A proposal

[David Thomsen]

Though I have no model to present, I do propose a discussion about MOCs, so I’ll place it here and if it should be moved I’ll ask the indulgence of the moderators’ to make it right.

Perhaps it's a bit arrogant of me, but I feel as though the plethora of LDD ships I’ve bombarded the forum with have in at least some small way, inspired some other "brick built" hulls in MOCs from others, both in the digital and plastic variety. What I’ve noticed, in all of these, is a lack of consensus in the type of models produced. For my own part I purposely kept my hulls "abbreviated" (a term I coined for myself to describe the shape which my own technique provides) in order to stay more in line with the underlining theme of Classic Pirates. All the vessels of Lego Group’s design are "water line" (stopping at the level where the hull rises above the water) models. The intent of this is so that the ships can be played with or displayed as though they were at sea; making the surface they sit on representative of the ocean's surface. Many of the MOCs I’ve observed as of late are of the full hull variety, requiring some medium in which to bury the hull partially, to achieve the same effect as the water line type, but being of a more accurate disposition. I don't feel there is any superiority either way, nor do I seek to make one more standard than the other. I do, however, wonder if for the sake of direct comparison, (if not healthy competition) has a consensus ever been attempted upon. That is to say is there any standard, written or otherwise, by which models of either type can be fairly judged and compared to counter parts in of the opposite variety?

I may be alone in my desire, but I would be very interested to see how all the vessels of this community would rank amongst one another. Not just by the craftsmanship of the builder but in terms of models as though they were actual ships in a real world setting. Comparing such things as a vessel’s fire power, sailing qualities, overall size, etc. might serve to invigorate discussion and serve to propagate new techniques. I would be very interested to hear what the rest of the community thinks on the subject. If a consensus could be reached, perhaps some sort of registry could be developed.

Waaait... this is how the thread got started? I ignored it because I couldn't see the forum agreeing on any kind of consensus (everyone should build based on their own ideals), and now I find a discussion has been going on for a while now about a game called 'Rocks and Shoals'?

Just for those of us who are late to the party, could this be broken up into different threads, or a new thread created outlining what is happening in the 'Rock and Shoals Beta Test' thread? I just want to know what's going on without reading through hundreds of posts.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

Waaait... this is how the thread got started? I ignored it because I couldn't see the forum agreeing on any kind of consensus (everyone should build based on their own ideals), and now I find a discussion has been going on for a while now about a game called 'Rocks and Shoals'?

Just for those of us who are late to the party, could this be broken up into different threads, or a new thread created outlining what is happening in the 'Rock and Shoals Beta Test' thread? I just want to know what's going on without reading through hundreds of posts.

The game started on page 1 of the topic... After Horry started posting it was all just giving ideas for a game and how it should be run.

[Horry]

Waaait... this is how the thread got started? I ignored it because I couldn't see the forum agreeing on any kind of consensus (everyone should build based on their own ideals), and now I find a discussion has been going on for a while now about a game called 'Rocks and Shoals'?

Just for those of us who are late to the party, could this be broken up into different threads, or a new thread created outlining what is happening in the 'Rock and Shoals Beta Test' thread? I just want to know what's going on without reading through hundreds of posts.

To put it in a nutshell: I thought it might be fun "comparing" the vessels by letting them fight each other in one on one games or fleet battles. So we developed some rules and are puttin' them to a test now in the new thread.

If you want to know the game, then I'd say read those:

Rules are here

tables are here

Spec sheets are here

[Capn Frank]

To put it in a nutshell: I thought it might be fun "comparing" the vessels by letting them fight each other in one on one games or fleet battles. So we developed some rules and are puttin' them to a test now in the new thread.

If you want to know the game, then I'd say read those:

Rules are here

tables are here

Spec sheets are here

Not sure if I'm allowed to do this, but I have attached these files to this post.

I put these files on this post in case ppl want to avoid all the pop ups.

Rules: Rules-for-Rocks-and-Shoals.pdf

Tables: Rocks---Shoals.xls

Spec Sheets: Template.doc

I will finally begin to look through these files.

[Big Cam]

Not sure if I'm allowed to do this, but I have attached these files to this post.

I put these files on this post in case ppl want to avoid all the pop ups.

Rules: Rules-for-Rocks-and-Shoals.pdf

Tables: Rocks---Shoals.xls

Spec Sheets: Template.doc

I will finally begin to look through these files.

Good idea, I'll link this post in the first post of this thread.

[Capn Frank]

Aye. There are a few ships around here that incorporate brick-built hulls that are complete with keel and bilge and they will certainly have more weight. It would seem unfair to give those ships that happen to be much work a disadvantage :-) - To add somethin' positive: it also gives your ship more hitpoints. So, if you got a 10Kg ship with a Lego hull, just add 300g

Horry,

In the next version of the Excel tables, would you like me to add a toggle button that automatically adds 30% to the entered weight?

This is what I get for bein' too impudent. I wanted to include rounding into the formula. This means, it's good in rounding - too good. Your speed should be 1 square, then. And yes, sadly the last table had no formula at this field at all, there was only a three, hence your marvelous three squares.

Should the formula used be changed from "round" to "roundup"? This way if there is any decimal at all, it's rounded up. I had thought about placing an If/Then formula to add a one if the calculated value is 0. However if a vessel doesn't have a sail area, its speed should remain zero.

[Admiral Croissant]

The game seems to be going well so far

Perhaps it would be nice if the battle playing field image were larger so you can really see the "personality"/details of the ships.

Of course there's a size limitation but a link to a larger flickr image or something like that would be possible.

In that way you can also add and see small images of cannonfire or a burning ship or things like that.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

The game seems to be going well so far

Perhaps it would be nice if the battle playing field image were larger so you can really see the "personality"/details of the ships.

Of course there's a size limitation but a link to a larger flickr image or something like that would be possible.

In that way you can also add and see small images of cannonfire or a burning ship or things like that.

I totally agree. At first, it took me a minute to distinguish which ship was which.

[Tazmaniac]

I think birds eye photos are the way to go, for better viewing see my zoom in proposal in the beta thread.

[Horry]

I think birds eye photos are the way to go, for better viewing see my zoom in proposal in the beta thread.

Viewing can be a goof solution but if larger fleets are battling this might get messy. I actually don't know why my pictures are bein' displayed that small on Flickr, as I upload 1164x1772 there and you can see much more. We'll work on that. Problem is: If I get the pictures even bigger with all the details worked out, the computer gets veeeery slow. Feels a bit like workin' on LDD with 12k + bricks.

EDIT: Free Flickr has a maximum size of 1024 pixels, as I just found out.

@Admiral Croissant: Yes, I'll add effects, already have some in reserve

@Phred: Adding the button would be brilliant! And The roundup would be a suitable thing - I'll note it.

I am really interested in what questions and problems this test will reveal

What I would find very helpful would be a link to a world-time clock so everybody can see what time it is for the opponents and the host. I feel like delaying the game because here it's always night if you guys ar up and runnin'.

Edited June 23, 2011 by Horry

[Capt.JohnPaul]

What I would find very helpful would be a link to a world-time clock so everybody can see what time it is for the opponents and the host. I feel like delaying the game because here it's always night if you guys ar up and runnin'.

Here is a clock of all major cities

[Tazmaniac]

That's all well and good but where in the word is JohnPaul

I'm in Australia and Horry is in Germany so I'm 8 hours in front of him.

( Don't worry about the world ending today it's already tomorrow here)

[Horry]

That's all well and good but where in the word is JohnPaul

I'm in Australia and Horry is in Germany so I'm 8 hours in front of him.

( Don't worry about the world ending today it's already tomorrow here)

I am pretty sure he's US-American, I think I've read it somewhere - now that gives us a ton of timezones, doesn't it?

[Tazmaniac]

I think the general rule of thumb with these games is you must make a move every day, more would be great but with time lines all over the place it can be hard. I'm here every couple of hours if not more (except the 7-8 hours I sleep but I'm working on "sleep posting" )

[Cap'n Crunch]

If you 'sleep post' in the middle of a game, you won't be concentrating on the game. This wouldn't be a problem if you were just posting, but if you were playing the game iI think the effects would be disastrous. Rocks and Shoals is a strategy-based-game. If you were sleep posting and you were tring to move from H1 to G1, you might type something like H1 to I1 and you would be peppered with another broadside.

[Tazmaniac]

Can we drop anchor to hold our position or do we have to be "in irons"?

[Horry]

Can we drop anchor to hold our position or do we have to be "in irons"?

Well, dropping the anchor would certainly be possible as I included the method of warping to get free from shoals. I'd say we use up a turn for pullin' the thing back up an settin' the sails again?

[Tazmaniac]

Sounds fair to me, but the anchor can be dropped at the end of a turn after movement if attack did not occur?

[Horry]

Sounds fair to me, but the anchor can be dropped at the end of a turn after movement if attack did not occur?

Yes, I'd say: If no other action than moving has been made, the anchor can be dropped. Things like gettin' your longboat into the water should take longer and need the full turn - does this make sense?

[Capt.JohnPaul]

That's all well and good but where in the word is JohnPaul

I'm in Australia and Horry is in Germany so I'm 8 hours in front of him.

Yes, Horry is correct.

[Tazmaniac]

Yes, I'd say: If no other action than moving has been made, the anchor can be dropped. Things like gettin' your longboat into the water should take longer and need the full turn - does this make sense?

Indeed.

Even with the time difference things seem to be playing out at a good rate.

[Capn Frank]

After reading through the rules, I don't remember there being any mention of raking. If there is not a mention of raking, I think a damage bonus should be included for a vessel raking another.

From books that I've read, ships usually did not last long in a fight once they were raked and surrendered soon after because of the significant amount of additional damage it causes.

[Tazmaniac]

Sounds fair to add a % of damage when raking fire occurs, maybe added chance to kill the captain/crew with stern raking fire.

[Capn Frank]

Sounds fair to add a % of damage when raking fire occurs, maybe added chance to kill the captain/crew with stern raking fire.

I would think that the damage should at least be doubled when being raking at the stern. A vessel was always weakest at the stern. Cannon balls pass through the weak hull or windows and would run the entire length of the ship. Where as a broadside shot would have to pass through the hull, then the width of the ship.

[Admiral Croissant]

Sounds good, but beware that you don't make it too complicated. There would be hundreds of factors influencing the fight so you can't mention all of them.

It must be quite easy understandable for (almost) every member on this forum.

But raking is a good addition indeed