mark novak
United States
bozeman
Montana
-
Quick question. I am considering the purchase of one of these two games. If you had to choose, which would you recommend? I like both tactical and strategic level games. Thanks
-
Johan Pettersson
Sweden
Smygehamn
Skåne
-
I would go fofr 1805 definetly. It's much more deep with strategic considerations and much more "sea"-feeling. Flying colors is to random, and simplistic, you can sink a ship with just one broadside.
1805 is a strategic game. Flying colors is a tactical one., But if you are looking for a tactical naval game I would recomend "Close Action"
-
Michael Edwards
United States
Everett
Washington
YA RL'YAH
Phnglui mglw nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah nagl fhtagn! With cheeze!
-
Hmm, that's a bit like asking "Which is the better dessert: Chocolate ice cream, or Chocolate cake?" It's a matter of personal preference and what you are in the mood for.
They are both good games (I am given to understand for Flying Colors, as I have friends who've played it, but I haven't). They both scratch an itch for Napoleonic naval games. They are both mainly played two player (I've seen a learning game of 1805 that was 3 per side, but it's designed for 2 total. I think Flying Colors gets two players most often, but appears to work with more).
1805, while having individual ships for Ships of the Line, it about the campaign. Flying Colors is essentially about any individual battle that takes place in a turn of 1805 - ship vs. ship tactical.
Flying Colors supposedly clocks in around 4 hours (presumably for experienced players), 1805 twice that.
I've played and love 1805, so I'd recommend that as a great game on a subject + scale with too few games on it. The subject of Flying Colors has had more games on it, but not tons.
Since you've asked in the 1805 forum, I'd expect a bias towards 1805.
-
Eric Walters
United States
Norfolk
Virginia
"...the art of manoeuvering armies...an art which none may master by the light of nature. but to which, if he is to attain success, a man must serve a long apprenticeship." -- G.F.R. Henderson
-
If we were really sharp, we'd figure a way to play 1805: Sea of Glory and resolve the tactical combats using Flying Colors and translate the tactical results back into the 1805 game....
Graduate level credit for doing same with Close Action instead of Flying Colors
-
Rob Doane
United States
Millersville
Maryland
-
I am - finally - in the process of doing just that. This was a project I meant to finish a long time ago but something else always came up to steal my time and energy. At last I am getting back to work on it. I have the big picture mapped out, now I need to work out the details of how the 1805 tactics/sail state chits interact with the FC combat system. I'll submit it to C3i for publishing when I'm finished.
-
Jan Ozimek
Denmark
Aalborg
Must resist M:tG. Boardgames are my methadone :)
-
Chanfan wrote: ...
Flying Colors supposedly clocks in around 4 hours (presumably for experienced players), 1805 twice that.
...
There is at least one scenario included in 1805 that you can play in 2-4 hours. The full campaign might take 8+ hours; I haven't tried it.
-
Derek Long
United Kingdom
London
-
For me, 1805 without a doubt.
I find the hex-sim ship-to-ship tactical games frustrating. The abstractions are too coarse to achieve the effects that I want to be able to see in the game and the strategic situation that makes sense of the battle is too difficult to capture in a satisfying way.
In particular, hexes mean that you cannot sail closer to the wind in a smaller or more nimble ship because there just aren't enough compass points to differentiate the ships. Rapid or clever manoeuvres are not really manageable because simultaneous movement is not possible within the constraints of reasonable gameplay, and the Igo-Ugo structure leads to strange situations. Plotted moves (WSIM style) are not satisfactory either because the reality is that a captain should have a chance to react as his opponent moves (even if the ship's inertia is going to hinder his responses).
These games work slightly better for the larger fleet actions since the details of the local ship-to-ship actions can be forgiven amongst the chaos of the larger fleet interactions. But then it becomes hard to understand why a fleet at a disadvantage will stay to fight unless the rules force them to (scenario constraints). Sea chases are never much fun in these systems because the coarsely abstracted movement means that it becomes clear that the chasing fleet will never catch the fleeing fleet. Hiding over the horizon, posting frigates, trying to chase by anticipating the destination - these are all the strategic actions that cannot be simulated at the tactical level (but are exactly the preserve of 1805).
I find the much more abstracted fleet actions of 1805 strangely far more satisfying - I can fill in the details in my imagination and the heroics all become possible. Once the action is joined any efforts to escape become a matter of seamanship (exactly what I want to see), but the details are abstracted.
Of course, the tactical games offer more flexibility to create different confrontations and the small two-ships-a-side type affairs are not going to happen in 1805. For my money, there is still a big gap for a really clever small scale tactical confrontations game in this period.
- Derek
-
Keith Medlin
United States
Holly Springs
North Carolina
-
swedgamer wrote: Flying colors is to random, and simplistic, you can sink a ship with just one broadside.
That's just flat out not true.
The most Hull Damage you can do in 1 hit is 9
The most Rigging Damage you can do in 1 hit is 9
All ships have 15 Rigging
The smallest ship has 14 Hull
In neither of those cases can you get a 9 Hull + 9 Rigging.
I just want to make sure people understand that this is entirely conjecture and demonstrates the lack of knowledge of the poster in response to comparing these games.
-
Craig
United States
Goodlettsville
Tennessee
-
Aren't you the same guy on the Youplayit site? I think I've seen your name there before. I played Blue Max for a long time there as templars and have played some WS&IM there as well - even in some games I think with this screenname.
I'm interested in this game and wish there were a few more reviews to make a complete judgment.
-
Alan Richbourg
United States
Arlington
Texas
I seez u be makin ur beeg move
-
Craig, if you have any questions about 1805: Sea of Glory, feel free to post them here. It's a unique and immersive game, and should have a new shorter scenario available soon.
-
Craig
United States
Goodlettsville
Tennessee
-
What is that shorter scenario all about by the way? I have the game coming to me now in a few days and I've taken a look at the videos the designer has posted - pretty good stuff.
-
Alan Richbourg
United States
Arlington
Texas
I seez u be makin ur beeg move
-
The new scenario, called A Change of Plans, starts with the (surprisingly interesting) historical situation on September 1, and goes from there to the end of the year. So it's one third the length of the full campaign, but includes almost all aspects of the game, except the possibility of invading England. It will probably be published in the next issue of C3i.
-
|
|
