geek
Recently Viewed
Hot Games
Dominion
Agricola
Android
Settlers of Catan, The
Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition
Battlestar Galactica
Race for the Galaxy
Pandemic
Titan
Puerto Rico
Wasabi!
Le Havre
Apples to Apples
Power Grid
Ghost Stories
Carcassonne
Twilight Struggle
Arkham Horror
Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942
Ticket to Ride
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Tigris & Euphrates
Risk
War of the Ring
Descent: Journeys in the Dark
Stone Age
Formula D
Lost Cities: The Board Game
Last Night on Earth: The Zombie Game
Caylus
StarCraft: The Board Game
BattleLore
Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition
Red November
El Grande
Space Alert
Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage
Galaxy Trucker
Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm
Mad Gab
Age of Empires III: The Age of Discovery
Scrabble
Hive
Munchkin Quest
A Touch of Evil, The Supernatural Game
Sequence
Guess Who
World of WarCraft Miniatures Game
Clue
Railroad Tycoon
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
13
16 Posts
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe | Bookmark
Your Tags: Login to Add Tags | View 
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Cox
flag
Avatar
0708
Modern Naval Battles


Military-themed Card Game of Modern Naval Warfare
3-6 Players
30-90 Minutes
Designed by Dan Verssen & Alan Emrich
Published by World Wide Wargames (1989)



“Proximity to beer and pretzels impairs the judgement of fleet commanders in combat situations. For this reason, and for this reason alone, all ‘beer and pretzels’ should be removed from the bridge and stored in foot lockers prior to entering combat.”
Dan Verrsen (designer of Modern Naval Battles)


For some reason that is totally beyond my understanding, many people seem to put Modern Naval Battles into the ‘beer and pretzel’ class of game. I suspect that it may be due to having a physical similarity to the Avalon Hill game, Naval War. I know – they are both card games, they both give victory to the person who scores the most points from sinking enemy ships and they both have a military/naval-theme. Ferraris have four wheels and an engine and so do Volkswagen Beetles – Volkswagen Beetles must be sports cars.

To those of us who have played both, and thought about how we play the game, we know that the similarity ends the moment you read the rules. It’s a bit like saying that the meat pattie in a Big Mac is the same as a finely cooked piece of Rib-eye steak – they don’t look the same, they don’t feel the same and they certainly don’t taste the same. They are not really the same thing at all and nor are MNB and NW.

NW is a ‘beer and pretzel’ game – it is fairly simple and doesn’t take much thought to play and enjoy. IMHO, MNB is a totally different style of game that is relatively complex for a card game and requires the players to make many significant decisions throughout the game. I feel that this complexity is due to rather sophisticated integration of ships and weapon systems as portrayed by the game system.


“I want you guys to go out there and roll sixes!”
Chester Nimitz (during a planning meeting prior to the Battle of Midway)


To explain the game is simpler than to play it well. You start the game with seven ships in your fleet and you have to arrange them. You can have one, two or three rows of ships and your submarines are moored to the side. Ships have different weapon systems – guns, missiles, torpedos and aircraft. The weapons systems will have a bearing on how your fleet is deployed. Ships firing guns must be in the first row of your fleet (Main Attack Group) and is only allowed to fire their guns at the enemy Main Attack Group. Ships firing missiles must be in the Main Attack Group or in the second row of the fleet (Screening Vessels) and is only allowed to fire at enemy ships in the Main Attack Group or Screening Vessels. The third row are referred to as Screened Vessels. Screened Vessels may only be attacked by aircraft and submarines – normally aircraft carriers are placed in the Screened Vessels group. The bottom line is: where you place your ships is important as it has a direct bearing on how effectively they can use their weapons and how vulnerable they will be to attack.

At the start of each turn each player draws a card to determine turn order. The turn order will vary from turn to turn and it is possible that one player may have two turns in a row.

Each player then has their turn. They will roll a “fog-of-war” die to see how many actions they have for the turn – roll a one and you have one action, roll a six and you have six actions. Each action involves either playing a card or declaring a carrier-based air-strike.

After you have rolled your dice you have to select how best to use your options. During your turn you can use action cards to make attacks (gun attacks, missile attacks, torpedos, anti-submarine warfare, land-based air-strikes, bomber strikes and carrier air-strikes) or you can use defense cards as area defenses.

Defense Cards: there are different defense cards (evasive manoeuvres, electronic counter-measures, air cover and anti-submarine warfare) which will protect against various types of attacks. You can play the defense card during your turn as an action and it becomes an area defense (these cards will be discarded at the start of your next turn and before then will protect your entire fleet from the appropriate type of attack) or they can be held in your hand and played as point defense (played from your hand during other people’s turns – in this case each card will only stop one attack).


“I want you to hit ‘em hard, hit ‘em low and, if they move, hit ‘em again!”
George S. Patton (in the dressing room of the army football team prior to an Army/Navy match)


Gunnery, missile and torpedo attack cards have a number which represents the damage the attack will do to the target vessel. When the accumulated damage equals or exceeds the armour value of the target ship, it will sink and the person making the final attack will be credited with victory points. Air strikes amount to rolling dice and a hit will sink the target immediately. Carrier air-strikes normally need a one or a two on the dice to be successful. Land-based air-strikes have a higher chance of being successful against the Main Battle Group than against Screening Vessels and has less chance again when launched against the Screened Vessels. Before selecting your targets you should ask yourself, “How lucky do I feel?” Alternatively, if there is a small Main Attack Group you may be able to completely wipe it out, thus making the Screening Vessels the new Main Attack Group.

Submarines are interesting parts of your fleet. They can be Active or Passive. Active submarines are easier to sink than Passive submarines. Submarines have the option to target any enemy ship regardless of its location in the fleet. Los Angles and Alpha class submarines are more effective on the attack and harder to sink due to their greater speed and/or stealth.

Bomber strikes are handled differently – for each “Fog-of-War” point allocated to the strike the player will roll a die. For each 1, 2, 3 or 4 rolled they will sink a ship in a single enemy fleet.

There are also special cards that allow you to gain additional ships, to retreat for a turn, repair ships during combat and make your aircraft carrier crews more efficient.


“You don’t have to be a rocket scientist – but it does help”
Wernher von Braun (Father of the U.S. space Program)


The game has advanced rules which are quite sophisticated. Without going into details, the advanced rules create situations where defense systems become more integrated and the effect of this on game play is to give the players more decisions regarding which targets are easier or more difficult to sink.


“Do you want fries with that?”
(Nameless Employee of Large Multi-national Corporation)


The quality of the components is quite good. The game comes with 55 Ship Cards and 114 Action Cards. The cards are printed in multi-colours on thick, glossy cardboard. The two decks have different sized cards which makes it easy to sort them out if necessary. They would be better with rounded corners but this is a minor complaint.

The rules are only four pages long and are clearly written (unlike many other 3W games of this vintage).

The six player-order cards have neat summaries on their reverse side that make it easy for people to check when and in what situation they can play the basic attack and defense cards.

The game requires players to make a lot of decisions and the decisions will have a significant bearing on the game. This lifts it from being just another ‘beer and pretzels” game.

Weapon systems, particularly if using the advanced rules, are highly integrated, making the location of ships within fleets quite significant. At the start of each turn a player may move a single ship to an adjacent group, so your initial deployment is important.

The ‘Fog-of-War’ is an interesting concept that works in this game. Even having the right cards is not necessarily enough. As with many cards games, how you play the cards is more important than simply having the right cards.

The person who has 180 or more points at the end of a complete hand will win the game. The game does have an element of “let’s gang up on the leader”, but due to the complexity of the integrated aspects of combat this is not necessarily a big deal.

When you have had enough of ‘beer and pretzel’ games and want to play a real wargamer’s card game, please pull out a copy of Modern Naval Battles and deal me in.


:arrrh: “Dead Men Tell No Tales!”



Last edited on 2008-07-27 21:57:45 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Looking for info on AH Naval War after enjoying a game, I discovered MNB. I'm a DIY junkie, so the lure of the PnP version Cold War Naval Battles was irresistible. One session with just the basic game was all it took to convince me. I've now made the expansions through #5 and am hoping to get to play some one-on-one campaign mode real soon.
John W
flag
Avatar
I just wanted to add that way back when I first started reading BGG (back in 2001, and earlier on rec.games.board), I started hearing the term "beer and pretzels game" and was confused, because people used MNB as an example of it.

I didn't 'get' the term, because I agree with your review - it just doesn't feel like a "turn off your brain" game - there are way too many tactical decisions.

Throw in the psychological interplay and bluffing (do I have the right card to defend against your attack? Do I play this defense card face down, to intimidate/demotivate the opponents from attacking me, or do I play it face up to discourage those attacks?), and the luck management and I think it's not as brain-dead as has been gotten across thru the years.

We played this a LOT in college, with various groups and playstyles, and invariably the winner was the one that played smart and had their gambles pay off. Any person in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place going into round 3 could win.

I don't think this is the case where the luckiest person will likely win, unless they are VERY lucky.
Ryan Hackel
flag
Game Designer
Avatar
reapersaurus wrote:
I just wanted to add that way back when I first started reading BGG (back in 2001, and earlier on rec.games.board), I started hearing the term "beer and pretzels game" and was confused, because people used MNB as an example of it.

I didn't 'get' the term, because I agree with your review - it just doesn't feel like a "turn off your brain" game - there are way too many tactical decisions.

Agreed. CWNB is one of the meatiest entries in the Naval War family of games.
jgf
flag
Avatar
0708
I must humbly disagree. If you're playing with just the first set, you forgot to mention that both players draw ships from the same deck, so its likely they'll get a mix of US, Soviet, British, French, etc. ships. And reinforcements are drawn from the same deck. This is one of the many abstractions where the designer chose simplicity in design over realism in simulation. Now, I'm all for elegance in design, but this is one reason I put this game (like many Dan Verssen games) into beer & pretzels rather than wargames.

Other reasons why: since you must setup ships into all 3 rows, there will always be ships within gunnery or missile range. Excuse me, but what admiral throws out all naval doctrine from the past 7 decades and willingly allows even the screen of his carrier task force come within gunnery range of the opposing fleet?

Furthermore, due to the mix of cards, gunnery and missile combat is usually as common as air strikes. Missiles I can understand, but again with the guns; this isn't WW2, it's supposed to be "modern." And the dearth of air cards means even the strongest US carrier can't put up a standing CAP.

Those looking for simulation value will find MNB1 lacking. The expansions address this, at the added cost of rules complexity (much like the campaign rules for Down in Flames). Thus I do lump MNB into the beer & pretzels category.
fusag wrote:
Those looking for simulation value will find MNB1 lacking.


Frankly, if all the naval iconography in the game were replaced with abstract geometric shapes, I'd still enjoy it. Compelling decisions is what elevates a game above mindless Fluxxism, not its simulation of reality.
Darren Copple
flag
Avatar
04060708
fusag wrote:


Other reasons why: since you must setup ships into all 3 rows, there will always be ships within gunnery or missile range. Excuse me, but what admiral throws out all naval doctrine from the past 7 decades and willingly allows even the screen of his carrier task force come within gunnery range of the opposing fleet?




*cough* Leyte Gulf *cough*

John W
flag
Avatar

Since when does "not being a naval simulation game" equal "beer and pretzels game"?!

:surprise: :surprise: :surprise:

Just because something isn't a wargame, doesn't mean it's devoid of tactics and is only good for random beer-infused sessions.

That's got to be one of the more elitist insinuations I've read on BGG... well, at least this week. :laugh:
Kenneth Bailey
flag
Avatar
fusag wrote:

Other reasons why: since you must setup ships into all 3 rows, there will always be ships within gunnery or missile range. Excuse me, but what admiral throws out all naval doctrine from the past 7 decades and willingly allows even the screen of his carrier task force come within gunnery range of the opposing fleet?

Furthermore, due to the mix of cards, gunnery and missile combat is usually as common as air strikes. Missiles I can understand, but again with the guns; this isn't WW2, it's supposed to be "modern." And the dearth of air cards means even the strongest US carrier can't put up a standing CAP.

Those looking for simulation value will find MNB1 lacking. The expansions address this, at the added cost of rules complexity (much like the campaign rules for Down in Flames). Thus I do lump MNB into the beer & pretzels category.

Most ships still have a gun mounted on them and it is entirely possible for guns to enter the picture.
jgf
flag
Avatar
0708
moldndecay wrote:
*cough* Leyte Gulf *cough*

Actually, Leyte Gulf only supports my argument that no admiral would willingly allow surface ships to engage his carriers. As you are likely well aware, Leyte Gulf was part Japanese subterfuge, part accident/luck.

With an enormous carrier air disparity, the remaining decisive arm of the IJN was its surface force. In fact, Ozama's carrier fleet was used as bait to draw off the US fleet carriers in order for Kurita's surface force to attack the invasion force. Both sides realized the supremacy of air power, so the Japanese planned attempted to remove US air cover from hindering its surface forces.

On the US side, the Taffy's were only stumbled into Kurita's force because they thought it had retreated, recon had since lost track of them, and TF34 was not left to cover the San Bernardino Strait. The surprise was so completely that the escort carriers launched aircraft to attack with whatever they were armed with, even depth charges. The US certainly didn't willingly let surface forces engage its carriers.

Leyte Gulf was an exception to the rule, which only more clearly delineates what that rule is: surface guns in a carrier air battle is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. The Prince of Wales and Repulse agree.
jgf
flag
Avatar
0708
reapersaurus wrote:
Just because something isn't a wargame, doesn't mean it's devoid of tactics and is only good for random beer-infused sessions.

Did I say it was devoid of tactics? Do I look down on games that aren't wargames? No and no, so please don't misrepresent me.

I most often hear beer & pretzels in conjunction with Axis & Allies. Simple game, still some tactics/strategy involved but questionable simulation value, and game mechanisms that reflect that.
Last edited on 2008-07-28 16:28:25 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)