Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Aw man, the SAC/Devil’s Maw combo isn’t legal anymore? What a shame, that was a really awesome technique I was planning on using. Same with sac’ing Ransom crew, I guess I’ll either not use them or figure out how to make them more useful.
Both of those techniques SHOULD be illegal. You won’t be a fan of it the one time you don’t use it but your opponent beats you with it. Ransom crew are extremely valuable by generally having great additional abilities. (+5, “free” reroll, etc)
I do have a question about cost reducers like Zuan. If he reduces crew cost, why can’t he reduce build total cost as well? I don’t understand his appeal otherwise- the amount of times a crew selection would go over a ship’s cost shouldn’t be happening that often and even then he’s not guaranteed to do much, so why does he even exist?
Because that would allow for overpowered builds, especially on large ships where you could save a lot of points. It would also be extremely confusing if the reducers let you mess with the build total but crew like Jonah did not – and they’re confusing enough as it is. That said, the 2 point reducers should have costed 1 point to make them more viable. They are only useful in extremely specific situations. (such as the Divine Dragon with OE Davy Jones, captain, helmsman, and Sir Edmund, which is my favorite and by far the most-used combo with a 2 point reducer)
All of those were made illegal shortly after they first appeared (the rulings are by no means recent). They all created situations that were extremely easy to abuse or flat-out broke the game.
If a crew with Black Mark activated is transferred to a ship of his original nationality, does that ship become Cursed? If the crew goes to a Cursed ship, can he use his abilities normally? Can a crew copy Black Mark or does it have no effect since it’s a start of play ability?
The crew remains Cursed (+1 cost) and would need to be transferred to a Cursed ship to keep using its abilities (it doesn’t convert the new ship). The ship they started on would revert back to normal when the crew left.
Copying BM won’t do anything because the effect is determined at setup.
I meant that that Maps’ effect doesn’t have to be mandatory. If the ship can’t move for some reason, the rest of the effect is ignored.
I was commenting more on the fact that it’s an optional effect where there’s no reason to not take the option if you can.
I suppose it doesn’t have to be mandatory. The maps being technically optional is what throws it off, because there are very few (if any?) situations where it isn’t beneficial for the opponent to give that move action, just to lock out additional actions.
This would also apply to derelicts and any other situations where a normal ship couldn’t be given a move action for some reason.
…I brought up a recent discussion where advancements in 3D printing are going to eventually make things more accessible and less expensive to make. In the long term (5+ years) dies may actually be a less cost effective solution than other options…
As 3D printing becomes more and more affordable, and scaling quantities becomes more efficient, it’s going to make dies largely obsolete. Why 3D print a die that you then have to use to produce a thing, when you can just 3D print the thing directly?
Anything the game can physically do, short of storing the pieces in cards, can already done with 3D printed models. Removable parts (masts, flags, etc. in this case) can be done, and even if the models are kept relatively simple, there’s really no limit to the potential designs – find a couple pictures or photos of any ship type in history and it could be created.
AR/VR games are neat, but they’ll never completely replace physical games, at least not in our lifetimes, and many people will actively avoid them. Back when video games first started to appear I’m sure there were people saying they’d make board games obsolete, but now decades later board game sales and the sheer number of options are greater than they’ve ever been.
you could have custom designed ships become part of the official game
Indeed, but I see this as an “anything goes” sort of alternative game idea. I wouldn’t want Wizkids or any other company to only choose certain customs to be “approved” or “official”; players would simply decide if a game would have customs or not. Before the game started they could decide amongst themselves if any customs brought to the game were too unfair to use.
“Officially approved” customs would never work.
There could be some sort of ship creator website/app that would calculate points for you, and even generate a PDF/barcode/QR code you could use to print out a deckplate. But, you’d be limited to only the abilities in the system at their official costs (no custom abilities at all, and discounts/adjustments), and it wouldn’t take long for people to start min/maxing their designs to come up with ridiculously overpowered ships that are still technically legal (i.e. Banshee’s Cry, San Cristobal, etc.).
Letting player groups decide on their own whether to allow customs and which particular customs is the right way to do it.
Is there any way to transfer the Fruit UT from one friendly ship to another?
Nothing comes to mind. It can be destroyed by effects that target cargo or treasure, and it can be converted into a cannon with Carbon Charlie’s ability, but otherwise you’re mostly stuck with it.
Is it legal to explore a flotilla to give it the Maps of Hades UT? (so the UT can be “hidden” away and basically made irrelevant)
Flotillas can be explored by other ships. You’d still have to roll for the Maps’ effect before the Flotilla could take an action, and even though it technically can’t move, the block on giving it other actions would still apply.
Also, it would be hilarious to see the other ship get repeatedly moved away while trying to dump that UT on the flotilla. 😛
<p style=”border: 0px; font-family: ‘Helvetica Neue’, Helvetica, Arial, ‘Lucida Grande’, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; margin: 1em 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color: #000000;”>anyone who would know: Do you think that printing blank white styrene cards with punchable ship and crew templates <span style=”border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: underline;”>without</span> the branding and set name would violate the patent(s)? I assumed so because ideally the design itself would be identical, but it’s intriguing to think about. <em style=”border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;”>(such as a very simple no-name box of 3 masted ship cards all white with no associated info to the old game)</p>
<p style=”border: 0px; font-family: ‘Helvetica Neue’, Helvetica, Arial, ‘Lucida Grande’, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; margin: 1em 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color: #000000;”>This actually might have reasonable potential as a stopgap measure if the legal stuff never resolves itself, but those same legal issues could be what dooms it in the first place.</p>I have no idea how things would actually fall legally, but unless you got their dies somehow and made exact copies, and then sold them using their artwork and under the Pirates name, it’s probably not going to be a big issue. It would depend mostly on what specifically they have patented/copyrighted/trademarked, but if you came up with their own dies and made your own generic buildable pirate ships that just happened to be a similar scale, you’d probably be fine. There always seems to be a lot of wiggle room when you carefully avoid the specifics of a patent, even when it’s an obvious emulation – but that’s something you’d need a lawyer to figure out.
Regardless, the dies are probably still the biggest hurdle, because if you can’t find a way to get those made and set up on a production line, it doesn’t matter whether the rest is legal or not.
In a more general sense, stickers are still the best bet. That’s a simple method that you could employ right now, and as long as you aren’t selling them for profit, WK/NECA/etc. isn’t likely to even look twice at it. If you good through the files section on BGG for almost any popular or high-ranked game, you’ll see tons of fan-created custom materials that are no more or less copyright-infringing than new deckplate stickers would be. Create a set, upload them as PDFs, and anyone else who owns the game can print them and stick them on the stuff they already own.
Connection hasn’t been blocked yet, so whatever it was on this site that was throwing up security flags must have resolved itself…
My issue with the fixed rates is I’d prefer it to be more realistic. Capturing and returning a 5 master to your home island should be worth more points than a 1 master. Not sure I like the idea of points or gold for masts eliminated, since it feels too much like a game to me and not enough like the Age of Sail (obviously kind of a silly point to make with no wind rules, but whatever). Part of my idea is that the fleets are trying to profit off each other, and one of the best ways to do that is to capture enemy ships for prize money or refitting them to expand the fleet. Incentivizing capturing rather than sinking.
Fixed rates that vary based on the size of the ship is fine, but I just don’t think it should take point values into account. Tactics, strategies, and crew setups aside, HMS Dreadnaught and the Spanish Morning Star take exactly the same amount of firepower to sink or capture, but there’s a 17-point(!) difference between them. Granted, that’s an extreme example and it’s going to be a lot more dangerous to go after the Dreadnaught, but the relative point values don’t really reflect their actual worth because both are excellent ships for what they do (and arguably, MS is much more likely to help you win games in a “standard” setup). Countless other examples can be found where a less expensive ship is significantly better than a more expensive one of the same size/class just because it has a better ability, has better stats in the right areas, or is just generally more efficient – and that’s before even taking crew setups into account.
There’s definite appeal to having additional ways to gain points, especially when it promotes directly interacting with other ships instead of just racing for the most gold.
Points for capturing opposing ships a very good one, although I think some sort of fixed rate is better than basing it on the value of the ship and/or its crew. Likewise with sinking ships or eliminating masts. Instead of being based on what you hit, I’d rather it be a straight value, like 1-gold per mast destroyed, 2 points for a crew, and 5 or 10 for each ship sunk. Whatever the rates are, it shouldn’t be so much that it offsets any gold picked up, because that should still be the priority.
Points for what you have remaining is already kind of addressed by having a build total for your fleet, but making that a major part of end game scoring could lead to some weird self-preservation / turtling tactics. A player might decide to leave an expensive ship docked at home purely for the point boost. There would of course be a break-even area where the points hoarded at home would be offset by having less to work with elsewhere, but if both/all players are doing it that point is much lower than if only one does it, and then effectively you’re just playing the game at a lower fleet total – which is maybe a better way to handle it.
Instead of getting bonus points for what you have left at the end, you get bonus points for how far you were under the fleet total at the start. You still might end up playing games where everyone is playing at a lower total, but that’s much more clear up front, and you never have to wonder which part of the opposing fleet is actually active and what’s there just for the points.
Posting while I can…
-Only automatic unloading at home islands? (choose at forts)
I’m not sure that this would have a big effect, since gold is not unloaded at forts all that often during games in my experience.
The way forts are intended to work, as a sort of secondary home island, it would make the most sense to have the same rule apply to both.
The automatic/mandatory unloading as home has brought up a few issues over the years (mostly when interacting with a few key abilities), so I’d rather that rule get scrapped entirely. Make unloading require an actual [explore?] action instead, or at least make it something that has to be actively triggered by a player beyond just arriving.
This next topic is not about the rules of the game, but certainly something that’s worth discussing.
It is important that the game remain random and collectible. I would not be interested in a relaunch if it is done in a living card game or similar non-random format. (hardcore collector)
I disagree to some extent. I think the game could be more profitable as a collectible game, but the collectible nature of the game is both a major problem for some people and one of the biggest reasons people say it’s “dead”
Making games “collectible” is all about profit. Technically it does allow for a less expensive entry into a game, but whatever revenue may be lost to people who never go beyond that is more than made up by the people who keep re-buying the same things over and over in blind/random packs so they can get their hands on the most competitive pieces and/or complete their sets. It’s a terrible system, but it works, and in many cases works extremely well.
Non-random has its issues too, depending on how it’s done. The same greed factor the drives collectible games can come right back in with non-random when a company pieces out every possible thing into mini expansions – look at FFG’s X-Wing game. I’m sure the game is excellent and lots of fun to play, but having to buy literally every ship beyond a “starter set” at $15 (or more!) each is ridiculous.
Personally I greatly prefer when you get everything in a single box, or a main box with a couple optional expansions to break up the cost a bit. Pirates kinda tried that with the Davy Jones game, but that was a mess entirely its own. Replace the board with some nice individual islands (nothing too fancy, but better than the thin cardstock), keep the more-or-less real rules instead of the dumbed-down alternate set, then in throw a bunch more (actually) balanced ships, crews, etc. in there so there’s plenty of replay value just from the base set. Each expansion could add an entire new faction or two that balanced with the ones in the base set. You wouldn’t have nearly as much choice with setups as you do in the current game, but if the end result was a much more cohesive, balanced, and well-designed game, I think it would be a big improvement.
Let’s see if it lets me post, or if this will get blocked as soon as I hit submit…
Those sets were most definitely influenced by the movies. You can see it by comparing the sets before DJC to the ones after. The prior ones were still mostly going for realism (fictionalized, but plausible), but then in DJC and after the franchise took a sharp detour into the supernatural (sea creatures, The Cursed, etc.), and it’s no coincidence that it happened right around the same time those movies landed. You can’t blame WK for jumping on that bandwagon – it obviously helped with sales, and spiked interest in the game.
What I don’t know is if WK reached out to Disney or Disney contacted WK, or when that happened, but it was almost certainly after DJC. My guess is that a Disney legal team was scouring the internet for anything that might possibly infringe upon their movies when they came across the WK stuff, but instead of automatically throwing a C&D at them, someone had the smart idea to collaborate.
You should keep posting these at MT until the site actually dies.
Is Runes of Death eliminated immediately after the elimination of the final mast or crew on the ship, or must you wait for the effect to trigger at the beginning of your next turn in order to get rid of it?
It’s eliminated immediately if there are no masts AND no crew on the ship. This can happen when the last is removed, or if it transfers to a ship with none.
With Message in a Bottle, does the owner of the ship choose where the ship is docked AT the island once your opponent chooses which (tied) island the ship docks at?
No, the opponent chooses only the island when there’s a tie. You still have control over where specifically the ship becomes docked at that island.
Canoes are ships, and Peter Miles’s ability only requires the ships to be touching. Ramming is not needed.
UTs that don’t automatically remove themselves remain in the game and face up, but they won’t re-trigger unless something in their text specifically allows it, or they get turned face down somehow and revealed again. If the UT’s ability doesn’t prevent it from being unloaded or transferred it can be given away in a boarding or through other things that steal treasures.
(Moved down so it’s attached to the relevant post)
Can Fruit be transferred between ships, or is that still considered “unloading”?
Fruit cannot be transferred. “Transfer” is really just a catch-all term that covers unloading and loading as part of a single action.
The distinction between loading and unloading is made mainly because of the handful of abilities that refer specifically to one or the other.
—————————————
When using the Pandora’s Box UT, couldn’t players use that opportunity to place more boxes on the same ship, essentially creating an “infinite loop” of boxes and endless “free” UT’s until a player voluntarily stopped the loop?
Technically you could add another Box, but the no-stacking rule would prevent any of the duplicates from generating additional treasures.
How do you quote text from a reply without manually copying and pasting?
A “preview” option would be nice to have too.
————————————————-
Great Turtles say “This island can’t be moved within 2 S of any ships or other islands.” Does this apply when moving the turtle multiple times in the same turn? If I move it within 2S of something but then move it back away during my turn, is that illegal? Basically, does each S movement need to adhere to the 2S limitation, or does it only apply at the end of your turn when you stop moving it?
The restriction is checked separately for each individual movement.
————————————
If a piece has a +1 boarding bonus along with a +2 that applies under certain circumstances, can you stack the conditional >+2 with a different +1? For example, Captain Charles Richard from OE: “This ship gets +1 to her boarding rolls. She gets +2 instead if her opponent is a sea monster.” If you had a different crew that got +1 to boarding rolls on the ship, it wouldn’t stack right? (same thing applied to a custom ship during the podcast)
As long as they have different conditions and/or effects, they can be stacked.
NO DUPLICATES LIST
CREW:
(Exact) Same Name, Same Spelling, Same Person (CANNOT be used together in a single fleet.)
-Calico Cat (SM) = Calico Cat (SCS) = Calico Cat (OE) = Calico Cat (RotF)
-Master Bianco (SM) = Master Bianco (SS)
-Bianco’s Haulers (SM) = Bianco’s Haulers (SS)
-Luis Zuan (MI) = Luis Zuan (RotF) = Luis Zuan (F&S)
-Victor de Alva (OE) = Victor de Alva (F&S)
-Various others that need to be listed – no known exceptions(?)Different Name, Title, or Spelling, but Same Person (CANNOT be used together in a single fleet.)
-“Cannonball” Gallows (MI) = Sean “Cannonball” Gallows (RotF)
-Capitan Alarico Castro (SM) = Admiral Alarico Castro (BC)
-Captain Blackheart (SM) = Captain Blackheart (BC) = Blackheart (DJC) = Emperor Blackheart (OE) = Blackheart (RotF)
-Captain Mission (MI) = Captain Mysion (RotF) = Captain Mysion (F&S)
-Jack Sparrow (DPotC) = Captain Jack Sparrow (DPotC) = Cursed Captain Jack (DPotC)
-Chief PO Charles Richard (DJC) = Master CPO Charles Richard (OE) = Captain Charles Richard (SS)
-Commodore Rhys Gryffin Owen (CC) = Commodore Rhys Gryffyn Owen (BC)
-Davy Jones (DJC) = Davy Jones (OE) = Captain Davy Jones (DPotC)
-Dominick Freda (BC) = Dominic Freda (RotF) = Dominic Freda (RotF)
-El Fantasma (SM) = El Fantasma (SM) = El Phantasma (CC) = El Fantasma (SCS) = El Fantasma (DJC) = El Fantasma (OE) = El Fantasma (RotF)
-Elizabeth Swann (DPotC) = Captain Elizabeth Swann (DPotC)
-Hermione Gold (MI) = Hermione Gold (RotF) = Hermionie Gold (F&S)
-The Inquisitor (DJC) = Inquisitor (RotF) — NOT Inquisitor Sebastian Blanco (CC) – see below.
-Captain Jack Hawkins (SM) = Jack Hawkins (CC) = Jack Hawkins (BC) = Jack Hawkins (DJC) = Jack Hawkins (OE)
-Monsieur LeNoir (CC) = Lenoir (RotF) = Lenoir (F&S)
-Admiral James Norrington (DPotC) = Norrington (DPotC)
-Ragetti = Damsel In Distress
-Sir Edmund Atkinson (DJC) = Sir Edmund (F&S)
-Thomas Gunn the Younger (SM) = Lord Thomas Gunn (OE) = Thomas Gunn (RotF) = Thomas Gunn (F&S) — NOT Thomas Gunn the Elder (SM) – see below.
-Tia Dalma = CalypsoSimilar Names, Different People (CAN be used together in a single fleet.)
-Angria — Kanhoji Angria and Yeshaji Angria are members of the same family but their exact relation is unknown.
-de Alva — Comandante Luys de Alva is the father of Victor de Alva.
-Gunn — Thomas Gunn the Elder is the father of Thomas Gunn the Younger – see above.
-Laffite — Jean Laffite and Phillipe Laffite are brothers.
-The Spanish Inquisition — Inquisitor Sebastian Blanco is an Inquisitor, not The Inquisitor – see above.
-Swann — Governor Weatherby Swann is the father of Elizabeth Swann.
-Turner — “Bootstrap Bill” Turner is the father of Will Turner.
-Zuan — Fidel Zuan and Gaspar Zuan are brothers; Luis Zuan is their nephew.——————————
UNIQUE TREASURES:
-Rum (SM) = Rum (PotC)
-Abandoned Crew (CC) / Abandoned Crew (MI) — Duplication of Abandoned Crew is allowed on a “per card” basis, so if a crew appears twice on one card you may use both at once. You may also mix & match freely between the two different versions of this card, as long as the total number of any given crew token does not exceed the number found on a single card.——————————
SHIPS:
Same or Similar Name, Same Ship (CANNOT be used together in a single fleet.)
-Black Pearl (DPotC) = Black Pearl (damaged) (DPotC) = Black Pearl (DPotC)
-Deliverance (CC) = Deliverance (CC) = Deliverance (OE)
-El Acorazado (SM) = El Acorazado (OE)
-Empress (undamaged) (DPotC) = Empress (DPotC)
-Flying Dutchman (DJC) = Flying Dutchman (DPotC) = Flying Dutchman (DPotC)
-Harbinger (SM) = Harbinger (DJC)
-HMS Apollo (RotF) = HMS Apollo (RotF) = HMS Apollo (F&S) — NOT HMS Apollo (REV)
-La Resolucion (SM) = La Resolucion (SM) = La Resolucion (OE)
-Le Bonaparte (DJC) = Le Bonaparte (OE)
-Le Coeur de Lion (SCS) = Le Coeur du Lion (OE) — Note the change in ship type.
-Neptune’s Hoard (REV) = Neptune’s Hoard (OE)
-Santa Lucia (SCS) = Santa Lucia (OE)Assumed to be the Same Ship, but Unconfirmed (Use your best discretion until noted otherwise)
-Amity (CC-009, F&S-404)
-Clear Wind (SCS-011, OE-159)
-Cutlass (RU-010, OE-212)
-Divine Wind (SCS-006, OE-167)
-East Wind (SCS-007, OE-155)
-Floating Stone (SCS-081, OE-212)
-Fool’s Hope (RotF-001, -200)
-HMS Stingray (RotF-006, -204)
-La Ebro (MI-068, FN-053)
-L’Afrique (BC-077, OE-078)
-L’Auguste (CC-073, OE-075) – Possible Non-Match
-Proud Tortoise (SCS-022, OE-36)
-Royal Louis (RotF-029, F&S-044)
-San Cristobal (RotF-006, -202)
-Sea Crane (SCS-015 , OE-164)
-Sea Duck (SCS-017, OE-160)
-Sea Lion (SCS-013, OE-152)
-Sea Phoenix (SCS-016, OE-156) – See also “Same Name/Different Ship” Below
-Sea Serpent (SCS-012, OE-148)
-Sea Tiger (SCS-014, OE-168) – See “Unknown/Unconfirmed” Below
-Sea Wind (SCS-008, OE-147)
-Tiger (RU-009, OE-211)
-Typhoon (SCS-009, OE-163)
-USS Atlanta (FN-076, OE-090)
-Virtuous Wind (SCS-010, OE-151)
-Weasel (RotF-005, -203)Different Name, but Same Ship (CANNOT be used together in a single fleet.)
-Asesino de la Nave (SM)(GS-004) = Santiago (CC)
-Baochuan (SCS) = Zeus (OE) – See Note 1 below.
-Barnacle (DPotC) = Grand Barnacle (DPotC)
-Black Pearl (PotC-025)/(-026)/(-087) = Wicked Wench (DPotC)
-Constitution (Rev) = USS Constitution (OE)
-Grand Temple (SCS) = HMS Grand Temple (OE)
-HMS Bolingbroke (SM) = Bloody Throne (PP)
-L’Aguila (SM) = Eagle (CC)
-Lezard (-208) = HMS Lizard (-209) = Lizard (-210) = Lagarto (-211) = Sea Lizard (-212) = Lizard’s Sting (-213) (F&S)
-HMS Morning Star (-202) = Morning Star (-203)/(-204)/(-205) = USS Morning Star (-206) = Mourning Star (-207) (F&S)
-Sea Phoenix (SCS)/(OE) = HMS Sea Phoenix (OE)German Ships
These four ships appear only in the German-language version of the Spanish Main set. Despite the alternate names and flavor texts, for gameplay purposes they are considered the same ships as their English-language counterparts.
-Bunte Kuh = El Ladron
-Roter Teufel = Raven’s Neck
-Klabautermann = Treachery
-Sturmvogel = Batavian BatSame or Similar Name, but Different Ship (CAN be used together in a single fleet.)
-Concord (Rev) ≠ Concord (BC) ≠ HMS Concorde (OE)
-Divine Dragon (MI) ≠ Divine Dragon (OE)
-El Algeciras (SCS) ≠ El Algeciras (OE)
-El Toro (BC) ≠ El Toro (OE)
-Executioner (Rev) ≠ Executioner (DJC)
-Fancy (CC) ≠ Fancy (PotC)
-Freedom (SM) ≠ Freedom (Rev)
-HMS Apollo (Rev) ≠ HMS Apollo (RotF-002)/(-201)/(F&S)
-HMS Diamond (PotC) ≠HMS Diamond (F&S)
-HMS Durham (BC) ≠ HMS Durham (FN)
-HMS Gibraltar (CC) ≠ Gibraltar (RotF)
-HMS Nautilus (Rev) ≠ Nautilus (MI)
-La Corse (SCS) ≠ La Corse (DJC)
-Lady’s Scorn (SCS) ≠ Lady’s Scorn (RotF) ≠ Lady’s Scorn (F&S) – See Note 2 below.
-La Santa Ana (CC) ≠ Santa Ana (SCS) – See Note 3 below.
-Minuteman (BC) ≠ Minuteman (RotF)
-Needle (OE) ≠ Needle (RotF)
-Neptune (PotC) ≠ Neptune (F&S)
-Nightmare (DJC-021) ≠ Nightmare (DJC-145) ≠ Nightmare (OE)
-Pestilence (RotF) ≠ Pestilence (F&S)
-Ranger (CC) ≠ Ranger (PotC)
-Revenge (SM)/(PP) ≠ Revenge (PotC)
-Saratoga (Rev) ≠ Saratoga (DJC) ≠ Saratoga (RotF)
-Scepter (CC) ≠ Scepter (F&S)
-Scorpion (BC) ≠ Scorpion (RotF)
-Tiger (Rev) ≠ Tiger (OE)
-USS Mercury (MI) ≠ USS Mercury (RotF)Notes:
1) All “Unlimited” items are considered the same as their non-Unlimited counterparts from the same set despite having different collector numbers, unless specifically noted otherwise.2) Baochuan (SCS) vs. Guichuan (DJC) vs. Zeus (OE)
Historically, “baochuan” was a generic name for a treasure ship, not necessarily a specific ship. Guichuan’s flavor text does not refer to Baochuan by name, so the sunken ship that was raised to become the Guichuan could have been any ship of the same class or configuration. The flavor text for Zeus does refer to Baochuan by name, implying it to be the namesake ship of its class, and provides a definitive link between them, so it’s safe to assume that Baochuan and Zeus are the same ship, while Guichuan is a different ship of the same class.3) Lady’s Scorn (SCS) vs. Lady’s Scorn (RotF) vs. Lady’s Scorn (F&S)
All three of these ships have connections to Calico Cat and share some similarities in stats and artwork, but the flavor text strongly suggests that they are different ships that were each controlled by Calico Cat at different points in her timeline. The similarities are assumed to be intentional, with each new ship being named after the previous one it replaced. As far as the rules are concerned, this means they are considered different ships that may be used together, even though it is unlikely that more than one was ever in use at the same time under the “Lady’s Scorn” name.4) La Santa Ana (CC) vs. Santa Ana (SCS)
These two ships share the same type (4-mast), but their stats are completely different and the flavor text in SCS makes no references whatsoever to the previous version. They’re most likely different ships, and with no definitive evidence to tie them together, they can be treated as such.Unknown/Unconfirmed:
1) HMS Granville (BC) vs. HMS Granville (FN)
The flavor text in Frozen North suggests the ship was refit to become an icebreaker, but changing from a 3-mast schooner to an icebreaker is a rather extensive change. Most likely there was a different (unseen) ship with the same name in between that received the refit.2) Sea Tiger (SCS) and Sea Tiger (OE-168) vs. USS Sea Tiger (OE-094)
Aside from the nationality change, the two Sea Tigers are an exact match in stats and are undoubtedly the same ship. The flavor text for USS Sea Tiger implies a connection, but its stats (and artwork) are quite a bit different from either Sea Tiger which suggest a different ship with a similar name. If USS Sea Tiger is the same ship, how does it fit in relation to the OE Sea Tiger?Topps wanted the cash cow that was HeroClix, and got the rest of WK along with it. When they decided HC wasn’t worth their effort any more they shut the whole thing down.
When NECA picked up the remnants later, mostly just for HC, they must not have seen high enough profit margins to bother restarting any of the other lines. They only made a half-hearted attempt with the Pirates license with that “Shuffling the deck” game, which faded into obscurity pretty much before it even began. They used the Mage Knight license to make a really excellent board game (currently ranked #22 on BGG), but it’s “Mage Knight” in name alone and has virtually nothing to do with the old miniatures game. ‘Mechwarrior and Crimson Skies reverted back to whomever they were originally licensed from (Microsoft?) and NECA never got them.
The whole collectible games market in general seems to have quieted down a lot in the past few years too. There are still several big ones still out there going strong, and the occasional new one, but it’s not like the mid-2000s where it seemed like there were five new collectible games being launched every week.
ADDED: Another factor, maybe less obvious, can be seen in some of the backlash directed at mobile and online games, and particularly EA, for their horrendous “loot box” and microtransaction systems that are bleeding consumers for every penny they can get. The whole blind booster system used by Pirates and so very many other collectible games is almost the exact same thing, just with an an actual physical element to it, so it didn’t seem as bad at the time.
