How many PG-HQ'ers are also GWAS/SWWAS players?

[plloyd1010]

I would visit such a site on occasion. I am not much of a GWAS or SWWAS player, but I do like the system and play occasionally. I am, quite obviously, entangled on the land side of things. I still might be able to help a little.

As far as migrants from PG-HQ, there may not be many. Your best shot for an audience would be at ConSim. I there are a few WAS forums over there. I think I would call your site WAS Fleet Command, or something similar. Headquarters sounds too land based to me.

WAS Fleet Command could look a like PG-HQ. Your "unit" library will need to be structured differently, probably by class. Then you will have a problem with sub-version of individual ships. Something like Kongo class battle cruisers, with sub-versions of the Hiei. I'm not sure how often that would be a problem, but I have seen variants like that.

I wouldn't jump to a NaVassal Academy right off. The PG Vassal Academy is an unwanted and unloved child. It exists because APL wanted a gate-check on Vassal. I don't know what the online play feelings are at the company now. Probably not a lot softer. Personally I would like to drop the academy thing all together. There be a rush to download, the free loaders would disappear, and we could all get on with our lives. Your first concern would be to get a working Vassal system going, but share outside a trusted circle.

[goosebrown]

Great answer. I was hoping for at least a few cross overs to the WAS series. I also love WAS Fleet Command. I think I am going to rif on that or even go with it. (owe you a bevvie of your choice)

I will check conSim later tonight and see what I find. 

Thank you Peter

[Blackcloud6]

I would be very much interested in a WAS HQ.

[goosebrown]

I am working on things. I want to do this WAS FC. My first project I am putting forward is a video walk through of the tactical rules. It is available here. 

https://youtu.be/_oz8MlJhPro     <-- Note new address for updated video
https://youtu.be/1-wUsW8IjFU

I will add that I sort of suck doing voice overs, but hopefully you can get something from it 

This is my first attempt at this so all comments welcome!

[plloyd1010]

I am working on things. I want to do this WAS FC. My first project I am putting forward is a video walk through of the tactical rules. It is available here. 

https://youtu.be/1-wUsW8IjFU

I will add that I sort of suck doing voice overs, but hopefully you can get something from it 

This is my first attempt at this so all comments welcome!

Yes, the sync between the video and narrative is off by several seconds. It be wiser to add voice in post processing, but that might be constraining. I think you should have used a few exemplary ships. Talking about torpedoes and plunging fire with the Hiei didn't seem to work.

You left out declaring targets before shooting and and damage rolling down when a hit box is not available. It would also have been useful explain your dice mechanics happening on the screen.

I was a little confused as to movement relative to turns or segments. Where was the break when the North Carolina's speed reduction took effect?

There was a big volume jump at about t10:30. The audio went back to its original level at t11:19. Vassal mechanics and a couple references crept into the video, that could be confusing (dice are good though). You should convert Vassal references to be more dead tree in usage. There is a large dead space at the end of the video.

I liked how you up the impulse descriptions and the data logs during the demonstration. I think those provided the best explanations when used in conjunction with the narrative. I like your opinion on unboxing videos. I never understood the point of them either, beyond advertisement that is.

[goosebrown]

Thank you Peter! Great comments all. Maybe this weekend I can soup it up a little

[goosebrown]

Unboxing has some value I guess, but this not like some powertool that you need to adjust when you assemble it. The goodies are not what you see, but how you use it. 

Anyway, thanks. I value your opinions Peter. Thank you.

[triangular_cube]

Unboxing has some value I guess, but this not like some powertool that you need to adjust when you assemble it. The goodies are not what you see, but how you use it. 

Anyway, thanks. I value your opinions Peter. Thank you.

With how often many buy games versus get them on a table, an unboxing video replicates the ownership experience nearly 1:1 

In addition to what Peter pointed out, is there a reason you changed it to World War Two at Sea, instead of Second World War at Sea in the video title?

[goosebrown]

Unboxing has some value I guess, but this not like some powertool that you need to adjust when you assemble it. The goodies are not what you see, but how you use it. 

Anyway, thanks. I value your opinions Peter. Thank you.

With how often many buy games versus get them on a table, an unboxing video replicates the ownership experience nearly 1:1 

In addition to what Peter pointed out, is there a reason you changed it to World War Two at Sea, instead of Second World War at Sea in the video title?

Good point in as much as my games have been shelf queens for many years. 

Yes. I changed names because I have the memory of a corn stalk. I will rectify that too. Good catch and thank you

[goosebrown]

@plloyd1010 - 
fixed: the volume jump and most of the sync of the arrows in the first 6 minutes of the video.

@triangular_cube -
If you are talking about the title in YouTube, I fixed that. The title card is correct, so good there.

Thank you guys. Might get some more done before Monday next.