Carrier Battles

I’ve been playing the game for a couple years and am a huge fan. Even if some mechanics are difficult to master it is fairly easy to get into. Some suggestions I have are an option to include the 3 Unryu class carriers as options for Philippine Sea as Shinano is already an option and was completed after them. I would also suggest a what if option for the scenario that gives certain Japanese carriers A7M fighters, similar to the one for B7A bombers. Lastly, I think it would be cool if midway had a no coral sea option like Operation FS does, adding Shokaku, Zuikaku, and Shoho to the Japanese, and Lexington to the US, along with having Yorktown keep her fully airwing if you select the Saratoga option

Following in the tradition of classic boardgames like “Flattop”, Carrier Battles has finally made it possible to properly simulate carrier warfare in the Pacific. Although the computer certainly makes things a lot easier to play than the old hex-counter wargames, there’s still quite a bit to learn, but after a certain point the game is tunable to the level of detail and control you wish to manage. As a suggestion, most folks prefer to learn more by “doing” than by choking down documentation. In that vein, I think the game could be made more accessible—and more fun—for beginners and veterans alike by expanding the variety of Tutorials to include truly replayable mini-scenarios that not only isolate particular skills and mechanics, but can also be tuned, randomized, or even played competitively, opening up options for players looking for getting a “quick fix” of Pacific naval warfare in a short amount of time. Example mini-games: for Search, a race against time to try and spot enemy carriers before they spot you. For Strike, a standoff between two airfields, trying to destroy more airplanes than they lose. Then perhaps a surface-to-suface scenario, trying to bring transports to engagement while avoiding an intercepting fleet. Next up, maybe a “Tokyo Express” scenario where the player must rush in to either land supplies on or bombard an airfield then get back to cover before daylight. For full mini-games, trying close and sink a carrier using only surface task forces (playable from either side) or even just a one vs one carrier duel. As another thought, the list of Tutorials can be made shorter by having optional elements on each that users can select to set complexity or difficulty to their liking. In the airfield vs airfield idea, for example, there might an option to add surface ships trying to to bombard or land transports on the enemy field—much like the first (repulsed) Japanese attempt to land on Wake Island. Other features can have their own Tutorials too: subs, cruiser search planes, etc etc. Regarding tunability, I wonder if perhaps even historical scenarios can be made less complex by adding an option to delegate certain forces to AI management? Also, regarding randomization, maybe the game could benefit from a very basic scenario creation capability - even if it’s nothing more than a little tunability for the above-mentioned Tutorials. Nothing fancy: players choose the month, the map, and maybe the type of mission, then checkboxes that set the probability of various ships or bases being there. To keep things simple, the loadouts for these ships and bases can be predetermined based on the year and month selected: even starting locations can even be predetermined to make things even simpler - perhaps you might limit players only to variations on existing scenarios. All in all, Carrier Battles is a truly great game!