Matrix Games Forums

You did respond to the post...[:D]

In EIA: Fleet = Squadron
Thus Factor = warship
Transport ships extra

In EIH: Fleet = Squadron
Thus Factor = warship
Transport Fleet newly added (not all "warship" can transport)

So, in essence I disagree with you on "scale". IMO it appears to one point = one ship.

You don't have to be derogatory and demeaning if you don't agree with some one to win an argument. It's OK. Not being sarcastic, but is this coherent enough for you. (I typed my original message at 12:40 in the morning.)

Jason

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: iamspamus
No, scale of game indicates that one "fleet" is a squadron. From old EIA a fleet could have 30 "ships". Amazingly enough the British Coastal fleet was 30 "ships" if I recall correctly. So, I'd say that these ships probably represent a ship.

Jason

You know, I'd respond to your post if it made any frickin' sense at all, but it doesn't, so I won't.

Well in EiA I remember the British having space for roughly 120 "ships" which is roughly the number of SOL + Heavy frigates in the british navy at the time. Total numbers of commisioned british naval ships at the time I believe was somewhere in the 4-500 region.
3 x as many light and transport/support ships as heavy battleships.
Of course I may be way out as these figures are from memory having read the info many years ago.

I'm gonna be nice, now. I got a little irritated, but some lotion and a glass of vegetable juice, and I'm back to my normal self again (I never did much like being big, green, overmuscled and suffering from tinnitus, anyway).

I don't seem to have been very clear. When I look at the EiA fleet counters, I don't see any depiction of what each NSP is, be it SoL, frigate, brig, Yamato, or otherwise (and I even used a magnifying glass and a pair of tweezers). So, I guess what I've been saying, then, is that you can call 'em whatever you want, but at this scale, all they are is a strength point. The terms "heavy," "light" and "transport" relate to function, not ship type. In any event, what difference does it make? This is EiA. Let's use EiA terms...

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger
Tell me what is the difference between a couple of 74's a 64 a couple of 48's and a 36 vs a similar squadron when compared to a 110 a 90 a 86 and a couple of 74's and a 64 vs a similar squadron? My answer would be the first battle is probably fought in the caribbean or Indian ocean while the second is closer to home.  

Thanks for the info. It took a lot of work and none of my sources went into detail, but here it comes.

the Dutch frigates, contrary to custom, bravely joining in the action, in which two of them were taken

.
From here
http://www.cleverley.org/navy/camperdownbattle.html

It looks like in none of the really big battles (Glorious first of June, St. Vincent or Trafalgar) stood frigates in the BATTLELINE! I ALSO MUST give in they regularly escorted squadrons BUT always fought seperately, so in that sense both opinions are valid.

Both Aboukir and Copenhagen were actions against anchored fleets so frigates naturally took part in it -on the looser's side.

So my question is what are the task of light squadrons?


PS One more thing. As I see frigates were so to say escort ships (similar to WWI + WWII destroyers). They formed a regular "screen" to SOLs. But were used on occasion in independent squadrons escorting the Spanish Treasure fleet or fighting as or against privateers.

Indeed it was not customary for Frigates to take part as part of the mail line of battle in any large fleet engagement, although this did happen somewhat more often on distant station where squadrons were generally smaller. Where frigates did come into their own was in the direct aftermath of a fleet action when they could be used to chase down damaged enemy warships, as happened following trafalgar and camperdown. You will note that following Camperdown at least a couple (sorry working from memory) of the dutch 74's were actually captured by british frigates.

Light warships would generally have been used more for other duties and generally individually or in small squadrons for convoy protection but were also usefull for attacking land forces like at Copenhagen where a number of bomb ketches were used, and of course were essential to the function of the larger fighting ships to send messages, replenish supplies while on blockade duty, act as scouts, and of course harrass enemy mercantile traffic etc
Of course this could easily be modelled by having fleets with a smaller number of ships in them and using these fleets to do the transport duties.
I can not say if we gain much by having heavy,light and transport fleets available in the game having only played the original EiA variant without them, and that some 20 years ago now...

AFAIK the heavy/light/transport or the SOL/frigate/transport were some houserules THOSE who HAVE played will correct me.

So you basically are saying that light forces are briggs, cutters, ketches etc? IN that case they should be only used against merchant shipping and privateers.

If possible I'd like to cling to SOL/frigates separation it give a better historical feel for me. [;)]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

I'm gonna be nice, now. I got a little irritated, but some lotion and a glass of vegetable juice, and I'm back to my normal self again (I never did much like being big, green, overmuscled and suffering from tinnitus, anyway).

I don't seem to have been very clear. When I look at the EiA fleet counters, I don't see any depiction of what each NSP is, be it SoL, frigate, brig, Yamato, or otherwise (and I even used a magnifying glass and a pair of tweezers). So, I guess what I've been saying, then, is that you can call 'em whatever you want, but at this scale, all they are is a strength point. The terms "heavy," "light" and "transport" relate to function, not ship type. In any event, what difference does it make? This is EiA. Let's use EiA terms...

Is that what I think it is? An unpunched countersheet!
No! Must resist the temptation!
NOOOOOOOOOOOO! Must punch counters!
I wish I still had my EIA game but the maps eventually disintegrated and my dog had a cardboard chit chewing fetish.

Why is it so important what the naval units are called?
 
Heavy/Light/Transport
Ship of the line/Frigates/Transport
Vanilla/Strawberry/chocolate
 
That said I would prefer they were called Heavy/Light/Transport. Two reasons: They are called that already and it is easy for me to know that a heavy ship is better than a light ship, but hard to decipher that a ship of the line is better than and a frigate since I have no idea and no interest in what boats of that era looked like and how well they performed.
 
I would have preferred Avalon Hill EiA rules with no optional rules forced upon me, but all of the options available for me to select if I wanted to.
 
I've accepted when I was told that the game that would be released would resemble EiH more than EiA cause though EiH in my honest opinion isn't half the game EiA is, it is still better than the alternatives available today.
I am tired of waiting and seeing that every time Marshall posts anything he is swarmed with requests to change map, counters and unit names to please peoples opinion what city was most important and help unimaginative players get the right historical feel of naval combat.

hlj,
 
Amen. It doesn't matter what the individual or group of ships are called. It would be like getting into an argument of whether or not infantry points should be called regiments, demi-brigades, or brigades. It just doesn't matter.
 
I, too, wish they would have kept to just the traditional EiA. However, I will accept EiH. I just want to play the game and a computer game is the most likely way I will get to play it again. I am hoping that it retains the feel of EiA.
 
Regards,
Mark

Aren't you glad that you gave some information out Marshall. Look at all of the nice conversation that it spawned.

ORIGINAL: hlj

I am tired of waiting and seeing that every time Marshall posts anything he is swarmed with requests to change map, counters and unit names to please peoples opinion what city was most important and help unimaginative players get the right historical feel of naval combat.

I agree.

ORIGINAL: donkuchi

Aren't you glad that you gave some information out Marshall. Look at all of the nice conversation that it spawned.

I think that opposite. The more whining the more members are sticking up for him!

Thanks for putting out info Marshall. Keep the flame-retardant suit on!
Jason

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

When I look at the EiA fleet counters, I don't see any depiction of what each NSP is, be it SoL, frigate, brig, Yamato, or otherwise (and I even used a magnifying glass and a pair of tweezers). So, I guess what I've been saying, then, is that you can call 'em whatever you want, but at this scale, all they are is a strength point. The terms "heavy," "light" and "transport" relate to function, not ship type. In any event, what difference does it make? This is EiA. Let's use EiA terms...

while the counters do not, the rules do define what each SP is:

and each "ship" equivalent to 1 ship of the line or a number of smaller ships of approximately equal force.

ORIGINAL: carnifex
while the counters do not, the rules do define what each SP is:

and each "ship" equivalent to 1 ship of the line or a number of smaller ships of approximately equal force.

Nothing to the point. Basic EiA merely says that each naval SP can be anything, including ships of the line "or a number of smaller ships." How does this supposedly differentiate which ship type each SP is?

Moreover, this game will base its naval rules on the EiH functional categories of heavy, light, and transport. So what do "ship of the line" and "frigate" have to do with it? Of course, "heavy" connotes "heavy ship types" and "light" connotes "lighter ship types," but the game's terminology is not couched in the expressions "ship of the line" and "frigate."

Now, I am finished talking about this. I have no idea why three or four of you have decided to make a career out of arguing with me about this stupid little point, but not one of you has yet to make the slightest fricking amount of sense.

So go ahead and argue, but it won't be with me. I am sick and tired of having to explain the same thing to you over and over, and I have far better things to do with my time ... "Esmeralda, yer my favorite mystic. Howzabout comin' over to my place tonight and I'll let you read my mind ..."

FYI:

Fleet counters are depicted as below:

Thank you

THX Marshall this clears thing up.

Like the counters very boardgame like. Every snippet gets me more looking forward to this.
 
Now quick someone wind Paternakski up a bit more I think he still has some hair left...

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger

Like the counters very boardgame like. Every snippet gets me more looking forward to this.

Now quick someone wind Paternakski up a bit more I think he still has some hair left...

Yep me would like to pit some light squadron against those pesky privateers! Or Send Kutuzov to Bayern wiht 3 corps 14I 3C and 1G. Or or something.

No, Ursa MAjor, Kutusov only marches into Bayern with the full Artillery corps and 2G, 70+ I, and 15+ cav!!! [:)]

Onward Russians into France!!!

Can't wait for the game.
Jason

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger

Like the counters very boardgame like. Every snippet gets me more looking forward to this.

Now quick someone wind Paternakski up a bit more I think he still has some hair left...

Yep me would like to pit some light squadron against those pesky privateers! Or Send Kutuzov to Bayern wiht 3 corps 14I 3C and 1G. Or or something.

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger
Now quick someone wind Paternakski up a bit more I think he still has some hair left...

The world splits into daffy and donald camps once more . . .