Switch Theme:

Thinking about Naval and Space Games  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)



Most of you folks know that my first game ever was a wet-Navy game set in the Warhammer 40 universe called Aquanautica Imperialis. Therefore, Naval and even Space combat games have a place close to my heart. However, I also find the genre challenging to design miniature wargames for.

This post explores why and some potential approaches to getting around it. It is a little rambling, think piece, and I hope it sparks some discussion. The audience here seems to have a lot of thoughts and ideas in this space. Hopefully, you can help spark some creative juices for me.

You can find it here:

https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2023/06/wargame-design-thinking-about-naval-and.html

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/08/17 19:14:18


Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in us
Rogue Grot Kannon Gunna






Still going with the design triangle stuff despite the whole thread on why the model doesn't work? Anyway, a couple of things on this specific article:

Why 1900-1950: because that's where a game works best. Go earlier and you have the problem of accounting for wind. It's not an impossible problem to overcome, which is why naval games with sailing ships exist, but it does add a layer of complexity vs. games where ships can move consistently under their own power. Go later and the game degenerates into adding up missiles vs. anti-missile defenses and then rolling to see if your one attack is enough to sink the enemy fleet (and with nukes the answer is always "yes"), followed shortly by the enemy missile salvo sinking your own fleet. Go into space and you keep the missile problem but add the impossibility of representing real physics on a tabletop game, which is why every space combat game is just re-skinned historical naval combat.

Scale: the issue with scale isn't weapon ranges vs. movement speed, it's impatient players who are used to GW-style "meet in the middle and roll lots of dice" games. In real naval combat maneuvering before shots are fired is the most important part of the battle. Fleets maneuver to gain an advantage, maybe their are a couple of skirmishes between scouting units ahead of the main fleets, but once the capital ships are committed to battle most of the outcome has already been decided. And once the shooting does start ships fire a ton of shots with very low hit rates, with the most likely outcome of a main battery salvo being "no hits, but we have a better range estimate for the next attempt". But a lot of players hate that. They want to jump straight into the action as fast as possible, with a brief maneuvering period at most, and once they start attacking they want to see major damage done with every attack. So yeah, you're definitely going to have problems with movement speed vs. weapon ranges when a battleship magically cripples or kills the enemy every time it fires. But the problem is not inherent to scale, it's about impatient players that will demand constant action and casualties no matter what scale you use.

Love the 40k universe but hate GW? https://www.onepagerules.com/ is your answer! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





A few months ago I picked Modern Naval Battles, a somewhat realistic wargame of naval warfare from the 1980s. There's even a Falkland Islands scenario.

As in all gaming, the first question is: what do you want to do? What is the game you want? Are you leading flotilla into a harbor raid or commanding fleets sweeping the seas?

What are the decision points based on? Is ship selection/fleet composition/list building even a thing?

All of these have to be addressed before one can get into the nuts and bolts of the design.

I will conclude by noting that omitted aerial designs, which are my specialty (for obvious reasons). I'm not talking about fighter on fighter, but on theater-wide engagement. Interesting thing about aerial strategy - there is no front, flank or rear.

I think this approach may be more apt for space than the naval model.

Want a better way to do fantasy/historical miniatures battles?  Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory.

Do you like Star Wars but find the prequels and sequels disappointing?  Man of Destiny is the book series for you.

My 2nd edition Warhammer 40k resource page. Check out my other stuff at https://www.ahlloyd.com 
   
 
Forum Index » Game Design
Go to: