"Fighting Sails - questions for Ryan Miller after first games" Topic

So today we gave the rules a try… they were a lot of fun..

We played two 300 pts games back to back in 4-5 hours

The game had lot's of fun stuff, boarding actions, spectacular critical hits, close range rakes… it was really great.

The following questions came up:

1) a ship has an anchor token and a damage token. After moving he rolls a discipline check and passes. Can the same ship now immediately attempt to remove the anchor token or does a ship only get one of these attempts per turn?

2) A ship with hull 7 has been getting damage and thanks to a very discipline crew fixing them… so much that this has happened 7 times! The rules indicate that you lose morale up to the hull level, does this mean that further damage to this ship will not cause morale loss for its fleet ?
2b) What if the ship sinks, still no morale loss, since in the past the fleet has already lost 7 points of morale from this ship?
2c) what if ths ship is boarded and captured, it would seem fromreading the rules that in this case the fleet does indeed lose 7 pts of morale since here there is no mention of up to the hull stat as there is in the dmg account

3) after my enemy with intiative moves, then my ship attempts to collide and board, hence I don't attmept an evasive maneuver.. what about the enemy ship, can that ship attempt to evade even though it has already moved ?
3b)What if after passing the test there is still nopossible pivot from stern to avoid collision?
3c)What if it manages to avoid but the ship trying to board once again manages to collide, try eveading again?
3d) when evading, should it be the shortest pivot to avoid or a pivot chosen by the pivoting ship ( this could have other gaming effects)?
3e) while we are at it, the action of the evasive maneuver in itself costs a sailing point, correct? So if I only got one sailing point, I pivot on my spot and that is it no forward movement, correct?
3f) finally I assume that if there is no room to execute the evasive maneuver due to other ships or something else then it is simply not executed, correct?

This is really a great set of rules to play with 4-6 ships per player, and we are hoping to try larger multiplayer actions soon…

Fantastic job…
thanks
Francisco

Is there a dedicated forum for these rules anywhere please?

Regards

That would be of great help… we are really enjoying them and would love to see them grow.. more fleets, more scenarios and other stuff…

( I have a bunch of uncharted seas minis that would love a fantasy version :) ) ..

To me they are starting to feel what I hoped trafalgar would be… except some of the mechanics in Trafalger ( GW) seemed that a needed a bit of house ruling and prevented us from keeping them longrun ( plus they are OOP ).. this one works as is…

Anyways.. hoping Ryan will stop by and answer some of these soon…

Cheers, I'm glad you are enjoying the rules!! An extra tot of rum for you!

1. This isn't explicitly spelled out in the rulebook, but a ship cannot test for both in the same sailing phase. A ship can only test for 1 thing each sailing phase. So if it has 2 damage tokens on it, it can't roll to get rid of both of them. Likewise, if it has a damage and an anchor token, it cannot roll for both of them in the same sailing phase. And per page 20 under "damage control", a ship with both damage tokens and an anchor token cannot test to remove the anchor token. It must clear all the damage tokens first.

2. The limit to fleet morale loss only applies to individual cannon attacks. Over the course of the game, there is no limit to how much morale you can lose from a single ship – the limit of morale loss from a single cannon attack (or the combined attack of a squadron) is set at the ship's hull rating.

2b. Whenever a ship sinks, your fleet loses morale equal to the ship's hull stat, regardless of how much morale your fleet has already lost due to damage to that ship.

2c. Whenever a ship is taken as a prize, its fleet loses morale equal to its hull, while the fleet that took her gains that much morale. Again, this is regardless of how much morale you've already lost due to damage to that ship.

3. Yes, the other ship may attempt an evasive maneuver, even if it has moved already in that sailing phase.

3b. If there is no room for the evading ship to do the evasive maneuver, it may no do the maneuver. Assuming the other ship was unable or unwilling to do an evasive maneuver, the two ships become entangled.

3c. Yes, the test to evade happens every time an entanglement occurs. So ships with lots of sailing points can make several attempts to collide.

3d. The evading ship turns just enough to avoid colliding with the ship again if it were to move straight ahead.

3e. No. Evasive maneuvers happen outside the normal sailing point system – and since a ship that has already spent its sailing points for the phase can attempt them, they cannot cost sailing points.

3f. Correct.

I'm working up a FAQ, I'll let you all know when it is posted. Thanks for playing, I hope I've cleared some things up for you!

Rayan,
I look forward to your F & Q and hope you would add to the nations fleets. The Russians (and Swedes) also had oared ships too. Again thank you for extra help with your rules.
Be safe
Rory

Well, Osprey has a forum for their rules sets not sure if there is one dedicated just to this set though…

I've set up a FB group unsurprisingly called 'Fighting Sail' mostly for my club to have all the rule amendments and clarifications that are coming out, together, in one place. But anyone with an interest would be welcome.

Bubblegum,
Great! that is good. But I'm not on FB. No one love's me!
be safe
Rory

Those are great answers… We'll play again on Sunday and I'm sure a few more might pop up for your Q&A file :)

cheers
Francisco

@Ryan,

A damage control question: I have a ship with an Anchor Token and two Damage Tokens. My ship is Discipline 8. I roll 8 dice on my discipline test and get two 6's, can I remove two damage tokens(understanding you cannot remove Anchor tokens while the ship has damage)?

Bob

Bob,
As I see it Ryan said Page 20 Damage Control "may attempt to remove ONE" "if it passes, remove ONE Damage token".I would say only one at a time. I may have got it wrong. But that is what I would do. Also see the opening questions to this thread and Ryan's answers to them.
Be safe
Rory

I have a question on movement. The QRS says a ship may move 'up to 2 inches' per movement point. Must it move that amount if it isn't turning or can it move less?

Also, I played my first game this weekend, and two ships sunk because of two lucky broadsides. This seemed ahistorical. Was my game a fluke or did others have the same experience? That was the one part of the game I did not like.

Liked to see a FAQ too. Did not see one for these rules on the Osprey site yet.

@Rory, yes I see in Ryan's answer #1 for the OP, one damage toke or one Anchor assuming there are no damage tokens. Thanks.

@Dantheman, on page 13, in the paragraph under Wearing, in states that you don not have to move 2", but if you choose not to move at least 2" the ship receives an Anchor token.

Bob

Thanks Bob

Danthman,
I have not played yet. I hope to in a week or two. I also hope your game was a fluke. If what happen to you in your game is the norm I for one would be very upset. To lose a ship or two in a very big game is O.K. but in a small or middle-ling game not so good. What size ships did you lose and what size ship(s) was firing at you? I would understand 2 frigates V 1 or 2 SOL or 1st rate V 4th rate. Or your ships where raked
Be safe
Rory

A Spanish and French 3rd rate took out a 1st rate (!) and a 3rd rate at mid range. We laughed about it because the hit rolls were definitely abnormal, both two hit, and to save. The perfect storm.

I definitely want to play the game again. At worse case you can modify the damage results table. Still something you shouldn't have to do for an Osprey game. I would like to think it had decent play testing and statistical review before publishing.

Umm… The doubts about these rules accumulate: first movement; now damage. But people insist they enjoy them?

Someone who's PLAYED the rules, please tell me what's to enjoy.

I played a game today. Not a big game, just a toe in the water. I think for small games, 2 to 4 ships aside. I would stick with what you known and like to play.
But! for a big battle a I think a big thumbs up! I will know more after the 2nd July. Doing a 600 pts a side game.
What is poor. turning. again in a big game it would be the captains job, not yours! So O.K. I can live with that. It is hard to keep the ships in line. I think this would be life like.
Firing, is O.K. You must repair as fast as you can. This can be done after a number of turns. Do not put a frigate up against SOL not good for the frigate.
Boarding did not do!
No ship logs, no tokens or boxes around the table. Only by the ship. Only one bit of paper to look after your "fleet Morale". The idea of no paper/logs game is more to me than turning. I think it would make a great 1-2400 scale game, half moment and ranges.
Be safe
Rory

Ryan,
One thing to ask! If you are In-irons and you roll sailing dice and get no movement. Do you get an "Anchor Token" like if you move less than 2 inches?
I enjoyed the game, but I'm looking forward to a larger game I have planed to play later of 600 pts a side.
Be safe
Rory

Rory,

You've said you enjoyed the game you played, but you haven't said specifically what you enjoyed ( although you seem to be positive about the lack of the need for book-keeping,but that lack is hardly an enjoyment).

You still seem to have problems with movement (vide your last post). You say turning is "poor"; and that "Firing is OK" only.

So what aspects of the game did you "enjoy"? (Or anyone else who's played the game).

I confess I have not played yet, but in reading the rules through (about 20 times), this game does not seem any more a fleet game than Sails of Glory. Yes there is less record keeping, but there is so much dicing! And counter dicing!

I like the fleet morale concept as a victory condition. The rolling for sail points seems extremely gamey and doesn't add to quick play, but actually detracts from it.

I'll be playing a game shortly then I'll be able to support the above remarks or retract them.

BillyFish,
I'll gladly answer your question about what is enjoyable about the game.
Bear in mind that this is a totally subjective point of view and by no means an assessment about the rules quality in an objective view, if such thing exists.

I like naval games, particularly age of sail. However as much as I hate to admit I find many naval games a bit dull. In a game I expect to make decisions that take into account my opponent's actions plus a series of uncontrollable random factors and all this in a setting that attempts to represent a historical period.
Many naval games that I have experience do a great job of simulating the particular details of the corresponding period but I find that the decisions you have to make are not too critical. Usually maneuvers can be corrected pretty quickly and it all defaults to a pretty predictable move plus rolling of dice, so the only important thing is what I rolled.

This game has managed to avoid that shortcoming. Not that their is no randomness, there is, in fact it is there even for movement, but it means that when I make a decision I account not only for my opponent's action but by how he will react to this randomness. If all movements are easily calculated, the optimal course of action is usually clear and this allows you to predict you opponent with ease. Here that is not the case. Hence from a game point of view it is fun again.

The initiative mechanic is also a good one. It is a common mechanic and of course a bit abstract, but since the best option is to get to close range to the enemy with the initiative then when you get that desired initiative you need to try to exploit it. So the rest of the time you are trying to set that up. Again that is the nice tactical part of the game.

Over the past many games I've played this pushed me deeper into studying fleet tactics and trying them out in the games. This is a very personal view but I feel that by attempting some of the standard tactics and sticking with it ( as opposed to doing unconventional things ) you tend to have an edge. Hence I feel that a good way to play the game is study the standard tactics that were use when facing particular tactical situations and apply them. I tend to like that.

Regarding the questions, I already mentioned that I don't see anything different than many other rules that need an errata or clarification here and there.

Regarding the damage comment above, how do we consider it unrealistic. It certainly depends on the turn scale, can a ship "sink" in a turn ? Well depends on how long a turn lasts and also what we call sink, maybe sink just means a ship that is totally out of action, which is the way I see it in this game since there is no granularity on out of action terms, there is strike, sink and captured.. clearly sink includes a bunch of other degrees on "out of action". From a gaming point of view, the lucky shot at medium range that takes out a ship is unusual, so it doesn't break the game. We played Nile the other day with all the ships and it only happened once, so you can see as an example of what I mean that this doesn't happen too often.

Overa all, I like the game because it does have a good period flavor, your decisions and tactical solutions are clearly affected by the context and your opponent and have a critical impact on the game and the scale is manageable enough to have 6 players each with 5-6 ships play a full game to conclusion in one afternoon (12-5 )

That is my very subjective opinion and a characterization of the main points I enjoy about the game..

Many people won't like many things here, like the fact that shooting is not simultaneous or things like that but I do…

very subjective one man's opinion…

PS. I love sails of glory, but what I like most about that game is playing with all the advanced and optional rules, then I feel it is really fantastic, but then it is complex and better suited for small actions. If you play with the basic rules you can do fleet actions, and it is probably equivalent to this one, but this one flows a bit easier in my view with fleet actions. SO… I keep both and use SoG for small actions (1-2 ships per player ) and this one for large actions (5-6 ships per player )… So I'm happy to have both sets on my shelf !!! :)

Regarding dicing for sailing points, I love that part, it is a new mechanic that I really enjoy, I don't think it slows the game down too much, it is pretty easy and is a great tool to force players to make mistakes.. Staying in line of battle is no longer an easy set tactic, if you sacrifice speed it is easy ( ships will always get one sailing point ) but if you try to speed up ships will fall out of station. And abstraction for sure but a good way to represent some of the problems I've read regarding fleet tactics. As I said, I don't expect everyone to like this game but I certainly do :)

cheers
Francisco

Rory,
I believe you do get the token, we certainly play it that way…
Francisco

If you fail to move 2" in a turn you receive an anchor token. Since when in irons you do not get the free sailing point, if you fail to roll a sailing point success, you would receive an anchor token.

Bob

Okay here is my issue with dicing:

You dice for initiative (okay so far)
You dice for sailing points (every ship)
You dice for Collisions and Entanglement
You dice to avoid collision
You dice to remove damage
You dice to shoot
You dice to avoid damage when shot at
You dice for extra damage if you roll explosions
You dice to board and to repel boarders

*remember in a fleet game most of the above will apply to each ship.

A smooth fleet action game needs less dicing. Record keeping is not as difficult as dicing and counter dicing. I have never understood why gamers are place opposed to record keeping, but will sit there and dice all night to avoid record keeping.

I would prefer simultaneous fire, but to me the thing that will slow this game especially at the 6+ ships per side is the dicing. It will be interesting to see what Ares comes up with, they are developing a fleet game.

By the way I do intend to try this game. Like I said earlier, I may completely withdraw all statements after I play.

Many thanks for the input, lads. I'm getting a better idea of the game.

Yes, if you are in irons and fail to roll any sailing points, the ship gets an anchor token.

Also, here is a folder containing the FAQ, as well as other resources:

link

As I mentioned I don't see the dice rolls slowing the game down.. We played a full "battle of the Nile" with all the ships.. started at 12Pm and before 5PM the French fleet had broken morale…

Only one ship was lost on a lucky medium range broadside. I did lose the Vanguard to a close range broadside from a heavily damaged french third rate, I had initiative, I closed for the kill and he saved and then he got lucky on the return fire.. but hey that happens..

The british fleet managed to keep their line of battle, the french of course had a tougher time ( we assumed they were just leaving anchor ) given the angle of the wind..

So, does it slow the game, well over 30 ships on the table and we got the game all the way to the end ? So pretty good outcome…

( We had no boarding actions, it seems a suboptimal way to accomplish objectives in these large actions )…

But, hey by all means give it a try and if it is not for you, off you go.. I had no clue Ares was working on a fleet action game.. that sounds fun.. For the moment, for the 15 bucks or so for this rules, I couldn't be happier :)

In our club this is the one set of rules that has brought all our 1/2400 fleets out.. we bought them for Trafalgar back in the day and that didn't work much for us so they went to sleep. and now they are all back :)

Francisco

Hi All,
Bob, Francisco and Ryan thanks for your help on "In-Irons"
Ryan, thinks for the file.
I have played a game on a 6x4 ft table with 52 ships, That was 52 Ships logs. We did make one or two mistakes with damage on the wrong log. We had 4 players. It was like a game of Snap or Happy-Family's, not a Napoleonic Naval game. I would say keep your favorite rules and play them for small/middle games. For the bigger games I think this is the it for me. Or maybe as I get to know it more the bases for newer fleet rules. I found after a time we knew how many dice for sailing rolls for each rate of ship. Also Gunnery etc. Not having too look-up each ships log to see what she can do. To see a rated ship and know what she can do. Or not do by the tokens by the ship is SO NICE. How she sails, How she fires at one look. Shuffling cards, looking up stats, knocking tokens off ships logs all gone.
Ryan has given us a chance to push model ships around a table and not be at a maths lesson.
O.K. we have to roll dice, Not all the time. Only sailing is a every time thing. You are not Firing, doing Damage Control or boarding each turn for each ship.This is what I enjoyed with my game, Billyfish. I am so looking forward to the next game, a bigger game.
I miss only one/two things stats for the Swedes and Turks.
Thanks Ryan
Be safe all
Rory

dantheman
Also, I played my first game this weekend, and two ships sunk because of two lucky broadsides. This seemed ahistorical. Was my game a fluke or did others have the same experience? That was the one part of the game I did not like.

A Spanish and French 3rd rate took out a 1st rate (!) and a 3rd rate at mid range. We laughed about it because the hit rolls were definitely abnormal, both two hit, and to save. The perfect storm.

I definitely want to play the game again. At worse case you can modify the damage results table. Still something you shouldn't have to do for an Osprey game. I would like to think it had decent play testing and statistical review before publishing.

Same result here. We played with just over 300pts each, 1 First rate each (L'Orient and Victory, Victory hereafter to be known as the Death Star by us)and a second and a third rate each. Within half an hour, after only three broadsides at medium range both second rate sunk and one third rate!I don't think the damage stats are very realistic TBH. I like the way the rest of it played, but when a 100 gun ship sinks after one broadside at medium range, really?

A demo game of "Fighting Sail" (Trafalgar) was played @ NJCon. I was told by a participant that his 100 gun 1st rate Royal Sovereign was sunk by a single broadside from a Spanish 64 (no further details provided). If this and other similar events being reported here are accurate, it must be accepted that historical verisimilitude is not at all high on the priority list for these rules. You might as well be playing a game of checkers with the counters named after famous Age of Sail ships.

B

I think that getting to re-roll explosions should be ignored TBH. It might make the game lst a little longer. We never actually used any damages tokens, after lots of laminating and careful cutting, because everything just sank on the spot!

I'm playing my 1st game Thursday. Will have similar or different insight then. I see multiple issues with this game. Only way to know for sure is to try it. I'm doing lots of remounting of ship mini's and laminating also. I hope it's not a waste of time.

I to am playing my 2nd game on Thursday with Pete. We are doing a Russian V I think French/Spanish of 600 pts a side.
I'm looking forward to the game and will hopefully cover most things in the rules, and see!
be safe
Rory

Well it wasn't a total waste of time LL, as we got some widely divergent results, and therefore a good stress test in…..I guess everything was fine until the dice rolling began (but then that starts pretty early with these rules).

FlyXwire had a frustrating day, for sure. We played a War of 1812 game that was around 200 points per side. The British had a third rate, 3 Leda frigates, and a corvette. The Americans had 2 x 44 gun frigates, and two of the smaller 36 gun frigates. We unfortunately for the British ignored the squadron rule for frigates. This doomed them.

First of all rolling for sail points slows movement in this game to an absolute crawl. Gunnery results are quirky due to saving throws. I admit the game would have played differently with an all SoL OOB or if the Squadron rule had been followed.

I spent about 12 hours prepping this game, I'd play again, but am pretty confident in stating this is not going to be my fleet rule set for AoS.

So, I have a competent crew, a competent captain, I have a steady breeze at a given aspect. I need to roll for sail points, why? This WoTC/GW (gamey) type play style. So are the gunnery saves, with uniform damage on all units, varying the number of saves.

Hi All,
I played a 600 pts aside. That gave us about 10 ships each.
We had other things to do. So did not finish the game. That was of our making not the rules.
I think that as the game is for large fleets, to play a small game with only 1 SOL would not help with rules that are said to be for "Fleet Actions". It says so on the tin! David in his rule does a shuffle thing with his ships to put them out of place. That is one of many ways too up-set the plan you have.
No two ships sailed the same! We had 1st, 3rd and 4th Rate ships on the table. Yes! we had to use lots of dice rolling. After 2 turns we knew the number of dice for each Rate size.
To help with this, we had number of dice for 1st rate, and added different colour dice for each smaller Rate. Yellow for 1st Rate, +1 red for 3rd, +1 green for 4th rate eg all the colours.
For the game size we found the dice rolling better than hunt the ship-log for each ship. Again in our game the uniform damage helped move things along. Not hunt the ship-log to mark it. We placed all new damage tokens face down, at the end of the turn marked off the fleet morale as we turned them over.
At long and middle range we did not find the damage too much as some have said. It took 3, 3rd rate ships 2 turns to sunk one of my 4th rate ship at middle range.
I found that after a ship got too much damage that to pull it out of the line and get repairing was the best. I'm looking forward to playing them again. For the big game they are O.K. For smaller ships or fleets, No!
I would not use this rule set for smaller games
Be safe
Rory

I'm still confused: One says he'll use these rules for his fleet action games, another says he won't!

Billyfish,
Why read us? Try them yourself!
I would say that Lincolnlog and FlyXwire had a small game. Using small ships, bar 1, 3rd rate. The stats do frigates and brigs, but not smaller. It is for the big ships, in big games. If I had done there game I would not use this rule set. We (2 of us) worked a table of 20 ships. I have not played a game this large without mountains of paper-work. I have seen Mark's Computer rules with no paper-work, but that is different! Perfect rules NO! Playable with lots of ships YES!
It's clear from the start that you have been anti-Fighting Sail. All I can say is play them or not, no one is making you!
Be safe
Rory

A question on movement – if you start in Irons without an anchor token and get sailing points by rolling 1 or more 6s, are you allowed to move directly into the wind? From my knowledge of the period, it would seem more logical to only spend these points in turning, although it would take a couple of 30 degree turns to get out of Irons.

I just noticed that the "In Irons" on the template only covers 30 degrees (rather than 45), so one turn would get you out of Irons (which is generous to square rigged ships, but works with the game). Still restricting In Irons movement to turning would probably be more historical.

JamesSB,
I think you are right on both counts. The angles are not historical right. For the game O.K. yes! But very generous!
If you dice 2x6 you could tack, 1x6 wear or turn. But in the rules you must move forward frist! Hard to do if "In-irons"!
If the rules said "if In-irons only turn, then move or just turn". this would sound good. Do you then get an "Anchor" token by not moving forward before turning. By turning then moving is that an "Anchor" token or a no-can-do? I think this is going to be a new house-rule!
Be safe
Rory

I'm not for or against Fighting Sail; but I am reading contradictory messages.

Billyfish,
I know of no rules that fit all pockets! Some want a game that is historical 100% right, some wish to play a game that just gives historical feel. Its horses for courses and what one wants at the time. Large or small game, it's up too you!.Don't use us. I have been open with the plus/minus of the rules. Get and try the rule set and answer your question yourself.
Then let us know YOUR take on the rules!
Be safe
Rory

I think if you are in irons and roll a 6, a house rule would be to allow you to turn without moving but then NOT get an anchor tag (your crew got its act together). This is simple enough to not disrupt the basic flow of the rules and prevents an historical anomaly of moving directly into the wind. The good crews can roll off the anchor tags and then turn out of the wind, while less efficient ships would be stuck.

I did some look ups and found that any sailing ship could not get closer to the wind than 22.5 degrees. However I seem to remember reading somewhere that square-rigged ships were not as good at this as fore/aft rigged ships.

Pointing directly into the wind was usually done deliberately only while tacking, and some ships didn't complete the maneuver and got stuck "in irons" where they were at the mercy of the wind until they changed their heading (usually allowing the wind to push them backwards while using their rudder – a "box" maneuver or "box hauling"). This was a tricky maneuver and often risked sail damage.

Hi JamesSB,
I think I could go with that.
Be safe
Rory

One more question regarding fleet morale loss, sorry:

I score 4 net hits on a french ship with a hull stat of 7. Due to previous damage taken, the ship immediately sinks. Now does the french fleet loose
a) 11 morale (4 net hits plus the sunken ship's 7 hull points), or
b) 7 morale (7 hull for the sunken ship's 7 hull points) only?

Btw I very much enjoy the game – just lost scenario 2 by morale reduced to 0 before the enemy convoy reached its destination.

:-)

I did some look ups and found that any sailing ship could not get closer to the wind than 22.5 degrees

You have apparently misread. No sailing ship could make way with her bow two points (22.5 degrees) from the wind. From Sam Willis' "The Capability of Sailing Warships – Part 1: Windward Performance" in The Northern Mariner XIII, #4 (October 2003):

"The mariner's compass is divided into thirty-two points: each representing an angle of 11 1/4°, and a square sail, attached to its yard, can fill with the wind at the very best no closer than an angle of six points to the wind, the traverse of the yard being limited in front by the forestay and abaft by the lee shrouds. Thus, with a northerly wind, the best course that could be sailed by a sailing warship was ENE, or WNW. A sail rigged fore and aft, on the other hand, is not subject to such restrictions, and can fill with the wind a mere four points off the bow and sail a course of NE or NW with a northerly wind.

Square-rigged ships did carry some fore and aft sails – lateen mizzen or spanker, staysails and headsails – and could effectively create a fore and aft rig by leaving all square sails furled and only hoisting headsails, staysails and spanker. However, any headway gained from such an arrangement would have been minimal and the ship would not have been able to make ground to windward since it could not gain sufficient speed for steerage to be relied upon."

Willis goes on to describe how a ship's ability to sail even this close to the wind was further degraded by it's tendency to sideslip to lee, resulting in a course that was actually less weatherly than that indicated by the angle of the keel to the wind.

But then, the author of Fighting Sail has ignored physics (and history) in so many other ways, it hardly seems worth quibbling over this issue. I wouldn't recommend trying to "house rule" it into something it's not. Just take the game for what it's worth, play and enjoy it for what it is.

Hi all,

I'm taking plenty of notes for Fighting Sail 2, this is all great feedback!

My goal is to make a game that is accessible enough to bring people into the hobby, while still having enough feel to convey the arena of conflict.

It's absolutely true that I traded historicity for accessibility. My feeling is that if strict historicity is your taste, there are already plenty of games for you. I wanted a game that focused on immersion rather than simulation.

Did I go too far in some instances? Of course. An opening shot rarely hits its target squarely in the center. Furthermore, I don't present Fighting Sail as the ultimate AoS wargame; merely my own humble contribution to a great genre that I truly love.

With that in mind, I can surely see some spots where I missed the mark. It may be hard to believe, but game designers rarely have the time to play test as much as we would like to, and working on a game for as long as I did (in its various incarnations) often causes a bit of tunnel vision. Below are a few areas I would fix if I could.

While it never really was a problem in my play tests, In Irons is clearly inaccurate as portrayed in the book. This was, I'm a little embarrassed to admit, intentional on my part. I had originally included separate rules for ships in irons, but as they rarely mattered in play test, I (in my infinite ability to over-think things) pulled them out in the name of "design elegance". What a misfire!

If I could go back (and who knows, perhaps Fighting Sail 2 will see the light of day at some point) then I would probably do something like this:

As a ship moves, if at any time it finds itself in irons, it must stop immediately, forfeiting all unspent sailing points.

When a ship begins its movement in irons, the first 6 it rolls must be used to do an evasive maneuver to get its bow away from the wind. This move is a turn to leeward using its stern as the axis point, and only turns the ship enough to clear the wind. (this is just like doing an evasive maneuver to avoid an enemy ship)

Next up is gunnery. I struggled with this system quite a bit, as I was (and still am) dead set against keeping too much track of hit points, hull points, mast points and the like. I feel the level of abstraction I chose was about right, but the explosion system does leave it open to some unlikely catastrophes. Losing a SOL to a single broadside is certainly cinematic, but can leave the game open for some unsatisfying results.

A better system would be to take out the hull roll, and make the hull stat a static number. That one change would eliminate most of the unlikely sinkings that can happen under the current rules. Of course, those numbers would need to be reduced across the board (say -2 hull each), but I think this would be a fine change that wouldn't impact my vision for an accessible game at all.

A more aggressive change would be to remove the damage deck, and split the hull stat into two numbers (for example, a third rate might have a hull of 3/6.) Score at least as many hits as the lower number, and the ship gets an anchor token (unless it already had one) and its fleet loses 1 morale. Getting at least as many hits as the second number would give the ship the same results above, plus a damage counter. Exceeding the second number gives you an additional damage counter per point exceeded, and the fleet loses 1 morale for each damage counter received. (So if the third rate from above were to suffer 7 hits, it would get an anchor token (unless it already had one), two damage tokens, and its fleet would lose 3 morale.) The effects of damage tokens would remain as outlined in the book. This would mean that smaller ships are very unlikely to cause major damage to larger ships, but are capable of harassing them and slowing them down, as well as chipping away at the enemy's morale.

Speaking of morale, it is needlessly confusing, especially when it comes to sunk ships. My idea was that a sunken ship really strikes a blow to the fleet's morale, so in addition to the morale lost from unsaved hits, you lose that ship's hull value as well. This is probably the most often asked question about the game, and should have been more straightforward.

The first thing I would do is cut out the additional morale loss (equal to the sunk ship's hull.) It's a bit punitive, and is confusing to boot. I would replace it with a simple "+1 morale loss if the ship was sunk." Assuming the above damage system worked its way into the rules, the only other change I would make is to lower the starting morale to keep the game from taking too long. Perhaps 15% of the fleet's point value, or something like that.

Anyways, thoughts and feedback are always welcome. Feel free to try out any of the ideas above and let me know how they work for you!