Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 63 of 63

Thread: Hull damage, crew casualties and crew actions

  1. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    I think you mean "_Bonhomme Richard_ and _Serapis_".
    No I'm pretty sure it was Bon Homme Richard and Guerriere, everyone has a purpose in life, and mine is to make other people look smarter by opening my mouth !

  2. #52

    Default

    Constitution and Guerriere
    Bon Homme Richard and Serapis

  3. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post
    In the abstraction of the game, this reflects the crew moving more slowly among fallen debris and such. And operating a partially crippled ship, with more effort and less efficiency. Some crew would also be drained to urgent duties. Overall, this means that the number of actions available decreases on a damaged ship.
    I understand the way you intend the rules work, but it's obvious something needs to be clearer in the presentation.

    On a different note: I do not agree with the logic that the crew is drained to urgent duties or is less efficient. Here are two reasons why:
    1) The musketry rating ignores hull damage and only goes off crew damage. The logic for any explanation of the hull damage affecting the crew falls apart if they can freely abandon all those explanations for musketry. It has to either apply to both or neither..or it just doesn't make sense.
    2) "Urgent duties". What could be more urgent than a fire damage marker or a leak marker? Whatever non-descript nebulous damage the crew would have been tending to would be dropped in a heartbeat to put out a raging fire. If they can drop that "urgent duty" to fire a musket, they can drop it to put out a raging fire.

  4. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Blozinski View Post
    I understand the way you intend the rules work, but it's obvious something needs to be clearer in the presentation.

    On a different note: I do not agree with the logic that the crew is drained to urgent duties or is less efficient. Here are two reasons why:
    1) The musketry rating ignores hull damage and only goes off crew damage. The logic for any explanation of the hull damage affecting the crew falls apart if they can freely abandon all those explanations for musketry. It has to either apply to both or neither..or it just doesn't make sense.
    2) "Urgent duties". What could be more urgent than a fire damage marker or a leak marker? Whatever non-descript nebulous damage the crew would have been tending to would be dropped in a heartbeat to put out a raging fire. If they can drop that "urgent duty" to fire a musket, they can drop it to put out a raging fire.
    I agree with what you say Andy but, I backed down because the rules and reasons have been stated by Ares, and rules are rules and we do need a common base.
    But I'm sure groups will have their own house rules.

  5. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunner View Post
    I agree with what you say Andy but, I backed down because the rules and reasons have been stated by Ares, and rules are rules and we do need a common base.
    But I'm sure groups will have their own house rules.
    The point system is going to be fluid (per statement from Ares) and likely to change as an electronic document. The rules, being widely distributed electronically, can be equally as fluid. I'm just trying to get the point out now in case they make any changes. There is room for improvement.
    I'll likely be house ruling this.

  6. #56
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Maybe the assumption is that musketry is being performed by marines, naval infantry, etc. and therefore a smaller pool of personnel who are also less likely - or maybe even trained - to do DC

  7. #57
    Landsman
    United States

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Arizona
    Log Entries
    22
    Name
    James

    Default

    I believe that I remember Andrea stating that musketry, and boarding, was handled by the Marines rather than the "crew" of Crew Actions.

    Regardless, these rules work fine for now, and the simplicity is what drew me to the game (as in WoG). I think we can weigh anchor this for now.

    Cheers!

  8. #58
    Comptroller of the Navy Board
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    4,298
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    Try thinking of it as "First Release is a Public Beta Test", establishing the basic rule-set and letting us handle the debugging and enhancing for historical realism, etc.

    Axis & Allies War at Sea saw the game rules almost completely rewritten before the second set was released, based on reported results with Set 1, for example.

  9. #59
    2nd Lieutenant
    United States

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Log Entries
    576
    Name
    Paul

    Default

    As David mentioned above, and to clarify crew assignments more completely in a general sense;
    Marines were the only ship's company armed with muskets, gun crews were kept to their guns until ordered to their boarding/repel boarders stations, if they were given a fire arm (pistol or musketoon) for such work it was generally a one shot deal as the weapons were loaded by the gunner's mate in charge of the armory before being issued. A select group of topmen were stationed aloft to handle the sails in battle, while another small select group were stationed to handle hauling lines. The "wasters" (those not otherwise assigned) were left to deal with damage control, fires, as well as hauling away the dead and wounded as needed. That's the general breakdown of the crew assignments. Each man of the crew knew what his assignment was, and who the petty officer in charge he was required to report to during battle.

  10. #60
    Retired Admiral of the Fleet
    Admiral
    United States

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago/Bloomington IL
    Log Entries
    5,095
    Name
    Eric

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diamondback View Post
    Try thinking of it as "First Release is a Public Beta Test", establishing the basic rule-set and letting us handle the debugging and enhancing for historical realism, etc.
    One nice thing about GMT is the living rules links on the different game pages. I have several games in which the rules are 2.0 or some such thing. I cannot imagine a new game like SoG would have a set of rules in place that would not need some tweaking, in time. WoG has been out a lot longer, and folks are still developing house rules, some of which are well worth adopting.

  11. #61
    Master & Commander
    United States

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Log Entries
    2,027
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmiracle View Post
    No I'm pretty sure it was Bon Homme Richard and Guerriere, everyone has a purpose in life, and mine is to make other people look smarter by opening my mouth !
    Well, if the game lasts long enough, maybe we can see what Jones could have done against Dacres.... >;)

  12. #62
    2nd Lieutenant
    Serbia

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Србија
    Log Entries
    539
    Name
    Heмaњa

    Default

    Reduced number of actions makes crew to do what is urgent - stop the leak or fight fire.

    House rule could cover redeploying of marines to ship-saving duties, when such action is necessary.

    For example:

    Move 1 - marines shot musketry (or not).
    Move 2 - marines are announced to help the crew. Can't shoot musketry, preparing for new duty.
    Move 3 - marines used as firefighters. Can't shoot musketry. Can continue to fight fire, or can be transfered to leaks.
    Move 4 - assuming action was successful, marines are returning to their posts. Can't shoot musketry.
    Move 5 - Marines can shoot musketry again.

  13. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Paul View Post
    As David mentioned above, and to clarify crew assignments more completely in a general sense;
    Marines were the only ship's company armed with muskets, gun crews were kept to their guns until ordered to their boarding/repel boarders stations, if they were given a fire arm (pistol or musketoon) for such work it was generally a one shot deal as the weapons were loaded by the gunner's mate in charge of the armory before being issued. A select group of topmen were stationed aloft to handle the sails in battle, while another small select group were stationed to handle hauling lines. The "wasters" (those not otherwise assigned) were left to deal with damage control, fires, as well as hauling away the dead and wounded as needed. That's the general breakdown of the crew assignments. Each man of the crew knew what his assignment was, and who the petty officer in charge he was required to report to during battle.
    Well said. I was about to chime in with marines when I saw David's post and now yours.

    One other point is that the damages tracks also represent crew morale whether due to casualties or ship damage. So you can also view the damage tracks as both affecting crew morale leading to a reduction in game actions.

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
  •