Forum Message
| City: | Fort Wayne  | | Personal Data: | Male, | | Membership | 19years 197days ago. | | Last Login | 14years 185days ago. | | Last Move | 16years 234days ago. | HeadMMoid is currently  | Send a mail to HeadMMoid |
| Message header | Area/Game: | Blue Max | | Topic: | Rules | | Subject: | Re: Movement | | Posted by: | HeadMMoid  - 18years 120days ago. |
|
|
| Message text parker wrote:
HeadMMoid wrote: Zarby wrote: Ashtar wrote: Crash and Burn wrote: crashalot wrote: I have a question about movement. It has been a long time since I have played the table top version, but I'm pretty sure that you couldn't complete opposite moves in back to back turns. What I mean by that is if you make a left turn, you couldn't follow that up with a right turn, you had to move through a straight turn first.
I have seen a couple matches here where that does not seem to be the case. Have the rules changed in the last couple years, or was that just a house rule we were using. I checked with some of the people I used to play with, and they confirmed my recollection.
I quickly looked through the rules posted here and I didn't see anything about that.
Thanks
crashalot In the very first edition there were no restrictions if memory serves me right (lately it has not), but in later editions of Blue Max stability was introduced. Planes were either A, B, or C stability. A and B could not fly left then right, but C could do this. Not sure if they will add this into the game. If they do, they need to have some visual representation of left and right banking of a plane to make it easier. C&B Yeah, apparently this was tested quite succesfully by Phill Hall, so I would like to see this rule included. Incidentally it's the only way to make the Camel at least comparable with the Triplane (which in reality was replaced by the Camel). With actual rules the triplane is better  Retro post. What was being discussed 1 year ago. Contrary to what is stated above, the requirement for a straight maneuver between turning maneuvers is not present in the rules for either the 2nd Edition (Blue Box) or 3rd (Miniatures Rules). Also, the problem with the Camel in the game is that the maneuver schedule provided for it is closer to what one might expect for a Sopwith Pup than for a Camel. Had the Camel possessed the performance indicated for it by its maneuver schedule, it would never have been accepted as a combat aircraft. In the rule books. http://www.youplay.it/play/bm_GameRulesFull.aspAnd also BM creator's comment on Plane character. http://www.youplay.it/play/forum_showmessage.asp?msgid=26016Regards P>
Your post seems quite cryptic, so I am trying to respond to what I think you meant.
The suggested rule is not in any of the "rule books" for Blue Max. The link points to the rules posted on this site. Those rules, as for the Blue Box rules from which they are derived, make no reference to any requirement to fly straight between turns in opposite directions.
I am assuming that the second link is with regard to my comments about the Sopwith Camel. The referenced post merely notes that with regard to the Camel, there were "considerable stories describing their flight capabilities". It describes nothing about why the Camel is so inadequate within the game.
Also, going further into the second link's post, there should be no surprise at the "un-maneuverable" nature of the S.E.5a, as speed was the intent of the design. While Blue Max is a game of dogfights, the true killing in the skies over Europe was done outside of dogfights. Although it was not to be understood until well after the war, it was speed, not extreme maneuverability, which was most important in producing kills, at least away from dogfights. In function, the S.E.5a was far more like aircraft designs of ten years later, than the aircraft of its period.
|
|
|
|
|
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
