Some more thoughts ...
-- You've done a lot of rules discussion, how things are represented for better or worse. But I don't have particular recollection of Strategic and Tactical breakdowns in rules contexts, or even rules to reality comparisons. For example, you might discuss common Dystopian Wars carrier tactics and army-build strategies to exploit those; then contrast to real-world tactical and strategic analogs. And then wrap up with a discussion how you wish the rules would work. You did a lot of rules discussion on Carriers a while back, but I recall it feeling more survey in nature than a tactics deep dive.
Digging into game-specific discussions is something we've tossed around over the years. Part of the problem is that it seems like Landlubber and I are rarely playing the same games at the same time (I'll be on a FSA kick, he'll be playing DW, etc) so we often don't feel confident enough to talk tactics on any one particular game. Another issue recently is that, specifically for the form Spartan properties, we've decided to hold off until the WC re-release is completed. This is something I think both of us would still really like to do, though!
-- More product news on Class B and lower stuff, and maybe looming Class A kickstarters. For example, until recently I didn't even process that GZG and FULL THRUST was still a thing, since its been ages since it was on shelves. What's up with hoary old Star Fleet Battles or SFB CTA?
Sounds like a good idea to me!
-- Deeper revisit to classic systems of yesteryear: BABYLON 5 WARS, B5 CTA, FASA's TREK Tactical Simulator, the TOG line of games, and even revival stuff like OGRE (vaguely a naval aspect) . Talk about what worked for those games, what's most missed , etc. (and get guests if you don't know the systems yourselves)
Most of those would have to be done with guests, as I don't think that either Greg or me have much experience with any of those. Know anyone that would be willing to help?
-- Maybe branch out into Naval adjacent games like OGRE, the new Adeptus Titanicus, GASLANDS ... you could call the segment "Man and Machines"
This is an intriguing idea, though I would be more inclined to do it as a spin-off show rather than as a segment within the MBS podcast.
Maybe a series from the editors with a break on what makes a game naval, and what games have reflected that best and worst? Could work through from age of sail of oar, Ironclads, Mechanised warfare, fantasy and the starry ocean. Start with a historiography of why MBS exists and how gaming of naval settings has emerged. As a Johnny come lately I can barely remember BFG, never saw Man O war, and hadn't heard of Ogre until it was mentioned here.
This is an idea I've touched on a long time ago on the blog. I definitely wouldn't be opposed to discussing it again on the podcast!
http://www.manbattlestations.com/blog/2012/09/04/line-ahead-why-naval-gaming/I have been thinking about your question again and revisited some of the older podcasts.
I think what I enjoyed the most in the past were the in depth interviews with game designers, representatives and so on.
Especially the episode with the author of the book about the battle of Midway was fascinating.
Interviews are fun! And we are definitely looking to do more of them in the future. They are always a challenge to coordinate, though, since we are always trying to coordinate across 2 or even 3 timezones to get them done!
Things I didn’t enjoy that much were the in-depth rule discussions.
Don’t get me wrong: I like rule discussions, I like to hear about major differences and what sets a rule set apart from others.
That can be summed up as the “First Layer” of rules – but once you dive through the second, the third and the fourth layer – it becomes increasingly hard to follow.
It might have to do with the fact that I listen mostly during my daily commute/ while driving and so on – difficult to concentrate and with no chance for visual aids.
Honestly, these aren't my favorite segments to prepare or record, either. They are pretty time-consuming to write and prepare, and I've always feared that listeners would find them a bit overwhelming to listen to. It's something that we'll have to take a look at in the future to see if we can strike a balance between too little or too much detail.
I enjoy the occasional battle report and insights into personal experiences + also negative ones. Have you ever tested a product you were sure to dislike to warn the community?
Well, we mostly stick to discussing things that we have enjoyed as we find that more interesting to talk about. I think we've been open whenever we had issues with specific products or manufacturers, but we haven't gone out of our way to find things we knew we would actively dislike, and I don't see that changing in the future
.
Poll