Proportional Naval losses

[pzgndr]

Basicly as in original EIA you have players who prefered to use the option, but also players who would not.

So, when players would NOT use the proportional losses optional rule for whatever reasons, how would they take disproportional losses without being accused of playing unfairly?? Just curious.

For heavy/light proportional losses, this is a new (EiH) feature and a reasonable rule could and should be implemented. There's no way a mix of ships should be allowed to take the inexpensive (and/or minor country) losses first at minimal risk to the heavy hitters. Why? I am all for making it an option of course but just cannot see why it shouldn't be a default. The naval game is trivial and insignificant anyways, right, so what's the harm??

[bresh]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

Basicly as in original EIA you have players who prefered to use the option, but also players who would not.

So, when players would NOT use the proportional losses optional rule for whatever reasons, how would they take disproportional losses without being accused of playing unfairly?? Just curious.

For heavy/light proportional losses, this is a new (EiH) feature and a reasonable rule could and should be implemented. There's no way a mix of ships should be allowed to take the inexpensive (and/or minor country) losses first at minimal risk to the heavy hitters. Why? I am all for making it an option of course but just cannot see why it shouldn't be a default. The naval game is trivial and insignificant anyways, right, so what's the harm??

Im not sure i follow your question.
If all players agreed to not use the option, there is nothing about unfairness, since its agreed ?

Do you guys have actual documentation of proportional loss ? There is fewer battles where the % was even split than not, high difference of % was not uncommon.

Actual battles, 1 side sometimes tried to target the weaker units to break the enemy and gain advantage, not taking proportinal looses in land battle, reflects such battles.

So i say, if you want realism you cant use proportional looses as it was designed, under options. You might even be better off playing another game where such details are more realistic.


Regards
Bresh

[pzgndr]

Do you guys have actual documentation of proportional loss ?

Bresh, here's what I posted in Matis #510:

EIA Rule 12.2.5 PROPORTIONAL NAVAL LOSSES: When a stack of fleets of mixed nationalities (including minor country nationalities) participates in a combat, the losses it takes should be as nearly proportional to the starting proportions as possible. Round ".5" and above up. When proportions do not "round out" precisely, an "odd" loss or losses should be assigned by mutual agreement or, if agreement cannot be reached, by competitive die rolls. For example, a stack of fleets totalling 68 ships contains 36 British (52.9%), 20 Swedish (29.4%) and 12 Portuguese (17.7%) ships and loses 10 ships in a naval combat. The losses should be 5.29 (5) British, 2.94 (3) Swedish and 1. 77 (2) Portuguese ships.

EIH v4.0 Rule 6.7.3.5.8 PROPORTIONAL NAVAL LOSSES: When a stack of Fleets of mixed nationalities (including minor country and Kingdoms) and ship types participates in a combat, the losses they takes should be as nearly proportional to the starting proportions as possible. Round “.5” and above
up. When proportions do not “round out” precisely, an “odd” loss or losses should be assigned by mutual agreement or, if agreement cannot be reached, by competitive D6 rolls. As the example indicates, losses are calculated first by nation, then by ship type.

This strikes me as perfectly reasonable, given any situation with mixed fleets by nationality and/or type. Anything else would probably be unreasonable. Given the EiA example above, would you allow your British opponent to take 10 losses from only the Swedish and/or Portuguese fleets but none at all from the British fleet with its inherent +1 modifier? It's not like you get to choose your opponent's losses, he does. I'm not sure I follow your objections... What rules do you use?

[bresh]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

Do you guys have actual documentation of proportional loss ?

Bresh, here's what I posted in Matis #510:

EIA Rule 12.2.5 PROPORTIONAL NAVAL LOSSES: When a stack of fleets of mixed nationalities (including minor country nationalities) participates in a combat, the losses it takes should be as nearly proportional to the starting proportions as possible. Round ".5" and above up. When proportions do not "round out" precisely, an "odd" loss or losses should be assigned by mutual agreement or, if agreement cannot be reached, by competitive die rolls. For example, a stack of fleets totalling 68 ships contains 36 British (52.9%), 20 Swedish (29.4%) and 12 Portuguese (17.7%) ships and loses 10 ships in a naval combat. The losses should be 5.29 (5) British, 2.94 (3) Swedish and 1. 77 (2) Portuguese ships.

EIH v4.0 Rule 6.7.3.5.8 PROPORTIONAL NAVAL LOSSES: When a stack of Fleets of mixed nationalities (including minor country and Kingdoms) and ship types participates in a combat, the losses they takes should be as nearly proportional to the starting proportions as possible. Round “.5” and above
up. When proportions do not “round out” precisely, an “odd” loss or losses should be assigned by mutual agreement or, if agreement cannot be reached, by competitive D6 rolls. As the example indicates, losses are calculated first by nation, then by ship type.

This strikes me as perfectly reasonable, given any situation with mixed fleets by nationality and/or type. Anything else would probably be unreasonable. Given the EiA example above, would you allow your British opponent to take 10 losses from only the Swedish and/or Portuguese fleets but none at all from the British fleet with its inherent +1 modifier? It's not like you get to choose your opponent's losses, he does. I'm not sure I follow your objections... What rules do you use?

Since i did not use that optinal rule, we voted against it.. 7-0 ! Yes all the looses could be taken from minors.
EIA-Optional rules section 12...

Optinal rules as the name strikes, are optional (Free to be included or excluded, chosen by the players of the game, not some comitte).

Frankly as i see it, why do you guys need a fix now ? Just play by it using houserules ! Im rather sure implementing this could create bugs.

Sure the "automatic" battles dont allow, but forces would only be mixed in naval combat, if you mixed in land you would get fileexchange and get the option to do as you see fair.

I did request fileexchange for naval battles to, and single defend-corps. But as a option, so it does not affect other games who prefer speed over game-balance.


Regards
Bresh

[bresh]

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Hi Bresh, I don't want any new possible rule tweaks,to interfere with games that are all ready in progress,proportional loss is for gamers who would like to be able to use it as an new option from the games menu!

But thats what im saying all along, but it as option, and you already agreed.

Regards
Bresh

[pzgndr]

Just play by it using houserules!

Yes but the computer opponent(s) can't. It needs to be an option, implemented sooner rather than later to improve the naval game.

[Dancing Bear]

I'd love to see proportional losses between ship types (and an option for nationalities), but there is also another solution. An official Matrix scenario, almost identical to the original sceanrios, but where only heavy fleets are available. No light fleets what so ever.