Subject:
|
Re: Pirate Game Postmortem (Was: Re: Brickfest)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming
|
Date:
|
Tue, 13 Jun 2000 19:26:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1383 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> Well, I guess I'm going to do some piecemeal responses... I will craft a
> final report in a week or so though.
Great! Is this something you can share with us when it's crafted?
> Some quick comments before addressing some of Lindsay's comments:
>
> After looking at some of the pictures, I'm glad I forgot tape measures
> and rulers. The LEGO range sticks look real good in the pictures, and
> highlights the LEGOness of the game. I will make some smaller rulers for
> personal combat. Sometimes it was hard to maneuver the large ruler
> through the ships rigging to get the range for a pistol shot.
I agree--I really liked the brick rulers. However, I do think
that 1x3 segments would be more useful than 1x4 segments--I'd
rather have compressed the range somewhat. I think that our
efforts at compression were definitely in the right direction,
and made for a better game.
> I think an initiative randomizer would add too much complexity to the
> game. The pursuit rules you mention below probably are a good comprimise
> which helps in the situation where it is most needed. I don't think it
> is at all a problem that the initiative gives the pirates and initial
> advantage over the bigger ships. The idea is to be able to upgrade your
> ship. Playing the whole game with a cutter would be boring. Note also
> that cutters can be merchants or imperial ships (we just didn't have any
> left for that purpose) so there will be times when the merchants or
> imperials have a better initiative than the pirates.
Good point. Hmmm...I wonder if there would be any kind of upgrade
one could buy to improve initiative? ;) But with "Pursuit Speed"
below and a firm understanding of how each ship moves, I think the
initiative system can be circumvented creatively.
> > But the frustration of pursuit is covered in the rules, to wit:
> > http://www.io.com/~sj/PirateGame1.html
> > under "Pursuit Speed." Did we make use of this clause?
>
> Yea, I didn't use the pursuit rules. You are correct in your analysis of
> what happened though. Shiri probably could have caught the ship if she
> had taken off at an angle instead of heading straight for it initially.
> Of course that would have required guessing that the ship was going to
> head in a straight line. It also could have more clearly escaped had it
> changed tack (it had a 12" move 45 or 90 degrees off the wind to the
> cutters 10" speed).
I didn't see precisely how the pursuit took shape, but in my
case if I had made straight for the ship, I would have been
in a lot of trouble and would have ended up in a stern chase.
I had to head it off and get ahead of it, and then pray that
I could be close enough to get under it. There was some
tactical computation going on there.
> Chris and I also discussed modifying the weather to be a somewhat
> simpler system, and also guarantee more changes in wind direction.
> Playing a whole game essentially under one wind direction was boring
> (and resulted in frustration for Shiri, a wind change would have either
> given the merchant a surge and cleaner escape, or would have given her
> an advantage).
I think that all we needed was a greater variation across winds
from the W, SW, and NW--a greater chance of wind shifting would
really help. But not to the point of making the wind suddenly
turn 180 degrees, of course. Maybe have one standard "wind
tendency" per game? Say, if wind tended to be from the West
in any given game, the chances of wind changing would be computed
either towards that direction or away from it? An example:
PREVAILING WIND determined the same way as a wind direction
on the first turn of a game.
WIND CHANGES: Roll on 3d6:
3 Freak shift of wind; now opposite the prevailing direction.
4-7 Wind shifts away from the prevailing direction by 45deg.
8-13 No change in wind direction.
14-17 Wind shifts towards the prevailing direction by 45deg.
18 Freak shift of wind, returning it to the prevailing direction.
WIND SPEED: Determine as usual. (Can we add "becalmed" to it?
Sure, no wind is pretty dull, but one could then use boats with
oars to haul their ships away at low speed! Pirate galleys,
anyone? ;) )
> I need to look over all of these ideas. I do have some thoughts on
> smaller cannon, though I'm not sure they will be feasible. I would like
> to see an option to mounting two smaller cannon on a cutter. I would
> also like to see more granularity in making merchant ships have lighter
> armament.
I may look up some things in the next week and formulate options
for deck sweepers, to accompany the siege mortar brainfarts.
> Of course in all of this there is a balance in providing options and
> having complexity which slows the game.
Absolutely.
best
Lindsay
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Pirate Game Postmortem (Was: Re: Brickfest)
|
| (...) Of course. (...) Actually, I wouldn't want to compress the inch any. The pistol fire was difficult as it was with a -1 per inch. Compressing that would make pistols almost useless (gee - I have no chance of hitting someone on the other side of (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jun-00, to lugnet.gaming)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Pirate Game Postmortem (Was: Re: Brickfest)
|
| Well, I guess I'm going to do some piecemeal responses... I will craft a final report in a week or so though. Some quick comments before addressing some of Lindsay's comments: After looking at some of the pictures, I'm glad I forgot tape measures (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jun-00, to lugnet.gaming)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
