PDA

View Full Version : SoG vs. WoG



7eat51
10-24-2013, 22:52
I reread the SoG rules today in preparation for running games this weekend. It made me wonder how SoG will compare to WoG in terms of being my favorite. As much as I like WoG, and I do like WoG very much, I think SoG will give it a run for the money in our household.

To some extent, I see SoG wind and WoG altitude balancing each other - similarly, SoG shore batteries and WoG ground-to-air fire. When I consider that SoG has different types of ammo, boarding, entanglement, and musketry, the scales start to move. However, WoG has bombers, Zeppelins/balloons, and Clipper creations, so a bit tipping back. SoG has smoke and fog; WoG has clouds. Both games will have a variety of plane/ship types from different periods and different nations. SoG has model potential, though of a slightly different scale (I'm thinking of the beautiful 1:1200 ships we have seen folks share here); WoG has Shapeways and other manufacturers - so both games have potential for additional pieces beyond those offered by Ares. It will be interesting to see how this duel unfolds in our household. Of course, to do it justice, I will have to invest more in both games to ensure thorough comparisons.

Edit: One could also compare SoG raking vs. WoG subsequent hits receiving the +1 bonus, special damage (it seems WoG has a bit more though there are SoG damage chits that have both ship and crew damage).

The Royal Hajj
10-25-2013, 06:35
I think the core rules for SGN are much deeper and I see more people playing scenarios then we see in the Wings games. Where I think we will see SGN fall behind Wings is in that there will not be as much verity between the play style of individual ships. So far all the SOLs have the same wind zones and nearly identical maneuvers. Same for the frigates. The maneuver cards for the SOLs are just a subset from the frigates, only at a slower speed.

Another advantage to SGN, you can use 3D terrain with out it interfering with game play at all... something that at least limits it's use in Wings.

7eat51
10-25-2013, 08:18
I wonder if we'll see custom maneuver cards being developed based on the characteristics of given ships/classes. It will be interesting to see what type of stats/technical group is formed here.

Old Ironsides
10-25-2013, 09:10
Tough call...I just last night I packed some of my WoG(WWI and WWII) stuff for ROCKCON. I doubt I will get in any of the offical events, but hping for a pick up game or two SAT AM or even Sunday depending how long SoG goes. It reminded me how much I really enjoy both games when I have had the opportunity to play. I really like both WoG games although I do not get to play nearly as much as I would like I own one of everything.

Now that I have reclaimed my game room I can leave tables up with a game out so set up will not be such a pain to play a quick game.

My issue with CONS is I enjoy running games as much as playing so I have not had the opportunity to participate that much. In the future I think I will limit myself to running one event so I am free to fly or sail. Cons are such a target rich enivironment with seaseoned and new players it is a tough call between teaching the games you love and actually playing.

7eat51
10-25-2013, 09:16
Now that I have reclaimed my game room I can leave tables up with a game out so set up will not be such a pain to play a quick game.

Have you looked at the solo WoG rules, and campaigns like OTT or play-by-email?

Old Ironsides
10-25-2013, 09:28
Have you looked at the solo WoG rules, and campaigns like OTT or play-by-email?

No I have not explored that probably for the same reason I do not regularly play video games. I prefer the face to face competition. If I have alone hobby time I have a huge backlog of modeling projects for my other games already. :erk:

The Mad Hatter
10-25-2013, 10:23
Hey guys, new around here, but thought I'd chime in on something. Take a look at the Kickstarter page, Kickstarter exclusive ship packs. Look at the two frigates or the two SoL models - the red/yellow/green zones are different (slightly different for the two frigates, slightly different for the two SoL). So the ships are slightly different in terms of performance.

As a side note, I'm currently reading a book, Fighting at Sea in the Eighteenth Century by Sam Willis, and it talks a lot about how different ships performed better and had different optimum points of sail. So while it may only be slightly different, looking at the cards matches up with the historical perspective - i.e. the Concorde could get away from the Juno by sailing closer to the windward point due to the red/orange difference in their cards. It may not quite be as obvious a difference as Wings, but there is a difference if those ships are the final card versions being shown.

Another interesting point I think in terms of difference is, there really weren't that many different classes of ship in a given period. Just as an example, in the 1790s-1800, there were about a dozen "classes" of 74 Gun SoL that were produced in France. ~90% of them were the Téméraire class (1782 onwards), most other classifications in that period having only 4-6 ships of that class ever being built. The Téméraire class has almost 100 ships built of that design, so just going by numbers...a big number of 74 gunners you'd encounter would be of that class (with all the swapping back and forth of ships, also makes things interesting). After 1800, it's almost all Téméraire class ships (even the Pluton is just a smaller Téméraire class ). Not trying to get too technical or in the weeds, but I guess I'm driving towards the point of asking the question, should there be a lot of difference between 74's?

RichardPF
10-25-2013, 10:31
Hey guys, new around here, but thought I'd chime in on something. Take a look at the Kickstarter page, Kickstarter exclusive ship packs. Look at the two frigates or the two SoL models - the red/yellow/green zones are different (slightly different for the two frigates, slightly different for the two SoL). So the ships are slightly different in terms of performance.

As a side note, I'm currently reading a book, Fighting at Sea in the Eighteenth Century by Sam Willis, and it talks a lot about how different ships performed better and had different optimum points of sail. So while it may only be slightly different, looking at the cards matches up with the historical perspective - i.e. the Concorde could get away from the Juno by sailing closer to the windward point due to the red/orange difference in their cards. It may not quite be as obvious a difference as Wings, but there is a difference if those ships are the final card versions being shown.

Another interesting point I think in terms of difference is, there really weren't that many different classes of ship in a given period. Just as an example, in the 1790s-1800, there were about a dozen "classes" of 74 Gun SoL that were produced in France. ~90% of them were the Téméraire class (1782 onwards), most other classifications in that period having only 4-6 ships of that class ever being built. The Téméraire class has almost 100 ships built of that design, so just going by numbers...a big number of 74 gunners you'd encounter would be of that class (with all the swapping back and forth of ships, also makes things interesting). After 1800, it's almost all Téméraire class ships (even the Pluton is just a smaller Téméraire class ). Not trying to get too technical or in the weeds, but I guess I'm driving towards the point of asking the question, should there be a lot of difference between 74's?

From what we have seen so far there are already some differences already built into the game between same rated ships. This will likely increase with subsequent releases of new ships.

RichardPF
10-25-2013, 10:42
Have you looked at the solo WoG rules, and campaigns like OTT or play-by-email?

I have spent a lot of time looking at the algorithms underlying the WoG solo game movement logic.

This is an implementation of AI (often classified as Weak AI) because it is expert rule based.
My "Day Job" often involves writing some AI code so this type of problem is near and dear to me.

Doing something similar in SGN is certainly possible though dealing with the challenges presented by wind direction would be interesting.
The solo rules may also have use where two individuals wanted to play out a scenario of commanding multiple ships.
Using some type of automatic action to control all but each flagship might be a good way to simulate the inefficiencies that would actually be present when commanding remote ships.

Large numbers of ships controlled in this manner might actually lead to something known as emergent behavior! and at that point, you are stepping into the world of Strong AI.

OK, my WAAAY TOO GEEKY warning light is flashing so I will stop now...

The Mad Hatter
10-25-2013, 10:42
What I think will be interesting is comparing the card decks between ships. From a historical perspective, people always found it interesting that two ships of the same class could perform at their optimum performance at different points of the wind. From what I've read, that was a key part of the captain's understanding - at which points of the wind could his ship out sail other ships. I'm not sure if there's a way to model that in the game, but it is an interesting aspect of how much building these ships was a form of art versus what we'd think of in terms of modern day production! I.e. every Toyota Carolla coming off the line performs just about the same - but it was pretty obvious to the captains of the day that not every Téméraire class ship performed the same as every other.

David Manley
10-25-2013, 10:48
I wonder if we'll see custom maneuver cards being developed based on the characteristics of given ships/classes. It will be interesting to see what type of stats/technical group is formed here.

Within ship types we shouldn't see that much variation - but it should be extremely straightforward to represent the sailing characteristics of different types of rigs, fore-and-aft in particular, through the way they are represented in the manoeuvre cards.

RichardPF
10-25-2013, 10:55
I reread the SoG rules today in preparation for running games this weekend. It made me wonder how SoG will compare to WoG in terms of being my favorite. As much as I like WoG, and I do like WoG very much, I think SoG will give it a run for the money in our household.

To some extent, I see SoG wind and WoG altitude balancing each other - similarly, SoG shore batteries and WoG ground-to-air fire. When I consider that SoG has different types of ammo, boarding, entanglement, and musketry, the scales start to move. However, WoG has bombers, Zeppelins/balloons, and Clipper creations, so a bit tipping back. SoG has smoke and fog; WoG has clouds. Both games will have a variety of plane/ship types from different periods and different nations. SoG has model potential, though of a slightly different scale (I'm thinking of the beautiful 1:1200 ships we have seen folks share here); WoG has Shapeways and other manufacturers - so both games have potential for additional pieces beyond those offered by Ares. It will be interesting to see how this duel unfolds in our household. Of course, to do it justice, I will have to invest more in both games to ensure thorough comparisons.

Edit: One could also compare SoG raking vs. WoG subsequent hits receiving the +1 bonus, special damage (it seems WoG has a bit more though there are SoG damage chits that have both ship and crew damage).

I am expecting to find that the more to scale turning radii make SGN movement seem much more realistic.
I am a bit concerned, however, in how the reduced effective fire range will affect realism and tactics that develop.

The bottom line to me of things like this is the way that this will impact optimal battle strategy.
If it turns out that the best way to fight a battle is far removed from the strategy of the time that actually emerged, it will be a bit disappointing.

Regardless, the ships and "living dioramas" presented by the game will be amazing.
Every move will be a photo op, especially at macro lens distances.

The Mad Hatter
10-25-2013, 11:02
I agree with RichardPF on this - the make it or break it point, for me anyways, is will the game have the "feel" of historical ship to ship combat based on what I perceive it to be? As Richard points out, games where the best way to win isn't at all in line with historical strategies of the time lose a great deal of charm for me. Just one guys opinion though!

David Manley
10-25-2013, 11:22
It has that "feel" for frigate actions, I'm reserving judgement on bigger actions just yet.

The Mad Hatter
10-25-2013, 11:43
David, from what I've seen (never played thus far) I'd agree. Lets line up a dozen or so 74s on a table and duke it out and see how that goes?

Nightmoss
10-25-2013, 11:45
I'm hardly an expert on this topic, but we might also want to consider the refit status of ships? IIRC the Royal Sovereign sailed faster than Victory at Trafalgar because of a recent re-coppering of her hull. If this is accurate than special status cards for ships might be worth considering?

To be honest I'm not too concerned with ship class differences as the game is still unpublished. I'm sure rules errata, balances, etc., will take place once people start playing it in earnest.

Old Ironsides
10-25-2013, 11:48
I just finished read Basic-Advanced rules at lunch. I have not seen any models or cards yet, this weekend will be the first time. It does look like they have some varying features built in for things like Bulk and Veer unless they are the same for all frigates and SoL.

IMO these ratings are an opportuity to make similar ships different just like similar planes perform differently.

DeRuyter
10-25-2013, 11:55
It has that "feel" for frigate actions, I'm reserving judgement on bigger actions just yet.

I agree. Looks good for small squadrons of mixed ships operating with a plan but independently (as was shown by the recent demo AARs). For larger actions you'd need house rules for signals and follow the leader type movement to stay in line of battle. Maybe boring for some players, especially those used to WoG, at least until the firing starts!!

Eric

Pseudotheist
10-25-2013, 18:48
To some extent, I see SoG wind and WoG altitude balancing each other
Personally, I think this is the telling difference. at a basic rules level, these are mostly the same game. But then you have the Wings of Glory altitude rules trying to shoehorn a third dimension into a fundamentally two-dimensional system that was never designed to properly accomodate it. The altitude rules feel kludgy and tacked on, becasue they were, and don't really capture any of the potential energy effects that altitude should have. Ships, on the other hand, never have to break out of the two dimensional plane that the basic system accomodates so well, and the wind rules look like they will blend pretty seamlessly into the system, elegantly adding tactical complexity.

7eat51
10-25-2013, 22:44
Personally, I think this is the telling difference. at a basic rules level, these are mostly the same game. But then you have the Wings of Glory altitude rules trying to shoehorn a third dimension into a fundamentally two-dimensional system that was never designed to properly accomodate it. The altitude rules feel kludgy and tacked on, becasue they were, and don't really capture any of the potential energy effects that altitude should have. Ships, on the other hand, never have to break out of the two dimensional plane that the basic system accomodates so well, and the wind rules look like they will blend pretty seamlessly into the system, elegantly adding tactical complexity.

The more I play with altitude, the less I enjoy playing with altitude. Maybe I have not seen altitude differences executed well.

This evening, I was able to play one of the SoG demo games. It was a lot of fun. I think everyone playing would agree that it will take a bit getting used to the effects of wind, especially coming off of playing WoG where wind is not an issue. I didn't consider wind when positioning my ships, and then I got caught for a couple of turns in a taken aback position. Working my way out of that was informative. It will be an experience once we incorporate wind changes.

From a pure enjoyment standpoint, I, personally, rank wind higher than altitude. Maybe with more experience being part of games in which altitude is done well that could change.

Coog
10-25-2013, 23:30
The more I play with altitude, the less I enjoy playing with altitude. Maybe I have not seen altitude differences executed well.

I like using altitude, especially when using a plane like a SPAD that turns poorly.

RichardPF
10-26-2013, 01:45
The more I play with altitude, the less I enjoy playing with altitude. Maybe I have not seen altitude differences executed well.

This evening, I was able to play one of the SoG demo games. It was a lot of fun. I think everyone playing would agree that it will take a bit getting used to the effects of wind, especially coming off of playing WoG where wind is not an issue. I didn't consider wind when positioning my ships, and then I got caught for a couple of turns in a taken aback position. Working my way out of that was informative. It will be an experience once we incorporate wind changes.

From a pure enjoyment standpoint, I, personally, rank wind higher than altitude. Maybe with more experience being part of games in which altitude is done well that could change.

To me, the difficulty with altitude is the fact that you either need to spend a lot of time adding and removing pegs from the base or just "imagine" that the planes are at different altitudes.
I don't think that either are a good solution, but can't think of anything better.

I have not had the opportunity to play SGN at any of the events, but I think I can visualize how things will go to at least some degree.
I would think that using wind direction and speed really does not require anything like that level of game play interruption or the need to visualize something that is not present on table (since wind is invisible anyway).

When I learned to sail, a lot of my time in the early stages was spent learning how to assess wind speed and direction since wind is not visible.
Next came learning to position the boat to take advantage of that wind speed and direction.
This seems amazingly close to what the learning curve for effectively using the SGN wind rules will require.
I think that that is all to the good.

One thing that I have not spent time with is calculating or simulating how rapid wind speed and direction changes will happen in the game when those rules are used.
My reading of the rules gives me the first impression that these changes may actually happen too often.
Wind on the ocean, especially offshore, is usually pretty steady over the course of a few hours.

Comte de Brueys
10-26-2013, 01:58
Some WW I planes like the Fokker Dr.I develop only with altitude rules their full strength.

Just a reminder. :wink:

David Manley
10-26-2013, 02:25
For larger actions you'd need house rules for signals and follow the leader type movement to stay in line of battle.

I agree with the signalling rules (got those squared away already). But definitely NOT "follow the leader" rules. The rules should reward historic play and should punish play that IRL would have brought disaster on the perpetrator. Ships commanders of the time didn't just "follow the leader", they had to sail their ships and that sometimes meant their ships didn't end up exactly where they wanted them. So fleet sailing orders took that into account, spacing was such that commanders within a squadron or fleet had the appropriate time to react etc. And squadrons that were better drilled at close quarter manoeuvring benefitted. so it should be here. Play a few games, get it wrong, get hammered if needs be and learn from it. Players will, I think, ultimately find this far more rewarding than having a rules mechanism that takes away the need to learn how to handle their ships properly.

David Manley
10-26-2013, 02:28
Some WW I planes like the Fokker Dr.I develop only with altitude rules their full strength.

Just a reminder. :wink:

True, but even so it is surprising to see how many seasoned players pass on applying the altitude rules. I was expecting the Prague event to be a full-on altitude peg-laden heightfest what with all the considerable experience around the WW1 table. But no-one seemed all that fussed that we were playing in 2D and, in fact, quite a few were relieved.

Pseudotheist
10-26-2013, 13:38
One thing that I have not spent time with is calculating or simulating how rapid wind speed and direction changes will happen in the game when those rules are used.
My reading of the rules gives me the first impression that these changes may actually happen too often.
Wind on the ocean, especially offshore, is usually pretty steady over the course of a few hours.
If you look in this thread (http://www.sailsofglory.org/showthread.php?1585-Windage-Dice&p=17997#post17997) I've actually run the numbers on the likelihood of at least one wind change for a game lasting a given number of turns. There's a 50% likelihood at about 6 turns. I'm sure it more common than average weather patterns, but there's something to be said about implementing a mechanic that is never likely to come into play...

7eat51
10-28-2013, 21:34
I am a bit concerned, however, in how the reduced effective fire range will affect realism and tactics that develop.

I played a couple of Aaron's WWII Naval Thunder games at Rock-Con this weekend - my first time playing WWII naval minis. Range was a definite factor in developing tactics - very cool, indeed.

As we have discussed somewhere on the Anchorage, SoG is not a mini game like Naval Thunder, but more of a family game, if you will. I wonder if folks will approach SoG accordingly, i.e. not have the same expectations or motivations for playing. Even with firing taking place in one ruler or less, SoG is a lot of fun. It would be nice to see some house rules for range, though. It would give options based on desired realism.


I like using altitude, especially when using a plane like a SPAD that turns poorly.


Some WW I planes like the Fokker Dr.I develop only with altitude rules their full strength.


True, but even so it is surprising to see how many seasoned players pass on applying the altitude rules. I was expecting the Prague event to be a full-on altitude peg-laden heightfest what with all the considerable experience around the WW1 table. But no-one seemed all that fussed that we were playing in 2D and, in fact, quite a few were relieved.

I learned a lot from this weekend's games about different plane capabilities. I am rethinking my attitude toward altitude. I can see how as I mature as a player, I will grow to appreciate it more.

RichardPF
10-28-2013, 23:54
True, but even so it is surprising to see how many seasoned players pass on applying the altitude rules. I was expecting the Prague event to be a full-on altitude peg-laden heightfest what with all the considerable experience around the WW1 table. But no-one seemed all that fussed that we were playing in 2D and, in fact, quite a few were relieved.

I really like the visuals that you get with the greatly varied height you can create with the pegs, but for me juggling pegs all the time just kills the game play dynamic.
Since it can be implemented without the fuss and still give an accurate visual, it seems like wind has quite an advantage in this regard.

7eat51
10-29-2013, 00:05
I really like the visuals that you get with the greatly varied height you can create with the pegs, but for me juggling pegs all the time just kills the game play dynamic.
Since it can be implemented without the fuss and still give an accurate visual, it seems like wind has quite an advantage in this regard.

With WoG, the pegs give opponents an idea as to altitude; with SoG, the sails do not give a corresponding idea as to speed. I wonder if there would be value in some form of markers to place on the base to show sail settings, or some rule that if you're within x-number of rulers, you must be informed of sail changes.

The Royal Hajj
10-29-2013, 07:48
The more I play with altitude, the less I enjoy playing with altitude. Maybe I have not seen altitude differences executed well.


I think this boils down to the loss of firing solutions. With altitude, there are a lot of opportunities you can not shoot due to the differences where you would be able to if you were not using them. So they make for a slower, less action packed game. But I can tell you, when you are involved in a game where altitude makes all the difference between living and dying, you will love it. In a campaign game of Knights of the Air, my ace was the last German flying after a bombing run on an Entente supply depot. There I was all alone in my Dr.I, 5 feet of game table separating me and my "friendly lines". And who was I sharing the skies with, 4 or 5 allied pilots flying a mix of SPAD XIIIs and SE5s!! This was back before the altitude climb rate tweaks. I managed to make it back to within about 3 moves of my table edge be skill full use of climbing and diving. That was the most tense and rewarding game of the entire campaign... not just to me, but all the players (even those shot down early in the game).



One thing that I have not spent time with is calculating or simulating how rapid wind speed and direction changes will happen in the game when those rules are used.
My reading of the rules gives me the first impression that these changes may actually happen too often.
Wind on the ocean, especially offshore, is usually pretty steady over the course of a few hours.

I don't think we will be seeing the wind change direction that often, and when it does, it'll only be by one degree (from N to NE). On the rare occation that it does change more rapidly, I think those will be the games remembered and have the most exciting "fluff" generated to go with them.


With WoG, the pegs give opponents an idea as to altitude; with SoG, the sails do not give a corresponding idea as to speed. I wonder if there would be value in some form of markers to place on the base to show sail settings, or some rule that if you're within x-number of rulers, you must be informed of sail changes.

Everyone should have three sets of masts/sails that they can swap out on the ship during play. lol A valid point though.

DeRuyter
10-29-2013, 13:47
I agree with the signalling rules (got those squared away already). But definitely NOT "follow the leader" rules. The rules should reward historic play and should punish play that IRL would have brought disaster on the perpetrator. Ships commanders of the time didn't just "follow the leader", they had to sail their ships and that sometimes meant their ships didn't end up exactly where they wanted them. So fleet sailing orders took that into account, spacing was such that commanders within a squadron or fleet had the appropriate time to react etc. And squadrons that were better drilled at close quarter manoeuvring benefitted. so it should be here. Play a few games, get it wrong, get hammered if needs be and learn from it. Players will, I think, ultimately find this far more rewarding than having a rules mechanism that takes away the need to learn how to handle their ships properly.

I suppose you are right, players will learn from experience to sail in formation. As we have seen with the demo games, there's likely to be some collisions along the way!

DeRuyter
10-29-2013, 13:49
I really like the visuals that you get with the greatly varied height you can create with the pegs, but for me juggling pegs all the time just kills the game play dynamic.
Since it can be implemented without the fuss and still give an accurate visual, it seems like wind has quite an advantage in this regard.

Perhaps this is the wrong forum for this question, but since it came up! Does anyone use telescoping rods with WoG?

Gunner
10-29-2013, 14:37
Perhaps this is the wrong forum for this question, but since it came up! Does anyone use telescoping rods with WoG?

Just with Canvas Eagles.

The base is too big for WoG.

Old Ironsides
10-29-2013, 14:40
I learned a lot from this weekend's games about different plane capabilities. I am rethinking my attitude toward altitude. I can see how as I mature as a player, I will grow to appreciate it more.

Sorry I have to ask...was the primary lesson you learned that two friendly planes cannot occupy the same altitude and location at the same time? :happy:

7eat51
10-29-2013, 18:00
Perhaps this is the wrong forum for this question, but since it came up! Does anyone use telescoping rods with WoG?

Clipper does with some of his creations, but I am not sure if he does with scouts.


Sorry I have to ask...was the primary lesson you learned that two friendly planes cannot occupy the same altitude and location at the same time? :happy:

I think the primary lesson I learned is that I am my worst enemy. I just flew a mission for OTT, and I successfully avoided myself, however.

So, what are the rules for collisions in NT? :wink: