Flak, I understand the origins of the idea. I think it's a little bit of stretch, but that's not new in W@S. We have similar "stretches" running around all over the place at this point.
Looking at this from the perspective of a player that almost always using "Historical Restrictions" defined by the rule book, I'm not sure this carrier should be restricted to just three aircraft types. A pure Australian force in a 1945 game is not impossible, but it gets harder to put together with this ship and a restricted number of aircraft choices. A low cost fighter option, (Martlet or Sea Hurricane perhaps) might be desirable, purely from a 100-200 pt game play perspective. Personally, I think the RAN would have been just as likely to adopt Wildcats, Hellcats, Corsairs and Avengers for a carrier air arm in 1945 as the the Seafire, Firefly, and Barracuda. The RN couldn't provide enough indigenous UK air for it's own carriers (not to mention the long supply lines)...it seems unlikely they would have had more capacity to provide for allied export. Why not the more readily available US options?
BTW, I've always found the "Historical Restrictions" rules for the use of US aircraft by RN carriers a bit ham-handed. When it first appeared, its was a simple kluge to deal with a small number of UK aircraft in the game, but it sloppily allows Dauntless and Helldiver DBs to be purchased on RN carriers, which absolutely never happened. Ideally, it would restrict the use of US air to the Wildcat, Avenger, Hellcat, and Corsair. I get it, but as time has gone on, super clunky.
Not a huge fan of this particular ship, but trying to be constructive.
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
At what point does it just become easier to do RN colossus? Australian roundel avoids greying rn carriers at least.
As far as i'm concerned, for a population of wartime 6million, putting aside a 1/3 of your monthy recruitment to man a carrier is as good as laying a keel.
In terms of the game, having a carrier in general play put australia comfortably into a 100 point fleet range with some flexibilty.
Prior to setting this thread up, i was happy to only have the usn corsair. It doesn't need experts ect.
Another alternative might be give it fighter cover 6, bomber detachment and poor facilities(as crowded deck or something). Functions as a carrier even without dedicated aircraft in a historical setting but in a open, its not drastically op.
I think having an HMAS Melbourne would help complete the Australian forces and I like the concept. However it would be a 1945 ship and at that point there are so many better carriers on the field for the Allies. I think something along the following would be fine (again just throwing things at the wall to see what sticks and continue the converstion):
"British Carrier Aircraft Operations" would still open it up to US aircraft since they can operate from British carriers. No need to make this overly complicated.
This will not be a British carrier but an Australian carrier so just allowing it to base British aircraft isn’t the same as treating it as a British carrier.