Car Wars 6e polls give me a sad feeling

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by thudthwacker

But unless you're only going to allow "GUN" as available weaponry, there's going to be shorthand when people are describing their vehicle.

To some extent, yes, though I think that can be minimized in certain ways. Rather than trying to create a UPP-style, maximally concise format, the published rules can scrupulously avoid abbreviations and particularly opaque jargon. For example, a car might be described thusly:

Recoilless Rifle (front)
Spike Dropper; explosive (rear)
Spike Dropper; explosive (left or right)
Wheel guards (fake)
Armor: Front: 70; Left, Right, Back: 60; Top: 2; Under: 5
Acceleration 5
Maximum speed 92.5
Handling 3

The player could take this list, pick out the three weapon cards (whose range, damage, and other capabilities are described thereupon), some markers for the explosive ammo (likewise described on the card), mark up some spots on the well-designed control sheet (armor values, lines on a mock speedometer), and be ready to roll

[kjamma4]

Originally Posted by Paul

Questions about market conditions have been asked, so I wasn't criticizing either the game or the method of posting -- I was just highlighting another factor that differentiates a "one-and-done" design from a "full line with broad market appeal."

I guess I'm still not understanding what abbreviations have to do with whether it is a one-and-done or a full line with broad market appeal?

People have a habit of abbreviating and will do so no matter what the format of the new version is.

[kjamma4]

Originally Posted by Turhan's Bey Company

The unavoidable fact of the matter, I think, is that you're going to get some sort of jargon in any game

Correct - and you're going to get twice as much jargon on a fan site dedicated to the game.

I get the idea that you don't want to have to decode a bunch of cryptic messages in order to play the game but here on the Car Wars forum, it saves quite a bit of time to just abbreviate.

[Andrew Hackard]

The thread is starting to wander afield. Wrap up the sub-discussion of abbreviations, please.

[natesroom]

I did want to say I've never played ogre (watched many times) or CW I backed the 150 and voted to redesign CW from the ground up..

[philreed]

Originally Posted by Pentalarc

I disagree on the ramplates. I think that the +2/-1 solution is better than dropping either the protection or hte damage completely.

And this is an excellent example of what all of us, including myself, need to remember: Every single person has a different opinion on what is and isn't right for Car Wars.

[jasperrdm]

Originally Posted by kjamma4

Correct - and you're going to get twice as much jargon on a fan site dedicated to the game.

I get the idea that you don't want to have to decode a bunch of cryptic messages in order to play the game but here on the Car Wars forum, it saves quite a bit of time to just abbreviate.

Yes it does. BUT I was posting as rank (hey i take a shower after the game) Newbie, who was trying to read the jargon as if it was included in the box as quick start rules.
I liked the weapon card idea. Pull a weapon and place face up in the direction it fires.

[Magesmiley]

Originally Posted by jasperrdm

Yes it does. BUT I was posting as rank (hey i take a shower after the game) Newbie, who was trying to read the jargon as if it was included in the box as quick start rules.
I liked the weapon card idea. Pull a weapon and place face up in the direction it fires.

The biggest issue I can see with weapon cards is that it increases setup time and complexity. I suspect that we'd be better off with vehicle sheets that have the information printed on them.

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Magesmiley

The biggest issue I can see with weapon cards is that it increases setup time and complexity.

FWIW, I suggest that merely as an illustrative example. Cards are one option, record sheets are another. Then there are special dice, creative use of different markers, and surely many others. I wouldn't want to derail things further into getting into the merits of a specific set of components.

[ammulder]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

The thread is starting to wander afield. Wrap up the sub-discussion of abbreviations, please.

Seriously? If we've moved to the point where discussions aren't even allowed to wander from the original topic without being closed or censored, could you post some new rules for this forum? Because it's getting unrecognizable!