I've been kicking around the idea of a Harry Potter quidditch mod. I really like the flight system this game uses.

Surely the way to sell this game to people though is 'it like you get to play the death star star fighter battle with little model x wings?'

I'd have thought 'star wars' was a bigger selling point than 'top gun'

Star Wars covers a whole gamut of things though, sword fighting, gun battles, etc.

This game is about dogfighting. And top gun is about dogfighting (and maybe Tom Cruise tuning away from his latent homosexuality).

It's the simplest descriptor without having to clarify anything

Simpler than 'star wars dogfights!' or 'star wars fighter battles' ?

Honestly i'd be put off by being told a game had any simularity to 'top gun'... that was a truly terrible film... no actually it was just poor.

'Bronx Warriors' or 'zombie flesh eaters III'... now *thats* truly terrible film

I think a WWI or WWII sytle game could work or even a game based off of one of several computer/console/arcade games.

Modern fighter combat is just to technical to just get on a guys tail and shoot him up.

I think a WWI or WWII sytle game could work or even a game based off of one of several computer/console/arcade games.

Modern fighter combat is just too technical to just get on a guys tail and shoot him up.

... We've already mentioned the decade old series of video games that's incredibly dog fight heavy.

And the movie dedicated to the real live program teaching modern pilots to dog fight.

Are you trying to tell me that dogfighting space ships is more plausible than dog fighting jet fighters?

I just wish somebody would do something with the Crimson Skies license already.

DANGAAAA ZONE

I just wish somebody would do something with the Crimson Skies license already.

yes, this

No. But Battlestar Galactica...

(Also, way to few ships...)

OP: No.

I actually might play a modern version of this. I have an old game called Red Star White Star, it was a modern (70s - 80s) style dogfight game, migs and phantoms and other aircraft of the day.. it was fun.

I also have the WWI version of Wings of Glory, and have some good times there as well.

So to the idea of a Battlestar Galactica version, I also say yes, just because they have fewer ships won't mean it isn't a good game. BSG was all about dogfights and blowin up Cylons.. I can play that out.. lol

All in all, I think a few genres could be fun using this system, just gotta try them out..

i personally wouldn't be interested. there are 3 versions of this in the market currently.

Getting away from all the "sky is falling" and "when will rebel aces get here" threads for a minute, whenever I try to describe this game to people, I typically lead with "it's basically a top gun simulator, with dice"

Which lead me to thinking that it would be really awesome to get, well, a top gun simulator. Some of the values would need to be tweaked, because aircraft don't have shields just yet, but the idea of loading up 4 f-14s with Phoenix missiles and shooting down some migs (actual migs, not black f-5s) would be equally as fun.

I would if they have a nice jets! Typhoons, Rafaels, su37, Raptor, etc. But with nice scale and paint jobs.

Ace combat was garbage.

The issue for me would be that modern air based fights are more about shooting missiles and avoiding them.

Which ain't fun for any game. It's -tedious-.

How about a Transformers based one? Decepticon seekers vs jetfire and arial bots.

The issue for me would be that modern air based fights are more about shooting missiles and avoiding them.

Which ain't fun for any game. It's -tedious-.

How will it be any different than this? the ships here is far off too if you really look at it.

You shoot a laser from a firing arc?? so what would be the different from having missile vs flares vs evade? If anything it will make more sense in a modern jet setting.

I just wish somebody would do something with the Crimson Skies license already.

Shoot I remember playing that on the xbox.

That was such a cool game.

I've never seen Top Gun.

Dont bother, its just lame. its not even bad enough to be funny.

its just tired cliches, lots of volleyball, oiled muscles and 'rogue maverick does good' balls.

yeah i'm from the UK, its not considered a 'good' film here.

More an hour and half PR advert for naval aviation

I've never seen Top Gun.

Dont bother, its just lame. its not even bad enough to be funny.

its just tired cliches, lots of volleyball, oiled muscles and 'rogue maverick does good' balls.

yeah i'm from the UK, its not considered a 'good' film here.

More an hour and half PR advert for naval aviation

And all that talk of "you can ride my tail anytime" hooo boy!

One good thing in top gun: Starscream cameo!

I prefer WW1 and WW2 planes to jets. I would buy a full squadron of XCorsairs.

If it was done well, like X-Wing, I could see one through the Vietnam era being fun. I'd totally deck out a flight of F-14s.

I've never seen Top Gun.

If the Tomcats are onscreen, I'm glued. As soon as they're off, so am I. Only reason I watch it is for the dogfights.

(was it that great, i think it was probably a bit horrendous.. although my great grandad apprently loved being at Gallopoli go figure.. .)

It was the Great War because of its size, rather than excellence. Though, for the first month or so, everyone assumed it would be an excellent, short, little war...

Hell no. You make it more real and it gets too much like glorifying violence and being macho. Huge turn off for me.

I'm very interested in this response.

Where's the line? These games are a facsimile of things that happened to fictional characters. So, would it be ok if it were fictional pilots in real fighter jets? Or, how about video games like call of duty. Those are fictional characters, in a modern setting. Are they included in the glorifying violence too? What about replacing bullets with lasers makes han's kill count ok?

I apologize if it seems I'm patronizing, I'm genuinely curious.

Games like Call of Duty are exactly what I'm talking about, I can't stand them.

I can't really tell you where the line is, it's not something I've though up logically, just something I know when I see. I think I'm more OK with historic violence than with modern violence, but not as OK as I am with fantasy or sci-if violence (and fantasy sci-fi is even better - sci-fi trying to realistically reflect what war would be like isn't so appealing to play with). That said, obvious unrealisticness annoys me too. My contradictions are what make me interesting!

I just wish somebody would do something with the Crimson Skies license already.

There was a heroclix version about 8 years ago. Models were pretty good too. Instead of dials you locked your moves in with maneuver cards. I still own all of mine. Not sure if WotC still holds the rights or not.

Modern jets, no. Modern helicopters, yes.

DANGAAAA ZONE

Did someone say.....danger zone?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtHrS-w2H6E

It's an interesting topic to consider, but a similar thread to this did come out a few weeks ago. Everyone has their own opinion, but I am definitely playing this game because of how much I have always loved the ships in Star Wars and the universe itself. It just so happens that the game is excellent as well.

No, I wouldn't use these rules if it wasn't for the awesome ships!

Absolutely yes! I was thinking about this today as to what planes would be what. I came up with

z-95= F-16 cheap and used all over the world

tie phantom = F-22 stealthy and tremendous firepower

tie defender = su 47 incredibly maneuverable

B wing =f14 (hlc =phoenix missles)

I went back and forth a dozen times on the next one.

x wing= FA18 multirole

so that means

Ewing =F15 designed with maneuverability in mind

tie interceptor= mig 29

Tie Bomber = A6 intruder for large ship hunting

Y wing =A10 tons of health

Haven't been able to pick out A wings and tie fighters though, feel like the AV8 harrier gets one of those nods. Maybe the ef2000 for the a wing?

Any thoughts? Agree disagree?

My entire experience of flying fighter jets comes from Ace Combat, which is less "fire and forget" and more dogfight-heavy.

I've done some F-16 simulator combat, using F16 simulators in replica cockpits (including glass canopy) featuring last-generation equipment (current stuff is not permitted, and the DOD checks up on the company periodically to make sure they are "compliant"). A dozen of us from work went, and fought in 2 sets of battles; I took Top Gun award.

Visually, you couldn't even see targets most of the time - they were identifiers on the HUD. Lock on was usually at 10km, and hold fire until within 5-6km. Fire off a couple missiles, move on to next target. Cannons were almost never used - I think out of 45 minutes worth of combat, there was a single cannon kill. I was rarely in range to use my cannons, and they only carried 5 seconds worth of firing.

Missiles are also highly accurate with something like a 95% hit-rate without. Flares and being low to the ground help, but aren't a guaranteed savior.