In 1975, SPI published Sixth Fleet in S&T and a flat box version.  The
game's subject was rare for the time: a modern naval war for control of
the Eastern Med between NATO and Soviet forces in the late seventies.
It made some strange design assumptions for the subject that had very
little relation to any recognizable naval tactics/strategies of the time.
Essentially, it seemed to graft a generic SPI approach to operational level
design for land games onto its subject.   It still is an entertaining game for
some and with a little tweaking, can be made even better.

Scale is just about equivalent to VG's later 'Fleet' series: turn is eight
hours and a hex is 45.4 miles.  Units represent individual ships for
cruiser-and carrier-types; three ships for DD and SS; six ships for DE;
twelve planes for a/c.  Each player uses his turn to Fight/Move.  ZOCs
are rigid and locking (except for a/c). Combat is mandatory between at
least one opposing units which have combat values that affect each
other.  The differential CRT is bloodless.  Electronic warfare is taken into
account by cross-referencing the differential column with the strongest
defending unit's ECM value, with a die roll needing to be less than or
equal to the result to force a one-hex retreat. Units defending in
restricted waters are doubled.  A unit unable to retreat is eliminated.  if a
unit is unable to get at least a zero differential for an attack, it is
eliminated instead. A/c required to retreat are eliminated instead.  Victory
is based on killing enemy units with the Sov. player gaining bonuses for
clearing the Aegean and Eastern Med and isolating Israel.  While I've just
reacquired this game, in many playings over the years I've found it pretty
difficult for the Soviets to win.

The retreat-based CRT is based on the designer's presumption that units
would retreat when overmatched.   Without any detection requirements
(a ka Fleet games), this is a difficult assumption to justify.  The designer
suggest players use the doubling effect of restricted (mainly coastal)
waters to manuever as to force enemy units to be unable to get a zero
differential in attacks (and thus be eliminated).  In play, this has the
bizarre effect of enemy units seeming to "bounce" off defending units
and be destroyed.  At the time, the Fight/Move sequence of play took
much getting used to...it let one exploit good combats but allowed the
enemy to battle you first before your attacks of the next turn.  This can
have an especially negative effect on your powerful but fragile (can't
retreat) air units.   One ends up creating solid "front lines" of units to
push back enemy units and avoid their slipping past to block a retreat.

The scenarios are somewhat interesting....the first one is 10 game turns;
then expanded to 21 with Black Sea, FR and Brit reinforcements.  The
Soviets are outclassed and outnumbered in the air and at sea.  Optional
rules can unbalance the game in the other direction...taking out one or
two of the US CV s, allowing the violation of Yugo/Albanian airspace,
adding the IS air force and Sov air forces in Egypt & Syria.

The counter mix is fun: Saratoga, America, and the French
Clemenceau.....a Kiev and Minsk....lots of Phantoms, F104s, Greeks,
Turks....I've refought Greco-Turk wars over Cyprus as alternate hist. and
IS airstrikes against Egypt/Syria.

Next: what's really wrong with the game and how you can fix it.

Doug Murphy