shots from the newly edited first
film, and I would think it should be ready by next year. Traditionally I think
the Star Wars films have been released during the end of March here in the
states. Obviously to get that jump start on the summer season.('Bring on those
dumptrucks boys, we got
another load of money to bring in!' - what film producers are probably
thinking.)

> On Tue, 30 Jul 1996 20:02:40 -0400 SGibson260@aol.com writes:

> As part of the 'master plan' for the Star Wars universe (don't you

Before the next movie comes out? Gee... which release date would that be?
Before 1990? before 1995? Before 1997? Before the year 2000? Don't get me
wrong, I was raised on Star Wars and am not ashamed to admit adicted to it.
However, one thing I have learned is to not hold my breath waiting for the
next flick to come out. The above mentioned
release dates were/are form Lucasfilm ... since then the Indiana Jones
trilogy has been done, not to mention Willow, and a score of others....
now we hear that Lucasfilm will re-release the entire first trilogy with
a whopping 5-10 extra minutes of refilmed scenes .... AND Lucas'
creative genious has shown up in the stores in the form of a new novel that is
a sequal series to the Willow story set 15 years later. Anywho, I am rambling.
My point is, I am playing with the models NOW, and waiting for the next
release of a Star wars movie won't help. *sigh*

* As the last of the Imperial fleet turns to leave, a huge chunk of the death
star crashes down on the Ewok village with a big
"thunk"...*      -sigh- If only....

So Lucas wants to put 'more' X-wing and Y-wing's in the Death Star
attack scene, huh? It should be obvious why he wants to do it. He wants to
make it look even better. Anyone worth their salt as a true Star Wars fan had
to have been blown away when they first saw the great battle scenes done in
'Return of the Jedi'. Especially with that initial shot of the entire Imperial
armada coming straight at you. I want more!:)

On Thu, 1 Aug 96 12:11:33 CDT a210486@texas.dseg.ti.com (kosta
> kalogeropoulos 956-6476) writes:

No doubt! Look at the re-release of Star Wars paraphanalia in the last
year! I'm going crazy... like a kid at the age of ten again! I too have seen
some image clips... but I cannot figure out why Lucas wants to make
more x-wings and Y-Wings for teh Deatrh Star attack?

kosta kalogeropoulos said:
> Anyone worth their salt as a true Star Wars fan had to have been

> of the Jedi'.

That's funny, I didn't particularly like the battle scenes in RotJ; I thought
there was far too much going on to really appreciate any of the details.
 The
attack on the Death Star's reactor was particularly dumb. [Flying into the
structure of the Death Star I can live with; the _Millenium Falcon_
flying into through shafts barely larger than the ship itself was insanity.
There
was _no_ reason why the Falcon was uniquely suited to that task, and
several reasons why she wasn't.]

There is room for improvement in episodes IV and VI (ESB is pretty good,

although I always found the space slug slightly annoying); if Lucas removes
the damn "lugnuts" song from RotJ I'm willing to forgive all his other sins. I
just hope that he doesn't confuse "more" with "better".

Excerpts from FT: 2-Aug-96 Re: Star Wars Models ... by "Christopher
Weuve"@inte > There is room for improvement in episodes IV and VI (ESB is
pretty good,
> although I always found the space slug slightly annoying); if Lucas

"Lugnuts" song?

Huh?

Chris Weuve siad:
> That's funny, I didn't particularly like the battle scenes on RotJ; I

Well there's always video and the rewind button.:)

Besides, most of the space combat was between fighters, which basically should
have a fast and deadly look it.

As far as complaints on film content, I can find 'other' more pronounced
material that should be removed. 'Especially' in RotJ.

Maybe the day will come when we can all do our own professional film edits at
home and watch only those parts that we want.

> Excerpts from FT: 2-Aug-96 Re: Star Wars Models ... by "Christopher

Probably the last song on the film.  Sung in Ewok with a sing-song
melody that you can't get out of your mind.

I should know. I watched RotJ about two weeks ago.

The planned release schedule for the showing of the special editions of the
Star Wars trilogy is as follows: Episode IV: A New Hope 7 Feb. 1997
     Episode V:  The Empire Strikes Back    4-6 weeks after Episode IV
     Episode VI: Return of the Jedi         4-6 weeks after Episode V

This is according to a real interesting web page on films (whose address is:
  //www.islandnet.com/~corona/films/allfilms.html

Kent

> Chris Weuve writes:

> here is room for improvement in episodes IV and VI (ESB is pretty

What, you didn't like "Attack of the Killer Teddy Bears?"    :)

> kosta kalogeropoulos 956-6476 wrote:

> * As the last of the Imperial fleet turns to leave, a huge chunk of

Wouldn't it be bliss? ROTJ is pretty much ruined for me by the little hair
balls. It seemed to be too much pandering to the child market.

Marty

On Fri, 2 Aug 96 10:14:58 CDT a210486@texas.dseg.ti.com (kosta
> kalogeropoulos 956-6476) writes:

> done in 'Return of the Jedi'. Especially with that initial shot of the

I just think it doesn't need it. The Rebel alliance wasn't that strong in the
books, and I think it even says they only had like 30 fighters. The film
stills I saw look impressive... but my point is the film doesn't
need re-toughing.

On Fri, 2 Aug 96 12:49:39 CDT a210486@texas.dseg.ti.com (kosta
> kalogeropoulos 956-6476) writes:

Personally, I love everything about the movies.... but to get my "war blood
pressure up"... make me a film of just combat scenes... do that for Star Trek
sometime... that's AWESOME!

Paul

On Fri, 2 Aug 96 15:34:26 EDT Martin Connell <martyc@hpnjmc.njd.hp.com>
writes:

> Wouldn't it be bliss? ROTJ is pretty much ruined for me by the little
In Lucas' words.. I wanted to show that with all the advances in technology,
pure hearts can win.

> Paul A. Neher writes:
@:) On Fri, 2 Aug 96 15:34:26 EDT Martin Connell <martyc@hpnjmc.njd.hp.com>
> @:) writes:
@:)
@:) >Wouldn't it be bliss? ROTJ is pretty much ruined for me by the little @:)
>hair balls. It seemed to be too much pandering to the child market.
@:)
@:) In Lucas' words.. I wanted to show that with all the advances in @:)
technology, pure hearts can win.

Yeah well I think even before all the advances in technology, it was pretty
clear that babies and their (animated) teddy bears could never win. Most
science fiction authors, from Tolkien on, don't seem to realize this.

As far as my indication of 'more' X-wing and Y-wings; that does
necessarily
mean 'quantity'. I just want more battle scenes w/ the possibility of
showing other fighter engagements. As long as it doesn't detract from the
trench-run
action. Now if I were re-creating this movie... :)

Date sent:  5-AUG-1996 15:00:09

> As far as my indication of 'more' X-wing and Y-wings; that does

The trench-run is itself a remake. Watch Dambusters, the attack on the
dams is virtually identicle to the attack on the deathstar, even down to the
phrases used by the pilots.

> Date sent: 5-AUG-1996 15:00:09

Joachim Heck said:
> Paul A. Neher writes:@:) On Fri, 2 Aug 96 15:34:26 EDT

Hmmm, I think I disagree with this on several levels, starting with "Tolkien,
science fiction writer". Aside from that, I would disagree with the idea that
Tolkien's characters were either "babies" or "teddy bears". What Tolkien did
say, though, was that you can't judge a person by their physical exterior.
Frodo and Sam in particular were characters who survived and won (although not
without tremendous personal cost) because they had far more character and
determination than anyone thought possible. They were hardly "babies" or
"teddy bears", however,
and they didn't win by engaging in a straight-up fight they were bound
to lose.

On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:07:04 -0400 Joachim Heck - SunSoft
> <jheck@East.Sun.COM> writes:

> Yeah well I think even before all the advances in technology, it was

You people have cold hearts!:P

I personally (asside from their singing and the fireworks at the end) found
them to be refreshing, and their victory a pleasant irony.

> Adam Delafield wrote:

Most of the fighter scenes were choreographed based on old WWII movies. I
believe the largest contributer was "The Battle of Britain".

Mike Miserendino states:
> Most of the fighter scenes were choreographed based on old WWII movies.
 I
> believe the largest contributer was "The Battle of Britain".

Yes Mike I can see where that is true. In fact I beleive there are a great
number of 'real world' parallels that runs through the SW saga. Ranging from
WWII era to even the American Rev. War and other eras of mankind's past.

> Mike Miserendino states:
Ranging from
> WWII era to even the American Rev. War and other eras of mankind's
Perhaps "real world" isn't /quite/ the right term, but rather
"historical myth". One of the things that sets Lucas' films apart, in general
I think, is his ability to infuse his stories with both American and World

myths.

> Mike Miserendino wrote:

Looking back, the movement of the fightres in ANH do have a WWII kind of feel,
not at all like in RoTJ... I always thought that they looked
kinda un-space like, with big long turns and lots of real smooth
movemenet... not at all like the erratic flying style needed to survive in
most Space Combat Sims.

> At 03:04 PM 8/5/96 +0100, Adam Delafield wrote:

While we're on the topic, _Star Wars_ is a virtual steal from Akira
Kurosawa's film _The Hidden Fortress_, a black&white samurai epic. R2D2
and C3PO are Ashigaru peasants. Han Solo and Obi Wan Kenobi are one character
in Kurosawa's version.

Warning, the following is a "spoiler" for _The Hidden Fortress_ (THF).

The film starts with the two peasants arguing in a wasteland after a battle.
They go their separate ways only to meet again in a prison. This is
virtually scene-for-scene Star Wars from the point where the two droids
crash land to the part where they are captured by the jawas. Even Lucas'
horizontal wipes, where the scene "slides" across the screen to show the next
scene, was used much earlier in THF.

The peasants find a "hidden fortress" with a princess and a general and are
recruited to get the princess home. They dress as peasants and sneak into a
town, where enemy soldiers are searching for her. They sneak away from the
soldiers (much as Luke et al sneak INTO Mos Eisley). They are soon followed.
They come across two enemy soldiers who run away. The general follows them on
horse back (reminiscent of Han chasing the stormtroopers in the Death Star
while Luke and Leia run for the Millenium Falcon). He gets one of the soldiers
but not before he's surrounded by an opposing general (Darth Vader; and you
thought it was only a COINCIDENCE that Vader's armour looks like a
samurai's). The Kenobi/Vader fight is much more protracted (and better
done) in THF, and the result is different. The good general wins and is thus
freed by the losing general.

Eventually the princess gets home (but not before an interesting twist; I'll
leave it out here since it doesn't correspond to _Star Wars_ and so
isn't pertinent).

Anyone who's a major fan of SW should check out this film. I still haven't
decided if Star Wars is a well done tribute to Kurosawa or a blatant rip off.
It's probably a bit of both.

> joachim wrote:

"Most science fiction authors, from Tolkien on..."

Hey, Tolkien's great, but he ain't science fiction, he's fantasy.

Heck in a fantasy anything can happen. In SciFi, however, I expect some degree
of realism. You know, "science" ie. facts, not wishful thinking. Fantasy and
Science Fiction are definitely two separate genres. Why do none of the
bookstores understand this? What I absolutely can not stand is when Horror is
mixed in too. (shudder) Why not just throw Westerns in, while you're at it?

Sorry, had to vent. Please don't compare apples to oranges. In other words, I
can live with hobbits beating up on a group of men (a much
smaller and less-well equipped group by the way, so I'm not sure the
reference is valid in the first place), _but_ teddy bears with rocks
defeating armored, blaster-equipped men in a _Science_ Fiction movie
did grate on the nerves just a tad.

Out here.

        -monty

> On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Mike Miserendino wrote:

> Adam Delafield wrote:
I like the way Y-wing rear gunners follow their targets - copied from
Ju-87 Stukas...

> RMMDC@jazz.ucc.uno.edu writes:
@:)
@:) "Most science fiction authors, from Tolkien on..."
@:)
@:) Hey, Tolkien's great, but he ain't science fiction, he's fantasy.

Obviously true. What I probably should have said, and what hopefully I meant
to say was "most fantasy authors (including most science fiction authors)..."
because I see most science fiction as a subset of fantasy. Oh, I know, fantasy
has magic and elves and people getting their heads split open by eighty pound
battle axes. Yes yes science fiction has hyperwarp drive and laser guns and
smartass computers. Fine. But, while some science fiction (let's see... I just
read Zodiac by Neal Stephenson) is obviously firmly grounded in the real
world, some (also just read Diamond Age by same) is indistinguishable from
fantasy. If it looks like a magic duck, and quacks like a magic duck, it's a
magic duck, even if it turns out it's powered by a micro black hole and not by
an enchanted crystal.

@:) Heck in a fantasy anything can happen. In SciFi, however, I @:) expect
some degree of realism. You know, "science" ie. facts, not @:) wishful
thinking.

I agree, but again there's plenty of science fiction stuff with no science in
it at all. Unless you count stuff like gravity, which they usually have in
fantasy novels as well.

@:) Fantasy and Science Fiction are definitely two separate genres. @:) Why do
none of the bookstores understand this? What I absolutely @:) can not stand is
when Horror is mixed in too. (shudder) Why not @:) just throw Westerns in,
while you're at it?

Well, although I basically agree about horror, the fact is that a great deal
of horror is also fantastic literature. Some Lovecraft is no more fantastic
than, say, the Narnia books or Thomas Covenant. On the other hand, horror
books have not only developed a seperate personality from fantasy books, but
they've also got a different reader base. I think that's less true for science
fiction and fantasy. Anyway I read all three (less and less) so for me it's
more or less convenient when they're all on the same shelf.

@:) Please don't compare apples to oranges. In other words, I can @:) live
with hobbits beating up on a group of men (a much smaller and
@:) less-well equipped group by the way, so I'm not sure the reference
@:) is valid in the first place), _but_ teddy bears with rocks
@:) defeating armored, blaster-equipped men in a _Science_ Fiction
@:) movie did grate on the nerves just a tad.

It was more the heroic efforts of Bilbo and Frodo to defeat, in turn, one of
the most terrifying creatures ever invented and a close relative of God (the
evil side of the family) that seemed a little far fetched to me. But honestly
it's not Tolkien that bothers me as much as the copycat authors (what, maybe
50% of what's on the fantasy bookshelves now) who felt compelled to retell the
"boy becomes a man and saves the world along the way" story. I am really sick
of that story and I wish somebody would tell something else. I tend to be
quite appreciative of science fiction and fantasy that deal with more
interesting topics. Similarly, Star Wars was fine (especially since I
was 5 when I first saw it - terrified of Darth Vader by the way), but
Willow was just dumb.

@:) Sorry, had to vent.

  Yeah - me too.  I've become so distressed about the lack of quality
scifi/fantasy (even horror) literature out there that I've started
reading books like "The French Foreign Legion: an Agonizingly Slow Examination
of Their One Hundred and Sixty Year History With No Pictures" and similar
works. Depressing:(

> It was more the heroic efforts of Bilbo and Frodo to defeat, in

Heh, heh, touche there. My personal pet peeve is "boy goes back in time

to King Arthur's court and saves the world despite the lack of any special
skills whatsoever." I have to confess I couldn't even get through the first
fifty pages of the Covenant series because of this (I think it was

the Covenant series...it was a long time ago).

On Mon, 05 Aug 1996 14:54:11 -0600 "Edventures/Ideas Developer - Adam
> Dixon" <adixon@pcsedu.com> writes:

> Looking back, the movement of the fightres in ANH do have a WWII kind

If you want a real cool game that gives that feel of fighter combat, try
finding a copy of Star Warriors by West End Games. It is excellent!

On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:13:41 -0400 Allan Goodall <agoodall@sympatico.ca>
writes:
> Anyone who's a major fan of SW should check out this film. I still

Q1: Where can you get the flick?

Q2: When was it made?

> On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Paul A Neher wrote:

> On Mon, 05 Aug 1996 14:54:11 -0600 "Edventures/Ideas Developer - Adam

> >of feel, not at all like in RoTJ... I always thought that they
I strongly disagree. Sure, it tells you the difference between the different
fighters... but I don't think it's excellent, in the same way
that I don't think Car Wars is an excellent car combat game - a game
turn, depicting a very short period of time, takes a rather long time to

play. Too long, IMO.

Of course, I haven't seen any other fighter games, so I can't point you at
anything better:(

> Oerjan Ohlson writes:
@:)
@:) > If you want a real cool game that gives that feel of fighter @:) >
combat, try finding a copy of Star Warriors by West End @:) > Games. It is
excellent!
@:) >

@:) I strongly disagree. Sure, it tells you the difference between the @:)
different fighters... but I don't think it's excellent, in the @:) same way
that I don't think Car Wars is an excellent car combat
@:) game - a game turn, depicting a very short period of time, takes a
@:) rather long time to play. Too long, IMO.
@:)
@:) Of course, I haven't seen any other fighter games, so I can't @:) point
you at anything better:(

I was, for a time, quite fond of FASA's Interceptor game, part of their
Renegade Legion system. Unfortunately, there were far too many rules loopholes
and as soon as we started trying to add all the nifty stuff like space
stations and patrol boats we started running into completely stupid problems.
The "impenetrable shields" bug and the "immobile space station can't hit a
ship sitting on its center turret" bug made it extremely difficult to come up
with a workable basis for games. Still, I thought the movement system was
pretty good, and I
was completely in love with the weapons, armor and damage techniques -
I am one of those guys who loves Xing out the auxilliary bridge on my SFB SSD,
and I thought the "circuit diagram" damage in Interceptor was great. Good game
for models, although we never had any and I don't know whether any were made.
I wish they would release a bug fix patch so people could actually play that
game.

> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:52:40 +0200 (MET DST)
...
> I strongly disagree. Sure, it tells you the difference between the

> turn, depicting a very short period of time, takes a rather long

But space combat should mostly be over in a matter of a few seconds to a
minute. Fighters are so fragile that any kind of decent hit is one dead
fighter.

> Of course, I haven't seen any other fighter games, so I can't point

Shooting Stars from Yaquinto (long, long out of print) was pretty alright.
Some of the special weaponry was ludicrous, but it did
have some shred of science in it -- get this -- inertia.

----------
From:   Oerjan Ohlson <f92-ooh@nada.kth.se>
Sent:	Tuesday, August 06, 1996 12:52 PM
To:     FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
Subject:	Re: Star Wars Models ...

> On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Paul A Neher wrote:

> On Mon, 05 Aug 1996 14:54:11 -0600 "Edventures/Ideas Developer - Adam

> >of feel, not at all like in RoTJ... I always thought that they
I strongly disagree. Sure, it tells you the difference between the different
fighters... but I don't think it's excellent, in the same way
that I don't think Car Wars is an excellent car combat game - a game
turn, depicting a very short period of time, takes a rather long time to

play. Too long, IMO.

Of course, I haven't seen any other fighter games, so I can't point you at
anything better:(

Joachim Heck - SunSoft:
> Yeah - me too. I've become so distressed about the lack of quality

You, too?

I picked up a book about the French Resistance in WWII. You'd
_think_ that would be interesting, with lots of interesting plots,
close-escapes, and horrible betrayals.

Nope. Dry as a bone. <shudder>

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:52:40 +0200 (MET DST) Oerjan Ohlson
> <f92-ooh@nada.kth.se> writes:

> Of course, I haven't seen any other fighter games, so I can't point

> On Tue, 6 Aug 96 14:15:09 CDT jjm@zycor.lgc.com (johnjmedway) writes:

> But space combat should mostly be over in a matter of a few seconds

That is of course assuming that fighters are built inferior to the weapons
systems delivered. This is like saying ariel fighter combat should be the same
way. But in all of the ariel wars to date, it hasn't been "bang! you're dead!"
Defensive systems are made with the offensive systems in mind. Admittedly,
against the rest of the fleet, fighters go poof real fast, but fighter vs.
fighter you would think there would be some survivability.

On Tue, 06 Aug 96 17:41:39 -0500 Timothy Klaus <tklaus@midusa.net>
writes:

> Try Renegade Legions: Interceptor. The game play is very good and the

Never tried that one... I didn't even know RL:I was still available

> Paul A. Neher writes:
@:)
@:) On Tue, 6 Aug 96 14:15:09 CDT jjm@zycor.lgc.com (johnjmedway) writes:
@:)
@:)... But in all of the ariel wars to date, it hasn't been "bang!
@:) you're dead!" ...

It was with the Japanese (after we learned how to fly our planes anyway).

Actually, I think aerial wars are getting more and more Bang! you're
dead - at least that's what the Pentagon hopes, since they've been
working on machines to Bang! your plane before your radar even notices that
you're in a battle. Of course, if the missile misses... well let's just hope
they don't shut down the Top Gun school after all.

> [quoted text omitted]
Oerjan Ohlson said:
> >Of course, I haven't seen any other fighter games, so I can't point

Thinking about this got me thinking about other individual-ship,
tactical, space combat games. Here is the list of that I can think of off the
top of my head:

Name Publisher Affiliation Note
Slag!            BTRC           -               cost is $8
Brill. Lances GDW TNE Battle Rider GDW TNE Mayday GDW CT Triplanetary system
Triplanetary     GDW            -               GREAT! Now owned by SJG
Interceptor FASA Renegade Legion small ships Leviathan FASA Renegade Legion
big ships
Slag!            BTRC           -
Voidstriker      Nightshift     -               new module coming out
(?)
AeroTech FASA BattleTech superceded by BattleSpace BattleSpace FASA BattleTech
Full Thrust Ground Zero GZG universe minis
Star Command     ??             -               very small publisher
Delta Vee SPI Universe RPG difficult to play Star Strike ICE SpaceMaster
Silent Death ICE SpaceMaster
Shooting Stars   Yaquinto       -
Star Warriors WEG Star Wars
Deep Space Nav.  Tac. Templates -
BS Galactica     FASA           -               included Galactica &
basestar
Last Starfighter FASA           -               used BS Galactica system
Last SF micros   FASA           -
Attack Force     T$R            -
Alien Space      Zocchi         -
SF Battle Manual Zocchi         -               Alien Space system
SF Battles       TFG            -               not even at gunpoint
SF Tac. Com. Sim.FASA Star Trek a lot of fun Space Opera FGU Space Opera RPG
ship combat rules Company War Mayfair CJ Cherryh strategic OK, tactical bad
Star Cruiser GDW 2300ad convert to Full Thrust???

This list is by no means complete.

Some of these designs are more elegant than others. For example (IIRC), most
of the FASA games use a chart to determine how many thrust points you need to
change heading at a particular speed (yuck!), while Star Strike states that
since there is no friction in space, a ship which is not using thrust will
move _half_ the distance it moved last turn (double yuck!).

Paul Neher said:
> I have played Silent Death (about the only other fighter game on

Sometimes I find myself in the mood for this, and sometimes I don't. Full
Thrust does a reasonable job of adding vector-type effects without a lot
of rules overhead, but sometimes you just need vectors. Triplanetary does this
well, albeit at a very large scale (the entire solar systems from Sol to

Jupiter).  Mayday is a better choice for vector-based fighter combat.

> On Tue, 6 Aug 96 14:15:09 CDT jjm@zycor.lgc.com (johnjmedway) writes:

> >But space combat should mostly be over in a matter of a few seconds

> Paul Neher writes:

Uh, no.  While some modern airplanes can take some damage (the A-10
comes to mind), in most cases "a decent hit" will bring one down. The key has
been (and will continue to be) to avoid getting hit.

> Admittedly, against the rest of the fleet, fighters go poof real fast,

> but fighter vs. fighter you would think there would be some

Actually, I wouldn't expect that at all -- if the fighter weapons are
such that they can damage ships 10^4 their size, I fully expect
fighter-on-fighter
combat would be relatively bloody.

> On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Timothy Klaus wrote:

> Try Renegade Legions: Intercepto r. The game play is very good and the

rules are well written. The one thing is that you get the feel of a fighter
ace as you play. And it works well with Star Wars fighter combat.
> Chrunchy Frog/ Night Shift Games now has the rights to all (past and

Well - I haven't tried Interceptor, because I own Leviathan and didn't
like those game mechanics too well. Of course, I'm picky - that's a
natural consequence of playing FT, I'm afraid...:)

> On Wed, 7 Aug 1996, Paul A Neher wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:52:40 +0200 (MET DST) Oerjan Ohlson

Hm. I must have been brain dead when I wrote the above lines. After all,

I own both Silent Death/Metal Express and Silent Death/TNM. SD is pretty

good, playing fast and having a fair amount of detail. I've converted all of
the models to capital ships for use in FT, though.

Of course, sitting in front of a computer screen all night and working during
the days tend to have some negative effects on your memory:(

> I have played Silent Death (about the only other fighter game on the
I can imagine that...

However, the fact that you have to determine all those jinks, loops, rolls etc
for your ships before you can move... sort of put me off. For
me, fighter combat shouldn't be about planning beforehand - that's for
the big units! (Well, it was a few years since I played Star Fighters. It
probably shows, but the above is my impression of it.)

Regards,

----------
From:	starwarsnut@juno.com (Paul A Neher)
Sent:	Wednesday, August 07, 1996 8:42 AM
To:     FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
Subject:	Re: Star Wars Models ...

On Tue, 06 Aug 96 17:41:39 -0500 Timothy Klaus <tklaus@midusa.net>
writes:

> Try Renegade Legions: Interceptor. The game play is very good and the

Never tried that one... I didn't even know RL:I was still available

On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:25:29 -0400 Joachim Heck - SunSoft
> <jheck@East.Sun.COM> writes:

> It was with the Japanese (after we learned how to fly our planes

Actually, they could take a few hits before they went bang...

> Actually, I think aerial wars are getting more and more Bang! you're

I admit there are some weapons and missiles... but look at an A10... it
can lose 75% of one wing and one engine/rudder and still fly! If the
missiles are juked, then the survivability factor goes way up as an F15 can
take NUMEROUR 20mm shell hits before a bank

----------
From:	Timothy Klaus <tklaus>
Sent:	Wednesday, August 07, 1996 5:03 PM
To:     FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk; starwarsnut@juno.com (Paul A Neher)
Subject:	RE: Star Wars Models ...

> Paul A. Neher writes:
@:)
@:) On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:25:29 -0400 Joachim Heck - SunSoft
> @:) <jheck@East.Sun.COM> writes:
@:)
@:) I admit there are some weapons and missiles... but look at an A10
@:) ... it can lose 75% of one wing and one engine/rudder and still
@:) fly! If the missiles are juked, then the survivability factor goes @:) way
up as an F15 can take NUMEROUR 20mm shell hits before a bank

So the question that comes to mind is: how many hits can the Full Thrust
fighters take? It seems that they have to get pretty close to each other to
attack, and they don't have any ammunition limits, so maybe they're carrying
guns or lasers of some kind? Perhaps a new
interceptor type would be interesting - one that could attack another
fighter group at 6", maybe, but at close range was easy to kill (F14's can't
steer real good, for example)? Might be interesting.

It might also be interesting, but probably prohibitively time consuming, to
use a system like Interceptor or something to actually
do the fighter combat close-up and mano a mano as it were.  Actually,
since my main beef with Interceptor was the ship design rules, which one
wouldn't have to use for this kind of thing, I bet that would work quite well.

> On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, Paul A Neher wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:22:58 +0200 (MET DST) Oerjan Ohlson
The feel is very much different. In capital ship combat, the ships move slowly
(well, all things are relative), and the various captains have
time to plan their manouvres. Fighter pilots have to react _NOW_ or else

they're dead. What made Star Fighter take so long to play was that
everyone wanted to optimize their manouvers - ie, they planned ahead,
far ahead. That's all very fine when you're preparing to attack a capital
unit, but you can't stop each five seconds in the middle of a dogfight to
consider your next move for five minutes...

> >

I hate to mention a game from GW!!!!!. But I liked the way space hulk (version
1). LImited the time you had for each move. This got less when officers and
the serg's where killed.

You could do the same in fighter combat, with better pilots getting
longer etc. If the next move/order is not ready in the time limit the
last could be repeated or the fighter flies straight ahead.

On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:22:58 +0200 (MET DST) Oerjan Ohlson
> <f92-ooh@nada.kth.se> writes:

> However, the fact that you have to determine all those jinks, loops,

But in a fiughter combat game, they ARE teh big units. It's no different than
writing orders in FT, or in any other miniatures game. It's determining what
you're doing for the turn.

On Thu, 8 Aug 1996 17:52:26 +0200 (MET DST) Oerjan Ohlson
> <f92-ooh@nada.kth.se> writes:

> The feel is very much different. In capital ship combat, the ships

> everyone wanted to optimize their manouvers - ie, they planned ahead,

Most of the experienced players I know actually have written orders for the
next turn as soon as they see the movement for this turn. To me, it's really
no different as it is all a scaler thing anyhow. Your reaction time is
different, but a turn time is different. It's VERY difficult to do all the
fancy manuvers, and the system is designed
around the difficulty/pilot skill roll for pushing the craft too far.
It's easy to do the forward roll, but try that in concert with a roll, two
snap fires a jink and a side slip... now that's tricky. And that is
what the turn plot represents as well as pre-determining a fighter's
actions for a turn.

My opinion anyway.

> On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, Darren Douglas wrote:

> I hate to mention a game from GW !!!!!. But I liked the way
IIRC, Space Hulk allowed you to do one action at a time until you ran out of
actions; while in (still IIRC; I will stand corrected if not:) Star Fighter
made you decide what actions your pilot would try during the entire move, add
them together, dice to see if he managed any of them,
and _then_ move. (Was that right, Paul?)

Oh damn... I'll have to re-read Star Fighter again...

On Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:52:00 +0200 (MET DST) Oerjan Ohlson
> <f92-ooh@nada.kth.se> writes:
<s; while in (still IIRC; I will stand corrected if not:) Star Fighter made
you decide <what actions your pilot would try during the entire move, add them
together, dice <to see if he managed any of them, and
_then_ move. (Was that right, Paul?)

Essentially. In Star Warriors, each pilot descides what actions he/she
wishes to perform in a round of combat. Each action has a difficulty number.
All the action's values are added together giving a difficulty number. The
pilot then rolls a Piloting Skill Roll. If he beats the target, he pulls off
all his maneuvers as planned, in any order he wishes as long as all actions
are performed. Basically like writing dowen ship movement orders in FT. If the
pilot FAILS this test, the plotted actions are STILL performed, but for every
5 points (or portions thereof), the pilot must roll once on the HAZARDS table
to simulate loss of controll, excessive torque on the fighter, systems over
taxation, etc. Then both sides alternate moving and firing, one ship at a
time.

> SF Battles TFG - not even at gunpoint

  Interested in trying TNG w/ starship construction with this one?  Just
curious, because a friend and I have been, um... rewriting this game to make
it more ST canonical.
  If you _really_ want more details, E-Mail me.  Hopefully, by the
release of
_First Contact_, my co-author and I will have web pages.

  BTW- this has _nothing_ to do with FASA's TNG books...

  -Mike Wuerthele <= (rambling, been up since thursday)