Recent content by Colonel_Jenkins

So y'all are saying that the game accurately represents the effectiveness of British airpower, but not American airpower? Well, I must admit, American airpower is pretty awesome. :D

Update: Even though I'm still suspicious that VaS may downplay aircraft too much, I found it for $20 so I decided on a lark to take the plunge.

Nice report and pics! Thanks! Two quick questions: 1) I see some people using counters and some using minis. What minis were used? I'm especially interested in the airplanes. 2) It sounds as if airpower made a pretty good showing. Did you find the aircraft to be suitably potent?

I was wondering what minis lines people are using for VaS. I'm interested in the 1/6000 scale Figurehead line. Would there be any problems in using those, aside from the general difficulty of being able to lose your fleet under a dust mite? The GHQ 1/2400 line looks pretty attractive, but I'm...

Great post! Very helpful. I like the multiple scenario idea. On the question of representing Midway, I think clearly the strike on the Akagi constitutes a "lucky shot"... an insta-sink result that I understand the game allows for. Conceivably a similarly lucky blow happened against the...

Thanks for that... it's really quite helpful. I'm still making up my mind about VaS. This makes me more inclined to look at it seriously. Are the rules structured in such a way that one could game out Midway or Leyte and have an historical result?

Thanks for the responses so far. I'm concerned about the aircraft issue. I'm into the USN, and it seems that naval aviation was the dominant factor in the Pacific. After all, if it wasn't, you would have expected the IJN to have done much better. It would be disappointing to me if the game...

Gentlemen, I hope you don't mind entertaining some entirely newbish questions. I'm thinking about 'taking the plunge' and was wondering about a few things: 1) For what scale of minis is VaS written? 2) How does the scale stack up to the visual disposition of the ships, i.e. do they have to...

This sounds excellent. I'll probably pick this up regardless of whether I get into MRQ as a whole.

Just to interject - I really want to like MRQ. It has an exciting lineup of stuff coming out for it, and it is based in the Chaosium system which I already like. I just have a hard time these days making myself buy a book that I know I'm going to have to do extensive house-ruling on. I was...

Mongoose is doing Lankhmar/Nehwon stuff, as well as (evidently) Corum and Hawkmoon and Hyboria. All of which sounds pretty exciting to me! (and will probably persuade me to buy MRQ despite my reservations) My question is this: will these setting books, when combined with the main rulebook...

Shouldn't there be some way to get an "Overextended" result on the combat tables? Like maybe a crit dodge against a successful attack? Also, in S&P 36 the "Lethal" weapon tables don't increase the AP/HP of any of the weapons along with their damages. Is that intentional? Thanks.

One thing I just noticed: in the "Extra Lethal" weapons table, the AP/HP of weapons has not increased. I wonder if that was intentional? There would be lots of broken weapons in that case.

I downloaded the SRD and I was further put off by the lower lethality of the combat. However, I've looked at the S&P 36 weapon tables... and I like the "Lethal" option a lot! Combat actually looks potentially fun and meaningful (not to be entered into lightly, or by the weak of heart) using...

It's cool - don't worry about it. If I sound bitter, I guess it's just that I'm disappointed. But if the rule works for you, more power to you. I've gotten shy these days about buying stuff I know I'm going to have to house rule.