Something that always bugged me with regard to maneuvers in x-wing is the all-or-nothing aspect of the k-turn.

When you bump a ship, you move to the closest point along ththe template and orient the ship based on how far along its path it is.

When you k-turn you continue in a straight line for the entire length of the maneuver, then when you reach the end point your pilot pushes a button and stops all momentum while fully rotating 180 degrees.

It would feel more realistic if when you bump and can't complete the full k-turn maneuver that you should rotate the ship to a degree relative to the distance across the template you traversed before bumping, and be given the option to make that rotation either clockwise or counterclockwise at your discretion.

Of course measuring in mm along the template then getting a protractor to perfect the angle would be a bit much, but what about at 50% you turn 90degrees. They could come up with a marker type template that would allow quarter turns at 25% and 75% too.

It'd make the k-turn more dynamic and thematic. Can we get that in x-wing 3.0 or a future rule revision, please?

25 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

Can  we get that in x-  wing 3.0 or a future rule revision, please? 

Thanks, but no.

This would unnecessarily complicate things from a practical perspective. They just made bumping easier. So why would they make a maneuver that is harder to do?

That sounds like bumping would make it a better maneuver. Not exactly something we want to encourage.

Bumping a k is harsh, but an easy solution would be to drop the stress if it doesn’t complete.

A ship performing a k-turn isn't spinning*, so rotating it to some sort of angle would make the opposite of thematic sense.

*even though I hear that's a good trick.

I think it would be too easy to set up bumps that allowed you to do bizarre turns if this were the case. If I perform a 4 K-turn and then bump about 3 out, I would get to turn 135 degrees. That's essentially giving me something very similar to an S-loop, which would really mess with how the ships fly and balance.

Personally, if they were going to make flying more complex, I'd prefer they start by adding altitude.

I've always felt it was a half loop with a spin to right yourself. In that sense, bumping at all makes little thematic sense but hey, we accept space is 2D for gameplay. So, with a bump, you don't complete the half loop and subsequent spin and end up facing 'forwards' still. All adds up to me.

I do feel the OP though. But it would be a **** of a lot of faffing.

You push the throttle hard then roll into a loop.

I don't think this video does it justice but it's labelled as such:

Dynamic/thematic <<<<<< risk/reward mechanic + not unnecessarily complicated gameplay

Yeah, I agree that it would be way to hard to implement. What would be cool is a pilot talent that allowed you to complete a Koiogran turn even if you bump for an additional stress.

The k-turn is basically this

https://youtu.be/NottMSxCPHg?t=1m29s

The change in orientation comes from the vertical axis and a roll, so obstructing the k-turn wouldn't cause you to face in a different direction on the horizontal axis.

The k-turn as is is just one of those concessions to depicting 3D combat on a 2D board.

If you bump a k-turn, you're essentially just blocking the 'run up' to the turn, so the ship stays facing the same way.

This gif applies to this thread in more than one way:

12 minutes ago, Herowannabe said:

This gif applies to this thread in more than one way:

Because you don't want it to change even though you believe the 180 rotation happens prior to the movement along the template?

8 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

Because you don't want it to change even though you believe the 180 rotation happens prior to the movement along the template?

Uh... no.

Because I think the OP’s idea is terrible and would make for impossibly fiddly gameplay, and because I can just visualize someone gunning it in order to do a K-turn only to have a ship fly in their way, so rather than crashing they go “nope!” and slam on the brakes and throw the ship into reverse (without changing orientation) to avoid the collision.

This could be also kinda a "K-turn" https://youtu.be/MCgjvI6VJeY?t=2m26s

6 minutes ago, Frodos said:

This could be also kinda a "K-turn" https://youtu.be/MCgjvI6VJeY?t=2m26s

Halfway through he is already reversed.. that's what I'm saying!

Yeah it'd be a bit fiddley. And it's probably scary for those that always set up perpendicular to the board edge. I still think it'd be fun.

This is also a k-turn. ?

Because it's a space Immelmann, but they didn't have Max Immelmann to invent it in the Star Wars universe, so they gave it a made-up name

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immelmann_turn

Based on the description from the old EU, whence it originated, the K-turn sounds like the historical Immelmann Turn: The pilot pulls up into a sharp climb, and just at the edge of the stall kicks the rudder to swing the nose over. (today this is simply called a wingover, and the Immelmann is a simple half-loop as shown in the clip from ESB. Not sure why the terminology changed).

Skot ninja'ed me. Here's a video, see what the British plane does at about the 10 second mark:

The space combat version is probably a lot like what Poe does during his attack run on the Dreadnaught to open TLJ, using a rudder turn to swap ends with little downrange movement.

1 minute ago, skotothalamos said:

Because it's a space Immelmann, but they didn't have Max Immelmann to invent it in the Star Wars universe, so they gave it a made-up name

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immelmann_turn

I think the other thing with calling it a Koiogran is it can then also be a split-S since we're dealing with a 2D space on the tabletop.

Can't do it because if a TIE Fighter bumps sideways it will damage its solar panels. Taught during the first day at the Imperial Academy.

1 minute ago, Ambaryerno said:

Based on the description from the old EU, whence it originated, the K-turn sounds like the historical Immelmann Turn: The pilot pulls up into a sharp climb, and just at the edge of the stall kicks the rudder to swing the nose over. (today this is simply called a wingover, and the Immelmann is a simple half-loop as shown in the clip from ESB. Not sure why the terminology changed).

A wingover is not the same maneuver as an Immelmann. You do not roll the aircraft in a wingover while you do in an Immelmann or split-s.

With many inaccuracies already existing in the game (chief of which is a 2D game trying to represent a 3D battle), I feel doing things to keep movement rules simpler is the better part of valor.

14 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

A wingover is not the same maneuver as an Immelmann. You do not roll the aircraft in a wingover while you do in an Immelmann or split-s.

Read my original post. They CHANGED THE NAME. The original maneuver that was developed in WWI by Max Immelmann WAS the same as the wingover. For reasons I've never been able to determine they changed Immelmann to refer to the Half-Loop between the World Wars.

Ah, the specific word Immelmann. Brings me back to my days in college ordering Grecko or Joey's (Garlic Fingers with Donair Sauce!) and playing Crimson Skies.

Immelmann just reminds me of the anime Last Exile.

2 hours ago, ViscerothSWG said:

Because you don't want it to change even though you believe the 180 rotation happens prior to the movement along the template?

It has nothing to do with how the manoeuvre works IRL (or in a projection of real life filtered through the Star Wars universe). Your suggestion results in an imprecise rule that is ripe for arguments about the exact angle a ship should finish up at. It also doesn't solve a problem that currently exists.

Having said that, if you want a real life explanation for the in-game mechanic, the pilot aborts the turn as he comes too close to another ship and fears he might collide, resulting in his next move having to be an easy one as they gather their wits and prepare for another pass.