The optional rule "Continuous Fire:" Why would you NOT use that (if being used)

[Pseudotheist]

Except that reloading drives the action system in the game, which is a nice tactical addition to the *oG system. Ditch Continuous Fire instead and you preserve a more intersting game mechanic.

[csadn]

Except that reloading drives the action system in the game, which is a nice tactical addition to the *oG system. Ditch Continuous Fire instead and you preserve a more intersting game mechanic.

I know the gamers up here would be less impressed by only being able to fire every alternate turn at-best, given how loathed the WoG turn-sequence is ("we've been playing twelve turns, and we've only gotten off three shots").

Oh, well -- at least I now know who to blame.... >;)

[David Manley]

Oh, well -- at least I now know who to blame.... >;)

Feel free

[The Royal Hajj]

Except that reloading drives the action system in the game, which is a nice tactical addition to the *oG system. Ditch Continuous Fire instead and you preserve a more intersting game mechanic.

Not for me. The fact that there is an official rule that completely removes them and the game can still function shows that they are not the driving factors. Firing and reloading are just two of many actions that need to be considered. As DeRuyter points out above, the gun crews have little effect on the sailing of the ship. I don't think repair crews were part of gun crews either... so not having actions for shooting/reloading would just simulate that the gun crews did what they did... always. The non fighting crews would be where a captain would have to make decisions on what to do with.

I'm with you on the mechanics are more interesting with the normal fire rules and had this rule not been introduced, I'd would say not to have it... or at least not in this form.