When I came up with the original idea for Gunboat, the intent was to get
some of the old flavour of the early games back by removing the omniscience
players have. As we cannot unknow things, except through disease and
decrepitude, an artifical handicap was used, whereby players lost their
ability to communicate with other players. Two positions were used so that
players still have some knowledge of the world.
As the point of the game is to have restricted knowledge, it seems strange
to then provide omniscience every ten turns. If you want to see everyones
turn then play the normal game......
Of course it is frustrating, but so were the early games when half your team
had dropped, you had no idea where the enemy pop centres were or how the
rules worked. Back when you had to rely on individual skill....
As for three nations, ignoring the increase in knowledge, two nations
dropping is a problem, three a disaster.
If you want a bit more communication then how about a version with a 10 or
20 word report submitted by each player each turn. Basically you can say one
or two things.
When I came up with the original idea for Gunboat, the
intent was to get
some of the old flavour of the early games back by removing
the omniscience
players have. As we cannot unknow things, except through
disease and
decrepitude, an artifical handicap was used, whereby players
lost their
ability to communicate with other players. Two positions
were used so that
players still have some knowledge of the world.
As the point of the game is to have restricted knowledge, it
seems strange
to then provide omniscience every ten turns. If you want to
see everyones
turn then play the normal game......
Of course it is frustrating, but so were the early games
when half your team
had dropped, you had no idea where the enemy pop centres
were or how the
rules worked. Back when you had to rely on individual
skill....
As for three nations, ignoring the increase in knowledge,
two nations
dropping is a problem, three a disaster.
If you want a bit more communication then how about a
version with a 10 or
20 word report submitted by each player each turn. Basically
you can say one
or two things.
Regards
Cheis Courtiour
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
---------------------~-->
Sell a Home for Top $ http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/jd3IAA/ofVplB/TM
------------------------------------------------------------
---------~->
When I came up with the original idea for Gunboat, the
intent was to get
some of the old flavour of the early games back by removing
the omniscience
players have. As we cannot unknow things, except through
disease and
decrepitude, an artifical handicap was used, whereby players
lost their
ability to communicate with other players. Two positions
were used so that
players still have some knowledge of the world.
As the point of the game is to have restricted knowledge, it
seems strange
to then provide omniscience every ten turns. If you want to
see everyones
turn then play the normal game......
Of course it is frustrating, but so were the early games
when half your team
had dropped, you had no idea where the enemy pop centres
were or how the
rules worked. Back when you had to rely on individual
skill....
As for three nations, ignoring the increase in knowledge,
two nations
dropping is a problem, three a disaster.
If you want a bit more communication then how about a
version with a 10 or
20 word report submitted by each player each turn. Basically
you can say one
or two things.
Regards
Cheis Courtiour
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
---------------------~-->
Sell a Home for Top $ http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/jd3IAA/ofVplB/TM
------------------------------------------------------------
---------~->
Hi,
I agree wholeheartedly with Chris Courtiour on the subject of Gunboat.
The whole point of the game is to restrict information severely and I
have to say that this is a very attractive part of the game. I
probably shouldn't say how many Gunboat games I'm playing in, but
suffice it to say that I feel qualified to express an opinion on this
The concept of this weird omniscience every ten turns (let alone every
five) would, for me, remove much of the fun from the game. Personally
I do not like the idea of giving a list of eliminated nations every
two turns (as is the case with some of the Gunboat games). i have
found that this distorts the game somewhat and reduces the previous
additional dimension of information gathering.
For instance Mages become much more useful as there is a real need for
scrying spells and things like perceive secrets. Likewise moving
emissaries around to uncover secrets, or even sending a commander or
agent off to recon/scout to see what's going on with your own team
(let alone the other side) is a big part of the game.
I'm all for additional variants to the basic game of MEPBM, but I'm
not sure that further twiddling with the Gunboat concept will leave
the game doing what it was originally intended to do. By all means
let's have another variant with limited communication, but it won't,
can't, be called Gunboat.
I like Chris' idea of a written report from players every so often but
with one or two refinements ...
* Player reports should be restricted in length as Chris suggests - no
reporting lists of stats (eg pop centres and armies)
* Ideally reports should be of an in-character roleplaying type.
* These reports should not be compulsory
* I can't see a way to avoid the necessity of all reports being
subject to GM censorship. Which probably makes it a no-no
