Need confirmation on a rule

[Ashtar]

Murat:
Again heavy fleets, light fleets and pp losses were EiH rules.

Indeed, but in EIH ligh and heavy fleets where packed together. So a "standard" fleet with some light and some heavy was worth 1pp, in EIANW it is 2pp. This creates unbalance.

Murat:
You need to have a limit or else it would never be practical to attack British ships and game balance would be lost. Letting them get a +2 on a d6 is a HUGE advantage. Trafalgar could never be attempted and Britain would be safe for the entire game, something no other nation could claim.

It could be, but as mluch as you need Austria, Prussia and Russia to bring down France, you can safely bring down GB by a France+Spain+Russia coalition.
And GB will probably NOT get a Heavy fleet superiority bonus even against a single France-Spain coalition. Plus, France recovers faster then GB from a loss.

Jimmer:
I would agree with this idea. However, I think it would still be OK to cap the kills at 25%, and not let them go below 5% (as per the current table -- I believe). In other word, change the wording to "1 or lower" and "6 or higher", rather than "0-1" and "6-7" as it is now.

Indeed, this was the spirit of the proposal.

[megalomania2003]

I found the advanced naval rules boring. I could not se a point in any other than GB (without Nelson) choosing linear attack (for the +1), so it did not hava paper - scissor - rock effect.

[Soapy Frog]

Yes and a single die roll with a single modifier is much more interesting
 
Forgive the snark! I agree with the lack of rock-paper-scissors as previously stated, but it certainly less boring than the base rules!!

[AresMars]

Lets face the fact that the Naval rules could always have used a little more work in both EiA, EiH and in EIANW....
 
I'll have to review EiH v5.2 to see if anything had changed that I had not seen before....mind you, the Napoleonic period is not about the French sea war.
 
Villeneuve checked out around 1805 if my memory is correct.
 
But, the rules are what they are.....unless we get Marshall to agree to make changes, we are not going to see a significant change of anything in this area.
 
Marshall? [&:]

[Jimmer]

Actually, I doubt that it is Marshall's decision to make. At best, he's one of a team that would decide. However, he could be the one to say "No, that's not technically feasible", or something like that.

[KenClark]

I had a whole series of games with a home-brew set of advanced naval rules similar to the General but about 5x more complicated.  It used hulks but the standard outflank/echelon etc. chit-picking system and morale.  It wasn't realistic but it certainly was fun.
 
The current system should easily doom GB when everyone gangs up on it and lends all their fleets to Russia, who will go pound on the channel fleet with a superstack.  I'd hate to be the GB player now.

[AresMars]

Oh, I am pretty sure that Marshall is the one who needs to make the HARD decisions.
 
Certain responses made by Monadman and his reaction to my criticism of the playtesters, as well as his comment about people riding a certain persons' private body part ..... See http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1672204&mpage=1&key=&#1673934 Monadman comment at 1/11/2008 8:54:28 PM  add to my confidence in my statement.
 
Could I be wrong?  Yes.
 
However, the Programming Credit lists _only_ Marshall; the Additonal Game Design credit lists others (including Richard and the elusive Michael Treasure)
 
 
 
 

[MarshallEllis]

AresMars:
 
I may make some hard decisions BUT they come with a lot of facts and information from Richard (Monadman). He and I constantly argue over what can and should be done. We don't always see eye-to-eye but I will say that he is an advocate for the player and he challenges my code every step of the way. He has a keen insight as to how things should be transfered from the board game to the PC. At the end of the day, Richard and I will hug and goto bed I guess what I am trying to say is that we all have different bed-side manners but still manage to get the job done for the customer! Richard will remain on my Christmas card list for along time! I cannot tell you how much he has helped us ALL!