Sails of glory point system?

[Ducky]

Hi shipmates,

Is there some sort of point system for SoG?

Are the ships within the same class balanced?

Just wondering....

Cheers,

Thijs:drinks:

[Nightmoss]

Hi shipmates,

Is there some sort of point system for SoG?

Are the ships within the same class balanced?

Just wondering....

Cheers,

Thijs:drinks:

It's readable and can be downloaded from Ares directly: http://www.aresgames.eu/11116

By the way did you know there's a Wave 2 coming this Spring/Summer? http://www.aresgames.eu/10945

[Swamprat33]

it would be handy if there was a formula for how the points have been generated.
At present it just causes me to wonder.

I am aware that ships were upgraded and so the points cost calculation can get pretty complicated and alter depending upon the year in question.

I have been renaming my ships but have no idea how to allocate their costs.

Tim

[Пилот]

Such formula would be of value!

[Diamondback]

I know other miniatures lines weight earlier units as higher value than late-war ones... for example, the same unit with identical stats in AAM or WAS will cost more with a 1942 availability date than a 1945 one.

[Naharaht]

I know other miniatures lines weight earlier units as higher value than late-war ones... for example, the same unit with identical stats in AAM or WAS will cost more with a 1942 availability date than a 1945 one.

That seems strange to me. You would think that the later unit would have been better equipped.

[Diamondback]

Right--what I'm saying though is that a theoretical identically-equipped unit, like say a 1945 Eastern Front partisan with scavenged gear equal to a 1939 Wehrmacht soldat will be considered "cheaper" because you can ONLY use the former in 1945-dated or undated scenarios, while the 1939 guy has no date restrictions and is available in any game scenario for the ETO. It's the economic doctrine of "Ceteris Parabus" at work again.

And usually 1945 units were a bit better, aside from partisan types, than their early-war counterparts ingame IIRC, but they still price about the same.

[Пилот]

So, you say unit's value in points should be determined relatively to unit's opponents? It makes sense. Submachine gun, that way, should be more expensive for '41-unit then for '45-unit.

[Andy Blozinski]

So, you say unit's value in points should be determined relatively to unit's opponents? It makes sense. Submachine gun, that way, should be more expensive for '41-unit then for '41-unit.

There isn't a good reason for a unit with the exact same capabilities to change in value.

[David Manley]

The way this discussion is going reminds me why I hate points systems in wargames :happy:

[Gunner]

With the same type ships being equal in points, the Captain and Crew cards used wisely should make the difference, along side a players skill.

[Пилот]

There isn't a good reason for a unit with the exact same capabilities to change in value.



So, you say unit's value in points should be determined relatively to unit's opponents? It makes sense. Submachine gun, that way, should be more expensive for '41-unit then for '45-unit.I wrote 41 / 41 before, but I meant 41 / 45. Sorry.

Anyway, unit armed with rifles has different worth in '39 and '45, if some better equipped units appeared in the meantime to set new standard. If you play in certain amount of points (say 50), you should be able to field roughly same amount of units, although late ones should be better than early ones. In other words (and armour should be better example than infantry, actually), if you field 5 Panzer I tanks for 50 points in France '40, you should be able to field more then 5 for 50 points after D-day in '44 - if you want to obtain same battle ratio. Or you should increase point limit to, say 100 points to have fielded 5 Tigers (which were more usual to have in 1944). And that's good solution for one off-game. For those who like to represent value in points, of course.

If playing tournament game, point values should be fixed, as points represent actual, and not relative, power of the different units.

[Andy Blozinski]

I'm not actually seeing how the point system might see much use in SoG. The practical scale of the game for a single player and the uniformity of ships means this game will work mainly with pre-set scenarios. Points tend to work best with tournament kind of stuff. Unless it's a team tournament situation, I don't see it happening.

[Swamprat33]

The pont i was trying to make is that the points values have been generated for the wave 1 ships in an official PDF from Ares.
In that you see the same 'type' of ship with different names with different points values.
You also see the equivalent ship used by the British with again a different value.

It is a though Ares have a formula and i don't think it can be just based on date.

What i am trying to work out is for some renamed ships i am using for my British.
There were several of the French Temeraire class captured, and then the British created the Pompee class which was based upon the Temeraire but much improved.

I am trying to determine a points value and stats for one of these ships.
I want to do the same for the Hebe class as i want a couple to use as Leanders.

I believe that both these classes of British ships should have improved stats over the French equivalents.

The British use of caronades should also be a factor but there is currently no seperate stat for close or long range gunnery.

Cheers
Tim

[Пилот]

I'm not actually seeing how the point system might see much use in SoG. The practical scale of the game for a single player and the uniformity of ships means this game will work mainly with pre-set scenarios. Points tend to work best with tournament kind of stuff. Unless it's a team tournament situation, I don't see it happening.
That's also true.