Tacking action?

[7eat51]

This game won't last long if ARES doesn't sit up and take notice.

I would disagree. This game might not last long among a certain group of players who might not be too drawn to SoG for other reasons, as previous discussions about 1:1000 scale, etc. have shown. I believe SoG, like WoG before her, are designed for the causal player who wants a fair level of feel, rather than for war-gamers per se. What I find rather amazing is the breadth of appeal; I have had war-gamers and non-war-gamers play at the same table with equal enjoyment.

whilst I personally would overhaul SGN and introduce a host of events and outcomes that could be resolved very quickly and simply with a die throw I would be loathe to suggest them here as it runs counter to the diceless ethos of the system.

Please, suggest away.

Personally, I like the development of house rules. I can employ them as I see fit based on the goal of any given gaming session. I have benefited from being a member of both sites by learning from the depth of knowledge and experience of others, and seeing how that knowledge and depth get translated into house rules.

Up to this point, I have found the basic and standard rules sufficient for many enjoyable gaming sessions. We, sometimes, play with a couple of the advanced or optional rules, but most of the folks I play with are content without too much added beyond standard.

[Dobbs]

IMHO the red cards represent a tack that did not go so well. During the first hourglass, the captain uses his ship's dwindling momentum to keep pushing through the eye of the wind. If that is not enough, for the second hourglass, he has the crew boxhaul the rig and push the bow the rest of the way through the wind as the ship is blown backwards by the backing sails. It is similar to backing the jib and putting the helm over the other way on a modern sailboat, only a tad more complicated. As far as introducing a probability factor, it would have to be a fairly remote chance of failure. These captains were professionals responsible for an important part of their country's strategic well-being (Victory alone had a greater weight of shot than Napoleon's entire army at Waterloo). Would you risk that on something with a 1 in 6 failure rate?

I like the idea of not being able to fire while using red cards, but all in all, I think the rules are a good compromise between playability and reality.

[David Manley]

Would you risk that on something with a 1 in 6 failure rate?

Depends on what you call "failure", it could, for instance, be a delayed execution rather than the ship going into irons. I agree that for an average crew in benign conditions the chances should be very low, but throw in green crews, adverse weather and sea conditions and (especially) rigging damage and it becomes MUCH harder t accomplish (which explains why wearing was often the preferred option)

[Dobbs]

To liven things up, one could always add a level of randomness, and if things do not turn out favorably, the player could randomly draw one of the other two red cards and use the 2nd hourglass maneuver for what his ship ends up doing.