4 replies to this topic

[Steven Gilchrist]

Hello,My friends and I have not used GQ3-FAE in over a month. There are two things that have caused this. We tend to enjoy making our own games, but do not know how to choose sides, because there is no combat value for any of the ships. An earlier post mentioned that using the victory point value for combat value is not accurate.So, what do we do? Any ideas?Another thing that turned me away was the critical rolls, and my bad luck with those @#*^&%ing D12. I have made up most of the WW1 USA fleet and gave them the same resistance to turret & ship explosions as the German ships. Yet, in the last battle of FAI that I played, 3 of 4 USA BBs exploded. :angry: I got very annoyed and have not played GQ3-FAI since this early July game. But I am getting over it. B) However, we definitely need a Combat Value Rating for ships tho...

[Cpt M]

However, we definitely need a Combat Value Rating for ships tho...

Truth told, I doubt if a functional 'Combat Value Rating' system is possible for ANY naval game given the nature of the beast. Due to the dramatic differences in capability under different conditions and against different opponents no one 'number' is ever going to work. Couple this with the way ships can be lost by catastrophic damage (ie, magazine explosions, multiple bulkhead hits, multiple fires, etc), and a rating system becomes almost impossible. Consider just two examples: An IJN DD flotilla in a 1942 daylight action against a line of USN CAs/CLs is basically dead meat. But change that to a night action, and the advantage swings dramatically to the DDs. Hood and Prince of Wales should have dismantled Bismarck through sheer weight of fire. Then Hood blows up, and the balance radically shifts. Balancing scenarios is definitely more art than science and generally comes with experience (and even then you can come up with some clunkers). The only thing I can suggest is to draw from the historical record and build your scenarios around actual battles (and feel free to add, subtract or substitute ships and units to game out those 'what ifs'). Also, don't be afraid of gaming lopsided battles; surprisingly, these can be very challenging and a lot of fun (and besides, as any OPs officer will tell you, a well designed battle plan is rarely balanced and definitely not fair to the other guy!).

Another thing that turned me away was the critical rolls, and my bad luck with those @#*^&%ing D12. I have made up most of the WW1 USA fleet and gave them the same resistance to turret & ship explosions as the German ships. Yet, in the last battle of FAI that I played, 3 of 4 USA BBs exploded.

I feel your pain! I went through a stinit of exploding flagships that garner me the nickname 'Boom!' Just hang in there; this too, shall pass!:)

[Steven Gilchrist]

I hope I am not being annoying on the idea of Combat ratings...(Obsessive-compulsive behavior; don't leave home without it).The people at mj12games, who make the combat-in-space game Starmada and other war games, have made a WW One version of Starmada called Dreadnought. This game replaces starship shields with Armor & has guns with different piercing ability and greater damage for heavier guns. There are different armor ratings similar to GQ3 & FAI. Also, each ship has a combat value which makes pointing and balancing a game much easier. The game's torpedo rules are fairly simple also. Starmada-Dreadnought is not as detailed, but is interestingI was hoping that a CR for the GQ3 & FAI games could be made in a similar fashion. :cheer:

[Jim O'Neil]

Someone suggested using the ratings from Fletcher Pratt's Naval Rules.I do not have the formula available, but either someone here or online should be able to help you.

[Steven Gilchrist]

We used to use the Victory Points assigned to each ship as a Combat Value. It is far from perfect, but it Is better than nothing :cheer: