Having played a couple of large standard (i.e., 3 objective) games of War at Sea back to back, Seth and I decided to mix things up a bit and try a different scenario. We ultimately settled on the Deathmatch rules created by none other than Neural Dream himself! Not really sure what to expect, we dove right into it. While we didn’t get to finish the game (more on that later), it was a complete blast and we both had a lot of fun with it. However, given the non-traditional structure of this scenario, what follows is going to be less of a full battle report and more of an overview our game and my thoughts about it.

The Deathmatch Scenario

If you haven’t looked over the rules yet, you really should; they are written on one page, with lots of pretty pictures to boot! But, to break it down simply, the deathmatch involves starting with 20 points of units and objectives to control. Each player gets more points at the end of each turn to spend on reinforcements, with the amount of points the receive being dictated by the number of objectives they control. The game continues until one side controls both of the islands on the map.  One wrinkle is that each unit in the game can only be used once, regardless of class limits. This means that there can only ever be one type of plane or destroyer on the board, and once it is gone, it’s gone! We also found it necessary to clarify some things about the scenario that weren’t explicitly mentioned in the rules sheet. For example, neutrals and the French would be available only to the side that deployed a unit from that nationality first.

Our Game

Since neither of us had a preference for which side we played, Seth and I diced off to pick Axis or Allies. Seth won the roll, and chose the Axis. With that out of the way, we went about spending our 20 points. My picks were the USS Richmond, the Gromiky, and a Buffalo fighter. Seth, on the other hand, took a Folgore, T1, and the Chitose. Over the course of the first couple of turns, we each managed to claim the “baseline” objective on our own home rows. The Gromiky even managed to survive long enough against the Chitose’s float planes to mine her objective sector!

We were both steadily expanding our forces. Seth deployed a Greek sub and the Agano, while I added a Martlet and the French sea plane tender Commadant Teste. The Richmond managed to claim another objective, while my air power successfuly prevented the T1 from doing the same. Success! I was now ahead in points.

From here, the game kind of went two different directions. I started saving points and going with an air-heavy fleet, while Seth focused more on a surface fleet centered around two German pocket battleships. The USS Wasp provided me with an inexpensive 3-cap carrier (not a small concern when the land base only holds 2 planes!), and my Dauntless was proving to be a real handful for Seth until he managed to shoot it down! Towards the end of the game, I was able to deploy the USS Alaska to offset his advantage in surface gunnery, but it was pretty much a tie overall.

Thoughts

Frankly, this game was some of the most fun I’ve had with War at Sea in a long time. I think this comes from the duel nature of the scenario; on one hand, it is wide open with the entire Axis or Allied arsenal at your disposal. On the other, the low starting points and the slow rate of accumulation severely limit the ability to play powerful units, forcing the player to weigh purchases carefully and consider units that might otherwise get looked over in standard scenarios. Here are a few specific observations Seth and I had about the scenario and our game:

• Given the constraints of the airbase, seaplane tenders make for an excellent force multiplier in this scenario, especially early in the game. Granted, the aircraft they are launching aren’t going to be that great, but then again they aren’t going to be going up  against a ton of AA. Some of the one-time use floatplane ships like the Lamotte-Picquet, I-400, or Ise might also be of some use in that regard (though the cost of the Ise is an issue – see below).
• This scenario rewards having a good familiarity with the entire set of War at Sea, as a player is free to select from any Allied or Axis nation. Key selection criteria for us included price (cheaper tended to be better) and special abilities that provide powerful combos not normally available to single-faction builds.
• Purchasing a submarine early on seemed to be the way to go. Given the slow speed of subs and the fact that they  have to start towards the edges of the map means that getting one early allows it to better position itself to actually do something useful! It is a difficult choice though, given the typical cost of subs.
• Battleships are cost prohibitive in this scenario; even a battleship in the 30-pt class takes several turns of dedicated saving, which means your opponent could well outnumber your forces by the time you have enough to buy one. As for those 70-pt monsters? Forget about it! Consequently, cruisers will tend to reign supreme in this scenario. The German pocket battleships, the Japanese Long Lance cruisers, and the Alaska all seemed like strong contenders in this area during our game.
• Team Poseidon units were quite handy to have around for this game! I wound up using several, and they provided some interesting abilities to my small force.
• Mines seemed like they might be a good way to protect your claimed objectives. While Seth didn’t have a chance to enter the minefield I had laid on top of one, it was certainly going to give him second thoughts when the time came! The effectiveness of mines as a psychological weapon tends to be magnified given the general lack of Torpedo Defense we saw during the game.
• This scenario takes considerably longer than the standard game to play. Seth and I played for about an hour and a half, and it could have easily taken another hour and a half to finish it. Not that this was a bad thing, we were having a lot of fun. However, we didn’t budget the correct amount of time for the game and as a result we weren’t able to finish it. One additional advantage of having a good familiarity with the units in the game is that it would also cut down on the time needed to pick purchases at the end of the turn!

Conclusion

The Deathmatch scenario is a blast to play! The strict limits it uses on points and the fact that there can’t be multiples of any one unit forces the player to think differently about the selection and employment of their units. I really like how it tends to encourage the use of units that don’t get a lot of play in normal scenarios; I had several “ah ha!” moments during the game where I discovered units I had forgotten about entirely. I definitely recommend that any War at Sea player interested in trying something new give this scenario a try; I don’t think you will be disappointed!