Coming back in late. I would have voted yes for the Sprint/Tough Cruiser/Raider. I also see au64's point of view. What do we do for one of the few remaining "heavy unit" possibilities for Germany, and a class that could be as numerous as all the previous cruisers combined? I can actually see two cards for the M-class. One for the proposed mission of the M-class, and one for a traditional fleet cruiser (including coastal defense).
She didn't carry enough planes to qualify for Scout Planes. And having a cruiser scouting for submarines (herself, not her planes) is... reversed. Airplanes scouted for subs. Subs scouted for ships.
TOUGH; are we really taking the word seriously here or in the confines of the SA; Tough as in having the benefit of warding off DD's and Fighters not 8 14 0r 15" shells!!!
Giving this unit those SA's has everything to do with representing speed and scouting;; SRINT your one time bonus without thrashing the 2 SPEED limit into chaos;;
TOUGH CRUISER; the benefit of out maneuvering DD's and Aux's;; Raider the benefit of out dueling DD's and Aux's;
What else was it suppose to do;;; take on the Convoy screen while the big boys went to work;;;
How does that compare to HELPING Germany's mighty Atlantic Wall take on the D Day invasion fleet;; really
This thread is becoming irresolute who ever is in charge please make a call; before we start fighting Space ships!!!
She didn't carry enough planes to qualify for Scout Planes. And having a cruiser scouting for submarines (herself, not her planes) is... reversed. Airplanes scouted for subs. Subs scouted for ships.
+1
I remain perfectly happy with Sprint, Tough Cruiser, Raider.
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
There are only assumptions that about why SAs are given to the wotc units. Yes they might be informed assumptions. But it cannot be said for certain the specific technical specification determined them or an abstraction of the service history.
Theres a case to be made thar gotland herself shadowing the bismark earned the Scout Cruiser SA. As her aircraft were not embarked by 1941 afaik.
Flak, using Gotland to make a case for Scout Planes on this light cruiser doesn't make much sense to me. As built, Gotland could carry 6 aircraft. The M-class could carry 2(?). If all it takes in this game to warrant Scout Planes or Scout Cruiser is a couple aircraft, we should go back and add it to several dozen ships in multiple navies. I think the design history stretching back over 10+ decks now strongly suggests that isn't the standard, and I don't think its appropriate here.
BTW, Gotland has always been a pretty screwed up unit from my perspective. The real ship gave up its aircraft to get the big AA battery. It shouldn't have both simultaneously.
As for the M-class, while I'm satisfied with the SAs the majority of folks seem to be supporting, another option would be ditch an SA and add Scoutplane Attack from Lamotte-Picquet. That SA seems to be more sensible on a ship that had a small number of aircraft, again with the caveat that MANY cruisers (and BBs for that matter) in WWII carried scout aircraft, but don't have them represented in the game.
The assumption is that its the number of aircraft is my point. It could as easily have been a case of historical service.
Tone scouted at midway.
Gotland spotted bismark. The transmission reporting that was intercepted by the brits. Not her planes.
I think scout cruiser alone a solitary SA is going to make the ship usable in a lot more fleet combinations than a bunch of abstract SAs to make is fractionally better replacement for a couple relatively unpopular ships.
The assumption is that its the number of aircraft is my point. It could as easily have been a case of historical service.
Tone scouted at midway.
Gotland spotted bismark. The transmission reporting that was intercepted by the brits. Not her planes.
Sure. And the M-class spotted/scouted...nothing. Its aircraft complement compared to other light and heavy cruisers was unremarkable. Further, the Germans are getting the Arado Ar 196 in this deck, the very plane most German warships and commerce raiders carried for this purpose. I don't see a need to double dip on the same capability twice in one deck.
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
SWO/Flak... easy guys. We're all friends here. I understand that we've been talking about this unit for awhile, and that Ticat can shut down this conversation since technically we have voted on the unit. But until he steps in, I'm going to keep trying to push for this unit to be something more interesting and synergistic. I'll be honest in that since it is a fantasy unit I'm focusing more on gameplay than keeping the function of the unit historically accurate (It doesn't have a history, just theory of naval doctrine at the time).
So with that in mind and taking some of the feedback into consideration, here's my counter proposal to the Sprint/Tough/Raider version:
SAs: Fast 5: At the beginning of your Sea Movement step, roll a die. On a 5 or higher, this unit gets +1 speed this turn
Evasive Action: Whenever an enemy unit rolls successes against this unit exactly equal to its armor value, roll a die. On a 4 or higher, that attack causes no damage
Repel Landing (NEW): Once per game, at the end of the Surface attack phase, choose one Auxiliary or a Ship with a Landing Ability that this unit attacked this turn. If movement is possible, the target must immediately move one sector away. That unit may not use the Landing ability this turn.
The Repel Landing can easily become Drive off if we want to just utilize an existing SA, though I think that the Repel Invasion is actually more useful in denying bonus points and protecting installations.
Looking forward to your comments and feedback guys.