Elegant Naval System

[DavidFields]

Again, guys, this is not for the vets. This is for the person who wanders into the forum as a newbie, and might want the perspective of a newbie.

[Great German East Africa AAR. My guess is that Ph.D candidates in history could even learn from it]

Naval Warfare--Campaign view

The elegance of the naval warfare system can best be seen, I think, by looking at the units.

Subs: It takes a special ability to attack subs, which most units, at the beginning of the Campaign, do not have. So, at times, the subs can be seen, but not killed. This, combined with their random ability to dive, and their effect on convoys, gives them a slippery, unique feel.

Battleships (Dreadnaughts): The have a large ship to ship punch, though, in the beginning, they are ineffective against subs. But when I took my first damaged Dreadnaught back to port, at a level 3 in damage, and realized it would take about 1/3 of my turn British MPP to fix it....

Long build times, expensive in MPP an NM, with a few parameters, they are the antithesis of the subs.

Then there are the destroyers, which hunt the subs. And the cruisers, which punch, but lightly, and which are cheap losses to protect transports and amphib. With a few bush strokes, the relevant issues with ships are painted.

[someone else can explain the carriers/seaplanes--help to monitor the convoy lines? I have not quite figured them out]

Combine the above with a first-strike system, where the enemy attacks you when you stumble into it--which penalizes mindless recon.

I was also suprised at the high movement points for naval vessels, but it seem to work both tactically, and to minimize the tedium of stategic deploymen.

The result is this:

Capital ships are committed only with much thought, and screened.

Subs and destroyers play cat-and-mouse games.

Transports and cruisers and destroyers function on the periphery.

In other words, reality.

In most stategic simulations, I have found that the naval part is often tedious and non-realistic. It is hard to simulate the FOW of a ship in a large body of water. This simulation seems to get it right. Indeed, combined with the convoy system, if one were allowed multiple players on both sides, I could see being the Admiral of either side being interesting an fun.

Bonus point: the simulation allows the US units to enter a "worm hole" on the east coast of the US, and end up near Europe several turns later. Though it avoids the tiny chance that a German unit could obstruct passage (given the vastness of the Atlantic and the multiple paths), the result is that one does not have to remember, as the Entente, to move the units each turn. That is a gamer's addition. Reduce the tedium, not make this just an OCD test, and get at the essentials.

[xwormwood]

Rankorian,

i can only agree with everything you wrote.

And i would like to add one more:

it is extremly expensive to upgrade Battleship with naval tech.

And that is historical correct too, because naval tech 1 represents the modern (during WW1) dreadnought class, and level 0 the old pre-dreadnought class battleships.

So you have to think hard if you decide to upgrade even a single battleship.

SC WW1 is (at least in my eyes) the best turn based wargame right now.

[Hubert Cater]

Thanks gentlemen for your posts, they are much appreciated and welcome aboard Rankorian