Re: [FT] Full Thrust-based fighter rules?

I'd go with the COA games, they're  very playable - more mechanics-heavy
than
FT, but still fun to play. If you had people "into" air combat, then
they're
beer-and-pretzels games, if not they're an advanced game.

Offhand you'll want to look at the COA games for things like scale, how
to
handle energy and what parameters an accurate air combat game needs.
Then pare
down, and use FT mechanics wherever possible.

On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, devans@uneb.edu wrote:

>
> This was always a 'back burner' project, intriguing, but not much done
> with...
>
> I'm assuming you're talking cinematic.
>
> Natch, the fact that you have restrictions on extremes of movement,
i.e.,
> too slow, you stall and drop, too fast, you tear wings off, or, more
> likely, your engine can't push through the air hard enough., means you
> don't get into those areas where cinematic's rules breakdown from
'real'
> physics the worst.
>
> I thought about starting with old SPI, such as Spitfire and
Foxbat/Phantom,
> or the Clash of Arms games for an idea of mechanics, then reverse
engineer
> to FT's simplicity.
>
> Have you decided if you're staying in one plane(geometric) or trying
to put
> altitude in? Fuel? Period?
>
> The_Beast
>