PDA

View Full Version : First Game, thoughts and observations. Is it a balanced game?



Moideeb
01-09-2014, 10:54
I finally got to play my first games of sails of glory last night, and have a few observations about the game.

Firstly as I’m sure by now most people are aware by now, the quality of the ships out of the box is excellent, I don’t have my mats yet so I cant comments on the quality of those. I did paint the spars on HMS Terpsichore before we played, but Iwas surprised how little I noticed the fact while we were actually playing. Both my friend and I quickly got caught up in trying to outmaneuver each other and noting the fine detail on the ships went out the window. This is an interesting contrast to me to other games, where when its not your turn you find yourself looking at pieces and thinking if you could make them better. Of course I still intend to paint all my ships spars and wash the sails, as it will just make them look even better than they look already.

The first game we played was a basic game with the two frigates out of the box, HMS Terpsichore and Courageuse. I played the Royal Navy with my friend playing the French. After both of us fighting to gain the weather gage and failing and some battering of broadsides it was all over realtivley quickly, with HMS Terpsichore going to the bottom. After this we decided to have another game playing with the standard rules.

The standard rules added a lot more fun into the game, but also a lot more confusion. We each took a frigate and a ship of the line, with me being the traitor to my country this time by playing the French. The delayed movement card certainly changed the game play for the better, but also managed to enable us to crash our ships of the line head on with each other, as we failed to remember how much earlier you need to turn. With our SOLs collided, my frigate unfortunately sailed right passed his capital ship and received a full broadside at point bank range through her vulnerable stern. The effect of which was to turn a trim Frigate fresh out of port into a floating wreck, with hardly any guns left in action.

This was not a great start for me and I foresaw another crushing defeat looming all too quickly. Fortunately for me, after disengaging our SOLs the change of direction to ships on movement from the collision caused the British SOL to careen into the British frigate, while the British frigate also ran headfirst into the broadside of my SOL (The Courageuse) The effect of a friendly SOL hitting a frigate is devastating, the Terpsichore had to draw 5 B tokens from the collision alone. This combined with a simultaneous broadside through the bow from my SOL, the British frigate was sunk in a single turn.

After this bloody turn our ships separated and once again vied for the weather gauge. Eventually the superior firing power of my French SOL and marginally better handling, won out against the British. I was able to win with a mostly sunk, but still afloat frigate and a SOL with only 50% damage.

Some things I noted with the game. Veer is hard to remember. Remembering what your previous card was to calculate the veer seems difficult at best. It would seem odd to have to keep the card on the table to remember it, because that would put that card out of action, as there are only two of each card. This seems an odd oversight to me. As a result we chose to avoid veer until we figure out a solution other than having to write down the veer of the previous card each time.

Secondly it seems to me that the French ships offer a significant advantage over the British ships that creates what appears to be an unequal game. With the British historically winning the vast majority of engagements, due to being both better sailors and gunners, plus every captain remembering what happened to Admiral Bing. I realise that the French did make better ships, but I still find that this disparity makes winning engagements much harder for British captains and much easier for French.

As a game as a whole, I am very impressed with this and have already arranged a game for later this month for 12 people, that should be a lot of fun, though with only me having played before, we will likely keep to the basic rules, with raking added in.

DeRuyter
01-09-2014, 11:07
Adding the optional rule for "Gunners lacking training" to the French side may help out. Possible "Sailors lacking training" as well.

fredmiracle
01-09-2014, 11:25
It does seem like devising very closely balanced engagements on such a small scale is pretty hard. The difference between the two types of SOLs is fairly significant, and the difference between 2 and 3 burden frigates can also be pretty big. On the other hand, the inexperienced crew rules appear to be a very blunt-force weapon that could easily tip the scales the other way.

Of course if you work at it and go beyond the starter set, you can match up two nearly identical ships against each other, since each model was done for both sides. But that seems a bit contrived.

If there is a skill/experience difference between the two players, then the disparities could be used as a form of handicapping. Some of the "crew and captain" cards also seem to hold out promise for more subtle play-balancing tweaks...

As more options come out and more games are played, it may get easier too.

The Royal Hajj
01-09-2014, 12:26
I kind of look at it this way... the ships in the game represent the ships as they were built. It's up to that ship's capt and crew (that's us) to sail and fight it effectively. So the game is historically accurate as far as the ship and their stats are concerned.

The options to lower crew skill or shooting and sailing does give a mechanic option to balance the sides game wise. The Capt and Crew deck might go further to do that... I've not seen it yet though.

Nightmoss
01-09-2014, 12:51
Thanks for the AAR report Chris. I still haven't played a game myself, but I am enjoying reading about others experiences and perspectives on the game.

Moideeb
01-09-2014, 15:51
I have been looking through the other ship packs, and like Fred said using certain ships you can balance the odds more, which for smaller games between evenly matched players works much better. Otherwise it is down to using special rules such as lower crew skill etc to balance the odds or if you have a weaker player they play the french and get to be Villeneuve while you get to take the greater glory of a tremendous victory against the odds as Nelson.

7eat51
01-09-2014, 16:07
Chris, you're making me want to break out the ships right now and play.

As for veer, it really only comes into play when you want to make significant shifts in turning directions, from one side of the spectrum to the other. A ship with a veer rating of 8 probably has a deck with maneuvers ranging from 0 to 10. Unless your current card is a 0, 1, 9, or 10, and you want to swing the ship around by playing a card on the opposite end, veer won't be a factor. Any card between 2 and 8 can play any card. Once I caught this, veer fear subsided.

Moideeb
01-09-2014, 16:21
Chris, you're making me want to break out the ships right now and play.

As for veer, it really only comes into play when you want to make significant shifts in turning directions, from one side of the spectrum to the other. A ship with a veer rating of 8 probably has a deck with maneuvers ranging from 0 to 10. Unless your current card is a 0, 1, 9, or 10, and you want to swing the ship around by playing a card on the opposite end, veer won't be a factor. Any card between 2 and 8 can play any card. Once I caught this, veer fear subsided.

Thats quite helpful, i suspect when the first rates come out, that veer might be more of an issue. For now though, it just rules out wild direction changes, which is fine and as you say easier to remember.

7eat51
01-09-2014, 16:25
Cool. I think you will see that ships with lower veer ratings will also have tighter decks (narrower maneuver ranges), so the same principle will apply.

Gunner
01-09-2014, 17:33
I kind of look at it this way... the ships in the game represent the ships as they were built. It's up to that ship's capt and crew (that's us) to sail and fight it effectively. So the game is historically accurate as far as the ship and their stats are concerned.

I agree 100%. It should be the player, not the ship that wins battles.
But if you're playing "what if's", that's another story.

Fremantle
01-09-2014, 18:12
Re: Veer

I think it will come into play more after your ship suffers rudder damage? (speaking only as one who has glanced that the rulebook and watched the Richard Bliss videos)

The Royal Hajj
01-10-2014, 06:08
As for veer, it really only comes into play when you want to make significant shifts in turning directions, from one side of the spectrum to the other. A ship with a veer rating of 8 probably has a deck with maneuvers ranging from 0 to 10. Unless your current card is a 0, 1, 9, or 10, and you want to swing the ship around by playing a card on the opposite end, veer won't be a factor. Any card between 2 and 8 can play any card. Once I caught this, veer fear subsided.


Cool. I think you will see that ships with lower veer ratings will also have tighter decks (narrower maneuver ranges), so the same principle will apply.

Eric is spot on here. If memory serves me correctly, it's only the two lowest and two highest veer cards in any give deck you have to worry about.



Re: Veer

I think it will come into play more after your ship suffers rudder damage? (speaking only as one who has glanced that the rulebook and watched the Richard Bliss videos)

Yes, rudder damage will make this a little harder. I've not done it in a game yet, but I'm thinking that turning the now "high veer" numbered cards upside down in the deck might help with remembering this.... so long as you remember to turn them upside down!

The Mad Hatter
01-10-2014, 21:05
I'm curious to look at the differences in ships once I have my set in hand. The British designed and built ships were definitely different that their French counterparts. Different species of wood being used, different construction methods and philosophies did result in different performing ships. Many of the books I have talk around this subject, so my expectation is that the ships are different. In general, French ships were slightly better sailors (early British ships tended to be shorter, while later ships copied the hull lines of captured French vessels), while British ships were known for being more resilient to damage due the way they were constructed.

I think when you add that to the already mentioned fact that British sailors were generally more experienced and better gunners, it isn't surprising that the British seemed to win 90% of the engagements!

The Mad Hatter
01-10-2014, 21:06
Oh, and I'm all for keeping the game in line with history, not having every ship being exactly equal leaving it purely to player skill. I may enjoy the challenge of playing the "inferior" French in some cases.

Cool Breeze
01-11-2014, 01:57
Re: Veer

Either I misread it, or some of us are over-thinking it. Veer rules are part of the standard rules set, which are supposed to be used as a complete set, including the second maneuver card for the, "Time to React" rule.

At the start of the game you select the first card and put it face down in its slot. During the planning phase you select an unused card to put in the second slot. In doing so, nothing prevents you from examining your first card to check its veer number. At the end of your movement, you move the 2nd card to the (now open) 1st slot, freely checking it's veer number. During next turn's planning phase, you again choose your next maneuver card to go face down in the second slot, checking the first one again as necessary. Note, I italicized the word, "unused" as I think it is intended to leave the last maneuver out of play until the next one is revealed. I could be wrong, but that's how we interpreted the rules text and example on pages 22-24 to play here.

Regardless of this interpretation, the only time it'd hurt you to leave the last maneuver out until you reveal the next one is if you are planning on using the exact same maneuver 3 turns in a row; as there are 2 identical cards (except for the card number), with each maneuver, in every deck. Cards #1 & 2 are the exact same maneuver, as are 3 & 4, 5 & 6, 7 & 8, etc., e.g.

Knowing this, and discounting the incredibly rare situation where choosing the exact same maneuver 3 turns in a row would be a viable tactic, I don't see where you'd ever have to memorize or write down the veer number of the card played before.

I guess the, "dead ahead" maneuvers might be selected 3 or more times in a row in a one-on-one fight on a big table, but I'd think it'd be understood that was what you were doing. Telling your opponent you're going to use it yet again wouldn't be a big surprise, nor would anyone ever call you on using veer 5s being too big a veer change until you start bringing rudder damage into play. :wink:

Hopefully, the above all made sense. It's been a long week at work. :pistole:

David Manley
01-11-2014, 04:36
Veer is the one major thing that I've noticed players forgetting (including myself), but then thinking back trough the actions as we fouhgt them its hardly ever been relevant unless a ship has a damaged rudder (in which case the fact that it is damaged tends to bring the need to consider veer into one's mind anyway)

Moideeb
01-11-2014, 05:40
Re: Veer

Either I misread it, or some of us are over-thinking it. Veer rules are part of the standard rules set, which are supposed to be used as a complete set, including the second maneuver card for the, "Time to React" rule.

At the start of the game you select the first card and put it face down in its slot. During the planning phase you select an unused card to put in the second slot. In doing so, nothing prevents you from examining your first card to check its veer number. At the end of your movement, you move the 2nd card to the (now open) 1st slot, freely checking it's veer number. During next turn's planning phase, you again choose your next maneuver card to go face down in the second slot, checking the first one again as necessary. Note, I italicized the word, "unused" as I think it is intended to leave the last maneuver out of play until the next one is revealed. I could be wrong, but that's how we interpreted the rules text and example on pages 22-24 to play here.

Regardless of this interpretation, the only time it'd hurt you to leave the last maneuver out until you reveal the next one is if you are planning on using the exact same maneuver 3 turns in a row; as there are 2 identical cards (except for the card number), with each maneuver, in every deck. Cards #1 & 2 are the exact same maneuver, as are 3 & 4, 5 & 6, 7 & 8, etc., e.g.

Knowing this, and discounting the incredibly rare situation where choosing the exact same maneuver 3 turns in a row would be a viable tactic, I don't see where you'd ever have to memorize or write down the veer number of the card played before.

I guess the, "dead ahead" maneuvers might be selected 3 or more times in a row in a one-on-one fight on a big table, but I'd think it'd be understood that was what you were doing. Telling your opponent you're going to use it yet again wouldn't be a big surprise, nor would anyone ever call you on using veer 5s being too big a veer change until you start bringing rudder damage into play. :wink:

Hopefully, the above all made sense. It's been a long week at work. :pistole:

Cheers Curtis, good explanation, it makes a lot more sense explained this way. It might be worth putting your explantation of veer in the files section for when divvies like me can't quite figure it out.

Chris