Brooklin Class Cruiser and Japanesse slow loading topedoes

[Joe_Dracos]

I recently rand a demo using a german, Japanesse, British and American cruiser force. The only raid level cruiser available to the USN is the Brooklyn. It doesn't have any torpedoes (which seems to be a constant in US cruisers) buit the most important factor seems to be the fact that it only has 6" guns, which makes them weak. 6" guns being weak is not the issue however, its the fact that the Brooklyn is a Raid level ship.

I found that it did not preform well enough to be classified as a riad level ship. It is not capable of dealing enough damage to another ship. Even with both cruisers pounding on an Admiral hipper they failed to do enough damage to sink it. I would suggest that maybe the Brooklyn should be reduced to a Skirmish level ship and either the Cleavland or Northampton class cruiser replace it. Though none of the above USN ships have torpedoes the Cleveland and Northampton have 8" guns, which means they can cause criticals.

Also there seems to be an inconsistancy with the way the Slow-loading Torpedo trait is treated with the Japanese ships. The Kagero is a Skirmish level ship. The light and heavy cruisers with the same trait on there Torpedo tubes should be bumped up a Priority level. The mogami and Takao both have the Gunnery strength to justify this in my opinion.

ANybody else have Opinions on this matter?

 

[Burger]

You're right, the Brooklyn is not worthy of being a Raid ship. Sometimes I think the ships were assigned their PL by random number generation. It is out-classed by many Skirmish ships, for example Aoba, Algerie, Chapaev, Trento, Leander, Perth........

The best solution is to go to a points-based system, since ships can't be arbitrarily tweaked for balance, because of historical accuracy.

 

[Joe_Dracos]

I wouldn't necessarily say that, I think that it just needs to be bumped down a priority level.

 

[Burger]

In the case of the Brooklyn, yes I'd agree moving it to Skirmish would be a much better fit. But I'm talking about the bigger picture. There are many, many ships which are not good enough for their PL, but too good for the PL below... or, too good for their PL but not good enough for the PL above. The PL system just doesn't fit in with a game based on historical accuracy.

 

[Soulmage]

See my other post on the poll forum. A points system wouldn't help anything. We just need a PL system with more levels to it.

 

[Burger]

A PL system with lkots of levels, is a points system...

 

[Jammybee]

No way should it be bumped down, it is a heavy cruiser, its murder to Destroyers with that many Twin-linked shots and radar. My last game my friend took 3 in a squadron and consistently mowed down my destroyers while having decent AA defense.

 

[Joe_Dracos]

Actually, historically it was a light cruiser

Heavy cruisers of that era had 8" guns.

3 of them mowing down a destroyer force is to be expected not to mention that most destroyers are not Skirmish. Try matching them up against cruisers, you'll see a different whole different battle there (or your friend won't take them).

 

[E Nicely]

The Brooklyn is a Raid level ship. The quantity of the turrets (even if they are Weak) Twin Linked, and Damage/Crew qualify it at that level. 5 Twin Linked turrets is formidable. You're trading crits for more shots to hit the target.

 

[Chernobyl]

I'd classify it as a srceening vessel...its really only good against enemy destroyers (high target, low armor). Don't use it against capital ships and you won't be dissapointed with its performance. I think its worth slightly more than skirmish, but it is a "niche" ship for sure.

Chern

 

[DM]

Don't use it against capital ships and you won't be dissapointed with its performance.

Good advice - last time I played with a Brooklyn (using GQ2) I ran into a couple of Japanese BBs (including the Nagato) during a Guadalcanal campaign. It wasn't pretty!!

 

[Burger]

The Brooklyn is a Raid level ship. The quantity of the turrets (even if they are Weak) Twin Linked, and Damage/Crew qualify it at that level. 5 Twin Linked turrets is formidable. You're trading crits for more shots to hit the target.

There are Skirmish ships with almost as many guns, and they are not Weak. Your arguement holds no water whatsoever. As I have already mentioned, see the Algerie, Trento, Aoba, York, Pensacola, Chapaev..... I'd take 8 non-Weak guns over 5 Weak ones any day.

It sometimes seems like some people don't even read threads before replying!

 

[Myrm]

A PL system with lkots of levels, is a points system...

Not quite - a points sytem is linear, with supposedly X points can fight X points. Now as a long time SFB player, which has an exquisitely sensitive points value system, I can tell you that a points system that generates a single power value doesnt take a lot of things into account and breaks down on certain points (and extreme example in that game is take a B10 up against an equal number of points of light escorts). Points are the King of smaller, even battles, though (IMO of course).

While the ability to discriminate between ships of moderately similar ability is vastly more sensitive in points systems and you avoid such things as the Yamato vs another 'equal PL costed BB that will die horribly' the PL introduces a non-linear scaling for the smaller ships that has a vital (again IMO) place, it includes recognition that you have breakpoints in design of range, specialisation etc that a linear system wont cope with and scales in additional ships to cope with inevitable losses.

Personally I think either approach will have problems and if you ditch one system for another you will get complaints about the new system where it happens to break down. I guess the question is what style of play generates less complaints, although ideally Id prefer to see some combination of points and PL while avoiding falling into an 'Army list' trap.

God knows how to do it though....

And to the original point, IMO (and based on limited experience) the Brooklyn was handy in a decent size fleet where it sees mixed oppo, but it breaks down in small battles where it faces its counter (hmmm, thats a cut down version of the entire post really...). For my next trick this newbie will play a carrier battle and get involved in that argument

Scenarios, scenarios scenarios

Tim

 

[Reaverman]

No way should it be bumped down, it is a heavy cruiser, its murder to Destroyers with that many Twin-linked shots and radar. My last game my friend took 3 in a squadron and consistently mowed down my destroyers while having decent AA defense.

The York Class is a heavy Cruiser and its Skirmish too

 

[Reaverman]

The Brooklyn is a Raid level ship. The quantity of the turrets (even if they are Weak) Twin Linked, and Damage/Crew qualify it at that level. 5 Twin Linked turrets is formidable. You're trading crits for more shots to hit the target.

There are Skirmish ships with almost as many guns, and they are not Weak. Your arguement holds no water whatsoever. As I have already mentioned, see the Algerie, Trento, Aoba, York, Pensacola, Chapaev..... I'd take 8 non-Weak guns over 5 Weak ones any day.

Just to reiterate Burgers comments:

Brooklyn

Here are some of the other ships, for comparison.

Algerie

Aoba

New Orleans

Penasacola

Trento

It sometimes seems like some people don't even read threads before replying!

Or play test even....ooops! :twisted:

 

[Joe_Dracos]

yeah, some of those 8" cruisers with 4 turrets and torpedos (one shot or not) should be raid level. The pensacola would make a better raid level ship then the brooklyn.

As far as play testing goes.... I think we're it

 

[Myrm]

Just as a side question, so far the focus is entirely on the guns of these ships for comparison.

How do the other features such as armour, target, speed etc line up and are these sufficent to explain any of the above ships being lower grade? Not got the rulebook here to check...

 

[Burger]

How do the other features such as armour, target, speed etc line up and are these sufficent to explain any of the above ships being lower grade? Not got the rulebook here to check...

Most are target 5+, armour 3+. So, exactly the same as the Booklyn.
You can see the stats on my ship viewer, see sig.

 

[Reaverman]

Just as a side question, so far the focus is entirely on the guns of these ships for comparison.

How do the other features such as armour, target, speed etc line up and are these sufficent to explain any of the above ships being lower grade? Not got the rulebook here to check...

With exception of the Algerie, they are virtually identical. 7" Movement, Target 5, Armour 3. The Algerie is Movement 6", Target 5, Armour 3. Similar Damage levels, and crew too. So as you can see, if you had 1 raid point aside. The USN deploys a Brooklyn, whils the IJN deploys 2 Aoba's, and sends the Brooklyn to a Briney grave!

 

[DM]

I crunched some probabilities of scoring hits to inform the debate:

AD4 ship, normal turrets, probabilty of scoring X hits on a 5+ target(rounded)

0 hits - 20
1 hit - 40
2 hits - 30
3 hits - 10
4 hits - 0

Average number of hits - 1.33

AD5 ship, twin linked turrets, probabilty of scoring X hits on d 5+ target(rounded)

0 hits - 2
1 hit - 11
2 hits - 27
3 hits - 34
4 hits - 21
5 hits - 5

Average number of hits - 2.77

On average the Brooklyn hits more that twice as often as the "Treaty" 8" gun cruisers with 4 twin turrets and its bigger, so it lasts longer.

Of course the above doesn't take account of Criticals (which the Broklyn wouldn't get unless you "house ruled" it).