Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 53 of 53

Thread: Collissions

  1. #51

    Default

    Hmm, were you using Entanglement and Boarding rules.....?

    Following a collision, assuming no entanglement, I play a house rule that both ships start next turn at backing sails, which in your case may allow Philadelphia to turn in front of Royal Fortune, especially if Royal Fortune plays a turning card while taken aback on turn 2+. When I referee I also play a house rule so that ships are not locked into multiple turns of "collisions" and let them pass through the next turn, within reason of course.

  2. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmoss View Post
    Regardless if a part 1 or part 2 taken aback maneuver card is placed there's going to be another collision, seemingly the ships stay locked in this position until one or both plays a card the moves them apart? What I decided to do was move both ships incrementally until the next collision took place. In effect the Philadelphia pushes back the Royal Fortune for the next turn. Does this seem appropriate?
    I agree that you would use the 2-hourglass part of the card. And in that case, it seems like a collision could be avoided, given that Royal Fortune would be moving backwards pretty substantially and assuming Philadelphia is still playing a sharp turn as shown in the photo (?)

    It seems like in most or all cases, if two "live" ships are in contact and both commanders want to break contact, it should be possible. But I know I had a jam up where two ships had collided with a surrendered prize, and since the prize couldn't move, it was literally impossible for any of them to break free from the collision...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmoss View Post
    Ironically, although it's hard to see, the last movement lets the Royal Fortune take a shot on the Philadelphia, which has no reciprocal shot at all, outside of musketry.
    These close-quarters situations can feel VERY arbitrary, with minor differences in positioning or facing making a huge difference in the combat potentials. But I think maybe it's realistic, it does seem like actual battles often turned on a small twist of fate allowing one ship a slight positional edge, which it then used to pummel the other with impunity

  3. #53
    Admiral of the White
    Admiral
    United States

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Log Entries
    4,568
    Name
    Jim

    Default

    Thanks all, for the feedback. Your unanimous position on using the 2nd hourglass makes sense and it's how I will proceed in future if this comes up again.

    I wasn't using entanglement or boarding rules.

    If I go with Rob's call on the actual movement Ship A moves first, but cannot move as it is already base to base with Ship B. Then Ship B would move using phase 2 of the #5 taken aback maneuver. That's not how I did it, but if I had it would have put the distance of the #5 taken aback card between the Philadelphia and the Royal Fortune. I can see the logic in this.

    On the other hand I can see why Eric has a House Rule that addresses these situations. Rules, House Rules and common sense should allow me to handle this in future.

    Thanks again!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •