I want a full loop-de-leep. So that you end up facing the same direction, but maybe behind your original position. :grin: BONZAI!!!!!

A little basic arithmetic:

2 half loops = 1 full loop

Sure it takes 2 turns, but that's pretty reasonable for such a maneuver. As a single-turn alternative you could always throttle up to 8, throw your plane into a tight turn, and end up right back where you started...

Remember,
part of catching your opponents to shoot them is knowing what manuevers they can do. If you create more manuevers, you make it harder to predict where your opponents plane is going, so less shooting happens.

Games already take over an hour for beginners, and close to that for vets. Do you really want them to take 4-5 hours?

Jamie there are some people who will never be satisfied. These folks are willing to sacrifice streamlined fun because they think what they want will somehow improve things.

In many cases, these are also the people who will sacrifice fun for authenticity.

In a few cases these are people who havent heard of play balance.

i am not saying any of the above posters fall into any of the above catagories, i dont need to. you know who you are.

Rapierduel, please keep in mind that simple=fun and authenticity=unfun are purely opinion. Some people like fast and simple, some people want meaty details. One is not automatically better than the other.

no one ever said they were exclusive. they can be combined in many ways. I find a game like Avalon Hill's Squad Leader a LOT of fun, and that is pretty definitively not a simple game, nor a short one.

The issue creeps in when play balance is not taken into account. Designers should strive for a balance which is generally precarious.

what it boils down to is that while there are manuvers that would add to the game, redundant or ill-concieved ones will throw the balance off, and make this a tedious experience

Yes, I agree with not adding more maneuvers here. I think I went into detail in another thread on this, basically it's due to how the the turn sequence works here.

Sorry, I just get upset when I see people try to define "fun" and use it to justify something.

no offense taken...

i get just as upset when i hear people put something down because it is not the style of play that they want, and expect things to change to the point that the game changes.

a good example is the Classic battletech players who want mechwarrior to be "their" version. Its a different game.

so my pet peeve is set off by the cries of "I want 3d" and "this isnt realistic enough"

personally I want to play the game i was presented with, not have it change into something else. If you want realism, or 3d rules there are other games out there.

while i understand your point raiperduel,
i would like to state that i feel simple changes and tweeks to the rules can only add to the experiance, and with more manuvers available allow more fire not less. right now if i want to turn 90 degrees it either takes two turns (usless) or an hammer head turn (limited).
the only manuver i would add at this point is an standerd turn template started in the front of your position rather than 45 degrees off to one side or the other...ie no new card only an more versitile card... allowing more control over your manuver and thusly more fire per game...in my opinion...

Though I agree with rapier duel, I do think the new manuevers will be pretty exciting (by new I mean the ones for the new Aces). But the way the deck is now is fine. Maybe a real pilot could do a lot more moves, but then again a real pilot is flying fake crimson skies planes that probably would not fly.

an real side Slip (one of the first manuevers you learn at flight school) Barrelroll, Picard manuever, Yeager Looping Falling leaf, jink, side Spin and Blade Turn.