The Inside Scoop on Gaming

First off, I must mention that I reviewed a play test copy of this game, not the final version. AFAIK, this game has not been released for sale. Considering the quality of the game, this is not surprising.

The basic problem with Neverwar: The Sea Battles is that this game could have been simulating futuristic tank battles, modern air combat, or a pro wrestling match. There really isn't anything in the game play that lends a sense of naval combat. Weather, wind, and currents have no effect on game play. The game is simple enough: players draw a random assortment of ships and munitions. Munitions are used to damage enemy ships, but muntions may only be played if the attacker has the ship type that corresponds to that munition in his fleet. Since the fleets and munitions are both random, luck plays a heavy role in this game.

There is an astonishing lack of tactical skill and strategic thinking in Neverwar. Resource management is almost non-existant. Players simply line their ships up and blast away at each other. Other card games, such as Magic or Groo, require players to carefully decided what resources to concentrate on. In Neverwar, players just have to cross their fingers and hope that they get the right ammo for their ships.

Neverwar is especially disappointing for a number of reasons. First, small press companies simply must innovate in order to survive. Neverwar fails to innovate. It even fails to imitate. The only thing it really does is complicate, since the various races in the game, while based on easily recognizible fantasy archetypes, have bizarre, difficult to pronounce or simply goofy names. Small presses must find *interesting* ways to innovate rather than simply rearranging and renaming the same old fantasy beasties in the same old fantasy setting.

Second, fantasy naval combat is, outside of GW's Man O' War, an area of gaming that has been pretty much ignored. Rather than take advantage of this and work in as much of the sea's unique qualities as a battlefield, Neverwar ignores them and opts for a bland, generic let's-bash-each-other-until-one-of-us-drops route. Finally, the game randomizes an aspect of combat that should not be randomized in a game setting with the munitions cards. Rather than randomizing the ability of a unit to launch an attack, why not randomize the outcome of the attack? It is very odd that ships in Neverwar don't always have the right ammo for their weapons, but when they do they inflict the same amount of damage with each shot. This is a common flaw in many games. I don't want to play games where the dice do all of the creating and thinking for me.

As a model of game design, Neverwar is a failure. There's no thought behind attacks, no real strategy. Players are essentially seperated from the action, made into automatons who simply dump the cards they hold into play and hope for the best. Neverwar represents the ever present trend in both gaming and science fiction to emulate the past rather than blaze new trails. It is sad to say that if Neverwar had been released in 1979, it would be equally tired and unoriginal. When one considers that games such as Magic, BattleTech, Groo, etc all serve as models of what makes a good card game, it is puzzling that this game couldn't even manage to steal ideas from them.

If Neverwar is released without a significant overhaul, ignore it at all costs.

Style: 2 (Needs Work)
Substance: 2 (Sparse)

Neverwar: The Sea Battles
Author: Unknown Category: card game Company/Publisher: Foreverworld Books Cost: n/a Page count: n/a ISBN: none Capsule Review by Mike Mearls on 11/05/98. Genre tags: Fantasy	First off, I must mention that I reviewed a play test copy of this game, not the final version. AFAIK, this game has not been released for sale. Considering the quality of the game, this is not surprising. The basic problem with Neverwar: The Sea Battles is that this game could have been simulating futuristic tank battles, modern air combat, or a pro wrestling match. There really isn't anything in the game play that lends a sense of naval combat. Weather, wind, and currents have no effect on game play. The game is simple enough: players draw a random assortment of ships and munitions. Munitions are used to damage enemy ships, but muntions may only be played if the attacker has the ship type that corresponds to that munition in his fleet. Since the fleets and munitions are both random, luck plays a heavy role in this game. There is an astonishing lack of tactical skill and strategic thinking in Neverwar. Resource management is almost non-existant. Players simply line their ships up and blast away at each other. Other card games, such as Magic or Groo, require players to carefully decided what resources to concentrate on. In Neverwar, players just have to cross their fingers and hope that they get the right ammo for their ships. Neverwar is especially disappointing for a number of reasons. First, small press companies simply must innovate in order to survive. Neverwar fails to innovate. It even fails to imitate. The only thing it really does is complicate, since the various races in the game, while based on easily recognizible fantasy archetypes, have bizarre, difficult to pronounce or simply goofy names. Small presses must find interesting ways to innovate rather than simply rearranging and renaming the same old fantasy beasties in the same old fantasy setting. Second, fantasy naval combat is, outside of GW's Man O' War, an area of gaming that has been pretty much ignored. Rather than take advantage of this and work in as much of the sea's unique qualities as a battlefield, Neverwar ignores them and opts for a bland, generic let's-bash-each-other-until-one-of-us-drops route. Finally, the game randomizes an aspect of combat that should not be randomized in a game setting with the munitions cards. Rather than randomizing the ability of a unit to launch an attack, why not randomize the outcome of the attack? It is very odd that ships in Neverwar don't always have the right ammo for their weapons, but when they do they inflict the same amount of damage with each shot. This is a common flaw in many games. I don't want to play games where the dice do all of the creating and thinking for me. As a model of game design, Neverwar is a failure. There's no thought behind attacks, no real strategy. Players are essentially seperated from the action, made into automatons who simply dump the cards they hold into play and hope for the best. Neverwar represents the ever present trend in both gaming and science fiction to emulate the past rather than blaze new trails. It is sad to say that if Neverwar had been released in 1979, it would be equally tired and unoriginal. When one considers that games such as Magic, BattleTech, Groo, etc all serve as models of what makes a good card game, it is puzzling that this game couldn't even manage to steal ideas from them. If Neverwar is released without a significant overhaul, ignore it at all costs. Style: 2 (Needs Work) Substance: 2 (Sparse)