"Cruel Seas Errata v1" Topic

Quite a few…

link

That must be a record for poor quality design and production. How many weeks, and ten page!

Oh boy!

Wow.

Yeah, not pleased with this amount of fixing needed, but glad they've made them nonetheless.

So now I'm thinking I need to literally cut & paste the altered sections out and adhere them right into my rule book, so I don't have pages and pages of errata to consult during my [first] games.

That's a lot of work ahead, and not so "smooth seas" either…..

Agreed, not happy.

Cruel Joke

Indeed, and I opted for the Gold Pkg. pre-order, that included the sleeved, autographed, hard-bound rule book too. (so really cool to have that now – maybe as an anchor)

I have to say that looking over the 10 pages of errata that this is Pretty G-D Sad. I was originally attracted to this game for the scale as all of my gaming is in 6mm. The topic was likewise interesting and I have purchased the starter set and the USN PT Boats, but this really makes me question those choices and if there will be any further buys of this line.

Great timing, I've just gone on my Xmas leave and hoped to have some games. I also don't have access to my work printer.

An unmitigated disaster.

For anyone on Facebook, I would urge you to go to the Cruel Seas Facebook page and share your thoughts with Warlord games on this "hiccup". I believe that we are all due replacement rule books with the errata included.

Fitzovich: +1

Yea, that's really gonna happen…

It's just like editing/proofreading in news articles – play testing must be obsolete…

Coopman, I don't see why they shouldn't be replaced. Warlord sold defective products to their customers. Their work was sloppy, lazy and 10 pages of errata 2 weeks after release is proof of just that. This doesn't even cover the packaging missteps that they had with the sets.

This whole release has been as you stated an unmitigated disaster. I am pretty sure I am done with Warlord's products. They simply don't seem to care about their products, name or customers.

Perhaps the rush to get it out before Christmas is the main factor in this. I heard that a lot of their kits had missing parts, wrong parts, etc. I just don't know what to think.

Um – ANNOUNCEMENT: CRUEL SEAS ERRATA V1…

V1?!

I wonder when Errata V2 will be out?

I'm guessing when they have complied the errors in the data tables

They are following the Microsoft model: put something out and let the users debug it for you.

They will put 25mm sprues on sale after the first of the year in order to divert attention, then everything will be right with the world.

It's disappointing, but honestly too much is being made of the ten pages. It's so long because Warlord basically reprinted entire sections of the rules (with all the graphics) with the corrections inserted. If it was just a typed up errata (like many rules sets release) it would have all fit on a page or two.

The errata makes changes to 30+ pages, or close to 1/3 of the rule book, and some of these have multiple corrections/clarifications per page, and then the QRS also needs amending.

If I were Warlord, I would get an amended, downloadable QRS out ASAP (for something we can play from that doesn't need to be papered over with corrections)!

Scott,

Agree. All but forgetting to put the mines in the combat table are minor changes that I figured out while reading the rules the first time. Agree with flywire a QRS with a new combat table would be a nice gesture.

Joe

I agree with Scott and Joe. I looked at the errata. Too much is being made of the 10 pages. I think Warlord did a good thing by getting the errata out ASAP.

If you think that most of the work of creating a new set of rules is in typing up the rules, taking some photos and then combining the two in a layout on the page, then yes I can see where the typos looks like a defective product.

However, you might understand that creating a new set of rules means seemingly endless repetitions of this cycle: trying some ideas, play testing the current set of rules, then comparing the play experience against the desired feel of the game. If you understand that the rule book is just an expression of the end of this long process, then you would understand that a few typos don't destroy a fun game or make it defective.

*FlyX..
My first thought as well. "I 'could' just cut & paste some straight from the errata into the book itself.
BUT, "How could/would that effect the value of the signed copies over time?"

IMHO, Its the 'SOP' of modern merchandise industry. 'Get It Out BEFORE Chirstmas!" 'Get it right, later.'

Bozkashi Jones
Um – ANNOUNCEMENT: CRUEL SEAS ERRATA V1… V1?!
I wonder when Errata V2 will be out?

THAT was the thing that caught my eye & gives me the greatest concern. Is there a V.2 in the works already.

To be fair, Ive never found any rules sys. that someone didn't find 'something' about them. Nothings perfect.
Played my first learning game Fri. night, over all, I really enjoy the game.

And following up on Part-timer and BJ here, it's version 1.1 of the errata that's out now currently (I guess that sounds a little better than V.2).

You know, instead of us having to amend our rule book pages ("at this point in the game"), they should amend the complete pages and offer those as downloads – and maybe that way we'll be getting closer to that "new" rule book – granted, all papered over with pasted-on pages in between. ;)

"Played my first learning game Fri. night, over all, I really enjoy the game."

And for many of us, that's the goal.

I usually quip at my games, "that I hope it looks good, but that I don't guarantee it'll play worth a darn!". :))) (I'm past trying to teach history, but if a scenario looks like it should, it's probably got enough design time behind it to play fairly well too).

Editorial: I put naval games into my "flat board" miniatures games genre. They're usually a lot easier to put on (like air combat games), and so there ought to be some really engaging effort put into the scenario designs being presented!

Editorial again: Some "flat board" games end up just being "flat"…..you may interpret that as you will.

CaptCarrot,

In reply to your thoughts, here.
"If you think that most of the work of creating a new set of rules is in typing up the rules, taking some photos and then combining the two in a layout on the page, then yes I can see where the typos looks like a defective product."

"However, you might understand that creating a new set of rules means seemingly endless repetitions of this cycle: trying some ideas, play testing the current set of rules, then comparing the play experience against the desired feel of the game. If you understand that the rule book is just an expression of the end of this long process, then you would understand that a few typos don't destroy a fun game or make it defective."

I don't believe that at all having spent 40+ years in the hobby and 18 of those in the game industry as a Retailer and with GAMA in various positions including Retail Division Vice Chairman, Chairman, Trade Show Manager and Executive Director. I worked with many manufacturers on various topics through those years and have some knowledge of the game design and production process along with other aspects of how the game industry works. What Warlord released in their book was well beyond a few typos. It was not really an issue of play testing and adjusting the rules, it was very much an issue of poor or nonexistent proofreading. It was likewise an issue of get it out for an artificial release date and fix it later. Those who purchased the first edition will simply be able to work through the errata or buy a new book (which won't hurt sales at all) later on if they choose to do so.

Warlord has a good presentation and good marketing which has long been needed in the hobby. They apparently do not have much commitment to their customers or their rules, which frankly I find overall to be fairly mediocre.

I will find a means of rewriting these to recoup my sunk costs, in conjunction with others in my geographic area to make them tighter, more representative and play faster using a combination of the many good ideas I have seen on the various blogs linked in these threads along with my own knowledge. They were a good idea, simply very poorly executed.

Perhaps the guiding principle behind"Cruel Seas" isn't naval strategy, but marketing strategy?