Topic-iconWorklist for update 1.5

Naval War HQ replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

4 weeks 2 days ago

andrewcooke71 wrote: Seeing as I am running Guadalcanal/Tokyo Express games, which are night games, I came up with one idea about adding searchlights disabled to the first box of hit location 5. This would mean adding a searchlight hit location to the data cards in order to keep track. Thoughts?


I really, really love this suggestion. But you do realize I have to make a serious change to all my data card templates, not to mention the fleet builder to incorporate this? I'll get back when I finish crying :)

Still, great idea, and I'll get it to work...


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.

Naval War HQ replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

4 weeks 2 days ago

andrewcooke71 wrote: Seeing as I am running Guadalcanal/Tokyo Express games, which are night games, I came up with one idea about adding searchlights disabled to the first box of hit location 5. This would mean adding a searchlight hit location to the data cards in order to keep track. Thoughts?


Painstakingly done!

andrewcooke71 wrote: Regarding starshells. Is the 10cm a radius or diameter from the target point?

Radius, text amended.

andrewcooke71 wrote: I noticed you also added the aircraft flights destroyed description to the magazine hit location. I feel this is not necessary as a magazine is a magazine whether it is for guns or aircraft munitions. What about randomizing the possibility of taking out either a weapon system or the air group weapons so the carrier cannot reload/refuel any further aircraft?


That would make it a bit to complicated in my opinion. The addition of the destroyed flights is more akin to the hitting of a hangar with armed aircraft. What happened to Akagi, Kaga and Soryu at Midway resembled more of a magazine detonation than anything else (although technically it wasn’t ofc). If I recall USS Franklin also almost sunk because of the same situation. Rolling a 20 should be a moment of horror. I did remove the extra D3 fires for the aircraft, it would be a bit overkill.

andrewcooke71 wrote: One thing that I feel would be really useful would be adding page number references on to the QRS.

Would love to have that, unfortunately, I see no way of adding them without losing other significant info or without reducing the font size even more. I don’t know if that is worth the tradeoff.

andrewcooke71 wrote: When rolling for close/distant cover are individual squadrons/aircraft/aircraft groups rolled for or is it one roll for all? Need to clarify under that section.

Clarified: Ships arrive with all squadrons simultaneously (only one roll required for either close- or distant support), flights roll separately for each flight that tries to find the battle area.

andrewcooke71 wrote: I have asked this before, but is it possible to have more squadrons in your force than the rating of your officer. I feel this should be yes, but you can only generate tokens for squadrons to the max of the officer.

Interesting, currently it is a no, but I can see where this could come into play. I’ll consider adding it to the officer section.

andrewcooke71 wrote: In the new QRS under generate tokens there is a typo in the first section and it should read “Each squadron lead by a flagship, with one ‘large’ or”

Fixed

andrewcooke71 wrote: The bottom of the US Navy standard com station, adapted tactics, the description is not complete and is cut off.

Fixed

andrewcooke71 wrote: Have you thought about adding an index?

Yes, I might oneday. Currently it is too much work keeping it updated with all the layout changes that still happen.

andrewcooke71 wrote: Getting rid of scouting means you need to redo the aircraft data card on page 5.

Fixed

andrewcooke71 wrote: What is the shadowing range for ships at night?

No idea, I’ll look into this, should a ship be able to shadow at night at all?

andrewcooke71 wrote: Add into the preparation phase that even if the officer/fleet flagship is not on the table that you still get all his abilities and tokens.

Add to page 6 & 10 that if fleet flagship is lost then all officer bonuses are lost.

I made a change here. In another test battle I found out that this can be misused. Keeping your fleet flagship in distant cover while still gaining the benefits of his tokens creates unwanted ‘gamey’ situations. I’ve changed the rule that an off-board officer cannot contribute tokens or special abilities (but ships cán use his command ratings)

andrewcooke71 wrote: In games with hidden deployment a clarification on when and how you can voluntarily reveal your squadrons should be made.


This is already covered on page 30 in the confirmation section? Maybe I should put it somewhere more visible?

Thanks again, I have updated the 1.5 onedrive files and I’ll get to your other post soon


Game designer

"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been;" -Ecclesiastes-
Last edit: 4 weeks 2 days ago by Naval War HQ.
The following user(s) said Thank You: andrewcooke71

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

andrewcooke71 replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

4 weeks 2 days ago

I feel my contributions may be a little excessive? Thank you for taking the time to evaluate and add my suggestions where appropriate. All that being said, as I have mentioned, I am running historical and some what ifs from the Guadalcanal campaign. Obviously some of the games are very lopsided. The 3 Japanese DDs vs 2 US APDs and the Tug Seminole, did not go well for the US! The next game once again involved PT Boats and the guy I play with and I are still trying to figures these craft. I understand that your rules, as written, are trying to accomplish as many aspects of naval warfare and as such need to even out some aspects. The best compromise we came up with for all MTB type craft would be allow them a special ability to activate for an attack but allow them to do a regular move and launch at any point. At night this would allow them to sit outside firing range, activate, move into torpedo range, fire, turn and head away, though not making it back to the darkness. Maybe calling this ability "Agile Craft"?
I thought about this and combining with my thought about increasing the long lance range. My additional thought here is that the target score is increased by 1 over 35cms, or maybe half hits or combo like high altitude bombing? On the other end of the range band what do you think of adding in a point blank bonus to torps, like gun fire, maybe out to 15cms? The third thought was that if your target was in small initial torp template, ie at or less than 5cms get to reroll one miss, a bit like accurate for aircraft?
I feel that these torpedo bonuses would encourage MTBs to get much closer.
This coming Sunday we are doing the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal. We take turns playing the US and IJN. I have added an interesting twist and we will do this twice as each side. The first will be historial with the Kongos, the second a what if and the IJNs send the 2 Yamatos….

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

Naval War HQ replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

4 weeks 2 days ago

andrewcooke71 wrote: I feel my contributions may be a little excessive? Thank you for taking the time to evaluate and add my suggestions where appropriate.


Your suggestions are very constructive, and although I don't implement everything, you do provide me with enough food for thought. As such you are invaluable (just as any other posters with feedback) to the development of the game.

As said in the other post, I'll keep your MTB suggestions in mind. Keep me updated on your experiments. Maybe we can find a middle ground where we can make them more interesting without any substantial extra rules.

Again, thank you for all your efforts


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.

Naval War HQ replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

4 weeks 2 days ago

andrewcooke71 wrote: I have asked this before, but is it possible to have more squadrons in your force than the rating of your officer. I feel this should be yes, but you can only generate tokens for squadrons to the max of the officer.

"Interesting, currently it is a no, but I can see where this could come into play. I’ll consider adding it to the officer section."

I added this to the rules. It is only one line extra and it gives some more options with scenario's and list building.


Game designer

"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been;" -Ecclesiastes-
The following user(s) said Thank You: andrewcooke71

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

andrewcooke71 replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

4 weeks 2 days ago

I understand all your points and agree with you. Trying to fix a historical encounter to make it even in the rules might not be worth the effort and I realize a balance is needed to make more even games playable. I will keep playing and posting AARs and rules bits!

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

andrewcooke71 replied the topic: Worklist for update 1.5

1 week 1 day ago

I know it was a painstaking thing to do, but adding the searchlight critical hit location made a big difference to the last game I played. The first run at the Second Battle of Guadalcanal. My Japanese opponent consistently rolled the searchlight locations on my DDs and in the end I had use the BBs searchlights. I had a little scenario rule for the IJN where the forces were divided into the 3 historical groups, with specific locations to enter the table, and only the first group was on table and the IJN could only roll for the next group to enter once the group before became engaged. The worked well for the most part. I was able to sink 4 IJN DDs, 1 CL and 1CA, but did loose all the US forces, all down to the Long Lance. Next week I am the IJN, but instead of Kirishima I will have a Yamato and the USN will get 4 PT Boats. One thing I did notice was that it seemed to easy to sink due to capsizing. I like the rule, but what about making it so that you capsize when the floods are double the remaining hull points? Have you thought about doing a similar rule for fires?

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

Powered by Kunena Forum