"Warlord Black Seas - It's not even out yet !!!" Topic

I suppose my first comment is how on earth people are getting a look at the ruleset when my FLGS games shop is still a week off getting a demo copy that they've asked me to look at and rig for them …

My second is 'A major games manufacturer is releasing a set of Age of Sail rules supported by half-decent looking miniatures and it is getting shredded before it even hits the streets ?'.

As with GW's Trafalgar anything that gets people interested in our rather specialist area of the hobby is to be welcomed surely, even if we have some quibbles about the detail ?

Get involved, contribute, try to improve it, but if we just sit on the sidelines playing our existing games in diminishing numbers we will pass into history as surely as the Age of Sail itself.

+1 to Mr Barker

So it is too much, then, to expect the designers and developers of historical games to actually have more than a superficial understanding of the historical realities before going into a project of this scope? The information is out there, as are many people who understand it well. To neglect to take advantage of this is to do a disservice to one's customers, especially those who do not already have a good grasp of the history.

The reality of the market is that historicity doesn't sell games; pretty toys and clever marketing do. The publishers don't see the need to keep their games from disseminating misinformation about the subject of their games, because it doesn't affect their bottom line. What it does do, though, is disappoint those who already have a love of the history the game purports to represent, and confuse those newcomers who may eventually pick up a history book and then wonder why the events of the past bear so little resemblance to their games.

As in any market, if you expect less you will get less.

Well marketed rubbish is still rubbish.

To be honest, I haven't noticed any particular decrease in those interested in naval games, the opposite in fact. It is sad to say that lousy rules, well advertised, do seem to whet appetites better than good rules only seen by the cognoscenti.

Sorry folks but I'm with Mr Barker on this. Cruel Seas has opened the door to naval gaming from some of the young guys down at my FLGS. I am happy for that. As the begin to develop an interest in the period and doing some reading on background they are coming up with modifications to the rules on their own. So why can't Black Seas do the same? And it moves them from WH40K to historicals. All good things for the hobby in my book.

Yes, slick marketing may appeal, but surely poor rules will ultimately put people off a period rather than promote it. Cruel Seas was all the rage at our club for about a month then the rules began to fall apart as the huge errors emerged and the lack of replayability became clear.

The game "battlecry" and "Broadsides" got me in interested in wargaming as a boy -- Hardly historical.
Many people want to just play a "GAME" --not come to believe they are actually Nelson at Trafalgar?
Many people should just go make their own stuff.

"So it is too much, then, to expect the designers and developers of historical games to actually have more than a superficial understanding of the historical realities before going into a project of this scope?"

You answer your own question here:

"The reality of the market is that historicity doesn't sell games; pretty toys and clever marketing do."

So why would anyone bother with historicity?

First of all, you're never going to get it right for those gamers.

Secondly anything they do will be criticized because they are a larger company and "only in it for the money" or some other nonsense.

Mark Barker is right, give the game a chance, maybe even support it even if it isn't your cup of tea.

"What it does do, though, is disappoint those who already have a love of the history the game purports to represent, and confuse those newcomers who may eventually pick up a history book and then wonder why the events of the past bear so little resemblance to their games."

This is crap, it doesn't confuse newbies. It gives them an exciting game that may wet their appetite to learn more about the history and if they don't think the game matches what they read about they may take their beautifully painted new models and find another ruleset.

You answer your own question here:

"The reality of the market is that historicity doesn't sell games; pretty toys and clever marketing do."

So why would anyone bother with historicity?

That was my point exactly, Scott. The vast majority of gamers are not going to care enough to check out the historical plausibility of a game before they lay out their money. In the absence of a monetary motivation to do the history right, some publishers just don't care about it, but they do have a duty of care to get the facts right when publishing something about a factual situation.

It costs no more to design a historical wargame that is reasonably congruent with the historical record. It doesn't matter whether the cause of incorporating historical inaccuracies in a supposedly historical game is negligence or incompetence; the result is the same. To ignore basic, easily verifiable facts about the past while marketing a historical wargame is dishonest.

You (and apparently some others) may be OK with them doing their job less well than they could, but I am not.

This is crap. It gives them an exciting game . . .

Respectfully disagree. It may or may not give them an exciting game. The game might be uninteresting anyway (and, in the case of Black Seas, we don't know yet) but it sounds like you're assuming that a historically plausible game cannot be exciting, which is a patently ridiculous and unsupportable assumption.

After the fun and games with Cruel Seas John Stallard asked if I could take a look at the rules. This was fairly late in the process, but the few pages worth if comments and suggestions I made to enhance realism whilst maintaining the level of fun and complexity were well received by Gabrio. How many of my suggestions made it through to the printed version I don't know as my copy hasn't arrived yet but I'm quite hopeful. And as others have said I'm loving how the game is already reaching out to bring in new blood to naval wargaming

I haven't looked at Age of Sail gaming since I got some Langton ships back when GW Historicals released Trafalgar back in 2009. The ships were lovely, but fell apart easily and I could not get anyone else around into it.

Now I'm looking into it again, thanks to the promise of sturdier plastic ships. So you might complain about the rules not beeing good enough or whatever, but for players like me it's making the period a lot more feasible. Other Age of Sail rules will definitely gain from an influx of more "casual friendly" minis.

Anything that makes a new historical period accessible and enjoyable for a new audience of gamers has got to to be more positive than negative IMHO.

Despite the flaws of Cruel Seas, it's got a lot more people owning and playing with little ships and if they're dissatisfied with the rules, most will try and find an alternative set rather than give up on the genre altogether if they're enjoying it.

The same is true of Bolt Action – not the most historically realistic set of WW2 platoon rules but it introduced the period to a lot of new gamers, many of whom have discovered ‘Chain of Command' and other rules as a result.

I still play Napoleonic naval games using Heart of Oak rules by Fantasy Games Unlimited (came in their RPG called Privateers and Gentlemen). The plastic miniatures in this new game look really nice though.

I hope that David Manley's efforts to edit and advise are helpful. There is absolutely no reason why this game or any other cannot be both pretty, well marketed and historically accurate. It simply requires good rules writing, research, play testing, editing, proof reading and effort. Anything else is just lazy.

The ship models are beautiful! I like the models from Cruel Seas too.

Its interesting to trash a set of rules, site unseen?? Its like well, trashing a set of rules site unseen. If you don't like the rules, use a set that you do like. This is the approach I intend to follow.

Mr. Manley made some interesting and useful suggestions for Cruel Seas on his blog. If Warlord was unable or unwilling to make all the changes he suggested for Black Seas, maybe he could include them in a blog post. I for one would like to see them.

I guess there must be some kind of assumption that everyone is stupid and will not be able to make alterations, make their own decisions, or decide for themselves how best to spend their own money and free time ??
Capitalism is so great !!!

"I'm loving how the game is already reaching out to bring in new blood to naval wargaming"

Wait. I thought that was what Sails of Glory was supposed to do and the myriad of other games that came before it. There's a pretty large variety of ship miniatures available in all scales, rules, board games, books, and more already out on the subject. What's missing here is that Warlord Games wants to get out THEIR version of age of sail combat so that you naturally purchase their boxed sets, books, and miniatures from them. Warlord is simply following the GW model, but applying it towards historical gaming. Nothing wrong with that and they seem to have been pretty successful up to this point. I think the issue is that when you're running a large operation like theirs and you've invested a lot of capital into boxed sets, miniatures, marketing, etc., which area all stacked in pallets sitting in a warehouse, the last thing you're going to do is get behind schedule waiting on the rules to get straightened out, so as long as they work to a degree they're going to ship them.

I'm also going to have agree with others who are questioning if this is really bringing in a lot of new historical gamers or converting them from the games they currently play. I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence here and there where some have, but I'm really not seeing it. At a local con this year (about 1500 attendees) that featured board games, RPGs, and miniature games we ran several Hail Caesar, BKC , Fire & Fury, and other games. They were well attended, everyone had fun, they thanked us,, then went right back to playing Root, Gloomhaven, and hundreds of other games with pretty bits. The hobby is so huge with so much product that historical wargaming has become a niche inside of a niche hobby.

Warlord is late to the market with Black Seas and I never mention heard of a GW Trafalgar. Forelock has been going to the shows with their Blood and Plunder system for several years. The reason I do not carry their product is that they are at almost every show in the South that I attend and they hit hmgs Eastern shows too. For the past year of 2019, they have been doing the Ship combat system as well.

There are mixed reviews on Cruel Seas as well. It seems the biggest complaint besides the price of the models is the fact that they went with 1/300 rather than the traditional 1/700.

Age of sail gaming has been around consistently for decades ever since WSIM. Portsmouth Miniatures out of Texas have been well received. As mentioned several systems are out there such as Sails of Glory and others mentioned here. But in regard to a great increase of games and sales in the era, the largest increase happened during the pirates of the Spanish Main cardboard ship decade.

As I mentioned above, I played broadsides as a kid, Probably the most successful game ever that involved sailing ships -- whether you like it or not.
It was a game and it was a battle between ships -- that is the criteria.

Regards.
Russ Dunaway

Also, Warlords do not "have a duty" to anything.
They have "a right" to produce what they want as they see fit -- and then the free market will decide.

Regards
Russ Dunaway

If the ships look nice and are priced modestly I will use them with my copy of Wooden Ships Iron Men.

"The game might be uninteresting anyway (and, in the case of Black Seas, we don't know yet) but it sounds like you're assuming that a historically plausible game cannot be exciting, which is a patently ridiculous and unsupportable assumption."

I did not say this at all. I said they come away from the experience with an exciting game, which a game can be whether it follows any given person's view of what is historical or not.

I agree with Russ that they have no obligation to make things align with that person's view either.

A company like Warlord has an obligation to make money.

Take Flames of War. It was the first WWII game I ever played.

I haven't played a more factually accurate game depicting WWII since that.

But you know what Flames of War did, besides get me to buy 100s of dollars of toy soldiers, most of them from Old Glory actually, it was to get me to buy 100s of dollars of books on WWII and read them all.

If people are going to play Age of Sail games, even ones that don't model the parts of Age of Sail combat that any one person thinks are critical, and the games are exciting then people are going to get interested in the history and read about it.

And get to play out their fantasy on the table.

Sorry I have to stop laughing at the comment Flames of war is the most factually accurate WW2 rules played. You have not played much and must be a real New by if it was your first.
I played my first in 1974 but it was not until 1981 with Tank Charts that I found a set of factual and historically accurate set of rules. We also used Armor, Panzer and 88 board games for miniatures. All are more accurate than FoW.

Neither Warlord nor any other company has a duty to make a game I or anyone else will like.

They do have a "duty" to put out a professionally produced set of rules. They should be play tested, clearly written and consistent, and free of typos. When you're asking people to give you their hard earned money that's the least you can do. And that applies not just to the big boys like Warlord, but also to all those guys that publish their basement rules because their mates tell them how great they are.

The knock against Warlord recently is that they've pushed out products that simply don't seem ready for prime time.

Sorry I have to stop laughing at the comment Flames of war is the most factually accurate WW2 rules played. You have not played much and must be a real New by if it was your first.
I played my first in 1974 but it was not until 1981 with Tank Charts that I found a set of factual and historically accurate set of rules. We also used Armor, Panzer and 88 board games for miniatures. All are more accurate than FoW.

Will you never get tired of letting the World know that FoW isn't "accurate"?

No one has "a duty" to make anything for you!!
If they make a bad product simply do not buy it or return it.
No one owes you anything!!
look up the word "duty."
They do not even have to produce it --let alone make it good just
for you.
There are plenty of things I do not like that others enjoy a great deal --those people do not have "a duty" to change it to "my likings"
I cannot understand how anyone can eat the "big slop" (big mac)??? Mcdonalds has no "duty" to me or anyone else to change it. Makes no sense!

"Sorry I have to stop laughing at the comment Flames of war is the most factually accurate WW2 rules played. You have not played much and must be a real New by if it was your first."

I'm not and I've played a bunch.

"We also used Armor, Panzer and 88 board games for miniatures. All are more accurate than FoW."

No they aren't. Both are only as accurate as Flames of War. If you don't think so you probably just don't understand Flames of War or perhaps you've never played it.

Avast me hearties, shoals ahead! How did FOW get into this?

I know a number of people who quit playing FOW for that very reason. I am not into WW2 enough to see the flaws. I do play a lot of Bolt Action, not because I think they are the "Holy Grail" of WW2 rules. I play them because that is what my club plays.

It is possible to write rules which are both newbie friendly and historically accurate. They are not mutually exclusive. Not to do so is just being lazy.

The idea that Black Seas is going to encourage newbies to play more advanced naval rules and become amateur Historians is rubbish. Most of them just want to play a fun and exciting game and could care less about the history behind it. Once the shine wears off it will be back to playing Space Monkeys or whatever it is the cool kids are playing.

Cruel Seas at least among my fellow club members lasted about five minutes. One game and they were done.

I'm confused. Were people sitting around for the last decade, waiting for Warlord to release a ship game? The perfect ship game? The crown jewel of sailing games so their lives could be complete? Did their happiness depend upon the quality of this release? It's a ing game! Like it, or don't. Buy it, or don't. Money talks.

Lukily OAK & IRON is comming. 1/700 and you can play the Spanish main. No boring Nelson all over again game, but piracy. Actually that what one would have expected from a title as Black Seas but does not deliver.
Smaler ships of Black Seas can be used for OAK & IRON. The plastic ships are beautiful and are what draws you to the game, but Trafalgar …. come on.

Sorry, all. I'm having a day…

I find it hilarious that some believe the WL has some moral obligation to share your vision of some how recruiting hoards of new recruits into an advanced knowledge of naval combat so they will someday learn how fast ships actually sailed, how far they could really fire, etc so they could all -- one day crawl around on the floor, bitch about their backs, and get angry as hell when someone steps on a precious model.

AND --if WLs does not do this they are somehow guilty of some form of treason and dereliction of "duty" to the greater good of the general public as well as the gaming world ???

I use OG 1/300 scale ships, use my own rules that are very simple, could give a dam how fast a ship actually sails or fires its cannon, play on a table top -- including Trafalgar once.
All because--as mentioned above 2 times -- as a child I really enjoyed broadsides. If you don't like that, then don't play my game.
Everyone that plays the game enjoys it and I would wager this is WLs vision and hope for THEIR game.

Regards
Russ Dunaway

No one has "a duty" to make anything for you!!
If they make a bad product simply do not buy it or return it.
No one owes you anything!!
look up the word "duty."
They do not even have to produce it --let alone make it good just
for you.
There are plenty of things I do not like that others enjoy a great deal --those people do not have "a duty" to change it to "my likings"
I cannot understand how anyone can eat the "big slop" (big mac)??? Mcdonalds has no "duty" to me or anyone else to change it. Makes no sense

You're being pedantic.

I'm not speaking of a legal duty. But how about a moral duty as a good merchant? Hard to believe you're defending merchants who'd put out shoddy products with "if you don't like
It, don't buy it".

"Shoddy" is the eye of the beholder. To each his own.
There are people who hate OG miniatures -- yet I have been in business over 30 years and sold millions of figs so many people love them -- others truly do not like them -- some may have an agenda?
There is one well known miniature company that I believe are very overrated, I do not like their figurines -- I do not buy them -- yet I do not consider them " shoddy" or "immoral???" I cannot even follow the logic ??
You are simply referring to something as "shoddy" and "immoral" simply because you do not like it and have -- completely discounted others opinions as if they were rubbish -- is McDonald's being "shoddy" and "immoral" simply because I hate the big Mack ?
Who decides if someone is a good merchant and if they make " shoddy" products if it is not the paying consumer?
"if you don't like it don't buy it" -- NEWS FLASH -- indeed that is how it works ???
Quite narcissistic really.

When I buy a product, especially a rulebook, I have the expectation that the company did a reasonably quality effort on it, with complete sentences that make sense, few or no contradictions, and a minimum of typos. Publishing a book that needs a lot of amendments to be useable right out of the starting gate is a problem for me and a whole lot of other people, I'm pretty sure. I should not have to take a rulebook and convert it into a "second edition" when I receive it. Hopefully that will not be the case here.
I was so mad after I taped all the corrections into my Cruel Seas rulebook that I threw it up against the wall and it's been right there where it landed on the floor ever since.

Coopman I am afraid if that had happened to me I would be wary of their product? However, that rule book does seem to have its fans? Perhaps products should have a disclaimer such as:
"levels of happiness may vary with use of this product?
Others seem to be satisfied ?
Look at the love hatred thing with Flames of war ???
Explain that?
I just read a book that was reviewed as "great" -- I found it to be rubbish. The writer and publisher still had the right to print it.
I read another book some years back that was set upon for all of the "layout,spelling, etc" -- which, upon reading it I found to be totally the case -- however the content of "the actual story" was so riveting I found it easy to overlook shortcomings in layout mistakes. It was, after all the story that I was looking for and not the academic production of the actual book?
Good and bad is based on what you are in search of.
I still play WRG 5th edition and their musket and ball rules, slightly modified --and I think they are still the cats meow!

Warlord have dug themselves a deep reputational hole with Cruel Seas, that is certain. For Black Seas I understand they have used a professional proof reader and taken the trouble to run the first version past the good Mr Manley which at the very least has resulted in 'advanced' rules where the limits of wind movement are more restrictive and realistic. That sounds like they are trying, and have hopefully learned from Cruel Seas where I am sure that coopman's rulebook was not the only one that got airborne … I tried it once and walked away, but then WWII coastal is not my interest. Age of Sail is, and I am willing to give it a chance and see what it plays like on the table. And if some people come across to look when we are running it at our club show because of the pretty toys, I am fine with that as well.

I've never played age of sail before, it seems a bit intimidating and quite frankly, boring. But I've ordered Black Seas I'm quite excited about it. The fast play simplicity really appeals to me. Maybe it will set me on the path of becoming an old salty sea dog.

The best AOS rules that I've ever played is "Bloody Broadsides" by Jeff Hunt.

Russ is right. Broadsides is an awesome game. I played it to death as a kid. I'd play it as an adult if someone asked me.

I watched one game of Cruel Seas give birth to one wargamer and make a true believer, if not a future gamer, out of another. Both were men over the age of 50. Neither had played Wargames before in their lives.

IT can't be that bad.

Wow, this is beginning to sound like the old TMP. You know, back when it was fun.

So let me get this straight. Cruel Seas recruited two fifty year old men into the hobby. Well that will certainly alleviate the graying of the hobby.

I am looking forward to the release of Black Seas, and am reassured that David Manly, the doyen of naval wargamers, has had a hand in it.

A word about Warlord Games and their duty. I ordered via a third party – Mighty Ape of NZ – a box of tanks. Sealed box duly delivered with the wrong sprues – Marder instead of Pz38T. Not ideal but anyone can make mistakes of this kind. The key thing that tells us about the company's attitude to its customers is that Warlord are not only sending me out the original 38Ts, they are also sending me the assembly guide and decals for the Marder sprues I have – that is what I call customer service.

wierd, this thread is the first place I've seen anyone say a bad thing about Black Seas. I've not seen any other shredding at all.

Just a lot of excitement over little models of ships. Quite like the look of them myself…

Shoddy" is the eye of the beholder. To each his own.
There are people who hate OG miniatures -- yet I have been in business over 30 years and sold millions of figs so many people love them -- others truly do not like them -- some may have an agenda?
There is one well known miniature company that I believe are very overrated, I do not like their figurines -- I do not buy them -- yet I do not consider them " shoddy" or "immoral???" I cannot even follow the logic ??
You are simply referring to something as "shoddy" and "immoral" simply because you do not like it and have -- completely discounted others opinions as if they were rubbish -- is McDonald's being "shoddy" and "immoral" simply because I hate the big Mack ?
Who decides if someone is a good merchant and if they make " shoddy" products if it is not the paying consumer?
"if you don't like it don't buy it" -- NEWS FLASH -- indeed that is how it works ???
Quite narcissistic really.

You miss my point. Aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder. But whet if the minis you produced weren't fully cast or had extreme flash. All would agree that is a shoddy product. Same with rules. If there are typos, the rules ate inconsistent, or simply don't work, all would agree that that's not acceptable.That's why I prefaced my comments by saying Warlord has no obligation to make rules i or anyone else likes. They do have an obligation to produce a professionally finished product.

If only it were just Cruel Seas that was the problem…SPQR is full of typos, unclear writing and weird rules. And yes, I've played both games. I am skeptical of Black Seas. Hopefully, Warlord will get their act together.

Warlord can put out whatever they want. People will or won't buy it. I only will buy figures from Warlord now. I've stopped buying their rules because I am paying full price for somewhat less than a full effort to publish a playtested, better proofread set of rules. I won't speak to historical accuracy, since it's a game, other than to say the history must at least be plausible.

Martian Root Canal,

I completely agree with your comment. Our group found Cruel Seas to be a wonderful game once we re-wrote it. The miniatures are decent and functional but I will not be getting into Black Seas based upon my experience with CS and frankly I am not starting another scale. I use 1/300 sailing ships from The WarArtisan for Limeys & Slimeys which is just fine for me and a whole lot less expensive.

Always good to kick off a discussions that runs ! TMP has been a bit quiet lately, so I agree with Old Contemptible …

One thing I will nudge back on is "The idea that Black Seas is going to encourage newbies to play more advanced naval rules and become amateur Historians is rubbish."

My view is more optimistic than that, as in you never know – it might …

My then girlfriend (now my wife) bought me AH's WS&IM at the age of 18. Great game, especially when you corrected the developer's error in tripling the number of melee rounds per game – which made it more efficient to grapple SOLs and take them with your 'boarding parties of studliness' rather than muck about with all that tedious gunnery stuff.

And you could recrew the ship with your bods and start shooting at it's former side !

Did this mean that this classic design was not worth playing – No, in those days pre-internet there was an article in the General magazine with variant rules on how to address. So at a stroke I was interested in a subject I had never come across before and had been introduced to the idea that if there was something in a wargame you did not like you could change it !

35 years later the Age of Sail has been a big part of my life – we've helped with new boardgames and TV programmes, had articles published and chapters of Conference proceedings attended by serious historians, had our research included in the animations in the Nelson Gallery at Greenwich and got to lay Trafalgar out in the Great Cabin of HMS Victory.

All because I got bought a wargame…

As I said, you never know, it might.

But if we stop trying to make the new stuff better and just go back to what we played before then maybe we are the last generation that will experience just how much fun this stuff is, and that would be a shame.

"Fresh minds, new ideas – be tolerant". Yes I know it is not an Age of Sail quote, but Captain Kirk is Hornblower in space …