Simple rules for Small Scale Naval Warfare?
#21
(01-29-2015, 04:45 PM)Caleb Wrote: Deployed facing the wind. Durr.... Blush

Urrrrrh. Yeah, real ship captains did that never.

Did you use your optional rule? Would you be upset if I started editing up a version of these rules with the changes made or discussed incorporated?


Reply
#22
No optional rule was used. I'll probably play another few games on a larger surface using the optional rules, larger firing arc, and maybe upgrade mlthe number of hull points.

Feel free to tinker with the rules. Share anything you come up with.
Reply
#23
I like the idea of smaller ships turning faster, and I like the 90 degree arc. I am not sure where to implement it yet though. I mean, at what class of boats is the cut off? I guess arbitrarily pick one and playtest it. Maybe 2 decks or smaller turns 90.

I am not excited about mortars for the only reason of never having played sail combat with them before. I would think long nines facing forward would be more useful than mortars, but I wasn't at Trafalgar either.
Reply
#24
SOME THOUGHTS

Turning
If a ship turns through the wind its subsequent movement is reduced by One Unit.
If a ship turns more than [ 90? ] degrees its subsequent movement is reduced by One Unit.

Guns
I only mentioned mortars because they existed and they are the anti-fortification weapon.
Types of Guns
Cannon...............numerous sizes and weights, three mile limit range
Carronades..........heavy shot, exceptionally short range
Mortars...............super heavy shell, only useful versus stationary targets, super heavy ordinance: only one or two mounted per bomb ketch.

Boarding
[..... ?? .....]

Maneuverability per Phase
At Trafalgar, as they pierced the French Line, ships in Nelson's command managed the following in one "game phase":
1. Adjust course without crossing the wind to aim the ship at a gap in the French line
2. Move forward into the gap
3. Fire starboard broadside into the bows of the trailing Frenchman
4. Move forward just a bit more (because raggedy French line)
5. Fire port broadside into stern of another Frenchman
6. Turn (away from the wind) to starboard  

Tacking (Crossing the Wind)
What if there was a dice roll check needed to accomplish this?
Roll a D12 (because everyone's dice bag has an all but unused D12 down at the bottom... Tongue longing to be rolled) a 12 means the ship has had a difficulty tacking.


Reply
[+] 1 user Likes pendrake's post
#25
Despite it's unpopularity Dreadfleet have some rather decent rules.
Maneuverability was handled by how far you could go before u could turn.
Reply
#26
I've been going over the rules so far and feel like I need to point out something I overlooked before regarding movement.

The points of sail do not accurately represent sailing in that a boat in a broad reach travels much faster than a boat sailing directly down wind.  As such, the POS template should reflect that.

The scientific explanation for this being a boat is not actually blown by the wind so much as pulled by the Bernoulli Effect in the same way an airplane is pulled into the air by lift.  A sailboat is pretty much a sideways airplane; one wing is the sail, the other  the keel.

If this were not true, and boats could only sail with the wind, they wouldn't be able to beat at all, let alone sail at 90 degrees to the wind.
Reply
#27
Yeah, it's fudged to be more intuitive for newbies.


A lot of accuracy has fallen by the wayside, so I'm not concerned.
Reply
#28
(02-06-2015, 12:50 PM)Caleb Wrote: A lot of accuracy has fallen by the wayside, so I'm not concerned.

Huh ?!?! DUDE! But these are WIND POWERED craft; their entire raison d'etre is wind. If you're not going to use wind for movement, why use sailboats at all? Just get out your old Batttleship game, cut the pegs off the boats and make the game WWII.

I don't like the n00b excuse. They're reading numbers off a chart, not trying to wrap their heads around the vector addition of pressure differentials. They can read the correct numbers as easily as the wrong numbers, so give them the right numbers. It won't make any difference to them. If anyone questions it (they won't), you can explain to them that boats go faster across the wind than with the wind. They will believe you because A) you are the boat guy and have SAILED boats, and B) it's common knowledge and can be looked up anywhere, including the new internet thing for computers.

Don't make a bad game on purpose. If you want a bad, simple small scale, entry level game, go back to Pirates Of The _____.
That's bad enough; you don't need to improve on its badness.
Reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tob's post
#29
Fair enough Tob.

From my time playing around with scale square-riggers, they do pretty well when running. Far better than fore-and-aft rigged ships. That being said, you're still right.

Changes will be made when I print up the final compass.
I've been thinking about the numbers anyways, I'm not sure I want so much speed upwind. Square-rigged ships are historically horrible at going upwind.
I'm thinking instead of 2, 3, 4 , 5, perhaps the numbers should be 1, 3, 5, 4.
Though I worry that may punish navigation errors too much.
I'm also thinking a D3 for wind changes might be better, the constant changes make for more emphasis on luck than skill. A chance of no change would be good.

I think a compass with different points of sail for other vessels will be needed. A Bermuda sloop would have different speeds, and be able to sail closer to the wind, as an example. That's not really a bad thing though.


The longer range template I came up with (not pictured) and a playing surface of about 4' x 4' will probably end up being the final iteration of this game. Originally I was hoping for a smaller gaming area, but it just doesn't play comfortably.

I'll likely give it some more though over the next week or so, but I'll be away from the workshop.


Another consideration I had is that the ships having 4 hull points and 4 shots means that engagements were very brief and more based on luck than navigation. I'm thinking more points, but the same number of shots may make for better gameplay.
An alternative, and this makes more sense to me, is to have 4 points, but a max of 2 shots per side, per turn. That way there is the ability to shoot from both sides in a turn, but a reduced likelihood of a shoot single turn sinking.
Reply
[+] 1 user Likes Caleb's post
#30
(02-06-2015, 06:25 PM)Caleb Wrote: Far better than fore-and-aft rigged ships.

I hadn't taken square rigs into account, so now when I see this...
(02-06-2015, 06:25 PM)Caleb Wrote: perhaps the numbers should be 1, 3, 5, 4.

I really like it.  Takes into account angle to wind and square-rigging and keeps things simple.


(02-06-2015, 06:25 PM)Caleb Wrote: A chance of no change would be good.

I agree, and would even suggest going further.  Winds at sea are going to be fairly steady over certain periods of time, so if the game wind-checks every turn you could go 1/4 or higher on your odds for change.  So D4:  1-3 = no wind change, 4 = wind change 1 wedge direction random (flip coin).   Advanced rule, D20: 1-15 = no change, 16-19 =  change +- 1, 20 = +- 2.
Again, this might be one of those things to tweak during/after playtesting to get "surprising" but not "annoying" wind changes.  Fun factor and all.

(02-06-2015, 06:25 PM)Caleb Wrote: I think a compass with different points of sail for other vessels will be needed.

I REALLY like this idea!  For a more advanced game, this would solve a lot of problems of speed and manueverability versus ship size and class.  Makes for super easy/fast play; no tables to look up or calculations to make.  


(02-06-2015, 06:25 PM)Caleb Wrote: Another consideration I had is that the ships having 4 hull points and 4 shots means that engagements were very brief and more based on luck than navigation. I'm thinking more points, but the same number of shots may make for better gameplay.
An alternative, and this makes more sense to me, is to have 4 points, but a max of 2 shots per side, per turn. That way there is the ability to shoot from both sides in a turn, but a reduced likelihood of a shoot single turn sinking.

I see what you mean and agree on the general solution.  And I lean toward the latter option as well, but can see the more hull points option working in an advanced game along with some of the other ideas like different POS compasses for different class ships.  The idea here being basing the number of shots on the number of decks one to one, then making each ship's hull points based on number of decks, say x2.  So a four deck ship would have four shots and eight hull points, 2 deck ship 2 shots and 4 HP.  When you add this system to a better movement system for different ship classes, you end up with smaller ships that are weaker, but can maneuver better and get more shots on target (mostly from end-on shots).  All of this sort of implies a rule that multiple deck ships cannot fire more than one deck at a time.  This could be rationalized as maintaining a firing cycle; the ability to have 4 shots per turn for a 4 deck ship comes from having one deck ready to fire while the others are loading.  Not too inaccurate really.  Now, while this doesn't PREVENT a one-turn sinking, any one-turn sinking becomes the fault of the target.  My reasoning here:   If a small ship (2 deck) engages a large (4 deck) ship and they sail at broadsides for an entire turn, the large ship will get 4 shots on the small ship's 4 hull points and sink it, a one-turn sink.  The small boat player can count the other player's decks and knows how many shots the other player has.  As such, if he can't figure out that getting out of the firing arc of the large ship is to his own strategic advantage, maybe he deserves to sink.   A system like this provides the balance of weak but fast/maneuverable to strong but slow/cumbersome and creates the impetus for strategy.
Reply


Forum Jump: