self explanatory: which WoG system is better, the 3 cards no-speed of WW1 or the 2 cards with speed of WW2
please elaborate/explain your vote
WW1: 3 cards maneuver - no speed
WW2: 2 cards maneuver - speed
Both are good: they represent the differences between both wars
Other, dunno
self explanatory: which WoG system is better, the 3 cards no-speed of WW1 or the 2 cards with speed of WW2
please elaborate/explain your vote
My vote is based on my view of the differnces in culture between the two games WW1 is more of a social game where as WW2 is more cut throat.
I think my vote says it all!
Shows the difference & improvement in Aircraft & their speeds.
Each system fits to his time period.
I personally like the 3 card system as it feels more like flying to me. The 1 card system (it's not really a 2 card system once the game is under way) seems to break up the "flying" into short choppy bits since you have to plan a new card after every move.
I do like the speed options in WGS though.
I like the 3 card system for WW I as it gives a feel of the slower speed of the aircraft of the period and the 2 card system for WWII as it gives the feel of the faster aircraft with its faster pace.
I like the 2 card system better. It gives you a faster reaction time and makes you have to think out 2 to 3 turns ahead. The other is fine but if you turn the wrong way by the time the 3rd card is done your out in la la land.
Thomas
Tom, you play WGS way more then me, but how does planning a new card after each movement make you think out 2 to 3 turns ahead? From my experiance and thinking it out, the opposite is true. If I know my opponent is going to be changing his line of flight after every card, I can't successfully plan ahead multiple turns and what I was planning would be void before I got to those plans.
Man that's a lot of plans and turns in that comment... hopefully it makes sense!
I have to agree with Tom there Heer Oberst, with the 3 card system you can get an idea of what they are going to do, but with the one card system you get no such help. For me you have got to think of all the option's open to the other player then plan your move to suite and this may be more than 3 cards of movment you either get it right or stuff up!
Seems like the same as the 3 card system to me. At the beginning of a tun I have to plan for every possible option they have.
I voted WW1 on the basis that I don't own WW2 WoG. Would like to try it out sometime.
I think that the WWI game flows better.
Rob.
It's more looking ahead 2 or 3 moves. As the moving goes you have to line up your pass then trying to get on their tail. It is very easy to over shoot or turn right in front of your opponent. The more you play it the more you will like it.
Now I still like the WW1 version. Its simple and you get to relax while you play. And that's a good thing.
Thomas
Both systems work for the time periods they represent in my opinion so that got my vote.
But being a KOF I prefer the more sedate 3 card system
I think each system fits it's own era and just jives with what i would expect.
3 card WW1 just makes the game work better for me. I some times use 3 cards and speed for WW2. It seams to work ok
Voted WWI / 3 cards.
For much the same reasons that Alistair has stated in his first post.
/Niclas
What I like about WGS is the rolling card sequence. Doesn't matter to me how many cards it has, or if it has speeds. I like ALWAYS planning a set number of moves ahead, and not variably no moves ahead or two moves ahead. The thing with WGF-style movement is that, at planning time, you have a very accurate of the enemy's next move, the next move is less certain, and the last move could be way off. If you guess the first one incorrectly, you are halfway across the map before you can make a correction.
I am quite seriously considering using a house rule to turn WGF into a 3-card rolling system like the 2-card WGS system, but having a third spot to delay returning a played card into the hand (thus enforcing restrictions on how many sharp turns you are able to do within three turns).
I have heard complaints that it might slow down the game, but really it just spreads out the planning time -- and you don't have to try to envision the map two turns in the future. It also keeps everyone more consistently involved.
Just my 2 cents, though.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
That's what I'm hoping. Best way to put it to the test is to have at it!
One thing I have experienced with the WGF system when playing with friends, at scrambles, or at cons, is that even when a misjudgment occurs, and the planes aren't where folks thought they would be, no one cares too much, in the sense of getting upset. Most of the time, such situations turn into laughing banter. When things do turn out right, cheers and bragging abound. Such a friendly spirit has been consistent. That speaks well of the game, and possibly the three card mechanic.
I agree totally Eric,
I am only really concerned with the movements of AI aircraft, or the one on one dog fight which can last for hours without anyone getting a shot off. In larger games, it is much easier to find a target even if you do get out of position.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
I have been having fun with the AI movements. By the time I figure which angle to use, roll the dice, and set up the cards, I usually have forgotten my maneuvers. Once I start moving the planes, it's all over. Every card seems unknown to me.
It will be interesting to see if the players who prefer WGF style strongly over WGS style change their mind about WGS once they start playing SoG.
I think they reflect the feel of the periods. If pressed I like the two card system best but thats with multiple aircraft and the 'instinct' rules in place.
Been playing Angels 20 with a mate who has it and I really missed the card planning system...It is a great mechanic which works way better than how it has been adapted to X and A Wing with their simultaneous mechanic.
Rich
Different approaches to different speeds and power. Love both.
I like WW1 with 1 card - feels more like a dogfight
We used a 3 written maneuver system years ago, but after the 3rd maneuver we adjusted the plane to correspond to a 1st maneuver in the following turn.
So a level plane could indicate an immelmann, split s, stall, or just a straight, a banked to the left was a left turn or a left side slip, and a banked right was a right turn or a right side slip. Everyone did this even if you weren't being tailed. It seemed to work very well as I remember.
I think that no system will ever be perfect for every situation. It is best to pick what you like and enjoy that.
Speaking for myself the 3 Card WW1 and 2 Card WW2 systems work fine for me.
Well what I enjoy is the 3 card WW1 system.
If one would play WW1 planes against WW2 planes, WW1s would outmaneuver WW2s, making Fokker D.VII deadliest machine of all times
Now, seriously. Flight sequence is shortened in WW2, and decision making quicker than in WW1. Game became more active. Speed change is a great thing and it adds to reality. On the other hand, WW1 system pictures technical capabilities of it's era. That's I find both systems appropriate, respectively.
I'm just interesting, if Ares decides to go further, how would "Jets of Glory" maneuver cards look like. Would they merge WW1 maneuverability and WW2 "one card, multiple speed" system?
How about trying the 3 card system with WWII ? Might as well have a moan about the "cockpit" for WG. Pah dont like it one bit.
I prefer the 3 card system anyway for the reasons most people have said
Last edited by tikkifriend; 01-05-2014 at 08:19.
I'm learning to fly, but I ain't got wings
Coming down is the hardest thing
Mouse mat?!
As I am back on operations (solo gaming) from the 12th I might try the 3 card option for WW2. Having now played both variants (and a lot more WW2 recently) both systems have merit. I would also like to try the climb/dive option with each card for WW2. Climbing 1 token using slow speed but a fast token and diving 1 token using fast speed on a slow token. For WW1 I don't think it matters as we don't have slow and fast arrows, so up 1 token on any card and down 1 on any card. A dive going down a full level and a climb perhaps 2 tokens instead of 1. Definately worth a try though.
See you on the Dark Side......
I like the 3 card WWI system a lot. Only tried WW2 a couple of times so can't say much without any experience. I like the idea about speed.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Thanks, Rob.
But the images in these threads are gone. Sadly.
Yes...interesting....to bad the images are gone.
I voted "don't know" as I don't do WGS
I prefer two cards with speed marker, as it gives better control over aircraft and allows faster reaction time.
"We do not stop playing when we get old, but we get old when we stop playing."
I had some scepticism to WW2, but only to my first game. I find WW2 system very "gamy". Athough I prefere 3-card for WW1.
Had to vote dunno as I have not played the WWII version.
Bookmarks