What about carrier based planes can combat move a total of TWO zones? (4 zones for non-combat moves)
This would allow the following:
Attacks on adjacent land-zones
Attacks on adjacent sea-zones without committing the carrier. (planes can retreat and move one zone back to carrier if attack fails)
Attacks on sea-zone TWO spaces away. However, this would be a “committed” attack since the carrier(s) would need to move into the contested sea-zone to retrieve the planes as they would have zero movement allowance left.
The two-space movement allows for the simulation of a strike. If planes can only move one sea-zone you would have to pre-arrange your fleet next to the enemy’s fleet on the previous turn … it would restrict sea movement too much.
Basically, the OOB rules allow for planes to strike a fleet THREE zones away. (Three out and one back. Carrier moves up TWO to “catch” the planes) … With the revised Naval Combat rules, maybe planes become TOO powerful this way. … This revised rule would allow planes to only strike a fleet TWO zones away. And the carriers would have to end their movement INSIDE of that strike zone.
This reduces the range (and power) of the planes. It also adds a risk-factor for longer, two-zone strikes.
Land-Based Naval Strikes
I like BM’s suggestion for handling “land-based” naval strikes. …. Maybe this would be made even more simple by just eliminating the extra movement allowance that air-bases provide??? That always seemed a little “gamey” to me anyway. This would achieve what BM is suggesting and still kind of keep air-movements OOB. That way, air-bases only provide scramble capability.