>still no fighter plane dogfight teegee in the year of our lord 2025

>>95973974 (OP)
I wanted to post some, but since you're such a prancing la-la homo man about it, I've reconsidered. Get fucked, I wish you a boring and planegameless life.

I bet they'll do a Sky Team expansion for fighter ops. Pilot and wizzo?

>>95973974 (OP)
>He doesn't know about Aerospace rules in Battletech

>>95973974 (OP)
I was just telling one of my buddies that this thread shows up like every other month

>>95974002
Liar. You have nothing.

>>95974373
As the owner of an Aerotech 2 box set, I can tell you that it doesn't really scratch the itch. Crimson Skies (either the original or the click version) was a little better, but still didn't get the fun of jets across too well.

X-Wing Miniatures bro

>>95973974 (OP)
There are a lot of air combat tabletop games...

Missile Threat
AirWar: C21
CY6 Jet Age
Harpoon
Birds of Prey

>>95973974 (OP)
*cough cough*

>>95975145
Shill somewhere else, faggot.

>>95975257
>OP Complains there's no dogfighting teegee
>someone posts a dogfighting teegee
>'shill somewhere else'
schizo moment?

i was playing this in the 90s

>>95973974 (OP)
https://start-warhammer.com/aeronautica-imperialis/

>>95973974 (OP)
>11 posts in
>no one mentions crimson skies
You should all be embarrassed

>>95975647
you oughta re-read >>95974405

>>95975358
he's importing a /v/ cliche; if a poster over there sees anything that isn't a AAA flavor of the month game being posted, their pavlovian response is to assume it's the work of stealthy jewish ninjas

>>95974552
and they all suck because they try being way too realistic, battletech air feels better, mostly because total warfare makes ground interaction with air feel meaningful

>>95973974 (OP)
there are dozens albeight

My problem with existing plane wargames outside of boardgames is they're dialed too far into the simulationist side of things. That would be okay in a submarine/battleship game because those things are all about methodical strategic combat but the essence of a dogfight aren't really captured by even the most arcadey of games posted ITT

>>95976006
AAA game threads are also made by shills thoughbeit.

>>95976461
it doesnt matter as much if they call those shill threads because there's always 10 threads about the fotm on the board (20 if its nintendo) THOUGH

>>95973974 (OP)
I don't think we ever found out what system the greatest game report on /tg/ was played in.

>>95976398
none of the games posted ITT are simulationist except for harpoon, and that's actually a naval game that has aircraft.
SPI's air war is simulationist

>>95974373
Most battletech players don't. Much to my annoyance

>>95977059
Most battletech players cannot do basic math. If only you knew how often i see people freeze when doing small multiplication and addition

>>95976461
>Obvious AAA marketer thread #49563891
Goes on until bumplimit
>Thread about an indie game only 3,5 people ever heard of
"REEEEEEEE SHILL BUY AN AD BUY AN AD BUY AN AD"
Why are they like this. /tg/ is like this too, but not to an extent, still worrying

>>95976383
This looks very cool, what game is this?
Whoever thought of using those pipe-cleaning things for missiles is a fucking genius.

>>95978201
that's a match of missile threat. Saw pipe-cleaners used as missiles online once and yes it's a great way to add more flavor to the game in an incredibly easy and low cost way

>>95976669
Link to the story?

>>95978986
Badass fleet, anon. And thanks for the info!

There was an old Avalon Hill hex & chit boardgame called Flight Leader which I recall being quite entertaining. For obvious reasons it only went up to late 80s/early 90s for its definition of 'modern' but it wouldn't be being the wit of man to hack something together if you needed to, and I'm sure it'll be 'stored' somewhere.

>>95973974 (OP)
Bro has never heard of Flying Circus.

>>95976669
The story was cool for the players, but it got autistic. Once the game moved to the zetabords it just...lost altitude.

https://2d4chan.org/wiki/Mercenaries_and_planes

I've been working on a Area 88 inspired RPG, but it's still in the "playtest with friends" stage.

best WW1 aircraft game I've played hands down. Too bad it's also very proprietary

>>95980677
>>95983348
Based flying deathtrap nonsense enjoyers. I'm holding my breath for that sci fi dogfighting game osprey offhandedly mentioned a while back converting to jets easily enough.

>>95985029
it's fucked up that the pilots flying clown-colored aircraft had a average life expectancy measured in minutes in the air

>>95973974 (OP)
Two words: Missile threat.
It even has a Mercenary module to play Area 88/Ace Combat-style campaigns

>>95985943
Hell yeah anon

>>95977059
To the point where they confuse Thrust with ground map scale MP. I've seen it happen on a YT video about the Shilone.

(the most hilarious under-evaluation of performance there is!)

>>95976669
I mean, I know what it is, since I ran it.

>>95991026
Where are the rules? You definitely had at least some house rules added onto... Air War C21, if I recall

>>95973974 (OP)
I wanted to make a generic pulp dogfight wargame, using Gaslands movement templates to represent the doghouse plot in a simple way (funnily, a way to circle back to the origins because the Gasland templates were inspired by X-Wing).
The idea was to allow players to field alls sorts of ridiculous air model kitbash, Crimson Sky style, as well as run all sorts of fun pulp encounters like: zepplin vs pterodactyls, biplanes vs king kong, or air force vs flying sauces.
Or be useable as a fun, simple, system for battlestarwarsgalactica 5-style space combat.
It's on my back burner at the moment, but if there's an interest for it on /tg/ I would be happy to put it on top of the pile.

Simple, and not really dogfight focused, but fun.

>>95991788
Fox Two Reheat

>>95990436
That's pretty bad, did they also just treat thrust like a move stat and not use it to adjust velocity?

What if I want LANCER but instead of mechs it's fighter jets, and a system that also supported on the ground gameplay for your badass pilots?

>>95995025
I am not sure, as it was one of those "unit showcase" videos where they just talk about a single 'Mech/vehicle/fighter, and there wasn't much time spent on its capabilities. It just stuck out as a "you really don't know, do you?" moment.

>>95977334
the sort of people who seek to become an internet mod don't act according to any forms of integrity, it only takes a little ego stroking to get them to make exceptions for games, smarter holdouts dont have to be bribed that much or show financial details like businessmen, politicians and doctors. lobbyist skills are carried over into every industry, and they dont have to use the complicated tactics, there is no law against directly bribing internet mods and organising bribable ones to get the site holder to let go of ones that dont take it is childsplay.

Any recommendations for minis? I want a wide selection of jets.
>>95978986
What brand minis are these?

>>95997429
Oddzial Osmy and tumbling dice are the best at 1:600

>What brand minis are these?
they're all 3d printed from various sculptors

>>95976669
I always got the impression that they used Air Superiority as the main system and Phoenix Command for ground excursions. Tbh the claim to actually play Phoenix Command seems like a bit fantastical.

>>95997429
>Any recommendations for minis?
I was under the impression that this was the perfect occasion to get one of these airplane kits.
The smaller scale ones are reasonably-ish priced (these were 12€ a piece).
It's funny, I had just bought these and had them on my desk when I found this thread

>>95992542
continuing on this a bit.
I know jack shit about airplanes, let along about dogfight. I have a few questions for airplane buff anons out there:
>Question 1: should the airplanes be able to accelerate, or is it assumed that fighters more or less have an optimal dogfighting speed? (which will be different from one model of fighter to another, obviously)
I mean accelerate/decelerate over multiple rounds (like in Gaslands) rather than decelerate for a short time when performing a maneuver, for example
>Question 2: How should I factor in altitude, if at all?
In Warlord WWII dogfight game, IIRC altitude is something you can spend when performing maneuvers, and increase in moments of respite. So there's three possible game dynamics that could be gotten out of this:
>Option 1: some maneuvers have a cost in altitude, you can spend additional altitude points for bonuses. Altitude is regained if you can fly in a straight line/wide turn for a round
>Option 2: altitude is just something that varies in some circumstances, after a certain type of movement, but it can either increase or decrease. It just influences your ability to be shot at, or not, depending if the opponent is at your altitude
>Option 3: altitude was just a factor for dogfights during WWII, if you want to be generic you may as well drop it because it is completely irrelevant nowadays
>Question 3: Gees. Would it be fair to use it as yet another token you can get in exchange for the ability to perform some maneuvers/ get bonus to some moves?
If you accumulate too many, your pilote blank out. You can decrease it when nothing happens. Something like that?
>Question 4: Pilot skills. Where do they factor in?
What makes a better pilot? Can he take more Gs? Have a higher bonus for performing maneuvers? Have some maneuvers that only they can perform?

>>95998229
only gigaboomers play air games with 1/72 scale scale model kits (they only had airfix when they started with the hobby in 1973)

This thread made me feel autistic enough to start haphazardly tracing over orthographic projections of aircraft to probably use for running some shit online sometime. Probably see about letting someone toss them up on the trove when I have a respectable amount too.

>>95997429
I've been happy with Pico Armor

>>95998344
>Accelerating
Most planes tend to have an ideal cornering speed, but acceleration and raw speed can be important for running away or re-engaging.

>Question 2: How should I factor in altitude, if at all?
Altitude is very important, especially if you have AAA. And bombing stuff on the ground/stopping the other guy makes for more interesting objective play. I actually cut out the turning aspect in my personal game, taking a side-scrolling perspective to focus on altitude and range and abstracting the actual dogfighting maneuvers.

It's also pretty relevant for jets in terms of ground clutter for before the mid-late 70s, and the radar horizon for long range engagements.

>pulling gees
The way I did in my game is that WVR dogfight actions drain your speed, and the faster plane has an advantage. This is my abstraction, and it might not make sense for you. The idea is that dogfights can be very lethal, but if you don't hurry up, you'll be slow and vulnerable to getting bounced by other planes that kept their speed up out of the furball. There are also interesting things with Gees, like many 50s and 60s requiring the plane to be pulling relatively few gees for the missile to work correctly - this was one of the problems with the MiG-23; it's ability to pull gees was modest but it's missiles required very gentle maneuvers.

>What makes a better pilot? Can he take more Gs? Have a higher bonus for performing maneuvers? Have some maneuvers that only they can perform?
I gave pilots a few skills that can differentiate them. Awareness (for radar use, joining existing dogfights, and getting to dodge long-range missiles), Piloting (mostly for keeping a damaged plane in the air), Dogfighting (half raw piloting skill, half understanding the best way to use their aircraft's characteristics against their enemy's characteristics), and Shooting.

With that said, my personal system leans quite abstract and ymmv

>>95996783
Funny how much overlap there is between Lancer players and jet fighter/Ace Combat fans. Every game I've been in used the soundtrack or ported over the superweapons or borrowed callsigns.

Sadly, I don't think that plane game exists yet. Several of my buddies have spitballed concepts for it over drinks, but we never got beyond the "should missiles be on the table, or abstracted?" arguments

>>95992542
>>95998344

>Question 1
There's multiple systems like you said. Think about how many levels of "speed" you want in your game or if you basically have 2 speeds, combat vs non-combat. Some fightercraft/doctrine are designed to quickly intercept their target, cause as much damage as possible, and then get out. They don't care about getting into a dogfight. This could be an interesting play style where players are trying to make the other player fight on their terms. Also depending on how you design maneuvering, speed could factor into how tight or wide your turns are. Star Wars X-wing and Armada does this.
Example: Player 1's Interceptors focus on taking out bombers, ignoring their escorts, and then get out. Meanwhile Player 2 focuses on dispersing their forces, incentivizing player 1 to stick around longer if they want to get kills, and then catching the less maneuverable craft in a dogfight.

>Question 2
How would you meaningfully differentiate speed & altitude? Why would I choose to dive/climb vs increasing my speed to get out of range and vice versa? You can do both, you can pick one, whatever. So long as you can design it to have a meaningful difference that impacts the gameplay.
Verticality is hard to pull off on the tabletop. Are you planning to have players measure from model to model instead of a static location? If I take you at your word that this is meant to be a "dogfight" game, then presumably we need to shrink things down and assume that we are all in dogfighting range.
Altitude is also a factor in modern day. The thinner atmosphere in high altitudes means less air friction for your missiles to "swim through" meaning that they have greater range than if fired at sea level. This also applies to planes as you use less fuel and energy wise it's easier to dive than to climb. But honestly that's too complicated for a board game to put too much detail in outside of a vague +1 modifier or perhaps an extra dice. I'm just telling you how it works IRL.

>>96003653
cont

>Question 3
I can see a mechanic where a player elects to take some form of dmg/penalty in order to achieve a tighter turn. As long as you balance it properly I think the mechanic is solid.

>Question 4
All of these sound fine. You can even elect something simple as a +1/-1 modifier to whatever stat you want. Or extra dice. You can even separate this from airframe to pilot. Since you want to use kitbashing, maybe a rickety plane suffers penalties to maneuvers. Maybe the red ones go faster. Up to you.

>>96003653
>if you basically have 2 speeds, combat vs non-combat
Well, I can straight away answer that:
It's a dogfighting game, therefore everything happening outside of that is out of the equation. Not just all of the part where jets are using afterburners to reach the position, but even the exchange of missile which presumably happened before the jets got in dogfighting range.
I'm aware that, for modern jets, this is the equivalent of designing a martial art game for hand to hand combat between soldiers set in a modern war. But, eh.
I'm taking good notes of your answers
>>96003564
Thank you both for the detailed answer. This kinda confirms the direction I was going for.

They've had them for awhile. I used to play this as a kid.

>>96005198
Have you considered sticking with Korean War or Vietnam period? That gets you your knife fights, given the problems of SARH missiles against fighters in the era?

>>95973974 (OP)
Dogfights are hard to simulate accurately.

>>95985943
I need to check that out. I like Air War C21 but I have only tested the rules solo so far

>>96006158
that's why you should play it more 'fast & loose' than with minutia. No time for talking when every instrument in your cockpit rings that you've been target locked.

>>95974552
I can hear it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4xM52-g9Pg