"Victory at Sea" Topic

This video makes me cry.

YouTube link

When you see the formations and tactics of this demonstration game, it really makes you wonder how much research the developers did into WW2 naval combat.

Nick

I'm off this game. The scale 1/1800 had such potential and the models are just awful. Smaller scale GHQ is actually better and that's sad.

What? You haven't read about all the battles where the two sides lined up and charged at each other?

The writers and developers did quite a bit (I was heavily involved in 1st edition and contributed to VAS2). Some players? Not so much :)

And to be fair I've seen desperately awful tactics used with just about every set od rules ive played because players did t k kw better (and usually lost against players who did). I would have hoped for something a bit better for a promo video though

From a historical gamer perspective, the line up and charge force disposition is just wrong. From a manufacturer's perspective, it makes more money. Their target audience is someone who wants to push ship models around on a table -- not someone making a more serious attempt to play naval warfare. There is room for both in the arena. That said, I am not aware of anything in the rules that would prevent players from recreating historical actions and dispositions. My thought is that a lot of players are going to create forces of X number of points and lay all of their ships out in a line.

I think that's the key, David – from a demo video you would expect more.

My worry is that, if no real-world tactics are employed, the game just becomes a dice-rolling slugfest, and players will become frustrated as it all seems a bit of a lottery. This will, in turn, reinforce the feeling that "naval games are boring" and we lose players for good when we may have had a chance to keep them in the fold.

To be honest, it would be a REALLY good idea if Warlord could use their high-production value videos to create a basic tutorial for new players. This would not need to be too technical; I would stick with:

1) The value of 'A' arcs – I know it's obvious, but I've seen a lot of these videos where players line up and charge at each other. If there was a real-world tactics tutorial that just pointed out that you can double your firepower simply by turning your ships, that would be a good start
2) Crossing the 'T' – the holy grail of any naval commander in the gun age
3) Using smoke to conceal units
4) Using lighter forces to screen more valuable units – whether it be against aircraft or destroyers

That would do for starters. If players could see that naval combat is all about trying to get into the best position, they wouldn't think of it as random, they'd see there were things they could do to improve their chances of winning and the aquatic chess that is the pre, or early, engagement manoeuvring would give more interest so they don't become bored.

Though I will add that one should use historic tactics because they work in the game, not as an artifice. If non-historical tactics work better then there is something wrong with the rules.

I used to play VAS1 with my lad when he was a lot younger and we both enjoyed it before moving on to other sets; the principals I've outlined above all work in VAS, in which case, as a simple gateway set they have much to commend them. We fought mostly historical scenarios and it handled them well, though the torpedoes are a little o/p!

I suppose what I'm saying is that, as well as after-sales service, Warlord Games should really give some time to PRE-sales and do some 'tactical tasters' to allow new players to get the most out of naval gaming.

Best wishes,

Nick

In the demo video each side seems to have three cruisers. For a typical WW2 action I would expect those cruisers to be in a single formation in line ahead. With the great difference between the ground scale and the model scale, placing the models end to end would result in the rear ship being thousands of yards aft of any realistic formation position, and thus arriving very late to the action. This would seem to encourage players to adopt non-historic (at least for WW2) formations like entering the table in line abreast.

It's only a demo game showing the mechanics.

That's a very good point NCC – you're right; the size of the models verses the size of the table does preclude real world formations and tactics.

I suppose they have a difficult dilemma here; smaller models would allow better gameplay, but would lack the visual appeal that Warlord rely on to get interest. I'm not going to criticise this as I must admit, small actions in 1/3000 (which I tend to play) lack visual interest. I play mostly DD and CL actions (RN v KM or RN v RM), so two destroyers which are only 1.5" long are tiny when placed on a playing area 72"x48".

For me, I would love to use 1/1800 for the visual spectacle, but there are far too many gaps in the range which I suspect won't get filled. For example, the only RN destroyers are Tribals – certainly the most famous, but more ubiquitous would have been the A-I classes (I'd even be happy with one model to represent them all as they were very similar), or the J/K/N classes that fought many of the Channel battles. I know I can fill in the gaps from Shapeways, but again Warlord has made this difficult because of the bases (which seem to be universally unpopular) so any 'third party' ships will look incongruous in terms of style. If you are going to set yourself up as the 'sole' supplier for this game, then you need to provide a good variety. I'd be happy to use the Warlord models but I like my models to be based in a consistent manner – yep, a bit of OCD, but as a miniatures gamer I bet I'm not alone!

Wargamer Blue – yep, I take your point, but for many this will be the first time they've seen a naval game. If Warlord had chosen a demo with fewer ships – let's say a couple of cruisers a side – then they could be explaining simple real world tactics as they went along so that newcomers could get the most out of the game, rather than just thinking it looks cool, buying the box and getting bored after a few games because it all seems a bit random.

I really wish Warlord well on this project; I actually like the choice of scale (but not for larger actions) and I would buy the models if I could get what I needed, but my concern is that Warlord will create interest and sell lots of box sets before this is side-lined because players have got bored, when those players could, with a bit of nurturing and support, have become enthusiastic, long-term naval gamers.

Nick

The bases are such a no-go. They look like hovercrafts.

Victory at Sea A Naval Newbie's first look

link

Armand