Do we have an expanded stat with initiative bonuses (because Flag is only one of them)? There have been several SA introduced that grant bonuses (cumulative - which flag is not).
I think the use of smoke is a nice consolation prise for losing initiative. However, I'd almost always rather have initiative for placement of ships based on what my opponent does. I've not had a lot of success relying entirely on smoke with not initiative bonus. I'm all for adding more flag units.
Post by CommanderSam on Sept 27, 2020 17:28:18 GMT
Could we also complete the stat list with ships that have initiative bonus other than flag? To get a whole picture.
I know that regarding smoke and more generally the wish to "lose" initiative, our group was always using the house rule that the player winning initiative was to decide in which place he/she would play, not always "first".
I know that regarding smoke and more generally the wish to "lose" initiative, our group was always using the house rule that the player winning initiative was to decide in which place he/she would play, not always "first".
That approach really emphasizes the push to get the highest initiative possible. On the positive, it can drive flotilla leaders and DDs into the mix that might not otherwise be there. On the negative, some Navies in War at Sea have more access to initiative boosters than others, leading to some lopsided battles. Angels 20 suffers from this dynamic a bit...unlike W@S, there really is no reason to "want" to lose initiative in AAAF. It can be pretty frustrating to play the air game and lose initiative over and over again.
Personally, I like the fact that losing initiative favors smokers. It offers a nice counterpoint for the uber-initiatve bonus build and kind of keeps it in check. It also helps navies that can't manage more than an Initiative +3>.
Nothing particularly wrong with that house rule, as long as everybody knows its the case going in to fleet selection. It would definitely change the way I build fleets.
Last Edit: Sept 27, 2020 17:51:42 GMT by SWO_Daddy
I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way. - Captain John Paul Jones
Unless you want to introduce an SA for a one time option to reroll your initiative roll. If you rolled second you could make a decision easily, if you rolled first it would be a bit more of a gamble. Unless you restricted it to “Once per game you can reroll your initiate if your combined roll is below 6”
The SA is fine, but it doesn’t make up for 3 Covering Fires on a 9-Armor target.
When USS Massachusetts came out in Set 2 it became the "value standard" BB for the US and the game. When South Dakota came out it unseated Massachusetts as an even better value. Then Alabama came out and took the crown for the class. South Dakota can hold itself just fine IMO. Continuous power creep in this class notwithstanding.
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care" Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
Rich Baker was asked many times why he made the Initiative roll a mandatory "win/first player." He was consistent and clear that play testing (and later experience) showed the advantage of initiative was so great in this game that it needed to be somewhat out of the control of player. There is always a great temptation to make cards or house-rules that give a player a real or perceived increase in control over their game. It is one important job of game designers to make sure that desire to "control" all the variables is not easily or consistently available to one side or the other.
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care" Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
I wouldn’t mind a sister ship to Scipione Africano. The Italian’s don’t have a flotilla leader yet and that was what this cruiser class was designed for. Only natural for one of these to get it. Would instantly be a hit in Italian swarm builds.