Brooklin Class Cruiser and Japanesse slow loading topedoes

[emperorpenguin]

What I fail to understand is the people who continue to believe a points system would be a panacea.
All of GW's games, Full Thrust, Rackham's, SST etc are dogged by constant complaints over points values.

It's not whether a PL system works in historicals or not (warhammer historical and flames of war have points value problems after all), it's a case of making sure everything is balanced

 

[captainsmirk]

I guess the idea is that because these ships are all historical they can't have their stats fudged to fit a particular PL like ships in ACtA can.

A points system won't make any more balanced in its self, just make it easier to actually balance. This is not because the points systems are better just more flexible when your stats are inflexible...


Nick

 

[Joe_Dracos]

I don't think they are perfectly historical anyway. besides its a game, not a history film.

 

[captainsmirk]

But people expect some form of historical accuracy, which means that you can''t make the Hood, the Bismark, the Yamato and the Iowa equal, you just can't, yet they all fall into the same PL.

The system as is works fine for Historical scenarios (if there was ever a truely balanced battle in history i'll eat my hat...) and friendly games, but if people want tournaments and competitive games it causes problems.


Nick

 

[E Nicely]

As PL, you prove to me the PL system works in a Historical game. If you can, which I doubt you will, then I will put my hands up and say you are right.

Every fleet that I build is balanced against any other fleet that is built by someone who has more than say, 2 games under their belt. The priority level system evens out when you take several ships (you know, like a fleet). Every game I play is a fair fight whether I'm playing IJN or USN, the 2 fleets I have models for, it would be the same if I was playing KM or RN, or the French. My group of units vs. another group of units, both built with fleet allocation points in a game that simulates naval WWII combat. Everyone I play VaS with wants to play again too. Seems like the PL sytem works in this historical game to me.

Thats anecdotal evidence, not facts Uhlan. The game has been geared to let players of different fleets, play campaigns or tourney's. Currently, you are going to find if you ran a VAS tourney/campaign. It would be a US/IJ pacific fleet tourney/campaign, or a North Atlantic Tourney/Campaign. Deviate from those factors, and you get an inbalance. The RN, are going to have a hard time against the IJN, especially of the Yamato rolls out, the RN fleet would not cope. Then there are the Aoba cruisers, which can dominate a battle too. All I am pointing out, is that the whole system needs some sort of balance for players who want campaign, or tourney.

I'll bet in a few days, maybe a week, someone else will bring the whole issue again.

I really doubt you've played a campaign of talked to many people that have. Your conclusions are anecdotal, not facts. Have you played your first game yet? Your fourth game? Does number cruching take the place of playing games over there?


You're looking at all of this like it's 1 on 1 ship combat. This game would balance more, not less in a campiagn. If any player took his 10 points at Battle and bought 5 Yamatos he's going to get smoked. Even if 2-3 Yamatos were in a campaign fleet vs. a KM player (for instance) who bought a good balanced fleet the KM player will take it if he knows how to play his fleet. Range, fire arcs, stuff like that.

You're bringing the Aoba up like its some super ship. It's not, it has 10 damage. It sinks fast. Anyone that knows how to play will take them out before they can get 2 torpedo salvoes off. An equal number of Pensacolas or German subs will finish them. And before anyone says 'No subs" a German player would be a fool not to use them. Even Trentos and Zaras are a match for them. They're fragile. Play range effectively and you'll beat them.


Captainsmirk:

But people expect some form of historical accuracy, which means that you can''t make the Hood, the Bismark, the Yamato and the Iowa equal, you just can't, yet they all fall into the same PL.

You do have a point, Colorado or Hood shouldn't be in the same class with Yamato. If a US player takes Colrados in a non historical scenario vs. any other fleet he doesn't know what he's doing anyway. If you want historical accuracy the Yamato would never fight Hood or Bismarck. As far as tourneys go no one has played one yet AFAIK. The IJN isn't the super fleet people are saying they are. If a tourney was Raid:5 I would put my money on the Germans. But it would be even with experienced players.

. The Brooklyn would preform well enough as a Skirmish ship, but as a Raid level ship she is totally inadiquate.

You're right. And that is unfortunate since it's listed at Raid.The Brit list has problems at Raid too.

 

[Court Jester]

Aye... British Raid Level Cruisers are all equal generally to the USN skirmish level cruisers...

 

[E Nicely]

^The RN Heavy Cruisers have torpedoes. Even if they are one shot that might make them a little better than the USN equivilents.

 

[Court Jester]

I don't think that quite makes up for it but it does seem that Torps are highly valued and really do bump up ship PL's

 

[E Nicely]

It doesn't make up for them being weak at Raid. It does make the RN ships a little better. Torpedo spreads sink ships.

 

[BuShips]

(if there was ever a truely balanced battle in history i'll eat my hat...)
Nick

Um, let me offer you the Battle of Cape St. George (November 26, 1943). I'm planning a write-up for S&P:

Five USN DDs against five IJN DDs (but I'll let you keep your hat on your head instead of in your stomach, heh). :wink:

The Battle of Cape Saint George was the last surface engagement of the Solomons campaign. In this action an American destroyer force ambushed and partially destroyed a Japanese force of identical composition and size returning from a Tokyo Express run to Buka Island. Halsey ordered DesRon 23, Capitan A. Burke, consisting of DesDiv 45, Charles Ausburne, flag, Claxton and Dyson and DesDiv 46, Captain Austin on Spence and Converse north to patrol the evacuation route in the strait between Buka and New Ireland. All of the US ships were of the Fletcher class of destroyer.

The Japanese evacuation force consisted of Onami and Makinami. They were modern boats of the Yugumo class launched in 1942 and 1941 respectively. Amagiri and Yugiri were older boats of the Fubuki class, but were solid ships. Uzuki, a Mutsuki class boat launched in 1925 had been converted, much like the old American four-stacker destroyers, into a fast destroyer-transport. Although not having as powerful a gun armament as the others, it did have an equalizer- six 24” torpedo tubes (you know the kind, lol). :wink:

Anyway, it is a perfect scenario for a 5-on-5 ship duel of DDs all around. Historically, the famous DesRon 23 "Little Beavers" was the only destroyer squadron to receive a Presidential Unit Citation. Due to communications which led up to the Battle of Cape St. George, Arleigh Burke was tagged with the famous nickname of "31-Knot" Burke. Stirring history to read as well as also a great balanced gaming scenario to play!

For a brief comment on the Brooklyn, there should be some allowance calculated that gives proper respect that those 6" guns were a fast-firing design. Some Japanese historical comments on that class of ship claimed they were using 6" machine guns! :shock:

 

[captainsmirk]

I knew I was going to regret that statement...

However I still doubt it was completely balanced...

That's my story and I'm sticking to it


Nick

 

[BuShips]

I knew I was going to regret that statement...

However I still doubt it was completely balanced...

That's my story and I'm sticking to it


Nick

True, the Americans by this time had learned the lessons that were taught at high cost to them and reversed the tables, using night stealth by staying close to shore (defeating enemy radar by blending into the coastline) and by holding fire with guns until their torpedoes began hitting the enemy ships. Of course, in a game the Japanese player will know the location of the other player's ships so it could be considered an equal fight to start with. So, would you like any mustard to go with that hat? It might help the flavor (or flavour) some. :wink:

 

[Reaverman]

I really doubt you've played a campaign of talked to many people that have. Your conclusions are anecdotal, not facts. Have you played your first game yet? Your fourth game? Does number cruching take the place of playing games over there?


You're looking at all of this like it's 1 on 1 ship combat. This game would balance more, not less in a campiagn. If any player took his 10 points at Battle and bought 5 Yamatos he's going to get smoked. Even if 2-3 Yamatos were in a campaign fleet vs. a KM player (for instance) who bought a good balanced fleet the KM player will take it if he knows how to play his fleet. Range, fire arcs, stuff like that.

You're bringing the Aoba up like its some super ship. It's not, it has 10 damage. It sinks fast. Anyone that knows how to play will take them out before they can get 2 torpedo salvoes off. An equal number of Pensacolas or German subs will finish them. And before anyone says 'No subs" a German player would be a fool not to use them. Even Trentos and Zaras are a match for them. They're fragile. Play range effectively and you'll beat them.

Kind of gets under your skin doesn't it, somebody who will not agree with you, or have a different point of view. So far you've done nothing to convince me, and being condescending not going to win me over either.

 

[DM]

I've been writing naval wargaming rules for many, many years now. I've never included a points system in any of them. I've been asked afew times to think about it but resisted.

This current discussion has just reminded me why!

 

[E Nicely]

Kind of gets under your skin doesn't it, somebody who will not agree with you, or have a different point of view. So far you've done nothing to convince me, and being condescending not going to win me over either.

So you've never played but you'll try to be authoritative anyway. Got it.

You're giving yourself too much credit if you think you're getting under my skin and I have no desire to win you over to anything. Your posts show an inaccurate veiw of how the system works.

 

[Reaverman]

Kind of gets under your skin doesn't it, somebody who will not agree with you, or have a different point of view. So far you've done nothing to convince me, and being condescending not going to win me over either.

So you've never played but you'll try to be authoritative anyway. Got it.

You're giving yourself too much credit if you think you're getting under my skin and I have no desire to win you over to anything. Your posts show an inaccurate veiw of how the system works.

Yes I have played, and yes its an 'Inaccurate view' held by many on here!

 

[Joe_Dracos]

Well you've never played huh? Well I would highly suggest you do. Looking at the rules for a ship and prejudging them without putting a model (or counter) down on the table and giving a toss of the dice is unfair. I have learned through my many times looking at a units stats in a wargame and trying to "guess" how that unit is going to leave you with a negative view of the game in general. I've seen the Brooklyn in action.

As for the british light cruisers that are Raid level ships (anything with a 6" gun) I am personally verey fond of them. The HMS Belfast has been included in every list I form. Those Torpedos do wonders for its performance.

As for balancing issues, Ravenman, your right, we can't adjust the ships (like say adding torpedoes to the Brooklyn) to a point that would make them ahistorical. We can not add guns, give them torpedos, or battlecruiser style armour (4+).

However, any numbers (such as AD, DD, Damage, Crew) is simply an interpretation of how the ship preforms within the game. We can simply adjust the interpretation. So we could reduce the brooklyns damage and crew scores by say 4 (more for the crew) and then put it in the Skirmish priority level.

Since there is nolonger any working versions of these ships anymore, who is to say our interpretation is wrong.

 

[Joe_Dracos]

You posted at the slightly before I did Raven man, ignore anything saying you should play.

I appologize.

 

[BuShips]

Since there is nolonger any working versions of these ships anymore, who is to say our interpretation is wrong.

As for me, I wouldn't be too thrilled at seeing a ship in the game weakened just to make it fit better in a different category. That is the road to science fiction. Yes, it's a game and all, but I don't want people to get history wrong in what a ship might be able to accomplish with what it was given. I'm not joining the debate on points versus priority, but only commenting on this particular ship design. If you want to know the reason that there are no examples of the Brooklyns, ask the British. They accurately considered the threat potential of what an operational Brooklyn class cruiser might do to Commonwealth ships, and sank the last example with extreme prejudice. Another experienced opinion of the capabilities of the Brooklyns would be from the Japanese who saw the wrong end of the fifteen 6" rapid fire guns she packed. A quote I plucked from the net just now says: "Helena began blasting away with a fire so rapid and intense that the Japanese later announced in all solemnity that she must have been armed with 6-inch machine guns." :shock: It looks to be a case of "danged if you do, danged if you don't" trying for across-the-board balance. If anything, I could argue that the ship isn't represented in the game as strong as it really historically was :roll:. While it's accurate to keep the 6" guns as non-armor piercing or "weak", the high rate of fire that those guns had should be modelled into the ship stats. DM already stated that the guns do better at hitting already, but I'd like even a game as "simple" as VaS to respect what those guns could do. If say an "average" 8-inch gun could fire about three rounds per minute and a CA had nine of these, we are then using a base reference of 9(guns)x3(rpm)=27rpm for a typical US 8" 'heavy' cruiser. The projectile weight was anywhere from an older 260lbs. up to a super heavy 335lbs., so we'll average the 8" projectile to 300lbs. 27rpm at 300lbs. = 8100lbs. Now take the 6"/47 Mark 16 fire into perspective and 15 guns firing 10rpm (some references state 12rpm!) and you get a rate of fire for a Brooklyn class 'light' cruiser of 150 rounds per minute :shock: . Compared to the 8" gun's ROF (rate of fire) the 6"/47 is over 550% more efficient. You need to now correct for relative projectile weight, between 105lbs. and 300lbs. (avg.), but the total throw weight of the 6" gun is still nearly double that of a slower-firing 8" gun (15,750lbs.). As it has been stated, these ships are destroyer-killers already in the game, and based upon my previous data should be left in the Raid level. I might even throw in that their AD should be raised to 2 for each 6" mount to reflect the high rate of fire of 150rpm these ships can put out. I'm not picking on you Joe, but you just said something not glamorous enough for my favorite warship, lol.

 

[BuShips]

Rather than edit the above, I'll add this quick comment. I'm not really having a problem with the general concensus that 6" weak ships (especially without torps) probably don't fit well in Raid level, but that ship (especially with the bumped-up stats that I suggested) would be too 'good' for Skirmish (sigh). Maybe the solution for Joe's original issue would be to add more US cruiser designs to the fleet lists, and what a segway for Mongoose that last comment would be for a new book, lol. At the very least, have them toss in new ships into S&P to fill the missing 8" cruisers Joe wants at the US Raid level (Baltimore class CA, anyone???) :idea:. This would correct for at least one-half of Joe's thread question, and not mess with the lists as-is. As more ships are added to the fleet lists, more options open up for players. As the game is new, I see some new things coming down the path for players. Just don't forget to have Mongoose "fix" my beloved Brooklyns (and St. Louis and Helena!) to give them the buzz-saw of (non-armor-piercing) weight of fire that they had. And as a Japanese player, I'll be sure to give those ships the due 24" type 93 sort of attention that they deserve. :wink: