hmm cant make port, acts like a modern LA class sub in PotC.... but Immelmann? nope.
Originally Posted by Marechallannes
Ever heard of the Flying Dutchman, Al?
hmm cant make port, acts like a modern LA class sub in PotC.... but Immelmann? nope.
Ever heard of the Flying Dutchman, Al?
Indeed. frigate actions is where this system is likely to excel, so you balance up the scenarios (if you want) using numbers, crew quality and the relative size of the ships. RN frigates were often smaller and more ligthly armed than their opponents (12pdr guns versus 18 or even 24pdrs, 28-36 guns as opposed 32-44, etc.). That is of course a sweeping generalisation, as there were quite a few larger British frigates and razees, and many captured enemy ships that were bought in to the service (or even where the lines were taken and the design copied)No problem, England ruled the seas true, but that was strategic, they lost battles aplenty on ship on ship combats and merchant losses.
Saw this done at a wargames show many years ago (Colours?) in 15mm - looked awesome!Lots of scenarios that do not involve whole english fleets... I do wonder how they will do the scenario of the cavalry taking the frigates...
Think, that's no problem.I just wonder how the designers are going to get around the fact that, except for a brief period around the American Revolution (thank god), Britain had the only effective deep-water navy on the planet -- the rest were poorly-led and/or poorly-equipped.
The French build the best frigates at the end of the 18th century. ...and think on the formidable US frigates.
I'am shure it's not always the Royal Navy vs. the rest.
hmmmm...Sails of Glory Seaport, Harbor, Anchorage?
new site opportunity Colonel?
Has Keith offered to be the Grand Admiral for a forum yet?!
I've laid the ground work to start a site for it. Don't expect any thing before the end of the year though. We move into the new house in two weeks, so lots of stuff to do before and after that. Then it's all the holidays over here.
This is a quote from Keith earlier on in the thread Tommy. It may answer your question.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
And herein lies the salient flaw in most games (and gamers): Too much emphasis on tech; not enough on the wetware using it.
I mentioned the down-period the British faced during the American Revolution; it was not a problem with their ships, or even of the sailors. No, the problem lay at the highest levels -- in simple terms, the RN had become divided politically, between Whigs and Tories; and neither group was willing to work with the other. If the lead Admiral was of one faction, and a subordinate from another, the subordinate would willfully misinterpret or "not see" orders, in order to make the opposing party look bad (look up "Battle of Ushant" for details). The French were able to take advantage of this, in a limited manner (having been slapped around the seas for so long, they were still more interested in not-losing a battle than going for the win).
However, times change. Sometime later, the French Revolution breaks out. Being a feudal society, guess what all the really-effective French commanders who'd handed the British their afts [ :) ] in the AmRev fighting were? Yup -- aristos almost to a man. Guess where they ended up? Yup -- in exile, or the graveyard. All that valuable experience -- gone in one fell swoop. Instead, the FrRev/Napoleonic wars would be fought by admirals who were Politically Reliable, but about as competent to command a fleet as I am. Coupled to this: The British had sorted out their political issues, for the most part. End result: Britain holds uncontested control of the seas throughout the period.
At least with line-of-battle ships; I know folks at this point are about to invoke the "US Humphreys frigate" argument. Anticipated -- and deflected: Yes, the US frigates were going-away superior equipment to British frigates; this is what happens when a nation can't afford SoLs itself, and instead has to get create with the FFs it can afford. But none of that matters if the ships don't have crews who are ready, willing, and able to fight -- three words here: "_Shannon_ vs. _Chesapeake_" (ignoring for a moment _Chesapeake_ wasn't technically a "Humphreys frigate"; it had been overseen by a man who despised Humphreys, and had decided to adjust the design to his own taste -- see the book _Six Frigates_ for details -- the flaws in _Chesapeake_'s design were the least of its problems at the time of its capture).
In short: I'm more concerned with how _SoG_ is going to deal with the fact that, for example, if the crews of the British and Combined Fleet ships at Trafalgar has been swapped (putting the Brits on the CF ships, and vice versa), the British would still have handed the CF a thoroughgoing Kicking-Of-Afts.
Guess that just about sums it up then Chris.And herein lies the salient flaw in most games (and gamers): Too much emphasis on tech; not enough on the wetware using it.
I mentioned the down-period the British faced during the American Revolution; it was not a problem with their ships, or even of the sailors. No, the problem lay at the highest levels -- in simple terms, the RN had become divided politically, between Whigs and Tories; and neither group was willing to work with the other. If the lead Admiral was of one faction, and a subordinate from another, the subordinate would willfully misinterpret or "not see" orders, in order to make the opposing party look bad (look up "Battle of Ushant" for details). The French were able to take advantage of this, in a limited manner (having been slapped around the seas for so long, they were still more interested in not-losing a battle than going for the win).
However, times change. Sometime later, the French Revolution breaks out. Being a feudal society, guess what all the really-effective French commanders who'd handed the British their afts [
At least with line-of-battle ships; I know folks at this point are about to invoke the "US Humphreys frigate" argument. Anticipated -- and deflected: Yes, the US frigates were going-away superior equipment to British frigates; this is what happens when a nation can't afford SoLs itself, and instead has to get create with the FFs it can afford. But none of that matters if the ships don't have crews who are ready, willing, and able to fight -- three words here: "_Shannon_ vs. _Chesapeake_" (ignoring for a moment _Chesapeake_ wasn't technically a "Humphreys frigate"; it had been overseen by a man who despised Humphreys, and had decided to adjust the design to his own taste -- see the book _Six Frigates_ for details -- the flaws in _Chesapeake_'s design were the least of its problems at the time of its capture).
In short: I'm more concerned with how _SoG_ is going to deal with the fact that, for example, if the crews of the British and Combined Fleet ships at Trafalgar has been swapped (putting the Brits on the CF ships, and vice versa), the British would still have handed the CF a thoroughgoing Kicking-Of-Afts.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
In most games like this that I Have played crews are given a quality rating, Wooden ships and Iron Men comes to mind. Field of Glory does the same thing.
Chris, you're absolutely right.
Revolutionary France had no money and men for a strong navy. They were too busy with the land battles on the frontiers and the uprising in the Vendee.
Many ships rested in the harbours without crew and repairs for years. Most men were fighting in land battels.
But I think, that's not an obstacle for the upcoming game.
France's navy spent most of their time in port (even in peacetime).
England's navy spent most of their time at sea.
Who do you think would win in a heads up battle?
So I do hope SoG will incorporate a crew quality rating.
Time for some naval icons?
Part of the fun (IMO) of wargamming is exploring the what its...
What if France or Spain had a Nelson?
What if they had invested in their sailors?
History is full of single moment turning points.
I cant wait to get this game.
Ooops what IFs...not sure what a "what its" is....
One of the joys of this new venture is the fact that there will be a high degree of interchangeability of ship models between countries. Buying in a captured ship to your own navy's service was a reguar feature of the time, especially for frigates (not so much for SoLs, although it did happen, HMS Ville de Paris being a good example) so it should be a case of merely swapping some ensigns (flags, not young officers
I voted maybe on this one. Big Aubrey/Maturin fan here, hoping for good balance of accuracy/playability, with some optional rules for those wanting even more accuracy. As others have said, wind needs to be included, and crew quality also important. If those things are done, this will be a definite purchase for me.
Probably recommending books to people who have them all already, but for some interesting discussion on the quality of varying nation's frigates, check out Robert Gardiner's series of books on the subject. Some are out of print, but Frigates of the Napoleonic Wars is currently in print and the others can be found. His theory is that, contrary to what I'd assumed from the opinions of the characters in O'Brian's wonderful books, British designed and made frigates were much more suitable for Royal Navy needs than captured ships tended to be. Be prepared for some heavy details and discussion of things beyond how fast the ships can go (like amount of storage for a long voyage, a necessity for a world-wide navy, as well as strength of construction), but it is interesting how national approaches to naval strategy affect design philosophy in a given country. Not that I expect a tactical game to take all those matters into account, but hopefully scenario designers may find some innovative ways to account for such things.
Doug
I´m spanish and I´ll enjoy commanding spanish ships like the greatest "Santísima Trinidad" the biggest ship of those years. And remember the superiority of Spanish "Armada" by hundreds of years wich was called "The Invencible Armada".
Near to conquer Great Britain, but destroyed in last moment by elements, storm weather.....
It is the forgotten factor when armchair experts compare ships (or indeed any weapon system). For example, German battleships in WW1 were "clearly superior" to their British counterparts, because of better subdivision, thicker armour, etc. Which ignores the fact that thr British ships were designed for sustained worldwide operations as well as fighting over afew days in the North Sea (and to be honest some of the "truths" known about the superiority of the German designs is myth anyway). Another good example are the Russian Baltic battleships of WW1. Not a patch on their German opponents - until you look at them in the context of the coastal defence system within which they played a part. Comparing simple stats is fine as far as it goes, but to do it honestly you need to put them in context. That is one reason why I like campaign wargaming - it gives you an opportunity to put that context in place.it is interesting how national approaches to naval strategy affect design philosophy in a given country
They did, actually -- the problem, as noted, was: They were all aristos, so most of them got the chop (figuratively, or literally).
At the time of Trafalgar, the best CF admirals (at least so far as I've been able to research) were:
France: Victor Lucas, commanding _Redoutable_ (whose snipers killed Nelson, no less)
Spain: Cosme Churruca, commanding _San Juan Nepomuceno_
Most of the rest were, as noted, chosen for political reliability over command ability -- and it showed. Lucas and Churruca were outspoken, which did not endear them to their respective political masters.
There were, of course, other factors; but respected commanders might have cleared away some of the other issues faced (Mr. Manley does bring up the point that different navies were designed for different purposes -- for ex., the infamous US "heavy frigates" came from the simple fact the US at that point couldn't afford ships-of-the-line, so the frigates were designed with SoL-grade "armor belts", plus more and heavier cannon).
Having just run a scenario at the Hurricon convention using WS&IM, it was very evident this period is alive and well, looking for a good play system to take over from WS&IM.
I have a large collection of the 1/1200 scale ships and the entire Trafalgar fleets in 1/2400. I can tell you now, the decision to use 1/1200 was brilliant, as time and again I hear that while it is a space saver, the detail of the 1/1200 is missed in the smaller ships.
I am going to be a poor man soon. Darn you Andrea!
To be fair, there are many good systems out there already which have strong followings. I see SOG-N filling the "ab initio" and "pick-up" game slot, possibly encouraging players to go on to more complex systems if the mood takes them. I mostly play "Form Line of Battle" and I'm working on a fast play fleet action set as well, but I'll most likely play SOG-N for fun, and with the kids (using a historical variant of "Man o War" for those kinds of games at the moment. WSIM has beem mentioned many times but worth remembering that its a board game rather than a true minis game.Having just run a scenario at the Hurricon convention using WS&IM, it was very evident this period is alive and well, looking for a good play system to take over from WS&IM.
[QUOTE WSIM has beem mentioned many times but worth remembering that its a board game rather than a true minis game.[/QUOTE]
I played miniature WS&IM way over 50 times and never thought of it as a board game any more than I would think of WoW/WoG as a board game. The miniatures are played on a table, not a board.
LOL, OK, fair enough. I suppose I've played "Close Action" (the developed version of WSIM by Mark Campbell) a handful of times with miniatures and a few dozen players (one ship per player with Mr. Campbell refereeing - a rather dazzling wargaming experience). I've never played WSIM with minis though, always as a board game (the board and counters being something of a giveaway). I guess I could try with my 1/2400 minis collection, they ought to fit in ther hexes. We played it regualrly at uni many years ago, that and Flight Leader - getting kind of back on topic as far as air wargaming is concerned
Last edited by David Manley; 10-10-2011 at 11:55.
A big yes from me. Ever since WoW first came out there has been discussion of how suitable the core system would be for an age of sail game. I still play and enjoy WS&IM so if nothing else I will buy the minis to use with that rule system, though of course the SOG rules will be interesting to see. Assuming the minis are of a high quality and reasonable price ie about Ł10 for a Ship of the line, I'm in for an expensive time. I had intended to buy some Langton kits but I doubt I'll bother now. In fact for me these minis couldn't come soon enough.
However, I do hope there is sound logic behind the first releases. For example, for fleet actions you really need 74 gun 3rd rates in numbers plus a few others eg the odd 100+, 98s, 90, 80 and 64s. So I hope we see the main classes of British, Spanish and French 74's covered in the first releases. England expects that Victory will be one of the first releases. I hope we don't get an odd jumble of classes and minor nations so we can hope to build historical fleets. Of course it'll be great to see the frigates, brigs, merchantmen and sloops etc as well. If the models are nice and I have the funds I'll be into this in a very big way, perhaps even more so than my WW1 planes and I may even sell some to fund the navy.
We've played WS&IM both as a board game and with miniatures on a hex cloth. Both are fun but it looks great with models.
I guess my age is showing. When I started out gaming, WS&IM was the bestest with the mostest. It was entry level as you didn't need anything else to play, as it had the board game. Being a model lover one of the first things I did was convert a bunch of Airfix Victory and Shannon models to create my fleets. Though the actions were very small, the visual was striking. I have loved it ever since.
I am glad David brought up the fact that there are many fine game systems out there. We are lucky to have so many options these days.
I will always be a fan of WS&IM though, and I think I will feel the same about SOG. Can't wait.
I, for one, and looking forward to seeing the game once it is in the shops. My own preference would be for fleet actions rather than ship Vs Ship - anything that allows either would be fantastic. Once I have seen what all the hype is about I will decide whether or not I will buy.
Amongst my ever increasing pile of lead I have a number of unmade/unpainted 1/1200 ships from GHQ, NavWar & Langtons waiting their turn on the workbench. There are also a number of rule-sets waiting for play testing so comments earlier in the thread about peoples preferences have been duly noted.
I'm thinking that the initial releases will be more aimed at frigate actions than fleet actions. I'm intrigued to see how the system will manage fleet actions; I have a mental image of trying to play WoW and controlling 20-30 aircraft at the same time - not easy at all! So perhaps a fleet action would be managed by using manoeuvre cards at the squadron level? That would work well, and would encourage players to manoeuvre their fleets as their historical forebears would have done.
Funny, I thought the opposite and felt it would be the fleet actions they would go for with the initial release as pretty much everyone has heard of Nelson and the Battle of Trafalgar in the way that everybody has heard of the Red Baron. I imagine Victory and Constitution being the iconic models of the Series, like the Red Baron is but the big colourful Spanish first rate ships being the 'stars'. I wonder if the first release for the Brits might focus on Nelson's ships eg, Victory 100, Captain 74, Agamemnon 64 etc.
Then again the US is a big market so Constitution is an important model. It might be that we get three frigates, three 64's three 74's and three first rate 100+ to start off. Either way I can't wait to see the images of the first decorated examples and hope they use clear bases but slimmer than those used for WoG.
Last edited by Timmo UK; 10-12-2011 at 01:36.
We Know that the Victory will not be one of the very first releases.
Ah I can't have read the press release info very well! Anyway that's got me really interested to see which way they take this game.
Considering the designers, they'll probably follow the WOW release sequence. I'm guessing they'll start with a starter set featuring frigates with rules for ship to ship combat, and follow that with later box sets featuring larger ships and additional rules for fleet and other actions.
Here's my latest thoughts. The starter set will cover frigate actions. Why do I think this?
1) We know that the starter set will comprise 4 models and rules, cards etc. Two-on-two ship of the line actions are as rare as hen's teeth, and not particularly interesting. Frigate actions are way, way more exciting
2) The starter set will not technically cover the Napoleonic Wars. Next year is 2012, the 200th anniversary of the outbreak of War of 1812. What better way to launch a naval minis game than by tying in with the bicentenary? If that is the case then I'd expect the models to be HMS Shannon, USS Chesapeake, USS Constitution and HMS Guerriere . This ticks a lot of boxes for a launch product - fun setting, historical example, US features heavily = will sell like hot cakes.
To be honest, if Ares aren't doing this then someone in marketing needs to be shot!
I'd buy that as a boxed set. Your reasoning makes sense to me.
[QUOTE To be honest, if Ares aren't doing this then someone in marketing needs to be shot![/QUOTE]
Save your shooting for the game. I'm just glad they're producing SoW.
Some people who read about a game set in the Napoleonic era might expect something related to Napoleon in the first set....so what are the chances the first set features a frigate from each of the England, France, Spain, and the U.S.? Or do you really think they'll either wait for a second or third box before getting around to do France and Spain? Or maybe just release French and Spanish frigates in single ship packaging?
No, probably amongst the first release of individual ships (assuming my theory is correctOr do you really think they'll either wait for a second or third box before getting around to do France and Spain?
The latest news from Ares is that the game will be launched in the Summer. If the fever pitch that it has already generated on this forum is anything to go by, they will be sold out in pre orders whatever ships they produce. I am going to regret getting rid of most of my books on Nelson's Navy.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
So where do they go after frigates? Down to brigs, sloops, schooners, gunboats and merchantmen? Or jump up to the 74's which are the ones which might just be the biggest seller.
Depends on how the system works. |If it copes well with fleet actions then I think you answered your own question. Merchies would be worth doing early though - convoy actions etc.So where do they go after frigates? Down to brigs, sloops, schooners, gunboats and merchantmen? Or jump up to the 74's which are the ones which might just be the biggest seller.
Surely a pre-painted 64 or 70+ SOL will be quite an expensive model to be put into a box set, Im putting in context of the bombers/balloons here.
The frigate actions will surely be the starter sets with four ships in without breaking the bank balances. I am looking forward to this set but am wondering what the cost will be for the bigger ships. Dave has already mentioned actions between 1 or 2 SOL were rare so for a reasonable action we are looking at say 3 to 6 a side which could be expensive
I hope they have all sizes. From Sloops, Flutes, Frigates, Galleons and Man-O-War as well.
Dog gone it I see my money leaving me already.
Rum for my men...
Tom
Could someone post up some pics of 1200 scale ships to show us the relative size and detail of what we will possibly be getting? Something with some scale in the pic, like a ruler, a coffee mug, or a WOW plane!
I'm gonna need a second job....hand me one of those mugs o' grog will ye'I hope they have all sizes. From Sloops, Flutes, Frigates, Galleons and Man-O-War as well.
Dog gone it I see my money leaving me already.
Tom
Russian Napoleonic, 100 gun Rotislav - 74 gun Aleksandr Nevski - 66 gun Rodislav
Base of the 100 gun is 40mm x 84mm
Base of the 74 & 66 gun is 40mm x 74mm
http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/...2/100_0631.jpg
http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/...100_0630-1.jpg
How about these for a comparison? From right to left a 100, 74, 32 and two unrated vessels in shot with a Nieuport for scale:
Same models, just moved around abit:
The ships are all 1/1200 models from Rod Langton
Thank you, Ed and David!
Those are very helpful. I'm thinking that they'll be priced in the "2 seater" range per individual ship.
Beautiful ships guys, I will not be able to pass them up if SOG's ships are in this class of finish! I can already imagine these sailing around my table.
Thanks Dave, that really helps get a perspective on these ships.
One thing to keep in mind about the boxed sets. While 1-2 SoL engagements were rare in real life, that might be overlooked for starting a new game out. Most players are going to want SoL, so having 4 of those in the start box to "jump start" your fleet, might not be a bad idea for them business wise.
I'm a Frigate action man myself. So Frigate for each side and a couple of merchantmen to escort would be my idea of a good game. you could also do cutting out actions, landings, and scouting with them.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Going back to WS&IM for a moment although we played all the fleet games, Nile, Trafalgar, etc they were big games that took a weekend due to all the tedious order writing which was one of the weak points in the system, the other being the poor boarding rules, however the rules excelled at small ship actions.
I have a Avalon Hill General magazine with a load of Richard Bolitho scenarios based on the books with the same character and these had all types of cutting out actions, frigates v's frigates etc and these provided for many, many enjoyable fast paced games.
Although I love the look of the SOL the frigate games are far more accessible from a price perspective. I'm not sure why a SOL would be any more expensive to produce than a frigate. Material cost on something so small is minimal and the rigging is essentially the same, as is the design of the ship, ie three masts etc. The only thing I could see effecting price is the need for a larger tooling and bigger packing and thus increased distribution costs. I doubt a WoG 2 seater costs more than a few pence/cents more than a scout to produce but the marketing people set a price point…
I am interested to see how and if they handle rigging and masts. Somebody mentioned plug in/out masts to show damage which is a nice idea but any rigging would prevent this. However, I can't help but feel that sailing vessels need at least a hint of rigging or else they can look very bare and unfinished. Equally though I've seen so many models lost under far too much rigging that's way overscale.
I've never played any of the naval games out there and I know very little about naval history, but... why do you have to play entire fleet battles/actions if you use SOL? Could a few SOL per side not indicated a smaller section of a much broader engagement?
From what I remember from that wargaming phase (my copy of WSIM is in the attic, on the top shelf), it was mostly a doctrine thing, with a little performance added. Basically, SOL were rather slower, and less weldy than frigate, so if they operated solo or in pairs, they were not as effective as a line of them, and a well handled frigate could concevably manuver to repeatedly rack fire down the bows or sterns of the SOL, avoiding the broadsides themselves. This plus the doctrine that the line must not be broken (note that Nelson violated this with great sucess) and their hugh expense meant that practically speaking, they were almost always used aginst other SOLs; occationally for convoy escort. I think that the British blockade squadrons during the Naponeanic wars were 4-8 SOLs, with escorts.
The French weren't as hung up on this, and had better designed ships (in general), but were less able to operste, due to the blockades. You will find 1-1 ans 2-2 SOL combats in history, but their rare.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
You could fight small games of 4 – 6 SOL against each other. We often did and they were good fun games but it never really felt as if the game captured the real essence of fleet actions of the period.
The Nile with 12 - 14 SOL a side was another matter and a cracking scenario.
For those fans of Aubrey-Maturin, at the end of Master and Commander there is a recounting of two smaller SOL fights, each with only 4-6 SOL a side (going off of memory here), that occurred in real life. Cracking fights they were too. Not exactly numerous as one would say, but then again large fleet on fleet actions didn't happen every day either. I would love the for the rules to include some way to do cutting out expeditions, those to me seem like a great deal of fun, as well as also being fairly common with smaller rated and unrated ships.
Doug
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks