Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

[Vitoria]

[schoon]

What a great concept!

Of course, I immediately think of WWII dog fighting as opposed to the IO variety.

Hmmm... How small CAN I make a WWII fighter aircraft in LEGO...

[Vitoria]

Thanks a lot, schoon! Nice to see you around again!

Yeah, absolutely, WWII dog fighting dynamics is what this is supposed to evoke! I know it's not necessarily the most realistic approach, but it is the one most movies and video games I grew up with use, so I can't help it!

That being said, changing the maneuver set, one could adapt this into other movement conventions quite easily.

[Francisco Duarte]

Greta concept! I have been thinking of something similar myself, albeit set in 1970's Cold War.

Originally I was mostly interested in using IO's movement rules and adapt the construction rules, but this may provide me some options. I really like it.

[David Artman]

Neat ideas here!
Suggestion: Allow SSRs to fire into the rear 90º V-arc as well. Not both front and rear; only one or the other, declared as part of loadout.

[Vitoria]

Thanks a lot, folks!

Back firing SSRs is an interesting suggestion, may I ask what inspired you to make this suggestion?

[David Artman]

[Vitoria]

[Francisco Duarte]

Yeah, I think I will base my own fighter simulation mod on these rules. They are really neat and way more mature than what I had in mind.

One thing that I may do different for movement is the influence of the extra green systems. I was thinking that if you have one movement system you would be allowed to either make a 90º turn at the end of the movement assuming you have moved at least 3 units, or make a snap shot which allows you to strike any unit in front of the fighter (everything on the side of the table forward of where the fighter stands and not just the 90º cone in front of it). If you have two movement systems you can do both things (first the 90º turn and then the snap shot).

I have other things in mind. Given time i'll probably just make my own post, but I'm glad you came with this first, gives me something to build from for what I have in mind.

[Vitoria]

Thanks again, Francisco!

Can't wait to read your version!

I had similar ideas, but I want to test the bare basics before considering adding more complexity. If all goes as planned I'm going to perform my first tests tomorrow!

[Vitoria]

[Vitoria]

Updated the cover rules slightly, so more Space Debris can be placed on the table.

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Why not just make turrets hit on a 6? Results are gonna be really similar, but without adding a new rule structure.

Shouldn’t an Immelmann/half loop require less forward motion, not more? Perhaps you have to have the whole way clear, but wind up facing backward only halfway along the ruler.

Since you have facing, you can have a rudimentary relative motion rule. If you’re facing someone’s tail, hits are 4+. Facing their face, 5+. At Burst range shooting at the side (the only time you’ll be unequivocally facing the side), 6+.

I suggest making the green a required system, not a free die. That way, you can take engine damage. That can work with this rule: when you move 0, you stall. That means you lose a white die for the next round. It also means you can do the thing where someone in hot pursuit jams by you.

What these rules are missing is a way to fool your opponent. Dogfighting is about knowing where your opponent is going to be next, and you can only outguess someone if they can hide their intentions. Wings of War and X-Wing handle this to different degrees. X-Wing makes it 10% simpler for a 50% reduction of fun strategy. Wings of War, on the other hand, is the most perfect dogfight game I’ve ever played.

[Vitoria]

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Any principled design decision is stronger than most game design decisions!

[Vitoria]

Thanks, Joshua!

I decided to give your suggestions some more time to digest.

About the turret thing, I have played RA enough times to know that, with good enough spotting and low enough defense, having 9+ damage dice is not that rare, and I wanted turrets to be unable to capitalize on that, and actually avoid being spent on way too high damage dice throws.

The direct-fire weapon is still supposed to be the work-horse weapon, and I don't want turrets to outshine it. And frankly, I played enough X-Wing to know that a "turret first meta" can be somewhat frustrating.

Still, your "hit on 6" suggestion might offer some interesting variance, so I'll add as an optional rule.

I also thought deeply about your "green can be damaged" suggestion, and despite loving the idea of representing engine damage, had to decide against it, since it clashes with a future rule expansion I'm planning on (which you had no way of knowing, of course). If you absolute must represent engine damage, throw some extra green systems in!

[Francisco Duarte]

One thing I've always contemplated regarding the '68 mod is that the first white damage is the engine, and the second one the structure, meaning that when you only have one white die you're gliding in that last few seconds before the plane disintegrates. I do like the floating green d6, though, as I think it works well conceptually.

I do like the stall idea, though, as it would be one way to either fool your opponent or shuffle your options a little. I would add that if you decide not to move at all you won't be able to attack in that turn either, on top of losing one white die on the next turn for that model.

However, Vitor, I would urge you to avoid adding too many rules, or at least make them organically fit the general rule set and be easily understood, as I think that is one of the great advantages of MFZ - it is easy to understand and play, but challenging to master.

Just my two cents. I still adore the initiative (wouldn't be making my own take on it if I didn't).

[Vitoria]

[Vitoria]

Also, clarified the maneuver template usage a bit. You should use it on the side of the base kinda like IO, but not exactly. Just noticed I never left this explicit here.

[Vitoria]

My first three players throw down!

For the first time players went straight for station capture, which gave birth to some pretty new and interesting interactions and strategies. Sometimes you need to plan two or even three turns in advance in order to get them reliably and survive!

Despite the silence I'm still developing this thing, I hope to release the "big fighter" rules soon.

Also, just like I was talking with Francisco these days, I wish to make a nice-ish PDF for Dog Fight (which he is sorta doing as well). Wondering if someone has a somewhat use-able template I can use. It can be any kind of file, I don't care if I'm going to have to learn a new tool.