If an airplane (due to damage or design) has a harder time turning one way than the other, it is entirely because the atmospheric resistance on one side is less of an issue than it is on the other. Without atmospheric resistance, however, even the most damaged aircraft would turn with equal grace to the left or right (if that were even possible without an atmosphere).

Orientation in a vacuum, is changed by applying force (thrusters!) in the direction opposite to the intended motion, so the notion that a space ship would find it harder to turn in one direction than the other is ... well, ... it isn't really feasible. No one would design such a vessel. One might hypothetically imagine some sort of Frankenstein-ian hack job, being Macgyver'd into temporary service to escape some desperate situation - such that what is being flown in more definitely not a functional craft, with these sorts of limitations "built in" - but nothing like that would every be made on purpose.

I don't think we'll see that sort of stuff - though it would be fun to build a scenario around something like that.

The WWI planes being discussed have nothing to do with atmospheric resistance, but already having rotational energy in one direction due to the rotary engine. An easy way to see this for yourself is to go on a teacups ride, it's EASY to spin the teacup one direction, but rather difficult to spin it the other. This is because the teacup already has rotational energy in one direction, so spinning the cup itself in that direction is easier. The other way you have to fight the energy it already has.

If an airplane (due to damage or design) has a harder time turning one way than the other, it is entirely because the atmospheric resistance on one side is less of an issue than it is on the other. Without atmospheric resistance, however, even the most damaged aircraft would turn with equal grace to the left or right (if that were even possible without an atmosphere).

Orientation in a vacuum, is changed by applying force (thrusters!) in the direction opposite to the intended motion, so the notion that a space ship would find it harder to turn in one direction than the other is ... well, ... it isn't really feasible. No one would design such a vessel. One might hypothetically imagine some sort of Frankenstein-ian hack job, being Macgyver'd into temporary service to escape some desperate situation - such that what is being flown in more definitely not a functional craft, with these sorts of limitations "built in" - but nothing like that would every be made on purpose.

I don't think we'll see that sort of stuff - though it would be fun to build a scenario around something like that.

The WWI planes being discussed have nothing to do with atmospheric resistance, but already having rotational energy in one direction due to the rotary engine. An easy way to see this for yourself is to go on a teacups ride, it's EASY to spin the teacup one direction, but rather difficult to spin it the other. This is because the teacup already has rotational energy in one direction, so spinning the cup itself in that direction is easier. The other way you have to fight the energy it already has.

are you saying teacups are made from old JU-88's (i know its a WWII plane)? i knew they were made with germanic evil..

Onboard gyroscopes on existing realworld spacecraft are used to control yaw/roll/pitch angles. If one of those is out of whack, you can have an uncontrolled rotation, or the inability to rotate at the rate desired. That is neither an aerodynamic nor reaction-thruster effect.

Like other points already made in this thread, this thematically relevant fact probably goes to damage mechanics rather than maneuver dial design.

This game desperately needs a new damage deck. The current one is just really limiting.

Replace Munitions Failure with Engine Burnout. All left or right turns and banks are red, attacker desides which when card is dealt or flipped.

I think the idea SHOULD be put into X Wing at some point. Some ship that is highly capable in one direction in exchange for poor manueveribility in another direction would be fun to play with, and against.

It'd be nice to have a Junkyard Scum expansion or something like that. I'd have a lot of fun with it.

Maybe drift lazily to the left?

http://www.traileraddict.com/family-guy-blue-harvest/ship-maneuvers

AC-130 Gunship. Fires out one side only.

AC-130 Gunship. Fires out one side only.

Didn't know it was spaceworthy.

I would love to see a huge cannon coming out the side of an otherwise normal looking transport ship, something that would give 6 or 7 dice I suppose. But I doubt any small ship would be able to field something like that.

Sounds like this is something you can already do... by starting a boosting or barrel rolling ship at 22.5 degrees instead of your usual 0 or 90...

watch the number of - oops, I meant the other way - Doh! there is no other way issues increase

I'd feel like they took the lettuce, tomato, and onion off my burger, set it to the side, and called it a salad. Sure, you could do that, why though? Sounds like a gimmick for the sake of gimmick.

Now "wide" or "long" bases... That I could have got behind but the HWK, Kwing, and houndstooth are already produced standard so I guess it's too late.

To OP: it would be introducing complexity without a purpose.

So you've got a ship that has a hard time turning left, but turns right real well. Everyone taking it just sets up in the left corner of the map - and now its complex maneuver limitations are moot.

better yet why not a damage card that gives this effect!! "lateral thruster damaged" all left turns are RED maneuvers..

That would have been more interesting to see, yeah, as the unpredictability of it and when/where it would occur (whether to the left or right) would mean it wouldn't be as easy to plan around.

If you always placed a ship with an asymmetrical dial on one side of the map, it would then be easier to place obstacles and counter-place your own ships. It would open up a lot of interesting mind games. "His ship is only good at turning left, so he'll probably put it as far right as possible. But then he expects me to know that so he might place it to the left and just deal with the sub par half of the dial and throw me off."

It would be fairly interesting.

The planes in WW1 wings of glory that work like this were very interesting to fly. You might start out thinking you'll only turn the favorable direction, but it never works out that neatly.

I strongly disagree that it adds complexity. Ships have maneuver dials. The dials are different for every ship. I don't see how the specifics of what are on any given ship's dial alters the complexity of the game in any way. I guess you could say it makes strategizing mire complex, but that is a good thing.

I also agree with the poster earlier who suggested the g9 rigger freighter as a good candidate for this type of dial. I thought the same thing the first time I saw the ship in clone wars.

This game desperately needs a new damage deck. The current one is just really limiting.

Replace Munitions Failure with Engine Burnout. All left or right turns and banks are red, attacker desides which when card is dealt or flipped.

Nah, replace it with Left and Right Engine Burnout. Simpler that way. Have 1 card of each.

Blue sky thinking here... A ship with asymmetric maneuvers, a secondary heavy cannon arc to one side, and a half barrel roll action with a pivoting mount for the model so it can be repositioned "upside down" to orient its cannon to the left or right. Two mirrored maneuver dials, one for each roll orientation. It's the AC-130 for space!

When I was 13 I hit a tree at nearly 8mph with my Dad's 112 John Deere riding mower and bent the left wheel about 20 degrees to the left. After that, It had a left turn radius of about 3' and a right turn radius of about 15'. If I needed to go around a shrub (asteroid) to my right, I had to basically do a 270 to the left to make the turn.

So it totally makes sense that this mechanic should have been in the damage deck from the start.

I've felt it would be a fine thing to use IF there was a reason to use it.

To me the best reason would be if it also had an asymmetrical firing arc, a.k.a. an alternative arc out one side only, which could provide the reason a ship turned better one way than t does the other.

While it may be a fine mechanic that could have reasons for its use there are also those reasons not to use it. It really shouldn't go on an agile ship but some bigger, and probably slower, ships could use it.