VaS Tournament 15th April 2007 Stafford Games
- Thread starter hyndridge
- Start date
What on earth have you done?
This many house rules for a tourney is ridiculous.
Tourneys must stick to published rules, or players won't have the first idea what they are doing.
With what you've said about torpedoes and turns, you may have misunderstood the current rules before you wrote your house rules.
This many house rules for a tourney is ridiculous.
Tourneys must stick to published rules, or players won't have the first idea what they are doing.
With what you've said about torpedoes and turns, you may have misunderstood the current rules before you wrote your house rules.
Hi Poi,
These house rules are primarily taken from a campaign we are running at the shop with a few amendments.
Most of the entrants to the tournament are also playing the campaign so there shouldn't be a problem with the changes.
Maybe I have misunderstood some of the rules, they are certainly open to a fair few different interpretations and I would be glad of a few clarifications.
Feel free to question any specific house rules, nothing is written in stone yet.
I don't see a problem with house rules, its done with every rule set!
Roland
These house rules are primarily taken from a campaign we are running at the shop with a few amendments.
Most of the entrants to the tournament are also playing the campaign so there shouldn't be a problem with the changes.
Maybe I have misunderstood some of the rules, they are certainly open to a fair few different interpretations and I would be glad of a few clarifications.
Feel free to question any specific house rules, nothing is written in stone yet.
I don't see a problem with house rules, its done with every rule set!
Roland
I have just looked at your house rules on turns and am also a little confused.
As I understand the current standard VaS rules the turn of a ship is always made halfway (and only halfway) along its current move (not its maximum move). i.e. your destroyer example is the normal move of a ship without the Agile trait. The Agile trait just gives an extra turn at the end.
I also think your house rules aon sequencing AA, dogfights and bomber attacks are unnecessary because they coinside closely to the VaS standard. (AA fire is already out of the normal firing sequence, directly after all the moves and dogfights are resolved before bombing runs).
As I understand the current standard VaS rules the turn of a ship is always made halfway (and only halfway) along its current move (not its maximum move). i.e. your destroyer example is the normal move of a ship without the Agile trait. The Agile trait just gives an extra turn at the end.
I also think your house rules aon sequencing AA, dogfights and bomber attacks are unnecessary because they coinside closely to the VaS standard. (AA fire is already out of the normal firing sequence, directly after all the moves and dogfights are resolved before bombing runs).
You've banned auto crits from torpedoes, but they don't get them. Torps get to reroll one of the 2D6 used to determine what a torp crit hits.
Don't know what you're doing with turns, but the rules say Agile ships you get to turn at half your speed and then again at full speed.
Other ships turn at half speed or later.
For example, my Agile destroyer is going to move 8". It gets to turn once at 4" then again at 8".
Don't know what you're doing with turns, but the rules say Agile ships you get to turn at half your speed and then again at full speed.
Other ships turn at half speed or later.
For example, my Agile destroyer is going to move 8". It gets to turn once at 4" then again at 8".
Most of this reply was written before your response so hope it answers your questions, I don't think we are too far apart really!
Some players play it that an 'Agile' ship can turn up to its maximum turn allowance after it has moved a minimum of half its move and then turn up to its maximum turn allowance again at the end of its turn.
So a ship with a turn of 2 can turn up to 4 in any one turn.
I think the rule means that an 'Agile' ship can split its turn in two, once after half movement and the second after full movement.
So a ship with a turn of 2 still only turns 2 but can split when it turns.
As for torpedoes, if it the house rule that says that torpedoes do not cause an automatic critical hit that concerns you this was added as a clarification for the campaign boys where torpedoes cause at least one critical hit.
I am sorry if these tournament rules are contentious they weren't meant to be!
Some players play it that an 'Agile' ship can turn up to its maximum turn allowance after it has moved a minimum of half its move and then turn up to its maximum turn allowance again at the end of its turn.
So a ship with a turn of 2 can turn up to 4 in any one turn.
I think the rule means that an 'Agile' ship can split its turn in two, once after half movement and the second after full movement.
So a ship with a turn of 2 still only turns 2 but can split when it turns.
As for torpedoes, if it the house rule that says that torpedoes do not cause an automatic critical hit that concerns you this was added as a clarification for the campaign boys where torpedoes cause at least one critical hit.
I am sorry if these tournament rules are contentious they weren't meant to be!
juggler69uk
Mongoose
hyndridge said:
An interesting observation and the rules dont seem crystal clear on it, however turning twice and splitting the move makes the turn seem somehow "less agile" and not turn as tight a radius as a "non agile" turn of 2.
Plus the first angle of turn is greater than the others so that may have something to do.
How would you split a turn of 3 ?
juggler69uk said:
Hadn't thought of that!
Just had a look at the fleet lists and its only subs and one French destroyer that's got a turn of 3 and is 'Agile' and we can't have them little b---ers spinning round on a sixpence can we?
Seriously you could split when you turned and by how my points.
Having just re-read 'Agile' you are right it is nor that agile!
Roland
Court Jester
Mongoose
If I could make it I'd love to take my carrier fleet to your tounament...
2AD per aircraft is lovely...
As for how Agile is played?
Agile means you get a complete turn when your ship finishes its move. This turn can be in addition to the normal complete turn a ship is allowed during its move.
In fact an agile ship can make 2 complete turns one after the other if it wants to. (Which if it has turning score of 2 means it will turn further than a single turn of with a score of 4.)
So ships with torpedo belts are harder to hit and then I have to re-roll my DD... why make TB's even harder? (I am just curious)
Also your houserule for turning is exactly how the real rule is played, which is covered in the VaS FAQ.
Although I agree with many of your houserules, or I at least understand why you would want to use them I must also say that in my experiance lots of house rules are bad for an event hoping to attract players from outside the local scene.
2AD per aircraft is lovely...
As for how Agile is played?
Agile means you get a complete turn when your ship finishes its move. This turn can be in addition to the normal complete turn a ship is allowed during its move.
In fact an agile ship can make 2 complete turns one after the other if it wants to. (Which if it has turning score of 2 means it will turn further than a single turn of with a score of 4.)
So ships with torpedo belts are harder to hit and then I have to re-roll my DD... why make TB's even harder? (I am just curious)
Also your houserule for turning is exactly how the real rule is played, which is covered in the VaS FAQ.
Although I agree with many of your houserules, or I at least understand why you would want to use them I must also say that in my experiance lots of house rules are bad for an event hoping to attract players from outside the local scene.
Court Jester
Mongoose
hyndridge said:
Thats exactly how it was played in the tounament at Mongoose HQ with the games designer on hand and watching.
Although it has not been asked as a specific rules question on the rules forum.
And I am used to having only 1 AD with my aircraft so 2 seems like a holiday to me...
Well, it strikes me that there are changes here, that are being done for the sake of it. After 35 years of gaming it is not necessary or even sensible to have a knee jerk reaction and make such drastic changes. I may not have played many games of this yet, but I have experimented with the seperate rules, and I felt that the game was reasonable before. I hope that these "house rules" are just that, and that they dont get adopted as a standard set of errata.
The "Agile" trait in the rulebook is a copy of turning in the boardgame "Dreadnought" which has worked very well without any amendment for 25 years. Also allowing a double turn mid move, massively changes the turning cirlce of the ship. Allowing it 1 additional turn at the end of the move (as in the rulebook)helps set it up for the following move but does not change its position at the end of the current move at all. Aircraft were not all that effective, and if anything the rulebook appears to make them "too"effective. These house rules improve them even further.
Personally I do not like the shooting changes as destroyers should be hard to hit, but once they are then they're as good as dead. Modifying the rules to allow hits at 7+ cahnges the balance of the rules completely. If you want to stand a chance of hitting a destroyer at long range, you need to use observation aircraft and radar. If youn have'nt got these you have to wait a little longer and use your secondaries instead (actually quite historical).
Torpedoes were not expected to sink a ship with one hit, and indeed multiple hits were needed to sink all but tramp steamers and the smallest of ships. Torpedoes were set at 2 different levels to do differing damage to ships. Shallow for cruisers and destroyers and deep for capital ships. Also torpedoes missing the first target could run on and still hit something beyond the original target. None of this is in the rulebook, but I do feel that VaS is a good set of rules without any amendment at this time.
As an active part of the WPS I have been accused of changing rules for WAB in the past, too quickly. However, the WPS WAB rules committee came to the conclusion that we could improve the game without over compilcating it, therefore it was better to leave the major changes to the rule writer. What is the viewpoint of the writer?
I know that this is only my one viewpoint, but I do hope that changes are not implemented too quickly to these rules, as I for one would end up with very few opponents for this game, as I will not adopt these house rules. New rules draw people into the hobby. Please dont make drastic changes to scare them away!
Trev
The "Agile" trait in the rulebook is a copy of turning in the boardgame "Dreadnought" which has worked very well without any amendment for 25 years. Also allowing a double turn mid move, massively changes the turning cirlce of the ship. Allowing it 1 additional turn at the end of the move (as in the rulebook)helps set it up for the following move but does not change its position at the end of the current move at all. Aircraft were not all that effective, and if anything the rulebook appears to make them "too"effective. These house rules improve them even further.
Personally I do not like the shooting changes as destroyers should be hard to hit, but once they are then they're as good as dead. Modifying the rules to allow hits at 7+ cahnges the balance of the rules completely. If you want to stand a chance of hitting a destroyer at long range, you need to use observation aircraft and radar. If youn have'nt got these you have to wait a little longer and use your secondaries instead (actually quite historical).
Torpedoes were not expected to sink a ship with one hit, and indeed multiple hits were needed to sink all but tramp steamers and the smallest of ships. Torpedoes were set at 2 different levels to do differing damage to ships. Shallow for cruisers and destroyers and deep for capital ships. Also torpedoes missing the first target could run on and still hit something beyond the original target. None of this is in the rulebook, but I do feel that VaS is a good set of rules without any amendment at this time.
As an active part of the WPS I have been accused of changing rules for WAB in the past, too quickly. However, the WPS WAB rules committee came to the conclusion that we could improve the game without over compilcating it, therefore it was better to leave the major changes to the rule writer. What is the viewpoint of the writer?
I know that this is only my one viewpoint, but I do hope that changes are not implemented too quickly to these rules, as I for one would end up with very few opponents for this game, as I will not adopt these house rules. New rules draw people into the hobby. Please dont make drastic changes to scare them away!
Trev
Court Jester said:
This is how I understand it to be, but they are house rules so I'll give 'em a go. (I am going to the Tournament)
At the end of the day the whole rulebook is open to interpretation. Maybe if Mongoose actually replied to many of the posts on this forum about the odd rules, then players wouldnt need to make up house rules.
Evil Trev.
Since when have secondaries stood a better chance of hitting fast moving targets in the rulebook? Its is historical that these smaller guns were used against smaller fast moving targets and its a house rule that they do not get -1 to hit fast moving targets. We have been using for a while, and one that we borrowed from the great DM.
Since when have secondaries stood a better chance of hitting fast moving targets in the rulebook? Its is historical that these smaller guns were used against smaller fast moving targets and its a house rule that they do not get -1 to hit fast moving targets. We have been using for a while, and one that we borrowed from the great DM.
