Realistic physics based space combat?

[stonester1]

This game does sound very interesting. Will also offer customizable ships AND a physical copy support level, if such interests you...

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...mbat?ref=users

[B.J.]

I saw that mentioned elsewhere. It looks interesting, but I don't think they're going to make their $40k goal in the next 5 days, seeing as it's only just under $9k now.

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, I wish them good luck and everything, but I see this as an extremely small niche. Sometimes things sound better on paper. What may sound great may actually not be that much fun to play. I could see this as an example of an idea of realism that could end up being a detriment to the gameplay and ending up being very frustrating. The space combat genre is already small enough as it is. Making it like Orbiter + Freespace while neat sounding, would make that niche even smaller.

[Kelthaz]

Realistic space combat? Well, that sounds dreadfully boring to play. There's definitely a gamer niche out there that would enjoy that sort of game, but it's a small niche.

[Zion Ravescene]

Frontier: Elite II attempted a Newtonian flight model back in 1993. It took a long while to get used to, and deep space combat at high velocities, while flying in-between stations, effectively turned your cockpit view into a turret picking out its target, instead of a fighter craft evading the enemy as per Wing Commander and X-Wing. However, low-velocity manoeuvres such as orbital combat, landing on rough terrain, and the recon and bombing missions, as well as manually flying to a station with a broken autopilot, were much more exciting.

[STR]

I used to mess around with Orbiter (LINK) back in the day. It was interesting, and extremely enlightening, but the last thing that I would add to it is a shooting element. Then, I'm not only calculating my own trajectory, but plotting enemy trajectories and missile envelopes. While I get the math (barely), I lack the willpower.

[stonester1]

There's a space combat boardgame that does it rather well, though in two dimensions. I'm hoping Steve Jackson, after they do their Kickstarter for Car Wars, does Triplanetary. That game is FUN.

[Sheep]

Kelthaz wrote:

---

Realistic space combat? Well, that sounds dreadfully boring to play. There's definitely a gamer niche out there that would enjoy that sort of game, but it's a small niche.

This is the first thing I thought too upon reading the word "realistic".

Give me something along the lines of the original Colony Wars and I'd be as happy as a pig in shit, though.

[stonester1]

I think if it involves just flying one ship a la Wing Commander, yeah, dull. But more of a tactical command simulation, where you are commanding wings, squadrons, I could easily see how that would be fun.

[Saturn0660]

Indeed, i remember playing a WWII fighter game back in the 90's.. They said it was "how it was" back then.. The game was so freaking hard.. About the only thing i could hit was the ground..

[Robert Maxwell]

I had this game called MANTIS back in the day, which was a PC remake of Warhead (originally an Amiga game.) Realistic physics, and hard as hell. It was extremely difficult to play without relying on the autopilot modes. And then the second half of the game becomes impossibly difficult...

[JRS]

There was a scifi game called I-War for PC that used realistic physics, too.
I did not play that much myself, though.

[Robert Maxwell]

Yeah, the sequel to I-War was a bit less punishing, as it had an automated "flight assist" (which you could shut off if you wanted to be hardcore.)

[Saturn0660]

JRS wrote:

---

There was a scifi game called I-War for PC that used realistic physics, too.
I did not play that much myself, though.

Independence War? If so great game. Hard as hell.

However, Falcon 3.0 , never gave me problems.

[Robert Maxwell]

Air combat is a much easier thing to deal with, even when realistically simulated, than Newtonian space combat.