"Ultramodern Naval Gaming: China" Topic

What is your interest level in gaming 'what if' naval battles involving China? On a scale of 10 (max) to zero (min).

10. This is the century China is going to make up past strategic mistakes.

7 – 8.

Looks like lots of opportunities for mixed air/sea engagements, with even the chance for the rare amphibious assault and land battle too.

Also, lots of possible skirmishes with minor nations as well, to add even more interest.

10 but not because I believe it's immenint, but because I like to game peer forces and China will be a peer level force soon and a lot can be learned from it.

0 for tactical. The speed of missiles and aircraft make the ships stationary targets and the EW aspects and subs are hard to simulate.

10 for strategic type games although board games do a good job for this. A game using miniatures instead of counters is good.

10

If I bumped into it as a convention game, maybe a 3. To invest in building it for my table: 0

3 in miniature gaming.

9 in computer gaming.

Modern naval gaming is geared towards isolated dots on a map, beyond visual range of one another, hurling missiles and fighters at each other, when they manage to find each other.

The puzzle or game challenge is at the operational level where the PC's ability to handle true double-blind maneuvering really shines. With miniatures you lose that aspect while also lacking the detailed tactical maneuvering present in earlier naval periods (and sci-fi space battles for that matter which is generally based on WWI naval battles).

I really enjoy naval games, especially convoys and coastal or island battles which provide maneuver challenges beyond those encountered on the open sea. I wish there were a way to make modern naval gaming more "miniatures friendly" but I haven't seen it done yet.

Another problem is the "maneuver opportunities to combat effects ratio".

For extreme contrast, consider 18th century naval games vs modern.

In 18th century gaming you get lots of maneuvering relative to the time it takes to destroy a ship. In one-on-one battles the ships almost dog fight!

In moderns, once you lock the target and launch missiles BVR, the target is pretty much toast unless it intercepts the missile. There's almost no maneuvering relative to the time it takes for weapons to engage and destroy a target. The weapons travel too far and waaay too fast for maneuvering to matter that much.

This is one area where I might be happy with a LESS realistic portrayal of combat! Something more abstract that condenses combat effects relative to maneuver opportunities. That might entail shortening missile ranges relative to movement speed and reducing missile damage relative to shooting opportunities. That could be entertaining, if not realistic.

0

I don't game to recreate work.

9

10. Played modern gunboat actions with Bulldogs Away. Would be interested on the same scale.

10… been gaming modern PLAN for a few years now. In any kind of stand up fight, I get my butt kicked by current USN :)

Chalfant

Seems to me the Chinese might be able to win an initial skirmish, if they plan well, or lay a good trap.

Long term, they're screwed, assuming leadership is willing to engage them forcefully. That could be randomized to make the USA a bit less overpowering.

Fear for other nations and their citizens might limit some US options too.

I'm thinking some sort of random die roll chart like in the SciFi boardgame, Imperium, where the Empire is all powerful, but also has to commit resources in other regions as well, so may not be able to bring their full strength to bear, immediately.

Gunboats and fishing fleet combats look most likely at present