Re: [GZG] Revised Salvo Missiles Update
From: "Allan Goodall" <agoodall@h...>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 10:13:48 -0500
Subject: Re: [GZG] Revised Salvo Missiles Update
On 6/29/06, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:41:55 -0500
> From: "Allan Goodall" <email@example.com>
> Subject: Re: [GZG] Revised Salvo Missiles Update
> Oh, rest assured that they have been picked on.
Just getting the digest means you are always late for the party.
One thing I didn't mention, if phased play floats your boat, go for
it. It will fix the "ships passing" problem. Most players don't like
it because it slows down play. The simple fact is that moving a ship
12 inches at once is faster than moving a ship 6 inches twice.
Now, there is a natural break point in the cinematic rules: the
halfway mark. You could move all your ships to the halfway mark and
then allow a round of combat. This will be a little bit slower than
regular play (you have to read movement orders twice, unless you have
a good memory; you have to drop the dice and grab the tape measure
twice; you have to move activation markers). This will not fix the
problem entirely, it will just reduce the most egregious aspects of
I keep wondering if there is some sort of "empirical" method of
determining if a ship should have been able to fire out of a
particular arc when passing. Is there an easy way of indicating when a
target was in the front arc at the beginning of the turn and the aft
arc at the end? Or in the starboard arc at the beginning of the turn
and the port arc at the end? Then you'd have the problem of deciding
range, and what arc was actually passed (port or starboard? in the
first example; fore or aft? in the second example).
It's not an easy problem to fix without slowing things down. The
method Jon mentioned was Noam's, which I alluded to. It's the best
compromise anyone has come up with.
Allan Goodall http://www.hyperbear.com
Gzg-l mailing list