Is damage a bit too swingy / slippery slope?

[surfimp]

I've played Sails of Glory for a few years now and, while I'm far from an expert with the system, I've played enough to have formed a few impressions of the game.

One of the things that bothers me a bit is that damage seems quite swingy, to the point that - in a 1v1 duel, for example - whoever gets the luckier draw on the first broadside exchange often gets out to such a commanding lead that it becomes quite difficult to fight back. If the advanced rules and special damages are used, the slippery slope becomes even steeper, where the unlucky recipient of the worse damage simply goes further and further into the hole fighting fires, fixing masts, and plugging leaks.

Now, I am nowhere near the naval historian of some here, and am very much in the more beginning phase of my reading about historical battles and whatnot. I'm not saying that the damage mechanic as reflected in SoG is ahistorical or that there aren't examples of exactly this type of thing happening (devastating broadsides).

My question is really more around whether this makes the game as fun as it might otherwise be?

Specifically, since dodging your opponent's firing arcs is not that easy, it really does come down to the luck of the draw - the scope for tactical maneuvering and/or having the weather gage not being such a meaningful thing within the rules. The "tactics" seem to boil down to not much more than trying to plan to get close (i.e. guess your opponent's moves) and have luckily chosen the "right" ammo (ideally double shot)... and then relying on your opponent drawing a lot of brutal hits and not too many zeroes.

Or is it more like I just need to "learn to play, noob" and "get good" and there's nothing wrong with the system, it's just a personal failing to appreciate it for what it is?

Not meant as a flame, more just an honest discussion about something I've been thinking about for a while.

[fredmiracle]

I think your observations are valid.

Overall, damage seems "accelerated" compared to real life. It also seems highly luck dependent, and that an early advantage will often become self-reinforcing. I agree with your characterization that while these latter two factors may be "realistic," they can be problematic in terms of gaming fun

One response I had was cobble together a custom chit-set. I combined one full set, and a second set from which I had removed some of the worst damage (IIRC, I took out 3+ blank damage counters, fires, and leaks)

EDIT: I've also toned down some of the multipliers for similar reason. I ditched the "first broadside" rule, since even though it is justifiable and historically flavorful, it compounds the issues you've noted; and likewise I play where double-shot only works at chain/grape range.

These don't solve the issue completely--still sometimes a game is basically over on the first couple of gunfire exchanges. But at least it's somewhat less likely

[Dr.Maturin]

You must both admit though that historically in many cases a 'raking broadside' from one ship was enough to finish off the recipient especially if double shotted.
And if your game ends quickly it's a good excuse to immediately start another one.

[fredmiracle]

You must both admit though that historically in many cases a 'raking broadside' from one ship was enough to finish off the recipient especially if double shotted.

Very true.

It's hard for me to go back and read about battles and even understand/quantify what it took for a commander to conclude that his ship could "fight no more." Usually a ship didn't come close to sinking, but sometimes it did catastrophically. Sometimes the casualty rates were 10% and sometimes 50%. Sometimes the ship was "unmaneuverable," but other times the captain would somehow jury-rig a mast and keep up the battle.

So really these chits are meant to capture a set of very malleable, largely-psychological conditions, arising when particular personalities encountered the "shock and awe" of extreme levels of mayhem, gore, noise and flying projectiles. Hard to say what is realistic.

But in gaming terms, the OP makes a valid point

And if your game ends quickly it's a good excuse to immediately start another one.

That's what we do!

[Hjl]

I think as in most combat situations, the first person to hit a hammer blow would win. Just imagine the damage 40 cannons balls would do when all you are protected by is planks of wood.

I think sog does an adequate job depicting that. As said above though, I tend to not use many of the multipliers as they can make the first shot a little too decisive in a one on one senario.

[surfimp]

I get the historical angle, I really do, but consider what has been for me a very typical situation in SoG, something that happens almost every time I play:

Two ships approach one another and veer to one side or another to fire. Usually both do this at more-or-less the same time, meaning they're both going to be shooting at the same time, i.e. exchanging broadsides.

Now, in the real world, one ship might have the weather gage, or a better trained crew, or better guns, or a whole host of other variables that aren't really accounted for in SoG. We would expect the ship which reaped the greatest advantage from all those variables to have the upper hand.

Whereas in SoG, regardless of pretty much all those factors, it really just boils down to whoever draws the most (and most damaging) chits on this first exchange. That player now has a very good chance of winning the engagement. There can be reversals, but these are the exceptions rather than the rule, at least in my experience.

For me, this just seems to much focused on "luck of the draw" and too little on skill & positioning... BUT, as noted, I am by no means any sort of masterful, let alone even a good, naval tactician. So I'm probably just 'doing it wrong' on some basic level.

Again, I want to reiterate that I enjoy the game, but have just found the above to be a bit of the flavor of the experience.

And of course, for those situations where through genius or good fortune someone manages to get an unanswered broadside in, well, that's fine - for me, that kind of "shoot without getting too shot up yourself" is sort of the standard towards which the positional game should be going.

I probably just need to play more and get better at driving my ships around ;)

[Bligh]

I feel that maneuvering, if done subtly, can make all the difference to this brutal pugilistic toe to toe encounter.
I am no expert myself, but having played against real experts, I have seen a perfect chance for a double shotted rake first time firing by myself brought to nought by a deft alteration of course or change of sails by my more astute opponent. Just the sort of move beloved by the many Maritime authors. Given that both ships start off with even chances, I can only put the outcome down to superior seamanship on their part which gets them into the box seat.
I do not find this situation a problem. A game, is after all a game, and if we strive for more historical accuracy rather than a quick two hour adrenaline rush, there are a myriad of other games out there to suit our needs, if you have the time and willpower to play them. I'm afraid that I have neither anymore. I now go for the quick fix.
Rob.

[Comte de Brueys]

I think there are other games that handle damage and "other variables" more detailed and challenging.

You can play SoG out of the box and explain it to rookies in a few minutes.

For the damage:

Luck & bad luck can be a devastating broadsides or a salvo that doesn't scratch your enemy. Same goes for the sister games Wings of Glory 1st & 2nd World War when you draw damage cards or damage tokens.

The SoG damage system can't be changed without adding lists and charts for calculating, so you will always have those moments when a lucky shot from a frigate set your first rate on fire or a raking broadside from HMS Victory blows your Hebe Class right out of the water.

[Union Jack]

I think the Sunday game at Prague shows what can be done . The French moved to break the British line. I gambled on THE French 1st rate not taking a full pounding as she closed with Victory. I missed a devastating full broadside by the width of a fly wing and then having taken the damage was still good enough after loosing hull boxes to have the full 7 chit broadside at my disposal. Victory and Goliath paid the price but Montagne was 2 crew boxes shy of striking herself. At times you pay your money and you take your chances. If Victory had got her close range double shot full broadside in it may have been a different game. Such is luck and good sailing.....

[Bligh]

Hello my more astute opponent, and congratulations on your PragueCon medal Europe Neil.
We should broach a puncheon of the old Jamaica to celebrate our extra gun.
Bligh.

[Union Jack]

I see your sailing a nice 40 (well 39 gun) gun frigate there Sir.

Whilst I a paltry 20 gun sloop.

In your honour I salute you.....

[Bligh]

Very kind of you sir.
However I will not be satisfied until I have a 44.
Bligh.

[TWR]

One of the things that bothers me a bit is that damage seems quite swingy, to the point that - in a 1v1 duel, for example - whoever gets the luckier draw on the first broadside exchange often gets out to such a commanding lead that it becomes quite difficult to fight back. If the advanced rules and special damages are used, the slippery slope becomes even steeper, where the unlucky recipient of the worse damage simply goes further and further into the hole fighting fires, fixing masts, and plugging leaks...

Specifically, since dodging your opponent's firing arcs is not that easy, it really does come down to the luck of the draw - the scope for tactical maneuvering and/or having the weather gage not being such a meaningful thing within the rules. The "tactics" seem to boil down to not much more than trying to plan to get close (i.e. guess your opponent's moves) and have luckily chosen the "right" ammo (ideally double shot)... and then relying on your opponent drawing a lot of brutal hits and not too many zeroes.

I've been playing on and off for a couple of years, but SOG is only one game I play. That means I'm still learning. That said I have a few thoughts...

With two ships on one side the positioning of the second ship to deliver a second turn of fire is important, especially where the first ship has caused some significant damage. However, positioning ships to take advantage of the wind is critical in these subsequent turns. Positioned well they can come about to deliver more damage. Positioned poorly the can be taken out of the fight. If the later the enemy repair parties, if using the advanced rules, can often recover much of the damage done in the first broadside. These repairs though can take some time.

I'm learning to keep a battle line, to be careful of the position in the wind and to try and deliver fire from multiple ships on to a single position. On a good day I'm starting to consider where my enemy may be in subsequent turns. That said drawing some high damage chits against the enemy really helps!

[surfimp]

I'm starting to warm up a bit more, I think I just needed to get a better feel for how specific maneuver decks play out on the tabletop.

Raking really is such fun :)

[TWR]

I'm starting to warm up a bit more, I think I just needed to get a better feel for how specific maneuver decks play out on the tabletop.

Some ships have some notable differences, while others are more subtle. Getting to know the ships abilities a little more is also one of my plans, especially the frigates.

[Bligh]

Another good ploy is to try cutting the enemy line.
You can then rake the enemy ships on both sides at once as you pass through.
Rob.

[TWR]

Another good ploy is to try cutting the enemy line.
You can then rake the enemy ships on both sides at once as you pass through.
Rob.

This was used to interesting results in our last game, which I previously posted.
https://thewargamesroom.wordpress.co...-out-the-guns/

Le Berwick attempted to break the English line but was delivered broadsides on the way in and the way out of our line. I wonder if she was reinforced the impact would have been even greater.

[MWBell]

I realize I'm breaking into this thread a little late but I can appreciate what is being shared. I understand the concerns over the "luck" issues and also understand the reasons for the chit system to keep the game moving. I've accepted the rationale and also recognize that in real life, "luck" DOES play a part, and has since the beginning of warfare thwarted many well laid plans. Getting that first shot, or getting it off when and where you WANT it. This leads me to my question which may or may not be related.

Am I the only one who has been disappointed by my passing up a perfectly good broadside as the maneuver cards of either my opponent, or me, or BOTH(!), have pushed us beyond the desired firing arc? I've seen many an aggravated "captain" over this (myself included) and have to ask about that of which we always read in histories and novels...namely, "Fire as they Bear"? Historically, ships fired away at each other as they passed, they weren't constrained as we are with a gaming technicality that says one may only fire AFTER one has finished moving. Many games offer what is called "opportunity fire" and even our most classic and ancient wargame - chess - allows for this with the "en passant" rule. So I offer the following for your consideration and comment.

Any ship that passes an opponent during its move and is unable to deliver what would have been a viable broadside because of said move, is allowed it's full broadside strength as opposed to a lesser arc strength. To allay any disruption of the game caused by the re-positioning of ships for true range determination, simply measure from the ending position. This may be less than optimal but can be assumed to be due to the passing nature of the maneuver as opposed to the standing off and continued pounding of ships following a similar course. This also works particularly well with rakes! For those who have already rightly encouraged strategy and knowing the nuances your ship, this minor modification will actually ADD to this viewpoint as the firing becomes more fluid and doesn't force players to bite their lips worrying about whether the card they choose will place them at THE one-and-only place they NEED to be once the firing starts.

Thoughts?

[Diamondback]

Michael, sounds like one that might be worth a playtest.

House Rule: If an enemy ship passes through one of your fire arcs during its Maneuver phase or yours, you may declare Fire As They Bear. Measure the range while they're in the intended fire arc, and if they're within range of what you've loaded you may make your attack. Resolve the Fire action as normal after the Move.

Who wants to test it?

[Bligh]

I have to agree with Michael that this has been one of the main bugbears of my gaming.
To plan carefully a rake and then miss out by a mm is not really what would have happened at sea.
The problem is as with all en passant moves the other party.
They will probably be doing their best to avoid a rake. As both cards and ships often get played in sequence for practical reasons, they may say that as ships moved and turned they were never in a position to rake according to the rules. That brings us back to the part move syndrome which slows play and outcome and is thus is a misery for the other gamers.
I am for the idea in principal, but you will need to be careful which of your gaming partners you try it out with and when.
For solo gaming I can't see any drawbacks, and will give it a go next time I play.

Note. I restricted my comments to rakes, because presumably any ships going head to head or passing in line of battle have commanders who are both intent on giving it out to their opposite number, and therefore are content to adopt the modification to the rules as it benefits them both.
Rob.

[Diamondback]

Part of why I proposed that you only call the shot and check eligibility in the move phase, resolve in the attack phase once movement stops for the turn. If ineligible, oh well, you got triggerhappy and wasted a broadside, Sux2BU. (Which happened occasionally IIRC...)

[Bligh]

Good point DB.
I expect that will deal with my qualms.
Rob.

[Diamondback]

Then again, I am one o those nasty sorts who thinks if you intend to use Grape, Chain or other "special" shot that you should be required to commit to it in the Load phase before firing... and again, if you loaded the wrong ammo when you call Fire, you wasted the shot and Sux2BU.

[Bligh]

Another interesting remark DB.
Have you had fish for dinner?
I always put the shot I intend to load in the shot locker before starting to reload.
I just assumed that was the correct way to do it.
Rob.

[Diamondback]

LOL, Rob, I'm actually allergic to all seafood--which creates the awkward situation of a carnivore (seriously, my frat brothers used to joke about me being a reincarnated tyrannosaur because of my meat-and-lots-of-it diet, though I have to admit I got the big-mouth-tiny-arms thing down pretty well) shopping in the vegan aisle when a recipe I'm teeing up requires Worcestershire sauce (anchovy), and I have to be very careful about avoiding the fish-sauce in Asian foods too. (We've had a few kick the bucket from it over the years, but in my case the allergic reaction is just a spectacularly violent expulsion akin to touching off one of Victory's 68-pounders. :o )

Good idea about a Shot Locker--I didn't recall seeing anything like that in the rules, but it is logical for those who want a more realistic game.

[Bligh]

Sorry to hear about your fish allergy.
My elder son is also allergic to fish and also nuts, (so I have to keep well away from him.)
I know how hard it is to check every little thing you eat.
Stick to meat, washed down with a good Claret. Can't go wrong.
Rob.

[Hjl]

So are you not supposed to select your ammo type before loading? That's how I've always done it. A few times I've missed a shot because I loaded double out of range.

[Dr.Maturin]

So are you not supposed to select your ammo type before loading? That's how I've always done it. A few times I've missed a shot because I loaded double out of range.

Correct TX or why would they bother to put the Shot Lockers on the play card? Pick your shot, load it, fire it (if you can), and start all over again.

[MWBell]

Quote Originally Posted by Hjl View Post
So are you not supposed to select your ammo type before loading? That's how I've always done it. A few times I've missed a shot because I loaded double out of range.

Correct TX or why would they bother to put the Shot Lockers on the play card? Pick your shot, load it, fire it (if you can), and start all over again.

EXACTLY! I'm not sure I understand the the issue of ammo type as it should already be loaded before your ship can fire. Also, my allowing the full broadside strength AFTER the move is completed is to:
1) not slow the game by retracing any ship's path and
2) to allow that ships not moving along the same course may not be as "productive" in their firing...especially if they're both veering away from each other.

If, in the end, they've actually moved out of range, simply use long range at half strength (rounded up) after all potential modifiers have been applied (I should have mentioned this little caveat in my previous post ... sorry).

For what it's worth, my intent is merely to keep it historical, keep it fluid, keep it noisy, and (above all) keep it simple.

[Bligh]

For what it's worth, my intent is merely to keep it historical, keep it fluid, keep it noisy, and (above all) keep it simple.

I agree with this view, and I know that Andrea would agree. The whole attraction of the game mechanism is just that.
We can tinker, as all gamers do, but as long as we keep those principles in mind we can't go far wrong.
Rob.