ORIGINAL: John 3rd
ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus
You're right, I should have stated that it doesn't include all the CVEs arriving before '44 to the allied side.
It's a grand total of 22 CVEs for 575 embarked a/c until the end of 1943.
I did the above tables taking into consideration the balance for a defensive maneuvre battle, in which I am likely to bring into action my full firepower, while the allies are unlikely to bring CVEs as well.
It has been done more to represent the not so huge delta between allies and Japan even into '44 when we take into consideration sheer numbers only.
To be fair, I don't find it changes much. Especially if you consider that in 1942 you get "only" 8 CVEs with 221 embarked a/c.
The big change happens after mid-43 and, even more, after mid-44
And... Hosho is amazing! It has 25knts of top speed: enough to stay with KB2!
PS. Please, take also into consideration that in my last PBEMs I have played with the HR of "max 500 embarked a/c per-hex" and therefore the carrier clashes have been way more complex and on a much larger geographical scale than usual.
Have often thought of a HR like this one. How has it worked for you?
I would say that until 1944 it works very well. After 1944 kicks in, I suggest increasing to max 700 embarked a/c per-hex.
It's obviously a pro-jap HR, but not as much as it might seem: indeed, an Allied player who is able to adapt to that can have very good results.
It requires a major switch in Allies' mentality from "making the big blob" to "manoeuvre battle".
In line of principle, I have seen that the HR doesn't change much unless the Allied player sticks with the idea of just putting every single ship he has in one hex. In that case, he's quite f@cked up.
In general, this HR produces much more complex battles in a much wider scope than usual. Engagements are quite brutal and die rolls play a big role. Basically, positioning is very important and battles are fought no longer in one hex vs one hex, but rather in "areas".
For example: an Allied approach to Mariannas has been done through several minor preparatory operations and then a sort of "sweep" embracing the whole area, instead of the usual "big fleet crawling to the landing point under 1,000,000 fighter cover".
Also, carrier clashes are more frequent but less decisive unless it's a major operation (such as the Mariannas mentioned above). If it's a major operations, they become really really bloody.
I find the HR quite interesting because it pushes away the general principle of "1,000 ships in one hex with billions of a/c in CAP", rewarding a more dynamic gameplay for both.
Also, take into consideration that Jap AirTFs are under the same limitation and,
ceteribus paribus, they are weaker: a/c are generally worse, CVs themselves are squishy and AAA isn't great either. So, the game becomes much more complex for the Japanese player as well.
I'd say that the game is much much more dynamic and complex with this HR, carrier battles are a matter of positioning more than anything else and that an allied player who is able to grasp the consequences of the HR and leverage them is in advantage, otherwise the Japanese player has a net gain.
NOTE: I do play both sides and I propose this HR also when I'm the evil Allies. So, I have a grasp of it from the other side of the barricade as well, even though I haven't gone far enough in the game with the Allies to have a definitive opinion on the topic.
