Topic-icon Reworking the scenario's, feedback appreciated

Naval War HQ created the topic: Reworking the scenario's, feedback appreciated

1 year 10 months ago

Hello all,

In the comments section of the Beast of War & Naval War Midway articles an interesting discussion developed about scenario's, fleet types and strategic objectives. I've tried to come up with some coherent draft for a scenario matrix that combines the type of fleet you brought to the table with the one of your oppenent and generates a scenario that is believable and interesting for those fleets. This would for instance allow the fighting of a no-visual-contact carrier battle without forcing a surface force in the same scenario.

Some considerations:
- This is meant for casual and tournament 'bring your XXX-point fleet' games. Everyone is ofcourse still very welcome to come up with interesting historic scenario's etc. but that is not what this idea is about.
- It's not compulsory to use the matrix and scenario generator, pretty obvious I would think, but I mention it nonetheless :)
- A simple, basic scenario will ofcourse still be available for beginners-games
- It's a draft, so nothing is set in stone yet, feedback, idea's and additional content is very much appreciated.

So here we go.

First, every fleet-list in the OoB's will get a fleet-type designation (two designations could be available to some fleet lists).

These are the three I could come up with so far
- Battlefleet
This is a fleet put to sea with no other purpose than to establish sea dominance somewhere. I could be to search out a specific adversary or as distant cover of any large operation. Examples: Italian fleets at Calabria, Matapan, Cape Spartivento. Japanese large battleship fleets at East indies, Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz, Midway. US battlefleet at Pearl Harbor. British force H, Home fleet.

The overarching strategic consideration is that losses will usually have a large impact on the strategic balance for both sides. So the willingness to take risks and large losses is not encouraged.

- Carrier fleet
These are fleets where the main striking component is formed by carriers. These include most Japanese and US fleets involved in Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz. British Eastern Fleet and some British carrier fleets.

The overarching strategic consideration of this fleet is to establish air superiority or use it's long range assets to harass or destroy the opponent from afar. The carrier core of these fleets are invaluable and a major influence on the victory conditions.

- Support fleet
I don't know if support fleet is the right designation, but this includes all those fleets that had a specific objective, protecting some very valuable asset or objective. These fleets would risk much more to protect their strategic assets. Examples are any of the British Malta convoy escorts, a lot of the US guadalcanal fleets protecting Henderson Field and the Marines.

The overarching strategic consideration of this fleet is to achieve their objective even if it involves serious costs. The victory conditions are more tailored towards preventing your opponent from achieving his.

These fleet types will face different scenario's when facing eachother as seen in the matrix:

Fleet TypeCarrier fleetSupport fleetBattlefleet
Carrier fleet1-4 Carrier clash1-2 Ambush1-2 Ambush
3-4 Weathering the storm3-4 Weathering the storm
5-6 Surprise encounter5-6 Interception5-6 Buying time
Support fleet1-2 Ambush1-2 Last stand1-2 Last stand
3-4 Weathering the storm3-4 Standoff3-4 Buying time
5-6 Interception5-6 Battle Royale5-6 Battle Royale
Battlefleet1-2 Ambush1-2 Last stand1-2 Surprise encounter
3-4 Weathering the storm3-4 Buying time3-4 Standoff
5-6 Buying time5-6 Battle Royale5-6 Battle Royale

A short description of each scenario

- Carrier Clash
Both fleets operate out of surface combat range. Both sides battle for air dominance with the carriers as prime targets

- Suprise encounter
Both carrier forces stumble upon eachother due to intelligence and jugement errors, both players need to extract their valuable assets while holding off the enemy.

- Ambush
The carrier fleet is ambushed due to serious flaws in scouting and intel, the defender needs to protects his carriers at all costs and lead them off the board.

- Weathering the storm
Defender needs to survive the air and sub attacks of the carrier fleet to reach a designated amount of turns or point on the map.

-Interception
The carrier group has been warned in time and escorts intercept the incoming enemy to delay its approach.

-Buying time
The support fleet needs to buy time for the larger strategic objective to be achieved while holding off an enemy battlefleet

- Last Stand
Defender needs to sell its hide as dearly as possible.

- Standoff
Both fleets engage but cannot afford any large losses. Victory is determined by conservation of force

- Battle Royale
Both forces exchange blows for dominance (I imagine this will also be the standard scenario for beginners)



Very curious about your opinions on this, as said, feedback is very welcome. I'll keep tinkering with it myself.


Game designer

"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been;" -Ecclesiastes-
Last edit: 1 year 10 months ago by Naval War HQ.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Dobber replied the topic: Reworking the scenario's, feedback appreciated

1 year 10 months ago

I think that, with a bit of polish, this should work quite nicely. For non historical play, obviously. One other possible consideration; perhaps for the purposes of tournament/points pick up games, allow players to tweak the air wings on their carriers. This reminds me of a game of Victory at Sea i played when it first came out... My Japanese opponent didn't think that destroyers were a threat to the mighty Yamato... 27 torpedo hits to the starboard beam changed his mind rather quickly. Tits allowed the Iowa to get in amongst 4 fleet carriers. Bad day for the Imperial Navy...

The following user(s) said Thank You: Naval War HQ

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Naval War HQ replied the topic: Reworking the scenario's, feedback appreciated

1 year 10 months ago

A bas day indeed :)I doubt he will make that mistake a second time...
I'm currently elaborating and condensing all the idea's here. I'll have an update soon I hope with more details.


Game designer

"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been;" -Ecclesiastes-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Pugliese replied the topic: Reworking the scenario's, feedback appreciated

1 year 9 months ago

It sounds like a pretty neat system for generating scenarios. Will there still be a place for the convoy and "proceed here, shell X" scenarios, because I don't really see any equivalents within the list, unless Last Stand were to have several variations.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Naval War HQ replied the topic: Reworking the scenario's, feedback appreciated

1 year 9 months ago

Pugliese wrote: Will there still be a place for the convoy and "proceed here, shell X" scenarios, because I don't really see any equivalents within the list, unless Last Stand were to have several variations.


Well, both scenarios have sort of a flawed pre-supposition to them. The bombardment mission supposes that a fleet would have a choice of prioritizing their bombardment target over the enemy fleet. Although the idea may make for an interesting game, the reality is that such an encounter could and did never take place. If faced with an enemy fleet, that threat would have to be neutralized first, only after that a bombardment would have taken place. In game terms, the winner of that scenario would just be able to bombard with impunity or not at all, negating the need for the target being on the table at all.

It would be like saying, 'Hey, let's land at Normandy, launch the little higgin's boats at the beach' but then noticing that Bismarck and Tirpitz start shelling the invasion fleet. In any scenario, those ships would have been noticed one way or the other and the whole invasion would have been blown off until that threat would have been neutralized by the support fleets, resulting in sort of a 'normal' sea battle.

So with this attempt to get the scenarios to be more 'natural' encounters depending on the type of fleet, that scenario might be retained in the scenario folder but I won't add it to the 'standard' scenario matrix.

The convoy scenario posed a different kind of challenge, since those direct attacks did take place one way or the other. It is just the combination of the scenario and the different fleet types that did not mix easily. A carrier fleet would not perform close escort duty for any convoy (except maybe in the med), neither would any battleship force. Those forces would be at a large distance from the convoy, intercepting any incoming forces. So instead of a specific scenario, I'm currently heading for the angle of including the convoy as a fleet type in itself. That way the transports will be integrated into the fleet list and any player choosing that fleet list will know what he's heading for. It will also allow the inclusion of some more minor direct escort fleets like those involved at the battle of the Barents Sea. The convoy fleets will then have their own lists which I can tailor a bit more towards adapted victory conditions etc, without the fuss of how to handle a convoy escorted by fleet carriers or large battleships.

It's all still a work in progress though, and the idea's here are subject to change when I hit to large a roadblock on the way or discover a different angle. I've currently only got 2 out of 6 scenario's worked out in detail, with the rest just being rough outlines still. It will probably be a while before it is all done and tested.


Game designer

"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been;" -Ecclesiastes-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Powered by Kunena Forum