Order of play

[Vice Admiral Hornet]

We thinking of having written movement orders for sea movement phase so to lessen the effect of going first.

Comments on this would be nice

[LoneWolf]

We thinking of having written movement orders for sea movement phase so to lessen the effect of going first.

Comments on this would be nice

Add a new phase.

inbetween, inititive and movement.

Add a grid number like chess to the rows and collums.

Order's phase.

Both players right down their planned movements in this phase, then reveal their movements in the movement phase. Move according to your movements.

At least that is how I would do it

This way, who goes first only affects your shooting, so it is a bit more of a HEY I SAW YOU FIRST NEINER NEINER :P

(NEINER NEINER stolen from a sig >.> lol)

[Barry Kendall]

I can certainly see the value of plotted simultaneous movement to heighten realism. It has been done before in other naval systems, both board and miniature.

Several considerations:

1. Different ship speeds. Do speed "2" ships move both spaces at the same time, or do all ships that are moving move "1" space, then speed "2" ships move their second space?

This may appear not to be an issue, but here are some complicating factors:

Collision determination: Do ships ever collide? In the real world, yes. In fact, in the November '42 Guadalcanal naval battle, the leading US destroyer (I believe it was Cushing) had to make a hard turn to avoid colliding with a leading IJN DD as the night action commenced. This threw the US formation into disarray leading to a very confused action with ships often acting on individual initiative.

So with si-move, do we roll to see if ships collide? If so, do faster ships get a modifier for being able to see/react to the course and speed of slower ships?

Firing: Is there still a separate phase for surface gunnery and torpedoes? Is it after all movement? Or do ships move "1," then ships may fire if they so choose, then those ships able move their second space, then ships which have not yet fired may do so?

Damaged/burning ships: If the "night action" rules that are to be published have retained the prototypical feature of damaged-ship illumination (ships with at least one hull point are presumed to be "on fire" and therefore illuminated), do such vessels plot and move before undamaged vessels plot and move? After all, a burning ship at night is a very disadvantaged ship relative to vessels still undetected in the dark.

Air operations: Do surface ships plot and move, then aircraft plot and move? Or is it all done simultaneously? It seems to me that with their vastly greater speed and field of view, aircraft should be able to react to ships' movement. Or do we plot surface vessels and submarines, but continue to place aircraft alternating one-each as desired without plotting?

All this is not to undermine an attempt to add simultaneity to the game, simply to point out things that one might want to consider. I am in agreement with those players who think the system invites and welcomes refinement and experimentation. I don't think such things make the game "too complicated to play" at all. Nobody's saying everyone has to play the same way, especially if tournaments aren't your cup of tea.

My philosphy is to try and re-create historical conditions as much as possible while retaining an enjoyable playability, then begin an engagement and watch the epic unfold. Si-move is worth a try.

While I'm pontificating, I'll also vote for a larger play area and doubled stacking limits, at least for Cruisers and smaller.