Message text derekticus wrote:
Stieli1 wrote: pbass111 wrote: Stieli1 wrote: michzeidler wrote: Stieli1 wrote: I noted that in some scenarios, the ships charateristics differ greatly from the "good old" board game original, like ships with too many guns or hull squares, etc. E.g., in the basic rules, a 120 gun SOL1 has 18 hull squares and only 14 guns on each side. However, this badly influences game play and balance.
Did anybody mix up the basic game data with the advanced rules? If this continues, we can play "Space Invaders" and I want a SOL1 with laser guns and photon torpedoes. Hm, and a warp drive would be nice to bail out...
Who designs the scenarios anyway? I think I (and many others) could provide some input in form of old "General" issues covering WSIM and other compilations. Doesn't it all boil down to how balanced scenarios are and how playable? Besides the pirates and the notorious 3:4 the scenarios seem to be pretty balanced to me, so I don't see the need to fine tune guns and hulls. Yep, but if that is the intention, we do not need to play WSIM at all. WSIM is a game about 18th and 19th century naval warfare and should remain so. The French had better ships, the English had better crews, some times the one or the other had the better position, or a different "geater objective", etc. And that should be be reflected. A "historical simulation (aka: wargame)" tries to simulate certain aspects of it's topic. And if it fails to do so, it is rubbish. If we only want "playable, balanced" games, let's play chess, checkers, halma, poker, you name it..... Or let's roll a die. "4 is better than 3 and you win". Fine. The game with the additional guns, crew, etc., is Arbuthnot and Des Touches. It was designed in the beginning using the Advanced rules, which doubles crew, guns, carronades, and halves again (1.5X) the number of hull squares. "Historical simulation" is almost redundant. This is a game that uses the period as a background only. Admittedly, it's not for everyone. So try some of the other games. Blue Max is similar; why anyone thinks aerial combat of any period can be done with any realism in two dimensions is delusional. Here, I'm delusional. I take it as a game. As they said back in the 60s: "Love it, or Leave it!" "Love" is too strong a term, but WSIM is an enjoyable pasttime. So, go roll your die a billion times and let me know how many 4's you get. Sounds like a good time to me. What are the rules? Ah, no, you misunderstood (and I may have been a little provocative  ): I always loved WSIM and what I see here is the best "computer based sailing ship game", I stumbled across to date (So I'll definetively stick to it.). Of course I am aware, WSIM has it's limits as a simulation (well, which game has none?). But still: One should not make it worse. I know the additional guns and hull squares come from the advanced rules. But remember, the field of fire is also more restricted in the advanced rules. Like in real life, in any system you can't fiddle with some parameters and still hope everything works well.. You are correct. I mentioned this same problem many moons ago about the beefed up ships in the "Arbutnot" scenario, but the discussion is pointless; the scenario is here and it will not be removed. You might also note that one of the French ships (Conquerant) is missing a number of rigging squares when compared to the scenario as listed in the board games' rule book. There are more inconsistencies, but in the end if a scenario offends you, then play a different one. Unfortunately, choices are limited, so hold your nose and enjoy!!!
Interestingly, the Arbuthnot is one of the scenarios I find pretty balanced. |
|
|
