Has anyone thought about why naval battles go on indefinitely (supposing the attacker want them too, which is likely), while land battles are one-round only?
I would have thought that its actually much easier for the defender to break-off a naval combat. Also, if if these battles are usually fought to a finish, do the CP fleets have any serious chance of surviving for very long?
Can transports convoy land units through contested SZs? If not, perhaps this is why battles need to continue, otherwise landings from the sea would be pretty much impossible.
If units can be landed from contested SZs, then if the attacker breaks off a naval battle to conduct landings, can the defender choose to continue the combat in an effort to prevent this?
Maybe this is why ships are relatively cheap in this version; despite mine protection they won’t last too long.
I imagine that Naval battles were much shorter than static trench warfare… maybe that’s why they are rolled to completion? Agree that they can break-off easier though…
The defender should be allowed to break off as many ships as he rolls on a die after each round. (harder for big fleets to disengage than small fleets) example: after a round, the defender wanta to disengage, he rolls a 5, so 5 of his ships may retreat.
Remember, Larry did say “stay in port” so maybe that has something to do with it.
I think “stay in port” from Larry means remain within the protection of your “home” SZ. Effectively, the Adriatic is the home port for the Austrian fleet.
