Greg's Playtest

Join the open playtest for the WWII naval combat game.

Moderator: rcbecker1

Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8810
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Greg's Playtest

Postby Greg Smith » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:07 pm

We played our first game last night. It was 1000 points.

British:
HMS Barham QE battleship 400
HMS Belfast Edinburgh class cruiser 160
HMS Kent cruiser 110
HMS Norfolk cruiser 175
3 type H destroyers 45 x 3

Germans
Scharnhorst Battleship 500
Leipzig cruiser 95
Admiral Scheer Cruiser 280
2 1936a destroyers 2 x 60

The Germans outranged the British, so for the first couple of turns were scoring a lot more hits and Belfast took a lot of pounding. The Germans came straight at the British, so only A & B turrets came into play, while the Brits effectively crossed the T. The British side-on helped the Germans score more hits at long and extreme range. The Scharnhort's armoured deck also helped keep the German's safe.

But as the Germans closed the range, the Scharnhorst's armoured deck no longer mattered. And the Barham's -2 AP proved to be massively effective. The German's sank the Belfast, and began to fire on the other cruisers. The Scharnorst concentrated on the Barham, but with -1AP wasn't dishing out as much damage.

I sent my destroyers on a flanking run, but they proved to be more vulnerable than in first edition and they came a cropper against secondary guns.

The Germans continued to close and a lucky initiative roll meant I was able to bring the Norfolk alongside the previously undamaged Scheer. One torpedo strike and she was crippled.

The Barham's continued pounding of the Scharnorst paid off, doing massive damage at point blank range. Finally with the big German ship was crippled, two German cruisers sunk, and one destroyer crippled, victory fell to the Brits, who had lost a single cruiser and 3 destroyers.

Conclusions:

This is definitely a better game that first edition.

Secondary weapon range took us a little by surprise. It made it much easier to target destroyers. Also it made destroyers not just a torpedo delivery system. This is a good thing.

Destroyers are easier targets. At longer range. Getting them in for a torpedo strike is going to be tricky.

Torpedoes are NASTY. Getting in to a decent range may prove to be tricky. Also winning initiative at torpedo range will be hugely important.

Is there any reason not to be on all hands to deck? Granted there are a couple of other special actions you may want to be doing, but if you are coming under any fire at all there is no reason not to attempt it every turn.

Weapon ranges slowed down the game a little, but not as much as I expected. I have to admit I was kind of rounding them, and never checking ranges to less than a full inch. I am looking forward to them being on the ship data.

We pretty much forgot about restricted on secondary weapons. I realise I will upset the history buffs, but does it add anything to the game? I don't need to try and remember to half AD in certain arcs for weapons that are, well, secondary.

-2AD was hugely important. When it comes to balancing ships, this is a big factor. Barham was 400 points to Scharnhorst's 500 but the Barham was able to dish out far more damage once it got to closer range.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral
msprange
Site Admin
Posts: 14495
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:25 pm

Re: Greg's Playtest

Postby msprange » Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:19 pm

Greg Smith wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:07 pm
Is there any reason not to be on all hands to deck? Granted there are a couple of other special actions you may want to be doing, but if you are coming under any fire at all there is no reason not to attempt it every turn.
In terms of balance, I am not sure I have an issue with this, as the downside is that you are not doing another SA.

In terms of game play, going through the process of every ship taking this SA could get boring. Perhaps if we assume that many on the ship are doing damage control, and so other operations suffer is the way forward? A simple -1 penalty to attacks will get people thinking twice about doing this SA, at least until it becomes critical...

How does that sound?
Matthew Sprange

Mongoose Publishing
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com
Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8810
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Re: Greg's Playtest

Postby Greg Smith » Tue Jun 05, 2018 4:57 pm

msprange wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:19 pm
In terms of balance, I am not sure I have an issue with this, as the downside is that you are not doing another SA.

In terms of game play, going through the process of every ship taking this SA could get boring. Perhaps if we assume that many on the ship are doing damage control, and so other operations suffer is the way forward? A simple -1 penalty to attacks will get people thinking twice about doing this SA, at least until it becomes critical...

How does that sound?
That sounds good. It works in the same way as the downside for evading, so you don't want to do it every turn.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral
msprange
Site Admin
Posts: 14495
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:25 pm

Re: Greg's Playtest

Postby msprange » Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:51 pm

Greg Smith wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:07 pm
Barham was 400 points to Scharnhorst's 500 but the Barham was able to dish out far more damage once it got to closer range.
Good catch - Barham (Queen Lizzy) is actually supposed to be 500 points. The fleet list at the start of the Royal Navy pages is correct.
Matthew Sprange

Mongoose Publishing
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests