Accuracy of Jump

[hal]

Originally Posted by Hans Rancke-Madsen

Which is, once more, precisely my point. FFW is aimed at fleet to fleet action, HG is aimed at ship to ship action. Neither of them are aimed at man to man action, let alone role-playing. So when you (generic you) try to use them for roleplaying purposes, you should expect to have to make allowances.


Hans

This is where we disagree. HG IS a fleet simulation. While it can be used for a single ship on single ship simulation, its overall game mechanics is fleet operations. If you doubt me, take a look at the original ship versus Ship simulations rules for Book-1 of CT and compare that against High Guard. Relative positions do not matter in the ship combat results matrix from HG, any more than Ship Combat positions matter in FFW. If range is measured between Ship A and Ship B, and the ranges is within reach of their weapon systems, then it doesn't matter if the ship is "screened" or not in Book 1, but does matter in High Guard.

I understand that the level of detail is definitely different, but - and this is a crucial point for me, High Guard has NO limits to how many ships are in a fleet when they battle each other. In fact? There has been discussion that the combat factor of any given counter in FFW represents ONE ship or hull, and that each counter's unit size is easily handled by HG, and that 20 counters is just as "easy" to simulate with HG as not. The time taken to handle those battles manually may take more time, but they can be done, which brings me back to my original point...

A wargame, any wargame, should have some "historical result" baseline that it is attempting to simulate. HG's simulations of defeat, victory, and keeping tabs on the cost of victory or defeat is definable and consequently, can become "historical". FFW likewise, by the same definition, is capable of being historical. On the flip side, the written "historical' accounts can not be reproduced, and as such, either make FFW incapable of simulating the "historical" aspect, or is otherwise flawed.