I am surprised they hasn't been any backlash yet on fantasy units.
Opinions very so widely on these it seems. Some don't want them at all, some want all they can get. Personally I can deal with things that could have been built in the time of the war i.e. Montana, Tahio sister; however I can't stomach the ships never built in the 20's or scrapped way before the war i.e. N3 class, British WW1 battle cruisers, Tillmann ships, etc. I know others feel the opposite and I see where they are coming from. Lots of you play online and that seems to be where the real conflict arises about fantasy units no? If you are against fantasy and Tosa shows up in an online battle, once it's a legal card you can't get it out of there again. I only play in person in a situation where I supply all the ships, cards, and accessories so I if I don't like a unit it just stays out of the binder....
Its counter productive to strike out a group of units in terms of getting a deck to print. No matter how much person A might hate a type of unit (as in nation, major, minor, hypothetical, historical only) person B doesnt. If neither person gets what they do like, then no one buys> no more decks.
We should have a conversation about how say "fantasy" units can be paletable to those who arent interested in them and vice versa. Because banning/blocking units from a deck is a cutting off your nose to spite your face situation
As long as they are useful, I am fine. Unique(fantasy) are preferred over variants of the same. Keeps the sculptors employed, and neat 'what if' possibilities open.
We should have a conversation about how say "fantasy" units can be paletable to those who arent interested in them and vice versa. Because banning/blocking units from a deck is a cutting off your nose to spite your face situation
To me, historical SAs on a what if Ship are a non-starter. Also making their SAs more powerful than historical ships that compare otherwise is a no-go. I’m looking at you, Sparviero’s EDF2.
So maybe the question is in deciding about Deck F is that the last deck or should it be a two step process of F (2018) and G (2019/2020)? In making that choice it influences how to allot units to Deck F.
Whatever the choice is the ratio of rare to uncommon/common would shift in favour of smaller units. Rares can be inter sprinkled with a few operational units, the odd fantasy unit, fortification or installation to make up numbers. Regardless, it will take carefully allotting of the slots.
It is still that basically simple and playable tabletop game so you don't want to mess with that formula too much.
In terms of representing all nations, all classes and all ships I doubt that is possible but there are some great member created cards and decks that meet this need. Solving the convoy scenario and some concept of the “fog of war” are tougher nuts to crack and outside the discussion of Deck F.
I'll reply about palatable fantasy units for myself.
1) it has to be something that was plausible for the country in question, both in a realistic sense and could they have actually made it given the situation sense.
For me this excludes Russian carriers and H-44. Those pass the line in an unforgivable capacity.
2) if it had started as planned, would it have been finished in time to participate in the war.
We've got some that are really pushing this line. Ontario, Midway and especially Vanguard. In my personal opinion, they just squeak in.
3) for air units, I want to see evidence of actual naval combat or even training to do so. Prototypes certainly count.
Basically, I greatly prefer keels laid, prototypes built or at the very least, projects that were greenlit but cancelled early on.
One thing I absolutely cannot stand is giving nation x a unit because nation y has it. Japan has been the biggest recipient of this and it drives me crazy.
I want things competitive, but at the same time I don't want to conjure up units to do so
To you from failing hands we throw the torch be yours to hold it high. -In Flanders Fields. John McCrea
I'll reply about palatable fantasy units for myself.
1) it has to be something that was plausible for the country in question, both in a realistic sense and could they have actually made it given the situation sense.
For me this excludes Russian carriers and H-44. Those pass the line in an unforgivable capacity.
2) if it had started as planned, would it have been finished in time to participate in the war.
We've got some that are really pushing this line. Ontario, Midway and especially Vanguard. In my personal opinion, they just squeak in.
3) for air units, I want to see evidence of actual naval combat or even training to do so. Prototypes certainly count.
Basically, I greatly prefer keels laid, prototypes built or at the very least, projects that were greenlit but cancelled early on.
One thing I absolutely cannot stand is giving nation x a unit because nation y has it. Japan has been the biggest recipient of this and it drives me crazy.
I want things competitive, but at the same time I don't want to conjure up units to do so
This basically mirrors my feelings on"what if" ships. To me Midway and Vanguard should not have squeaked in. But that is life.
I am also not a big fan of operational variants. That just opens an endless Pandora's box of fan service IMO. I supported an Operational Variant of Hood and Bolzano because they did not have sister ships to do later to represent the class. I especially don't like Operational Variants when we have so many named ships - built and partially built - that are not in the game yet. As for ships with specific year/refit variants - not for me. Too much detail. Too confusing to non-historical gamers as well.
So here is the list I have of capitol ships that have not been done in the game yet. I am limiting this to relatively "good stuff" from the major navies. I am not against a rebuilt dreadnaught for Lithuania, but that won't see the light of day in a competitive game and it won't sell decks IMO.
France
Gascoigne (last of the planned Richelieu's with a traditional fore and aft main battery) - not started, but only a derivative of the two sisters that were actually built
Great Britain
HMS Anson HMS Howe HMS Indomitable HMS Malaya HMS Ramillies HMS Resolution HMS Revenge
United States
USS Indiana USS Colorado USS New York Several more Essex class (Franklin and Ticonderoga seem to be mentioned the most)
Soviet Union
Izmael - 30s modernized "what if" battlecruiser
Germany
H40 "Hindenberg" (FdG sister)
Italy
I am not aware of anything remaining that meets ticat1's (and my) preferred criteria - may have to slum for an Operational Variant here , or not.
Japan
Kii - #111 4th Yamato class BB (30% completed) Taiho Kai - planned sister to Taiho (wasn't started because of lack of resources, but it certainly could have been built.) Amagi and Katsuragi - Unryu sisters Ise - before conversion to a hybrid
That is more than enough for another deck. (And I do think this will be the last one. We are not economically sound even on Deck E by a fair margin.)
IMO, if the Axis and Allies do not each get at least one "fast battleship" and one "fast fleet carrier" the deck is a bust for gamers. That's just the way it is. Ideally there would be at least two fast battleships and at one or two fast fleet carriers (since only Japan had them) for each side.
My picks:
France:
Gascoigne
Great Britain
Anson or Howe Indomitable Maybe Malaya or one of the "Rs" ()
United States
USS Indiana Ticonderoga or Franklin Maybe USS Colorado
Soviet Union
Izmael
Germany
H40 "Hindenberg" (FdG sister)
Japan
Kii - #111 4th Yamato class BB (30% completed) Taiho Kai - planned sister to Taiho (wasn't started because of lack of resources, but it certainly could have been built.) Amagi and Katsuragi - Unryu sisters (Give them the Cap 2 they should have, but add an SA that effectively brings the cap to 3)
With these we have the "rare/capitol") core of a sound deck and I think we call it good after that. Move on to Admirals cards or niche cards that will not have a large market and must be printed another way or posted online.
So here is the list I have of capitol ships that have not been done in the game yet. I am limiting this to relatively "good stuff" from the major navies. I am not against a rebuilt dreadnaught for Lithuania, but that won't see the light of day in a competitive game and it won't sell decks IMO.
France
Gascoigne (last of the planned Richelieu's with a traditional fore and aft main battery) - not started, but only a derivative of the two sisters that were actually built
Great Britain
HMS Anson HMS Howe HMS Indomitable HMS Malaya HMS Ramillies HMS Resolution HMS Revenge
United States
USS Indiana USS Colorado USS New York Several more Essex class (Franklin and Ticonderoga seem to be mentioned the most)
Soviet Union
Izmael - 30s modernized "what if" battlecruiser
Germany
H40 "Hindenberg" (FdG sister)
Italy
I am not aware of anything remaining that meets ticat1's (and my) preferred criteria - may have to slum for an Operational Variant here , or not.
Japan
Kii - #111 4th Yamato class BB (30% completed) Taiho Kai - planned sister to Taiho (wasn't started because of lack of resources, but it certainly could have been built.) Amagi and Katsuragi - Unryu sisters Ise - before conversion to a hybrid
That is more than enough for another deck. (And I do think this will be the last one. We are not economically sound even on Deck E by a fair margin.)
IMO, if the Axis and Allies do not each get at least one "fast battleship" and one "fast fleet carrier" the deck is a bust for gamers. That's just the way it is. Ideally there would be at least two fast battleships and at one or two fast fleet carriers (since only Japan had them) for each side.
My picks:
France:
Gascoigne
Great Britain
Anson or Howe Indomitable Maybe Malaya or one of the "Rs" ()
United States
USS Indiana Ticonderoga or Franklin Maybe USS Colorado
Soviet Union
Izmael
Germany
H40 "Hindenberg" (FdG sister)
Japan
Kii - #111 4th Yamato class BB (30% completed) Taiho Kai - planned sister to Taiho (wasn't started because of lack of resources, but it certainly could have been built.) Amagi and Katsuragi - Unryu sisters (Give them the Cap 2 they should have, but add an SA that effectively brings the cap to 3)
With these we have the "rare/capitol") core of a sound deck and I think we call it good after that. Move on to Admirals cards or niche cards that will not have a large market and must be printed another way or posted online.
Im all in
Just as a point of interest, was Kii ever mentioned on official Japanese records as the name?
To you from failing hands we throw the torch be yours to hold it high. -In Flanders Fields. John McCrea
I found a reference to it possibly being named Kii somewhere a good while back. I will have to do some searching through my library to find out for sure.
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care" Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
I hate fantasy ships in the game, and I don't think they've done a damn thing for play, except dilute the nation-specific build characteristics that made it fun. The effect is to make every faction more alike, which is dumb. Balance is overrated, especially if it means symmetrical balance.
Outside of the game, a lot of the fantasy cheese seems cool, especially given the aesthetically pleasing layouts of a lot of the cancelled BB designs of the era.
So here is the list I have of capitol ships that have not been done in the game yet. I am limiting this to relatively "good stuff" from the major navies.
Great Britain
HMS Anson HMS Howe HMS Indomitable HMS Malaya HMS Ramillies HMS Resolution HMS Revenge
United States
USS Indiana USS Colorado USS New York Several more Essex class (Franklin and Ticonderoga seem to be mentioned the most)
New Mexico and Idaho would be on par with the UK ships you mentioned.
Does Leonardo da Vinci meet your criteria? Italian BB sunk in WWI and raised but not returned to service because of the depression. Would give Italy something at least.
Ramilles is in the game - and is well-done for the old ship she was. We've done a bunch of the QE's already recently (Valiant and QE - looking at you Malaya), but they are more interesting than the R's (looking at you Revenge).
I think Anson or Howe are no-brainers for the Brits - it has often been discussed if it were possible/feasible to do them without Jammed Mount. While the numbers don't support it via discussions we've had in the past, even a less-bad version on Jammed Mount could make them very acceptable.
I do like (and have always liked) the idea of "enhancement" cards that could be bought with points to add an SA (OPG or permanent) to a unit, but I think that that is a completely separate deck idea/discussion.