[Consim-l] CV Session Report

[Mircea Pauca]

["Mike NotSpecified"] 
> BGG has published my session report on CV if anyone is interested.
> http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1245400#1245400

    I've followed the replay with great interest.

    First, I appreciate this more detailed system highlighting
1h timing of flights, but wonder how 'ergonomic' is it in play ? 
for instance, fuel left for each air unit is marked on a roster ?
    Was this system applied to South Pacific carrier actions too ?

    (The most 'compact' system still having some decisive air
timing detail- 3.5h, is Markus Stumptner's "Solomon Sea")

    Funny detail, how that carrier was running away from BB
Yamato, and could not launch planes due to wind direction...

    Another question, now on historical doctrine:
was it relevant for Japanese (or other amphibious powers)
to have completely dedicated Carrier, Bombardment and 
Landing task forces ? wouldn't have been better for ships
to join and detach as needed, for more mutual protection ?

    Also, a game like "Fire in the Sky" separates completely
surface ships for Sea Control and those for Ground Support,
not to mention those attached to carriers are useless as guns
(relevant only as AA fire, and DD against submarines).

    I understand some physical limitations:
- Carriers cannot go close to shore, and must sail at some
speed and direction relative to wind for plane landings.
- Civilian transport ships much slower

    Or maybe US Navy was more flexible, only Japan had 
those fixed formations ?

   Thank you for thinking about this,
    Mircea Pauca, Bucuresti, Romania