The two issues which had been giving me a bit of trouble were handling the gain and loss of energy during out of plane maneuvers (anything that doesn't involve level flight). After a bit of thought and due to little hard information on some of the key statistics I have decided to simply divide aircraft up based upon airframe types and allocate a general rating for energy gain and loss in climbs and dives. I'm going to ignore the impact of speed on turn arcs as the game is intended to be quick play. I have decided that the relevant airframe classes are going to be
- V strutters (mainly Albatrii and Nieuports) - these have a lower maximum velocity as the wings tend to fall off in high speed dives
- Biplane single seat scouts
- Triplane single seat scouts
- Two seaters
- Pushers
- Multi-engined
I have arbitrarily assigned energy factors across each of these classes based upon an assumed drag factor of each design and rotary engines are penalised in dives because of the risk of overspeeding the engine and blowing out cylinders.
I have created special 'moves' for the commonest combat maneuvers such as Immelman turns (both wingover and hammerhead type), barrel rolls and yo-yos. These cost a number of move points and cost energy and have a movement 'footprint' on the table. I need to do some playtesting next to see if these give a decent feel without adding to much rule overhead.
Hi Elenderil, have you assigned a category for the earlier non biplane scouts like the Fokker eindecker, Taube or Morane Bullet? Maybe they should be as fragile as the V strutters?
ReplyDeleteI should have added that as the maximum safe airspeed isn't known for most types I have created a value above which structural damage may occur. As airspeed is made up of power input (throttle setting) and energy held in the air frame the gain of energy can be partly off set by throttling back. However for fragile types setting a low max safe speed will try to mirror the problems of those types. If an aircraft exceeds its maximun safe speed then there is a risk of structural failure, which is a chart I already have as part of the combat results.
ReplyDelete