EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815



Message

Mardonius -> EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 3:58:41 PM)

Gents (and Marshall specifically):

I'd like to solicit interest in a naval rules redesign working group (NRRWG) that would transmit the landward corps and leader based system into a seaward fleet and leader based combat system. A commitment would require a significant level of interest, patience, and knowledge of the era as we are sure to stir the pot here. Stats, programming, and math skills would be desireable but not required for all.

This NRRWG output could be then introduced to Marshal and Matrix for their review and incorporation into the EIAnW system. The end result of this NRRWG would be an option that player groups could embrace instead of the current system.

I would like to collect five or so interested parties to be part of this NRRWG and spend about three months coming up with ideas and options that would improve the current system without overburdening the programming requirements with excessive chrome and remaining true to the ADG spirit of the game.

But before I go any further, I would like to know, Marshall, if this is something that you would take to the next level and program into the exisiting game. [:)]

Let me know if you want to partake, figure about three hours a week for a few months.

Thank you,
Mardonius



obsidiandrag -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 4:21:59 PM)

Just wanted to give you a starting place... If you look in the General I think it was

The GENERAL Vol.26,No.6
Empires in Arms – “Napoleon's last chance - A Waterloo scenario for Empires in Arms” (Scenarios) by John Sakelaris.
Empires in Arms – “The influence of Sea power - Advanced Naval Combat for Empires in Arms” (Variant) by Bob McDonald, Mike McGinnis & Ed Whittaker.

This article had a naval variant with morale for the fleets and chits for combat choices (3) for attacker and defender.

OD



obsidiandrag -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 4:23:00 PM)

I have photo copies of it with my EIA stuff if you need, I can try and scan them for you.



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 4:28:37 PM)

That would be great! Thank you. Would keep with the spirit of the original game and casue us not to have to reinvent the rules from scratch. Please send then to varick_ready at yahoo dot com.

best
Mardonius (Varick)



NeverMan -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 4:51:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: obsidiandragon

Just wanted to give you a starting place... If you look in the General I think it was

The GENERAL Vol.26,No.6
Empires in Arms – “Napoleon's last chance - A Waterloo scenario for Empires in Arms” (Scenarios) by John Sakelaris.
Empires in Arms – “The influence of Sea power - Advanced Naval Combat for Empires in Arms” (Variant) by Bob McDonald, Mike McGinnis & Ed Whittaker.

This article had a naval variant with morale for the fleets and chits for combat choices (3) for attacker and defender.

OD


This is the system we picked up once we found this article. That said, I think the Chit picking is pretty limited.



hellfirejet -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 5:24:11 PM)

This is the combat table from the general chit picks.

Meleeing force closes on a 1-4 after each round (modified by Nelson)
vs Linear Attack.

Meleeing force closes on a 1-3 after each round (modified by Nelson)
vs Linear Defense.

If majority of ships are British, add +1 to combat resolution when
using Linear Attack or Melee.

If majority of ships are French add +1 to combat resolution when using
Linear Defense.

If having numerical superiority, add +x OR subtract -x depending on
ratio stronger/weaker force. Modifiers are 2:1 -> +1, 3-1 -> +2, etc.
Maximum adjustment for each side is still +or- 1. (Note: this is a
house rule)



General Chase Chart:

Victor's Morale Loss: 0-0.5 0.6-1.5 1.6-2.5 2.6-3.5 3.6+
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll once on table: 5-1 4-1 3-1 2-1 1-1



hellfirejet -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 5:28:15 PM)

Well looks like it did not copy correctly a bit of a mess will try to spread it out abit to look how it should.



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 5:42:27 PM)

So do any of you want to be part of the group?

Last thing I want to do is sit in a room and come with a brilliant (or so it seems to me) plan and have it ripped to bits. I'd rather have a transparent process that we can eviscerate along the whole way vice waiting for the end gutting...



hellfirejet -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 5:46:31 PM)

But the thing is will our time spent be worth it,is Marshall prepared to implement a new naval system.



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 6:38:23 PM)

Ah Graham, that is the crux. I would think that he would find it worthwhile to greatly improve the EiANW product but I don't know his incentive structure. Thus, I solicit his interest. I anticipate that we woudl ahev a better chance of getting him to sign on if he saw there was a disceranble momentum/customer demand to improve the naval system. Thus, my invitation.



hellfirejet -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/27/2009 6:43:32 PM)

Hi Varick,
Count me in,I'm not into programming or anything like that or I would have implemented a new system myself,but I have 40 yrs interest in the subject and would love to teach the land lubbers what they are missing in not having an interesting naval system.

I would think a system with Linear attack /Defence and Melee with 3 chit picks like the land system is a favourite to start with,I also want to reduce the % loss in combat as 25% is excessive,also the light fleets need to be - 2 or -3 CRT, in any combat with heavies.

I had an interesting debate with Bresh on Saturday in my thread Naval combat to simplistic, very enjoyable I like a good debate!



pzgndr -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/28/2009 12:37:28 AM)

Mardonius, have you got copies of the advanced naval combat rules from The General and the EiH v4.0 rules? These are available on the EiA and EiH Yahoo! groups respectively. Anyone can join and have access to these. Lots of good resources there. If you need copies send me a PM.

I take it there is general agreement that proportional losses should be a priority. I don't see anything listed in Mantis so I shall add something. Ditto for political points. For campaigns with light fleets and transports, there should be reduced effectiveness of these fleets and reduced pp's to be consistent with classic EiA.

IMHO there are already well-defined alternate naval rules out there. And I believe Marshall is interested in eventually implementing an advanced naval system option. The big question is what specifically he can and cannot do with the game engine, and then a working group could focus on what to recommend for the parts he's willing to implement.



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/28/2009 1:02:27 PM)

Thank you PzGndr. Just got copies from Obsidiandragon. His draft letter is in the post. [;)]

I agree with the Mantis postings in concept wholely... just am a bit cautious.

My concern though is this: we run a danger of suboptimizing our fixing process if we change one thing at a time. I think it more prudent to collect most or all of the the proposed changes (and maybe some new ones from EiH/Harry Rowland thoughts) and amalgamate them into a model and run some scenarios/mock combats therewith. We can then see how these changes interact with each other rather than let one loose at a time and potentially muck up the works of a game in process. Also, I think that it prudent that we keep any changes as part of an option tree that players can elect, similar to the options tree that HFJ posted from World In Flames.

Come on in and be part of the working group... you seem like a savvy fellow.

best
Mardonius



pzgndr -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/28/2009 1:40:16 PM)

I am willing, but I have not used either of the alternate naval rules nor am I a naval warfare expert of the period.  I am interested in the rules development to keep up with changes.

quote:

My concern though is this: we run a danger of suboptimizing our fixing process if we change one thing at a time.


This is a valid concern but I see the issue in three major parts.  Part I is simply restoring a sense of balance regarding heavy and light fleets, and the proportional losses rule and pp losses should resolve that.  Part II is an advanced naval combat model with tactical chits, and either EIA or EIH rules could be adopted.  Thresh indicated the EIA rules in The General were OK, and being that was an official optional rule that would be a good place to start.  Part III would include all the other optional stuff and those would have to be carefully considered in total to ensure no unfair advantages or disadvantages are being intoroduced.  Parts I and II are pretty generic and should be realatively easy to implement?



hellfirejet -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/28/2009 1:49:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mardonius

Thank you PzGndr. Just got copies from Obsidiandragon. His draft letter is in the post. [;)]

I agree with the Mantis postings in concept wholely... just am a bit cautious.

My concern though is this: we run a danger of suboptimizing our fixing process if we change one thing at a time. I think it more prudent to collect most or all of the the proposed changes (and maybe some new ones from EiH/Harry Rowland thoughts) and amalgamate them into a model and run some scenarios/mock combats therewith. We can then see how these changes interact with each other rather than let one loose at a time and potentially muck up the works of a game in process. Also, I think that it prudent that we keep any changes as part of an option tree that players can elect, similar to the options tree that HFJ posted from World In Flames.

Come on in and be part of the working group... you seem like a savvy fellow.

best
Mardonius


Hi Guys, I think any changes need to be options selectable, like my recent post for World In Flames which has 80 options,I'm not saying EIA needs 80 options but certainly a few more would not go amiss. I'm also curious to see what alteration can be implemented via the editor to fine tune the naval side of the game?



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/28/2009 1:54:08 PM)

I think you are spot on. Very sound concept, in my opinion.

However, Marshall has been trolling the forums this morning and has been conspicuously silent on the naval rules redesign prospect. So our enthusiasm may be just enough to get ourselves spun up.

Marshall: please let us know where you stand so that we can either take action in accordance with your cooperation or find some other means to employ our efforts.

thank you
Mardonius



Marshall Ellis -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 12:30:59 PM)

Hey guys:

I am so far away from changing the naval rules that it is hard for me to say yea or nay today! There is much in the que for me at the moment and touching the naval rules (While I'm not opposed) is very low on my list right now. You will see a classic scenario before naval changes.



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 3:20:53 PM)

Well, this shelves the NRRWG for now. Thank you to Nathan, PanzerGrenadier, OD, HFJ , and others for the input and/or signing on.

Marshall: I would implore you, once you have the priority for naval rules, to consider enlisting the help of a NRRWG so that you don't incur broadsides from reasonable changes.

best
Mardonius



pzgndr -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 3:35:57 PM)

quote:

Well, this shelves the NRRWG for now.


Not so fast! There is still something to be gained by carefully reviewing the advanced naval combat options out there and proposing a specific game enhancement in Mantis. That "Part II" piece I mentioned before. I already added "Part I" to Mantis for consideration. This naval combat option could be a simple as taking the rules and tables from The General and saying this is what the working group proposes. Or perhaps some adjustments based on the EiH rules. Or maybe multiple options? Whatever.

Of course, Marshall considered the group concensus idea before when developing and releasing EiANW and has been flogged unmercifully ever since. But hey, may as well try again and get an agreed upon proposal entered into Mantis for future consideration. [8D]



Marshall Ellis -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 4:02:40 PM)

Please don't take my post as shutting the door for good!
I'm all for Future consideration but nothing will get done until I get ahead in Mantis.
Bugs, clear deviations will be first as well as a classic scenario!
There are only 48 hours in one day over here in TX!



Mardonius -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 5:08:53 PM)

Marshall
I am coming to Arlington this Friday to see a Rangers Game and do some USMC stuff and have some construction projects on going in El Paso. Best batten down your hatches!
best
Mardonius



Marshall Ellis -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 8:13:24 PM)

Mardonius:

You should know that we don't play baseball down here :-)
Have a great time and careful in El Paso. I hear they are having an influx of folks trying to outrun the Swine Flu!

Keep your powder dry!





anarchyintheuk -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 9:55:00 PM)

There's a form of semi-professional baseball played in Arlington. It sucks being a Ranger fan.

I've heard that drinking is effective against swine flu.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: EiANW Naval Rules Redesign Working Group (NRRWG) (4/29/2009 11:33:18 PM)

Spoken like a true fan!
They'll break your heart! :-0
So many great players.
Great park
ZERO titles!




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.845703