the problem is that the combat tables already take into acount the realtive sizes of the fleets, i.e. 25% of 20 ships is more than 25% of 10 ships, so the +1 for superior numbers should not apply as superior numbers is already accounted for.
Dancing Bear, how so? 15.5 Naval Combat Table does not account for relative fleet size. If you take Britain out of the equation completely and consider all other naval combats, the +1 random number modifier for having 1.5 times more heavy ships seems reasonable enough. A British fleet still retains its +1 bonus and if Nelson is present then there is additional bonus. These are modifiers for the random number roll remember. The actual % loss result is random, and of course a % loss for a larger fleet is going to be larger but that's not the point. It's the modifier for the random number roll that the bonuses/penalties are for. I hear what you're saying but question how often this is a genuine problem for a British player, and if it is a problem why the fleet numbers were allowed to get so out of whack in the first place. Britain retains a natural superiority, obviously, but why shouldn't this be subject to change during a campaign game??
Finally, for the purists, only GB gets +1 in the original game, as per the rules.
And since we can fix it with playing with light ships only, it does not require intervention from the Marshall, so it is up to the players in the particular game.
I'm not arguing per se, just trying to draw out some key points. The +1 modifier for 1.5 times heavy ships could be a game option? Playing with light ships only may be a work-around at present using the editor, but if Marshall reworks the PP losses to be 1pp for heavy fleets and 1/2pp for light fleets, then that would not be consistent with the original game. Better to have a solid set of consistent rules for either classic EiA or EiH OOBs, where either heavies only would play out as in the original game or heavies/lights could play out equally well. That should be the objective, yes?