Canvas Falcons

[Mogadeet]

Just an update on Canvas Falcons.

With some final tweaks in place we have a good game with a good flow. Though the Beer & Pretzels crowd may find it intimidating to look at, after a test flight to see how the numbers work together it proves to be pretty intuitive. I find it no more complicated than Wings, and considerably more realistic.

1917 is raging and we’re exploring that, with Albatros D-II and D-III fighters dealing with SPADs, Nieuports, Pups, FEs, DH-2s, Rolands, Albatros’, RAF two-seaters, and Pfalz’s. Quite a number of good aircraft types are available.

Also a part of the game is an Operational module, where you can operate squadrons with missions. The operational game can be played solitaire, or vs an opponent. Ground attack and AA rules are in place and work. If random scenario generators are not your cup of tea, the Operational game works just fine. We are currently involved in a battle generated by the Operational game where 2 Albatros D-IIIs are being jumped by 4 SPAD VIIs. The Albatros’s, though outnumbered, have higher quality pilots than the SPAD flight, which is sporting a number of rookies.

So, those who remember the game, it is alive and well, and will be published by Clash of Arms. The game works and is a lot of fun.

We're doing our playing in a PBEM format, and have Vassal modules available for those who like to use Vassal (and duplicate boards for us Luddites). It's something to have a battle where the players are spread out all over the globe.

Mogadeet

[Willi Von Klugerman]

What is this game,I never heard of it until now,is it of public release?

[Mogadeet]

It will be published by Clash of Arms when a couple of spots get their final triple-check. If you are interested, and don't mind PBEM, then e-mail me at joeseph.mccarthy@gmail.com and I will send you the designer's address as well as passing your's on to him and he can give you a good look at it.

It can truly be described as an aerodynamically correct game. If you are familiar with flying as it really is you'd love it.

It shares many similarities with J.D. Websters Fighting Wings system, and if you've played any of the Fighting Wings games it will be simple to learn.

Mogadeet

[Kirk]

Just wondering if this is the same game I played via e-mail a couple times many years ago. It was extremely detailed and involved the use of the Pythagorean theorem to move. I remember it took me something like a weeks worth of moves to execute a 180 degree turn. It was intriguing, but at my advanced age of 47 I'm looking for games that are less rules intensive.

[Mogadeet]

Well, I've been playing this for a number of years, and was in on the original playtesting, and I don't remember either the problem or anyone complaining. I remember a couple of people who jumped into games, moved a couple of times, then stopped replying to e-mails (grinding the PBEM to a screeching halt). Last battle I not only executed lots of turns of various degrees, but a hammerhead stall and a diving loop (among other maneuvers), and it didn't take any time at all, so I'm not sure what problem you are referring to.

PBEM always has slow response to turns when you have 6 or more people playing, but everyone knows that.

Among our current crop is a person who's not only never played an air game, but is conducting everything in a language (English) that is not his native one. He's not having any problem.

The Pathagorean you mentioned may be referring to the PY table, which is simply a chart which cross-indexes vertical altitude for quick figuring of ranges and climb/dive abilities. Compared to games from the Fighting Wings system or Wings, this is quite the labor-saving device. Never an ambiguity.

Mogadeet

[Kirk]

I never bailed in the middle of a game, but I remember this game having a huge amount of detail. It just seemed like too much work to replicate a very small amount of time.
Back in my college days I loved complicated games but these days I look for games that are more simple.
Also, in a more generic sense, no matter how detailed one tries to get, no tabletop game can ever realistically replicate air combat. I've played many air combat games and just the fact one has a relative eternity to determine what one will do next is an inherent flaw in any tabletop game. That plus the constant struggle to balance realism and playability makes every game a compromise. That being the case these days I side with the simpler, more playable games rather than those that leave me scratching my head and constantly digging through rulebooks.

[dglewwe]

you (and any who feel as you do) may like my rules --they leave the flying to the little guy in the model and let players concentrate on their objectives.

the aim is more at the mood of a dogfight rather than the fiddly-bits of flying: player decisions are mostly risk-reward ones rather than specific -maneuver choices.

i still use miniatures (too many decades of model-building to give up completely on the "this looks cool!" aspect of gaming...) but the game is more akin to most (all?) other gaming genres in its treatment of the minis.


as a pilot, i love the challenge of the flight-sim games (and will most likely grab a copy of "falcons" when i can), but feel that there's a need for a "non-flying" dogfight game.

[Mogadeet]

Originally Posted by dglewwe

as a pilot, i love the challenge of the flight-sim games (and will most likely grab a copy of "falcons" when i can), but feel that there's a need for a "non-flying" dogfight game.

Amen there. There will always be a need for the "Beer & Pretzel" airgame. Especially something that group can get together with, pick up, and play, without any hassles.

If you want to try out CF you would be most welcome. PM me and I'll provide you with an address so you can get rolling. If you appreciate actually flying the airplane, and like a gaming experience that allows you to read about the airplane and say "Yes! I remember doing that!" Then you'd like CF.

And it's a challenge too. A good player in a mediocre aircraft will stomp a poor one in a dynamite crate. And at my age I LOVE to see skill win out over luck. That's why I play GO and Chess.

Mogadeet

[dglewwe]

"There will always be a need for the "Beer & Pretzel" airgame."

it's my baby, so i have to nitpick:

my game is not a B&P game (i've made plenty of those). it simply does what other games (in pretty much every other genre) do and assume the forces under one's command know how to do their particular fiddly-bits: leaving the player free to make the decisions of a commander (rather than micro-manage the details). too many (most all, really) existing games concentrate almost exclusively on flying mechanics/simulation --ie: the physical skill-set of the pilot. my game leaves that pretty much to the little guy in the model, and focuses on the mental challenges/stress of dogfighting. dunno if it will work (or should i say: fly ) but it's a niche that gets little attention amidst the glitz of flight-sim.

okay, soapbox rant done...




"...to try out CF...provide you with an address so you can get rolling."

my goof: i thought it was a tabletop game?


"If you appreciate actually flying the airplane..."

i do --and have (not period craft, but open-cockpit biplanes). maybe that's why flight-sim doesn't do anything for me: it's really nothing at all a "simulation" of that type of flying. attractive and enjoyable in its own right, to be sure: but not in the same ballpark as the real thing.

[Mogadeet]

Actually, it is a tabletop game.

Mogadeet