AoD issues

[Der Kaiser]

I recently played my first game of AoD and here are a few issues I have found. Maybe I am just not playing them right, so please let me know:

1. Turn radius: with almost every ship having a turn rating of 3, that means that every ship can turn 180 degrees in a single turn (on full move), and thereby be very agile. In my opinion, this removes too much of the tactical movement aspect of the game, as errors can be corrected within 1 turn. Has anybody found a way to make this more realistic? Maybe decrease the time increments by half, i.e. dividing speed, turn ratings and AD by 2? Also, shouldn't moves/turn have a negative effect on the turning ship's shooting?

2. In the game we played, we came across the situation that one ship (moving first) moved to cut another one off before that one had a chance to move. So one ship moved about 7" while the other could not move at all and seriously got its "T" barred. Any way to handle this sort of situations? Can ships move "over" other ships, as long as they don't stop on other ships (to represent simulatneous moves)?

3. For every category of ships, the quality ranges from poor to good, i.e. there are very poor cruisers and very good cruisers, so unless one wants to play historical (and therefore usually imbalanced) scenarios, it is hard to get a good matchup. Has anybody devised a good point system for the various ships?

 

[steveburt]

1. Having all ships with the same turn radius *is* realistic. Most WW1 ships did have very similar turn radii; also, it was very seldom a factor in battle. Small differences in speed are much more important, which is why I rate speed to the nearest half inch.

2. Ships can move through each other so long as they don't end the turn on top of one another; the models are well overscale for the sea scale anyway.

3. Don't know - we only play historical scenarios.

 

[Der Kaiser]

1. Having all ships with the same turn radius *is* realistic. Most WW1 ships did have very similar turn radii; also, it was very seldom a factor in battle. Small differences in speed are much more important, which is why I rate speed to the nearest half inch.

I don't have a problem with them all having the same radius, I just have an issue with all the ships being able to turn 180 degrees in any player's turn. If the ships are slower and more ponderous, then you have to think your manoeuvres through ahead of time, making the game more tactical.

 

[DM]

Some thoughts on your questions:

On turning....

Your issue (as I see it) isn’t so much with the manoeuvrability (which, as Steve pointed out, is consistent with the manoeuvrability of vessels of the period), but with the ability of the commanders to exercise control over their fleets. There are a few ways around this (which, in my defence, I considered but decided not to include in the rules for reasons of added complexity).

1) Impose the “squadron” rules on page 17
2) ...and impose the die roll to turn in all cases, not just where the flagship is not leading. This removes the 100% assuredness that players will have regarding the command of their squadrons.

3) If you are not using the formations rule, impose the die roll to turn for all capital ships anyway.
4) Forbid capital ships (armoured cruisers or larger) from executing turns on successive game turns.


On movement....

Given that (unless you are using models less than 1cm long) the ships themselves only occupy a fraction of the area that the model ship takes up I would allow ships to move through each other (but not to end the turn overlapping)

On points....

I agree, and its one of the reasons why I dislike the system that was ingerited from VAS and ACtA. I've toyed with the idea of having "+" and "-" designators within classes (I use the system in my age of sail rules with some success), but so far the suggestion hasn't found favour within Mongoose Towers.

Like Steve, I prefer to play historical games, or games from a campaign. I hate points systems, always have, always will