Jump to content

Dave Bednarek

Member
  • Content Count

    155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dave Bednarek

  • Rank
    Mimreg

Recent Profile Visitors

607 profile views
  1. Dave Bednarek

    Carriers in 2.5

    Our group feels the same way...……...
  2. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    Once again I am in complete compliance with all these thoughts.
  3. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    Another thought I had was to eliminate the exploding die mechanism. Although I really liked it in the other versions, I believe it led to a lot of excess damage due to successive 6's. And keeping in line with reducing the 70% casualty rate we all agree on his historically inaccurate, I would still allow 6's as 2 hits but no reroll. Also, am I correct in stating that a ship fired on by just guns has no defensive measures available to it in the new version? In other words, if I had shields I could roll defensive die to counter previously, but this is not an option now? Unless it is torps or rockets, then you get defensive fire, correct?
  4. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    I think we are definitely on the same page on this one! I agree with all you said and LOVE the idea of " Get the Admiral to Safety" card. Great idea...………..
  5. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    Bunna, Thanks for the feedback. I'm all on board [excuse the pun] with the "make smoke and run" option as you mentioned. As far as the " become faster while damaged not being used all the time"? Well it was just part the total package of " doing all you can to save a damaged ship" scenario. Basically, it's pressing the panic button, diverting all power\energies to speed\shields for a very limited amount of time and hope you escape. After which, if you have managed to get off the board, your ship would basically limp home for repairs. Also I agree with the "compression factor". As a simulation\game, by definition we are asked to suspend reality in some case to make the game more playable. How many corners you cut to make a playable game is somewhat individualistic. I don't think the answer lies in trying to compute, using say WWI ships, how many rounds they could fire or the spread. But rather a more abstract view of the game, in it's simplest form. And work from there..... I would be more than happy to share my ideas on scenarios...……….. Oh yea, as you so correctly pointed out, I was in total error of big ships doing a 180 in 1 turn, they need 2 at least. I was thinking of my scenario where ANY ship does not need to go 2" straight IF they had they failed a morale test AND are invoking the drastic retreat measures. Rather the just start turning and adding 2"...……………...
  6. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    One thing that I have found interesting in this discussion, is that ALL agree that the amount of ships lost is historically inaccurate. From just the ideas above I find this so easy to remedy AND still have an exciting game. For example, as correctly stated by Jorgen above, scenarios greatly add to a game. So rather than just kill to win, there will be other methods to achieve victory OTHER than just sink ships. To me, it stands to reason that the more ways you can achieve a victory the more different tactics will be needed. Scenarios offer MANY different ways to configure a battle. I'd consider that losing a ship would be more costly than sinking one, since we are talking BIG assets here. As I mentioned already, it would seem highly likely that the biggest and baddest ships of each nation would have the means of taking drastic measures to attempt to save a critically damaged ship. It may avert all its power to shields, increase it's speed, have a crude cloaking device [a la Ghost Ship], and\or drop smoke all in the effort to save the ship. So if you were forced to take a morale test at some given point due to excessive damage, and you failed, you would have to start moving your ship off the nearest board edge. Not hard to do, especially if the ship used the drastic measures listed above to increase speed by, 2" let's say. Well unless some critical hit also affected that ships speed, ALL ships in DW can do a complete 180 degree turn in one activation. I would then consider that enemy ships can still continue to target that ship, BUT at maybe 1/2 AD due to the defensive measures taken. I would also consider that the damaged ship could not fire back at full strength or not all. The above is just an easy example of what the possibilities could be, so we're not witnessing 70% or more of ships being sunk to win the game. I have more ideas but I wont list anymore here, but you get the idea. I also agree with Jorgen that the above ideas will NOT turn into "turtle tactics." If one of the ways to win the scenario is to either protect or bombard an island, for example, I fail to see how "turtle tactics" will carry the day? I also love the thought of Bugzappa above mentioning the "Gung-Ho" attitude of the times. Heck, you could even, incorporate that factor in the morale test! For example, you could allow either a +1 or -1 to the die roll to see if they will continue the fight. Maybe the ship is really damaged badly and the modifier gives him a better chance to try to save the ship. OR the reverse could be true as well. See, there are MANY ways to make this work, I feel.
  7. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    I really like some of your ideas, and I get the fact that SOME people need the satisfaction of sinking a big ship. However, even implicating all 3 of your suggestions above will still result in too many ships being sunk. For instance, I've never seen a player in DW ever try to "save" a capitol ship because, as you so correctly pointed out, you just can't physically turn it about to make a difference. Rather players just "drive it" until it sinks. My feeling, and this is just me, is that this is totally unrealistic. And because you can never save ships you end up with big body counts. I had thought that using a 'Morale' test would force a ship to withdraw from the battle, at reduced VP's due to damage. I can justify using smoke screens and who knows what other devices would be available in DW that would make a large capitol ship harder to see\shoot. I would say, "Yes" they can still be targeted. But due to all the defensive means that the Captain has at his disposal, perhaps make the target ship obscured.
  8. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    Good points made. Your thoughts on how larger ships would turn away when damaged got me thinking. Perhaps as some ships get damaged, and depending on how severely they are crippled, some type of "Morale" roll made? If failed, assume the ships has laid smoke or taken extreme defensive maneuvers, or both, and has slipped away. The ship would be taken off the board, and VP's would be granted BUT at a reduced points because the ship has not been sunk...….
  9. Dave Bednarek

    Too Easy to Sink Ships.....

    My biggest issue with DW always was that too many ships get sunk too easily. I know this is a game, a recreation, but historically sea battles were decided without one side being 75% or more sunk. I, for one, would like to see this somehow incorporated into the game. Maybe VP's allowed for other things other than sinking of ships. I don't know. But I always liked the game, and I'm really hoping many of the above issues are looked at, as well as my thought.
  10. Dave Bednarek

    The Beta Lives!

    I could not agree more. This WAS my favorite game of all time, but now, just a shadow of it's former glory. Hyde is perfectly correct in all his opinions. This, to me, is a huge disappointment in every way. BUT, again, this is my opinion, you need not agree with it. I'm hoping that there are drastic changes in the works to fix this game.
  11. Dave Bednarek

    Clarification on Interruption

    Any mods answer this one?
  12. Dave Bednarek

    Taking One for the Team and Quick and the Dead

    We've had this come up in our games, and we allow it. So, yeah, he steps in andcan use his QatD roll...……...
  13. Dave Bednarek

    Clarification on Interruption

    I see. So you are in the camp that the Interrupt card can be played at any time during a full turn, and NOT just prior to the very first activation of that turn?
  14. Dave Bednarek

    Clarification on Interruption

    no one can answer this?
  15. Dave Bednarek

    Clarification on Interruption

    is this card ONLY used at the beginning of a whole turn, OR, can it be used at anytime during a full turn and not JUST on your opponents 1st activation?
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.