Printable View
Something I hadn't noticed before. It appears that the Wings site has a lot more activity - "appears" in that there are more posters, but what I just noticed is that the number of views for AAR are typically in the 100s for Wings but are in the 1000s for Sails. That surprised me but maybe the counts aren't accurate.
I must say I had not noticed this discrepancy Paul, but as far as I know both sites are set up on identical lines.
Rob.
I would think so too. Just scan these pages for views per AAR for the current OTT campaign and the Sails 2015 AAR (the latest AAR will be mostly John's and my AAR so roughly a comparable period). If accurate it would seem that the Sails forum has a far great lurker to poster ratio than the Wings one; and that there's far greater interest in Sails of Glory than it appears - which is a good thing. Now to encourage posting by lurkers. However, I will see if I can make it 3 months running for top poster - might be possible with the final 2015 scenario, my Dutch fleet to be completed and maybe a start to the 2016 campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bligh
Vol has also drawn my attention to the fact that site activity has dwindled since we came out of strict Covid measures. Apart from my own posts we only had 128 others in total throughout March, although the number of lurker members is increasing.
I hope that this is not a sign that we are going into a terminal decline, but we are certainly becoming an endangered species.
What we really need seems to be more input of AARs as this draws in even more viewers than the Drome gets in that area.
I was hoping that the ready supply of printed ships would help to gain players, but this does not seem to be the case thus far. So shipmates I implore you to be more active, and any new members please let us know what gave you the incentive to join us.
Remember the old addage. Use it or lose it.
Rob.
Interesting points about numbers and the aar reports.
However the lack of active players does seem to be upheld at the shows we attend.
I find that we get a few looks, but few takers to play our participation games. Those who have played before do keep coming back for a quick fix. The few new players who try out the game all say how much they enjoy the game and like the idea of play from the box, the price of a starter set does seem to put off a few but main is the lack of availability of the sets, yes some available on line but no stand actually sells at shows, same for wings.
We keep attending and we do enjoy playing, maybe if the new sets get released at some point, especially the pirate set, we may see a rise in games.
I am now a bit more readily available for games, plus in a couple of months the intention is to go into semi retirement so even more time for sails and aar, I have a few more scenarios plus now my shipyard is open I have a few merchantmen on the go, this week I will have a few posts ready for April workbench
Personally I'd welcome any age of sail AAR even if not using the SoG rules. There are a lot other age of sails rules out there especially at different scales (e.g., 1/600) that seem to be attracting buyers - and it should be noticed that price doesn't seem to be putting off people buying Blood and Plunder kit - a Spanish Galleon at several hundred USD (real dollars - not my Canuck ones). Yes, there are Facebook groups for all of these rule sets but a forum like this is far, far easier to search for old posts, for organizing posts, photos, post AAR, etc. However, I wouldn't suggest that we push SoG to the side - it's the core of this forum and should remain so, but perhaps opening it up a wee bit wider might attract more people.
Little sailing ships are attractive - if I can use my wife's response to Wings (no comment on from the box kit and "nice" for kit I built) compared to Sails (from the box kit - "wow, those are nice, where did you get those" and also to my recent Portuguese 17th century kit). So even if we don't get a lot of active people on the forum, as we can see from the stats, wee sailing ships attract. Now to get people from attracted to active. Ideas for easy entry? Cheaper ships? Easy to learn rules? SoG isn't that complex but at first glance it can appear daunting.
Yes to PIRATES! Always an attraction. That's one of the benefits of 17th century / early 18th - it's the golden age of buccaneers and pirates.
Annual fee? Maybe it's time to for a formal subscription instead of voluntary donation. Don't know but sometimes paying for something gets people to use it.
Some very good points here shipmates.
We never debarr anyone from displaying or discussing other games here as long as they have a nautical theme.
Where a formal subscription instead of voluntary donation falls down is that it would take some setting up and administerating.I know Keith is not keen to split his time any further with this type of extra work.
Rob.
Good point about administration for a subscription. The voluntary donation just means I need to remind myself to periodically donate - speaking of which, I just tried to donate and got a "things don't seem to we working" response.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bligh
For other rules, personally I'm thinking of complementary ones for skirmish actions and large fleet actions. SoG is good for ship vs ship or squadron vs squadron but it overwhelms me if I get much beyond a 4 on 4 game. One thing that might be of interest is how to convert ship stats into SoG stats/maneouvre decks for other periods such as late 17th and early 18th. Maybe if Ares produces pirate ships we'll get some of that.
Good luck with quantifiable hard numbers... first, hard turn rates and speeds were not exactly well documented at the time nor even subject to good measuring equipment for getting those numbers, and second while Wings is relatively "open source" with hard stats where we can back-figure an unreleased plane's numbers from comparisons with similar-performing aircraft Sails is a lot more "Secret Sauce" in how the math works. (Frankly, I'm not even sure there IS any math, it seems more like "fling spaghetti at the wall and hope it sticks" sometimes. This ad-hoc "on the fly" approach has meant some tight needles to thread, and then there's the blatant Munchkinry with the Spanish...)
Fair enough, the physics of a sailing ship is complex. Perhaps I can use a relative approach for things like assigning manoeuvre decks to older ship designs (i.e. sprit vs jib sails)..Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamondback
Pretty much we've had to use relative comparisons like "better than a 32-gun frigate, worse than a Common 74-gun SOL," which hasn't really left us a lot of room for squeezing in 18pdr frigates, 24pdr superfrigates, 44-gun cruisers, 50-gun cruisers and 64-gun SOL's in that space, nor on the other side a lot of room to squeeze 80-gun SOL's, 90-, 98-, 100- and 110-gun threedeckers in between Large 74's (Temeraire) and 120-gun threedeckers. Similarly, trying to cram 18-gun sloops and 20, 24 and 28-gun Sixth Rates in between Swan and the 32's is a bloody pain... to say nothing of the game's exaggeration in differences between near-peer Amazon and Concorde 32's. (Personally, I use the lighter more maneuverable stats for 32's and the less maneuverable but sturdier for 36's.)
If I'd been in from the conception the first thing I would told 'em would have been to "rack 'em and stack 'em," determine an Upper Bound (Santissima Trinidad), Lower Bound (ships of around 28m LGD; roughly 14-gun, pretty close to Swan) then list the major slots in between and rank from best to worst in speed, maneuvering, firepower and durability, spacing the stats enough to have room between the baselines for each rating to allow stat bumps for exceptionally overperforming or underperforming designs in that class. But that's water under the bridge, the best we can do is try to figure out racking to fill in the holes they've left.
I haven't been active for a while now. In my case it's a temporary shift to actually meeting people for the first time in years. I'll be back when this novelty thing of actually meeting people calms down. Now I'm soon off to Gothenburg to do some Age of Sails gaming and some Jane Austen RPGing. Then I'll be off to a regency ball in Oslo and in May I'm off to Italy to sail on La Grace once more. I haven't left the genre, just not as much Sails of Glory lately. But don't worry... I'll be back!
Good to have you alongside even if only fleetingly Jonas. it has been a bit like the Marie Celeste here of late. I am jealous of your social life. We missed our annual Playford Ball last weekend because Mrs Bligh is awaiting her hip operation. Have a great time on your tour and I look forward to hearing your news next time you dock.
Rob.
Ongoing T&P to both of you on Eileen's operation, prep for and recovery from it and the demands that are going to fall on your shoulders in particular helping carry her along the road back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bligh
Thanks for your concern DB.
The latest on Eileen's operation is that she should have had it last Monday, but on Sunday the hospital rang to say that the aneasthetist was ill. No future date was suggested, so we are just left hanging at the moment.
Rob.
I'm still alive too, but as in the past, my activity here correlates strongly with my vacation times. I work in IT and sit in front of a computer screen for eight to ten hours a day (actually in front of two or three screens :wink: ), so I'm very happy to be able to do something else in my spare time. Then on vacation there usually is the time to catch up on a few things.
Our group is still active, we have about 4-6 dates a year where we meet to play sails of glory. And as usual I will report about our activity from time to time.
@Rob: All the best for Eileen's operation, I cross the fingers that you get a new date soon and everything goes well.
Good to hear from you Achim and also for your best wishes about Eileen.
I look forward to following your group missions.
Rob.