开云体育

hello francis

Am 13.03.2025 um 15:46 schrieb Francis Marliere via :
> Gents,
>
> I have started working on a slightly modified interface and rules for
> the next Long Lance game.
> My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in order to
> ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but don't hesitate to
> tell me your feelings.
>
> - Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the Flag
> Command Rating, because the problem is not that players send too many
> messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can send one message by
> flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by
> flag use Seekrieg V codes, while others are in plain text (length of the
> messages may be limited to 30 words).

generally speaking .. even as flag officer i did not feel the flag
command rating to be a serious problem in sending messages (famous last
words, i know)

i also like to send tbs and blinker signals in the flag code format -
its more economical (and afaik this was done for blinker occasionally)

one thing i noticed in communications is that we need better ways of
identifying ships (i.e. which ship are we talking about)

> If more than one TBS message is
> send on a channel, interference is possible.

how so? there should be enough available channels? do we have to submit
a channel plan before battle now? 8)

the limit might be more of having enough receivers to listen to the
channels

> VHF messages take two turns to get through the codage / decodage process.

do we have to code the VHF?? seriously most of the stuff that is being
sent has very limited shelf life - its tactical and any enemy can
observe the result two turns later in real life

> I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple, so
> everyone will understand and respect them.
>
> - Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many players. I intend
> to help them by simplifying the process :
> * I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the turn before
> the launch. It's too difficult for many players, and wastes many
> opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo officier always have the
> torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter the water immediatly and will move
> during the movement phase of the turn of launch.

my main problem with torpedoes is not the rules per se .. it is that i
do not get enough practice with them (basically one does one torpedo
attack per game and draws the learning curve out somewhat ..

perhaps finding a way to drill torpedo warfare might be more useful .. ?

> * Some players have issues computing the bearing of the torpedoes. I
> wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it for them. Let's assume
> that the ship captain just picks up the target, and let the torpedo
> officer make the computation.

see above .. 8)

> - Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at Sea)
> reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is a designed
> choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too fast in my taste (USS
> Franklin would not have survived with SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules,
> the fires create damage (and possibly DE if severity >50) only when they
> start, and if the total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of
> the ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems damaged by
> fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke). The damage cpntrol roll
> to fight off the fires is not made at the end of every turn (it request
> too much hand work for the referee), but only on the third turn after a
> fire has begun. This last rule just don't work because it is too
> cumbersome, and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no
> DC roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.

not having enough practice with burning to have a real opinion here 8)

servus

markus

>
> What do you think about this proposed changes ?
> Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?
>
> All the best,
>
> Francis
>
>
>

Gents,

I have started working on a slightly modified interface and rules for the next Long Lance game.

My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in order to ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.

- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V codes, while others are in plain text (length of the messages may be limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is send on a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two turns to get through the codage / decodage process.

I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple, so everyone will understand and respect them.

- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :

* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players, and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase of the turn of launch.

* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks up the target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.

- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage (and possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and if the total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke). The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not made at the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun. This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome, and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no DC roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.

What do you think about this proposed changes ?

Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?

All the best,

Francis

Dear Francis,

Gentlemen,

Here's my opinion on these rules :?

1. Order/Command Phase: We never feel too restricted in sending messages; you can abandon the flag rating ;

2. Torpedoes: It's okay to consider the torpedoes ready as soon as needed, but I think it's better to let the players calculate their own firing parameters—it's fun and, like real target shooting, it allows them to demonstrate their skill ;

3. Fires: No comment.

For my part, I rather advocate a "conservative" approach aimed at limiting perpetual changes to allow players to keep habits without having to worry about understanding a new interface every new game. For instance, I find that the current Excel table is less clear than some previous ones, in particular I founded it more satisfying to gave heading and speed orders in 30-second increments. Furthermore, the trigrams abbreviations used to identify ships on the map are sometimes obscure.

Regards,

Dominique

Le?jeu. 13 mars 2025 à?15:47, Francis Marliere via <marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Gents,

I have started working on a slightly modified interface and rules for the next Long Lance game.

My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in order to ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.

- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V codes, while others are in plain text (length of the messages may be limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is send on a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two turns to get through the codage / decodage process.

I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple, so everyone will understand and respect them.

- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :

* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players, and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase of the turn of launch.

* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks up the target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.

- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage (and possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and if the total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke). The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not made at the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun. This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome, and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no DC roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.

What do you think about this proposed changes ?

Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?

All the best,

Francis

Thanks for the feedback.

For the communications, I understand that the main problem is not to limit the number of messages that the players can send during a turn, but to make them communicate. Some of them too often tend to be mute ...

For the torpedoes, I am afraid that a substantial part of the players is not able to compute the bearing for torpedo launches. If the players have to compute the bearing of the torpedo launches, it is, as you say, fun and realistic, and it allows players to demonstrate their skills. But in the other hand, it put some players, especially the beginners, in difficulty. If the referee is in charge of the firing solution, it makes things easier for these players, but it deprives all players of an important and interesting decision. The choice is not easy ...

I understand that trigramms are not always clear. But it makes the map easier to read. DST is much shorter than Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta...

Francis

Le?mar. 18 mars 2025 à?14:57, Dominique Guillemin via <dguillemin75=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Dear Francis,

Gentlemen,

Here's my opinion on these rules :?

1. Order/Command Phase: We never feel too restricted in sending messages; you can abandon the flag rating ;

2. Torpedoes: It's okay to consider the torpedoes ready as soon as needed, but I think it's better to let the players calculate their own firing parameters—it's fun and, like real target shooting, it allows them to demonstrate their skill ;

3. Fires: No comment.

For my part, I rather advocate a "conservative" approach aimed at limiting perpetual changes to allow players to keep habits without having to worry about understanding a new interface every new game. For instance, I find that the current Excel table is less clear than some previous ones, in particular I founded it more satisfying to gave heading and speed orders in 30-second increments. Furthermore, the trigrams abbreviations used to identify ships on the map are sometimes obscure.

Regards,

Dominique

Le?jeu. 13 mars 2025 à?15:47, Francis Marliere via <marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Gents,

I have started working on a slightly modified interface and rules for the next Long Lance game.

My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in order to ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.

- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V codes, while others are in plain text (length of the messages may be limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is send on a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two turns to get through the codage / decodage process.

I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple, so everyone will understand and respect them.

- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :

* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players, and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase of the turn of launch.

* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks up the target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.

- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage (and possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and if the total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke). The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not made at the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun. This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome, and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no DC roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.

What do you think about this proposed changes ?

Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?

All the best,

Francis

one thing i would love to have would be a torpedo sandbox .. where one could shoot several torpedo attacks in a row to really get a feeling for how things work ..?

?

servus

?

markus?

Dominique Guillemin via <dguillemin75=gmail.com@groups.io> hat am 18.03.2025 14:57 CET geschrieben:

?

?

Dear Francis,

Gentlemen,

?

Here's my opinion on these rules :?

?

1. Order/Command Phase: We never feel too restricted in sending messages; you can abandon the flag rating ;

?

2. Torpedoes: It's okay to consider the torpedoes ready as soon as needed, but I think it's better to let the players calculate their own firing parameters—it's fun and, like real target shooting, it allows them to demonstrate their skill ;

?

3. Fires: No comment.

?

For my part, I rather advocate a "conservative" approach aimed at limiting perpetual changes to allow players to keep habits without having to worry about understanding a new interface every new game. For instance, I find that the current Excel table is less clear than some previous ones, in particular I founded it more satisfying to gave heading and speed orders in 30-second increments. Furthermore, the trigrams abbreviations used to identify ships on the map are sometimes obscure.

?

Regards,

Dominique

?

?

Le?jeu. 13 mars 2025 à?15:47, Francis Marliere via <marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Gents,

?

I have started working on a slightly modified interface and rules for the next Long Lance game.

My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in order to ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.

?

- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V codes, while others are in plain text (length of the messages may be limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is send on a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two turns to get through the codage / decodage process.

I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple, so everyone will understand and respect them.

?

- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :

* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players, and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase of the turn of launch.

* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks up the target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.

?

- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage (and possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and if the total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke). The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not made at the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun. This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome, and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no DC roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.

?

What do you think about this proposed changes ?

Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?

?

All the best,

?

Francis

?

?

?

?

yes to the trigram list ..?

?

the trigrams are not always intuitive - to use your example why is

Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta DST? i would expect either DAO or AOS #

?

servus

?

markus?

Dominique Guillemin via <dguillemin75=gmail.com@groups.io> hat am 18.03.2025 15:55 CET geschrieben:

?

?

Maybe you should considere tha automation of torpedo firing as an option, at che player's choice.

?

For the trigrams, I only need a clear listing with the order of battle : US San Juan = SJN, for instance

?

?

Le?mar. 18 mars 2025 à?15:28, Francis Marliere via <marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Thanks for the feedback.

For the communications, I understand that the main problem is not to limit the number of messages that the players can send during a turn, but to make them communicate. Some of them too often tend to be mute ...

For the torpedoes, I am afraid that a substantial part of the players is not able to compute the bearing for torpedo launches. If the players have to compute the bearing of the torpedo launches, it is, as you say, fun and realistic, and it allows players to demonstrate their skills. But in the other hand, it put some players, especially the beginners, in difficulty. If the referee is in charge of the firing solution, it makes things easier for these players, but it deprives all players of an important and interesting decision. The choice is not easy ...

I understand that trigramms are not always clear. But it makes the map easier to read. DST is much shorter than Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta...

?

Francis

Le?mar. 18 mars 2025 à?14:57, Dominique Guillemin via <dguillemin75=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Dear Francis,

Gentlemen,

?

Here's my opinion on these rules :?

?

1. Order/Command Phase: We never feel too restricted in sending messages; you can abandon the flag rating ;

?

2. Torpedoes: It's okay to consider the torpedoes ready as soon as needed, but I think it's better to let the players calculate their own firing parameters—it's fun and, like real target shooting, it allows them to demonstrate their skill ;

?

3. Fires: No comment.

?

For my part, I rather advocate a "conservative" approach aimed at limiting perpetual changes to allow players to keep habits without having to worry about understanding a new interface every new game.For instance, I find that the current Excel table is less clear than some previous ones, in particular I founded it more satisfying to gave heading and speed orders in 30-second increments.Furthermore, the trigramsabbreviations used to identify ships on the map are sometimes obscure.

?

Regards,

Dominique

?

?

Le?jeu. 13 mars 2025 à?15:47, Francis Marliere via <marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io> a é肠谤颈迟?:

Gents,

?

I have started working on a slightly modified interface and rules for the next Long Lance game.

My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in order to ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.

?

- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V codes, while others are in plain text (length of the messages may be limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is send on a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two turns to get through the codage / decodage process.

I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple, so everyone will understand and respect them.

?

- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :

* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players, and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase of the turn of launch.

* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks up the target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.

?

- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage (and possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and if the total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke). The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not made at the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun. This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome, and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no DC roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.

?

What do you think about this proposed changes ?

Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?

?

All the best,

?

Francis

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

sorry for not being really clear - i was thinking about a little
tutorial ..

a list of kmx / excel files giving the relative positions and speeds of
two ships .. one does calculate a firing solution and then compares the
result with an optimum solution .. repeated over several such set-ups

kmx or the position / speed data might be culled from the past scenarios
(the optimum solutions clearly are those that generated hits)

servus

markus



On 18.03.2025 16:34, Francis Marliere via wrote:
> Please elaborate. My English is unfortunately limited, and I don't
> understand your sentence.
>
> Le?mar. 18 mars 2025 à?16:06, markus baur via <http://
> > <baur=chello.at@groups.io <mailto:chello.at@groups.io>> a é肠谤颈迟?:
>
>? ? ?__
>? ? ?one thing i would love to have would be a torpedo sandbox .. where
>? ? ?one could shoot several torpedo attacks in a row to really get a
>? ? ?feeling for how things work ..
>? ? ?servus
>? ? ?markus
>>? ? ?Dominique Guillemin via <>
>>? ? ?<dguillemin75=gmail.com@groups.io <mailto:gmail.com@groups.io>>
>>? ? ?hat am 18.03.2025 14:57 CET geschrieben:
>>? ? ?Dear Francis,
>>? ? ?Gentlemen,
>>? ? ?Here's my opinion on these rules :
>>? ? ?1. Order/Command Phase: We never feel too restricted in sending
>>? ? ?messages; you can abandon the flag rating ;
>>? ? ?2. Torpedoes: It's okay to consider the torpedoes ready as soon as
>>? ? ?needed, but I think it's better to let the players calculate their
>>? ? ?own firing parameters—it's fun and, like real target shooting, it
>>? ? ?allows them to demonstrate their skill ;
>>? ? ?3. Fires: No comment.
>>? ? ?For my part, I rather advocate a "conservative" approach aimed at
>>? ? ?limiting perpetual changes to allow players to keep habits without
>>? ? ?having to worry about understanding a new interface every new
>>? ? ?game. For instance, I find that the current Excel table is less
>>? ? ?clear than some previous ones, in particular I founded it more
>>? ? ?satisfying to gave heading and speed orders in 30-second
>>? ? ?increments. Furthermore, the trigrams abbreviations used to
>>? ? ?identify ships on the map are sometimes obscure.
>>? ? ?Regards,
>>? ? ?Dominique
>>
>>? ? ?Le?jeu. 13 mars 2025 à?15:47, Francis Marliere via
>>? ? ?<> <marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io
>>? ? ?<mailto:gmail.com@groups.io>> a é肠谤颈迟?:
>>
>>? ? ? ? ?Gents,
>>? ? ? ? ?I have started working on a slightly modified interface and
>>? ? ? ? ?rules for the next Long Lance game.
>>? ? ? ? ?My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in
>>? ? ? ? ?order to ease the work of new players. I have a few ideas, but
>>? ? ? ? ?don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.
>>? ? ? ? ?- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the
>>? ? ? ? ?Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players
>>? ? ? ? ?send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each ship can
>>? ? ? ? ?send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if
>>? ? ? ? ?fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V codes,
>>? ? ? ? ?while others are in plain text (length of the messages may be
>>? ? ? ? ?limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is send on
>>? ? ? ? ?a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two
>>? ? ? ? ?turns to get through the codage / decodage process.
>>? ? ? ? ?I hope that the communications rules will be clear and simple,
>>? ? ? ? ?so everyone will understand and respect them.
>>? ? ? ? ?- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many
>>? ? ? ? ?players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :
>>? ? ? ? ?* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the
>>? ? ? ? ?turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players,
>>? ? ? ? ?and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the torpodo
>>? ? ? ? ?officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will enter
>>? ? ? ? ?the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase
>>? ? ? ? ?of the turn of launch.
>>? ? ? ? ?* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the
>>? ? ? ? ?torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it
>>? ? ? ? ?for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks up the
>>? ? ? ? ?target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.
>>? ? ? ? ?- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by Command at
>>? ? ? ? ?Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V. It is
>>? ? ? ? ?a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill ships too
>>? ? ? ? ?fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with
>>? ? ? ? ?SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage (and
>>? ? ? ? ?possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and if the
>>? ? ? ? ?total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the
>>? ? ? ? ?ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems
>>? ? ? ? ?damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke).
>>? ? ? ? ?The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not made at
>>? ? ? ? ?the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the
>>? ? ? ? ?referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun.
>>? ? ? ? ?This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome,
>>? ? ? ? ?and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be no DC
>>? ? ? ? ?roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.
>>? ? ? ? ?What do you think about this proposed changes ?
>>? ? ? ? ?Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?
>>? ? ? ? ?All the best,
>>? ? ? ? ?Francis
>>
>

could you post the address for the downloadable tool? (and perhaps the
methods used in SK5 and Amiraute?)

servus

markus


On 19.03.2025 12:04, Francis Marliere via wrote:
> Yep, I will try to explain better how to calculate a fire solution.
> Anyway, understand is that tricks for calculating a fire solution are
> not a rule per se, but just advices. So, there are different good ways
> to do it:
> 1) Wild guess or hand computing, using common sense and the ruler. Guess
> roughly the travail time of the torpedoes, then move the target ship
> accordingly. See where the torpedoes must go, and refine untill the
> solution is good.
> 2) The method explained in Command at Sea (the same as in Long Lance)
> 3) The method used in Amirauté
> 4) The method used in seekrieg 5
> 5) A downloaded tool developped by a SK5 player
> and any other ...
> In the past, one player, who unfortunately has stoped playing now, had
> developped an online calculator. It was great as you just had to enter
> the parameters to quickly get the lead angle. It's gone now ...
>
> Le?mer. 19 mars 2025 à?07:46, markus baur via <http://
> > <baur=chello.at@groups.io <mailto:chello.at@groups.io>> a é肠谤颈迟?:
>
>? ? ?sorry for not being really clear - i was thinking about a little
>? ? ?tutorial ..
>
>? ? ?a list of kmx / excel files giving the relative positions and speeds of
>? ? ?two ships .. one does calculate a firing solution and then compares the
>? ? ?result with an optimum solution .. repeated over several such set-ups
>
>? ? ?kmx or the position / speed data might be culled from the past
>? ? ?scenarios
>? ? ?(the optimum solutions clearly are those that generated hits)
>
>? ? ?servus
>
>? ? ?markus
>
>
>
>? ? ?On 18.03.2025 16:34, Francis Marliere via <http://
>? ? ?> wrote:
>? ? ? > Please elaborate. My English is unfortunately limited, and I don't
>? ? ? > understand your sentence.
>? ? ? >
>? ? ? > Le?mar. 18 mars 2025 à?16:06, markus baur via <http://
>? ? ?> <http://
>? ? ? > <>> <baur=chello.at@groups.io
>? ? ?<mailto:chello.at@groups.io> <mailto:chello.at@groups.io
>? ? ?<mailto:chello.at@groups.io>>> a é肠谤颈迟?:
>? ? ? >
>? ? ? >? ? ?__
>? ? ? >? ? ?one thing i would love to have would be a torpedo sandbox ..
>? ? ?where
>? ? ? >? ? ?one could shoot several torpedo attacks in a row to really get a
>? ? ? >? ? ?feeling for how things work ..
>? ? ? >? ? ?servus
>? ? ? >? ? ?markus
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Dominique Guillemin via <>
>? ? ?< <>>
>? ? ? >>? ? ?<dguillemin75=gmail.com@groups.io
>? ? ?<mailto:gmail.com@groups.io> <mailto:gmail.com@groups.io
>? ? ?<mailto:gmail.com@groups.io>>>
>? ? ? >>? ? ?hat am 18.03.2025 14:57 CET geschrieben:
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Dear Francis,
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Gentlemen,
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Here's my opinion on these rules :
>? ? ? >>? ? ?1. Order/Command Phase: We never feel too restricted in sending
>? ? ? >>? ? ?messages; you can abandon the flag rating ;
>? ? ? >>? ? ?2. Torpedoes: It's okay to consider the torpedoes ready as
>? ? ?soon as
>? ? ? >>? ? ?needed, but I think it's better to let the players calculate
>? ? ?their
>? ? ? >>? ? ?own firing parameters—it's fun and, like real target
>? ? ?shooting, it
>? ? ? >>? ? ?allows them to demonstrate their skill ;
>? ? ? >>? ? ?3. Fires: No comment.
>? ? ? >>? ? ?For my part, I rather advocate a "conservative" approach
>? ? ?aimed at
>? ? ? >>? ? ?limiting perpetual changes to allow players to keep habits
>? ? ?without
>? ? ? >>? ? ?having to worry about understanding a new interface every new
>? ? ? >>? ? ?game. For instance, I find that the current Excel table is less
>? ? ? >>? ? ?clear than some previous ones, in particular I founded it more
>? ? ? >>? ? ?satisfying to gave heading and speed orders in 30-second
>? ? ? >>? ? ?increments. Furthermore, the trigrams abbreviations used to
>? ? ? >>? ? ?identify ships on the map are sometimes obscure.
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Regards,
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Dominique
>? ? ? >>
>? ? ? >>? ? ?Le?jeu. 13 mars 2025 à?15:47, Francis Marliere via
>? ? ?<>
>? ? ? >>? ? ?< <>>
>? ? ?<marlieref=gmail.com@groups.io <mailto:gmail.com@groups.io>
>? ? ? >>? ? ?<mailto:gmail.com@groups.io <mailto:gmail.com@groups.io>>> a
>? ? ?é肠谤颈迟?:
>? ? ? >>
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?Gents,
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?I have started working on a slightly modified interface and
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?rules for the next Long Lance game.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?My priority is to simplify the rules as much as possible in
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?order to ease the work of new players. I have a few
>? ? ?ideas, but
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?don't hesitate to tell me your feelings.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?- Order phase / commandment rules : I suggest to abandon the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?Flag Command Rating, because the problem is not that players
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?send too many messages, but rather the contrary. Each
>? ? ?ship can
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?send one message by flag, one by blinker, one by TBS (if
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?fitted) and one by VHF. Messages by flag use Seekrieg V
>? ? ?codes,
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?while others are in plain text (length of the messages
>? ? ?may be
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?limited to 30 words). If more than one TBS message is
>? ? ?send on
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?a channel, interference is possible. VHF messages take two
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?turns to get through the codage / decodage process.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?I hope that the communications rules will be clear and
>? ? ?simple,
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?so everyone will understand and respect them.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?- Torpedoes : using torpedoes seems difficult for many
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?players. I intend to help them by simplifying the process :
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?* I will probably delete the need to prepare torpedoes the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?turn before the launch. It's too difficult for many players,
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?and wastes many opportunities. We will assume that the
>? ? ?torpodo
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?officier always have the torpedoes ready. Torpedoes will
>? ? ?enter
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?the water immediatly and will move during the movement phase
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?of the turn of launch.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?* Some players have issues computing the bearing of the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?torpedoes. I wonder if the referee (me) should calculate it
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?for them. Let's assume that the ship captain just picks
>? ? ?up the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?target, and let the torpedo officer make the computation.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?- Fires : the actual Long Lance rules (inspired by
>? ? ?Command at
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?Sea) reduce the danger of fires compared to Seekrieg V.
>? ? ?It is
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?a designed choice I made because in SK5, fires kill
>? ? ?ships too
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?fast in my taste (USS Franklin would not have survived with
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?SK5 rules). In Long Lance rules, the fires create damage
>? ? ?(and
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?possibly DE if severity >50) only when they start, and
>? ? ?if the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?total of fires is superior of 10% of the initial DP of the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?ship, it is a conflagration (there are chances of systems
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?damaged by fire or evacuated due to flames, heat or smoke).
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?The damage cpntrol roll to fight off the fires is not
>? ? ?made at
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?the end of every turn (it request too much hand work for the
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?referee), but only on the third turn after a fire has begun.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?This last rule just don't work because it is too cumbersome,
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?and I don't apply them. On the next game, there will be
>? ? ?no DC
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?roll to control the fires during a surface engagement.
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?What do you think about this proposed changes ?
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?Do you see other stuff that need to be changed ?
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?All the best,
>? ? ? >>? ? ? ? ?Francis
>? ? ? >>
>? ? ? >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>