I like it but clear something up for me:

What happens when you move two ships carrying 3 tokens to an enemy city location that also has 3 enemy ships on it?

How does that work itself out in your scenario? Could you post your official rule on how it would be worded Jonno?

In this thread I will adress and clarify the current draft rules for both Naval Warfare and Advanced Military. For posibly extension of them, please see the Advanced Military thread.

The rules from 2.06-draft4 states:


In plain english this says that:
Neither Advanced Military nor Naval Warfare affects whether a battle starts or not! For a fight between tokens to start, there must be more tokens (not counting ships) in that area (not counting neighbouring areas) than the population limit in the area. For an attack on a city you still require 7 tokens (not counting ships) in the city area (not counting neighbouring areas).
Nor does tokens in neighbouring areas or ships affect in what order causalties is taken, that is solely determined by Metalurgy and amount of tokens (not counting ships) in that area (not counting neighbouring areas).
However, when the fight well has started, and the players are taking turn to take causalties, holders of Advanced Military may remove a token in a neighbouring area instead, and a holder of Naval Warfare may remove a ship instead. This will not change the order order future causalties, but may affect how many tokens from each nation that will remain in the contested area.

So in your example, all three tokens will just die, as they aren't enough to start a fight. The main benefit in city combats is that 2 ships will suffice to raze and rebuild a city. If the attacker holds Naval Warfare and the defender has neither Metalurgy, Naval Warfare nor Advanced Military (or can't use them due to no ships / tokens availible) the attacker will only need 9 tokens and 2 ships to raze and rebuild a city with no defending tokens (provided neither or both holds Engineering). The nine tokens is enough to start the fight, and more than the defender, so the defender will take causalties first. So the defender will have to take his 6 tokens and causalties, and the attacker has to take 5. If he takes two ships and 3 tokens he will still have 6 tokens to rebuild the city.

To sumirize the minimum amount of tokens to raze a city is still 7, just as before, but the minimum amount to raze and rebuild a city is now lowered by 4, from 11 to 7, provided you have 4 ships in the area, or 4 tokens in neightbouring areas, or a combination thereoff.
In addition Naval Warfare and Advanced Military would be usefull to purge other nations (or barbarians) from high-pop-areas, as you only would have to enter with an amount of units equal to the population limit, and still remove all the enemy tokens from the area, provided you have enogh ships and/or tokens in neighbouring areas.

Oops I ment to say 3 tokens each. But you cleared it up for me.

I'm cool with this rule. Perhaps it should also remove the intital cost of ships by 1 as well?

The Piracy help is good - but Piracy seems to be a bit rare so the ship cost reduction seems like a good balance.

I don't think that would be necessary. It would make supporting a ship a non-isue, as building a new one costs the same as suporting them. And I think Naval Warfare would be balanced anyway, considering the posibility to raze and rebuild two cities by ship in one turn (using two ships each, instead of the three needed to transport 11 tokens.).
This is something we could add if it proved the cards still is underdpowered, but I don't think it is nessesary, the card is still much cheaper than Advanced Military, the only other card with similar effects.

What everyone else think? Would you purchace Navel Warfare instead of a similar priced card?

Again, talking about an old rule set/board, no one has even looked at Naval Warfare. As the game is ending shortly, I will ask why not. Another note. Piracy has been anything but rare. It has come up every round for the last 4? rounds. This final round, both of them came up.

This wouldn't be a problem, except the Kushan always managed to attract the card to himself. Then, was able to assign the secondaries at will.

Piracy being out so much: good

I'm not sure how much good asking about the old card will do. We already know it needed improvement. Maybe bring up the changes?

My concern is that since you can only have at most 4 ships which you must pay for in tokens/treasury that this still isn't good enough.

Maybe we should get rid of the maintanence costs? Or maybe also increase the amount of tokens they can carry? Or (gasp) make them be able to count as two tokens in combat? I guess my thinking is it needs to be good because there are so many other good cards to pick from...

I dunno as it stands now - with the negative effects it has on other calamities I probably wouldn't pick it...

So you are basicly paying causalties in battle from treasury. I think that is quite powerfull, even though there is quite a lot of restrictions.


I wouldn't let them coun t as two tokens in combat, but the other sugestions could work. Perhaps lowering the cost would be an option as well. But as stated above, I wouldn't change anything before some testplay.

Lets let them carry one more token as well then...