Worklist for update 1.5

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...

Painstakingly done!
Radius, text amended.

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.
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.
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.
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.
Fixed
FixedYes, I might oneday. Currently it is too much work keeping it updated with all the layout changes that still happen.
Fixed
No idea, I’ll look into this, should a ship be able to shadow at night at all?
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)

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

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….

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

"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.

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!

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?

I'll look into the capsizing rules, they are experimental, so your feedback is appreciated.

I really like your changes for the air warfare. Moving the landing and take-off into one phase make sense. In 1.4 landing needs attention - we were using dice to mark the free landing capacity of carriers for the last phase. Also preventing aircrafts to fly forever is something we were looking for.
We've been experimenting with fuel usage in version 1.4 and as a house rule aircrafts can stay 3 turns in the air - meaning they can delay attack or landing for 1 turn. We add 3 fuel tokens to each air group when they take off and remove one at each end of turn. If aircraft groups break up we add tokens accordingly.

Hello,

A few things about version 1.5:
1. In the QRS it is written "disruption tokens=order tokens". It may be misleading, maybe better would be "disruption tokens=opponent order tokens"
2. Maybe it is just my laptop, but Fleet Builder xls does not work correctly in Excel 2013 under Windows. The drop down menu is not shown, only when holding down the left mouse button on the very left edge of the cell. I saw there are compatibility issues under Mac. Has anyone else experienced this?
3. What is the idea behind making landing capacity of carriers unlimited in 1.5? Seems strange that only launching is limited by capacity. Or do I misunderstand the new rules?

These are for both 1.4 and 1.5:
4. Is it on purpose that there is no launch/land restrictions for crippled carriers?
5. In section "conduct AA fire" on page 20 in the Rulebook you mention AA dmg rating multiple times. Afaik AAs have no dmg rating - did you mean pwr?
6. Do aerial torpedos suffer from ships "turning away" from them? Conventional torpedos suffer when they hit from the direction of front or back of the ship. Shouldn't be the same for aerial torpedos?

In general I really like your changes in 1.5 very nuch - great work! They worked well during a few games we tried.