Project log - Space:1889 Aerial Combat

[Fortescue-Smythe]

I am finally tackling a project that has been knocking about at the back of my mind for years:
a game for combat between Martian Cloudships and colonial Aerial Gunboats in the skies of the Red Planet.

Two things need to be sorted out: models and rules.

For models, thanks to help from this community, I have linked up with YPU, resident of this forum. He will design 3d-models of the hulls that I can print and then embellish with details, rigging, ordnance et cetera. I already have the test model for the British 'Aphid' class gunboat (linking images of the model below). As soon as I have obtained a test print to check scale, YPU will receive the commission to 3d-model 8 more hulls. Scale is 1/300th(ish).
Ships will be modelled on home-made flight stands involving telescopic pointers, neodyme magnets and a genereous helping of stuff from the plumbing section of my local DIY store. So models will be shown at different altitudes, and they can yaw (obviously), but will not roll or pitch.

For rules, well, I will write my own. Again.  
I intend to steal a lot from games like, for example, Star Wars:X-Wing, where I like the way movement needs to be planned in advance, and is handled by means of templates. Rules will be geared towards each player commanding one to three ships, so they will simulate individual ship and small squadron actions, rather than grand fleets. The idea is to go for relatively coarse-grained mechanics that allow fast play rather than highly detailed simulation. Ideally all book-keeping should be doable with a marker on a ship card no larger than A4.

I will chronicle the progress of this endeavour here, and would gladly read any feedback. Next steps are:
- test print the 'Aphid', then commission the 3d-models
- draft a dummy ship card

And now for the eye-candy: HMS 'Aphid' (larger images on my under-used blog: http://daddelkram.blogspot.de/)

[The_Beast]

At your planned granularity, will you have altitude? wind? boarding?

Doug

[Fortescue-Smythe]

That's yeerrrs, yes, and yarrh.

Altitude: yerrs, but I haven't reached a final decision as to how exactly, yet. I have telescope stands which consist of 4 sections, if memory serves. I'll post a few photos tomorrow. So I could have...

... sliding absolute altitude: 1 inch equals X feet actual altitude. Right now, that seems mechanically fiddly (have to measure the actual altitude of the model and adjust it very finely), and difficult to track, rules-wise.

... stepped absolute altitude: 1 telescopic section equals X hundred feet actual altitude. That one seems practicable, but I think it might be too limiting as far as the range of altitudes I can model is concerned.

... stepped relative altitude: 1 section difference equals "higher than", two sections difference equals "a lot higher than", 3 sections difference equals "way too high to interact". My current favourite. So each ship's telescopic stand extension would represent where it is relative to a fictional "ecliptic" rather than actual altitude. A paper record of the actual altitude of the ecliptic would need to be kept to make sure it has afloor and ceiling.

... sliding relative altitude: 1 inch difference equals X feet difference. A mere academic permutation I am not really considering.

Wind: yes, of course, me being an armchair yachtsman of some repute.

Boarding: yarrh. In an abtract way, not modelled with crew figures.

[The_Beast]

Roger!

You did see Piljie's rules for 28mm flyers, right? Might give some nudges if you wish. Thread with basic rules

I imagine you're familiar with Aeronef, Imperial Skies, and Space 1889's Ironclads and Ether Flyers. If one steals, it should always be from the best. 

I keep toying with various Full Thrust variants.

Doug

[Fortescue-Smythe]

Thanks for the pointers. I have Imperial Skies and Cloudships&Gunboats (though I will have to read them again, actually).
Didn't know about Piljie's work, thanks.

[The_Beast]

The ships used by Imperial Skies, from Brigade Models, were originally used with Aeronef, and BM still has Aeronef stats available on the site. It has some parts that are similar to Full Thrust in damage and ship design. The movement is simpler, to me than most of the others.

I'll mention Leviathans, which, like most mentioned, are actually into, if not full, Edwardian, but 'flying battleships' all have connections.

I find the models enchanting, but the rules a bit steep a learning curve for the simple likes of me.

Doug

Edit: By the way, I've been trying to find the closer-than-Aeronef Full Thrust variants, but not finding links. One was called 'Full Nef', and I'm finding some of the paperwork, but not enough to fly with. Mind, I think FT's 'cinematic' is pretty close as is.

[Pijlie]

The writers of GASLIGHT have also written an aeronef ruleset for small scales. AFAIK there are no altitude rules.

[The_Beast]

Quite right, ol' bean, as did 'When the Navy Walked.'

Both depend on the main rules for the ship rules, so familiarity is most handy there.

I'll see if I can cogitate up any others.

And, before anyone else pops up, 'my, how I do go on...'

Doug

[Old-N-Busted]

The bases used in GW,s  aeronautica could be of use to you pricey but in scale and have both altitude and speed dials built in.

[Fortescue-Smythe]

Are those still available somewhere?

[The_Beast]

I've looked at the usual places, but am finding none.

Now, I know, in the US, Litko and CorSec do bases with > 1 dials for just such things.

Not sure about Germany in particular and Europe in general.

Doug

[Old-N-Busted]

Are those still available somewhere?

You could ask on the wanted board here, i have six unused ones if you would like them PM me ANDY.

[Fortescue-Smythe]

On second thought, I think I will stick with my telescopic stands. I like the visual referent I get from them. Here's an example:

[Pijlie]

I completely agree that real 3D gameplay is the way to go. It looks better and plays better. No need to remember or check what you can see at first glance.

[The_Beast]

And, if you make interactions based on altitude 'bands', they can be how many 'sections' are showing.

Doug