Hypothetical Ships in a Supplement?

[vitalis6969]

Ships like the Graf Zepplin I can just about cope with but we will be in danger of having H44 class super battleships that were never really going to be built :/

So don't use them and let others play the game how they want to play. Pretty simple, really...

-V

 

[juggler69uk]

Its also pretty simple to fill the gaps in reality with this supplement and have another supplement (or Articles in S&P) for the What ifs, Rather than wait even longer for a never ending list.

I mean the list of actual built ships that are missing from the current book is pretty large, so where do you stop with hypotheticals

 

[vitalis6969]

I mean the list of actual built ships that are missing from the current book is pretty large, so where do you stop with hypotheticals

Well, the German H ships are already done and in S&P, so no reason for them. Literally, how many others are there? The U.S. had a few that were never built, there is the Super Yamato, England, France and Italy prolly had a few that were never done. Hardly enough to hold up a supplement really.

I think the whole "holding up the supplement" is kind of a hollow argument. Personally I would rather buy one book than two and I really don't thing the Hypotheticals are going to take up that much room. Heck, even if they did, at least Germany would have something in the new supplement as well as Italy and France. Except of course the one single page it will take for Italy's aircraft.

I just want to make sure whether or not this is a actual room/space thing about the new supplement or just a grognard rant-fest.

-V

 

[Aramanthus]

I voted. I'm very interested in seeing ship done. Even those that were only in the most basic format at the time of the wars end.

By the way could someone please place some sort of link for the Lion and Malta class. I've been through several source books at home and have only the most basic info on these two classes.

 

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

I mean the list of actual built ships that are missing from the current book is pretty large, so where do you stop with hypotheticals

Well, the German H ships are already done and in S&P, so no reason for them. Literally, how many others are there? The U.S. had a few that were never built, there is the Super Yamato, England, France and Italy prolly had a few that were never done. Hardly enough to hold up a supplement really.

I think the whole "holding up the supplement" is kind of a hollow argument. Personally I would rather buy one book than two and I really don't thing the Hypotheticals are going to take up that much room. Heck, even if they did, at least Germany would have something in the new supplement as well as Italy and France. Except of course the one single page it will take for Italy's aircraft.

I just want to make sure whether or not this is a actual room/space thing about the new supplement or just a grognard rant-fest.

-V

Actually, the missing, existing, list of italian ships is rather big, and larger then `a single page of aircraft`:

* the 5 `groups` of Condotieri light cruiser class
* Soldati DD`s (heavier then Navigatori, more the size of Fletchers etc)
* Bari and Taranto, light `exploration` class cruisers
* the Aquila (and if the `in building` stages counts, Sparviro)
* Conte di Cavour battleships
* Attila Regolo light cruisers (VERY light cruisers as they where mostly used as destroyer squadron leaders)
* Turbine DD`s
* Ciclone DE`s
* 7 more classes of submarines, most heavier then the now included coastal subs of the Adua class
* ...

The problem with the `what of`s` and `just dont use em then` is you can`t prohibit players in a friendly pick up to use a fleet full of super Bismarcks etc etc (not to mention the horror experience of tournaments) and would widely open the shism between `historic players` and `a game with boats players`.

 

[vitalis6969]

The problem with the `what of`s` and `just dont use em then` is you can`t prohibit players in a friendly pick up to use a fleet full of super Bismarcks etc etc (not to mention the horror experience of tournaments) and would widely open the shism between `historic players` and `a game with boats players`.

It's real easy, don't play the game or set a "operational" date for the game. I guess I am spoiled because I have a regular group of players that I wargame with and we don't go to gaming stores for a game against a stranger.

And there already is a huge schism between grognards and casual players... :roll: Unfortunately...

BTW, thank you (seriously) for the list of Italian vessels that haven't been done yet. Gives me something new to look up and read about.

-V

 

[juggler69uk]

......The problem with the `what of`s` and `just dont use em then` is you can`t prohibit players in a friendly pick up to use a fleet full of super Bismarcks etc etc (not to mention the horror experience of tournaments) and would widely open the shism between `historic players` and `a game with boats players`.

Well said, It also promotes the old saying of "Its in the rules so Im having it"

 

[vitalis6969]

Well said, It also promotes the old saying of "Its in the rules so Im having it"

Right, but taking a fleet full of Iowa classes is ok because they were actually in the war... Despite the fact that they were a 1944 ship its perfectly fine to smash the bejeesus out of a bunch of 1930's era ships because they were both in the war...

I'm not buying it. If someone doesn't like the non-deployed ships, don't use them. Or use the actual deployment dates. It's as simple as that. No one is forcing you to play a game you don't want to play so you don't have to fear that flotilla of "super bismarcks"...

-V

 

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

@ Vitalis69

* no probby on the list, our fleet was bigger then most think , and FAR better then how it is imagined (third most modern fleet in the world at the start of WW2). But then ever since that `little conflict` italians are generally seen as `non warriors`. It was a real crusade to find rules and figures for the GHQ 6mm modern game of italians, even though after the US and the UK they are the third largest NATO participant in modern conflicts.

* I am in a regular club as well, so it aint a problem on `historically correct` vessels, BUT it is for that new guy that wants to join in and can`t find an opponent due to no-one wanting to play those things.

I think personally (and people will shoot me for this) for this kind of games (aka, lets call em generally Historics) its up to the grognards to `sensible` the what I call warhammer generation to get away from the idea that `bigger is better I can use them I will use them to bad for you` mentality and learn to live with the fact that some nations (races) WHERE much less `good` then others in the war, and you just have to do your best a lot harder to pull something off.

An example from another game, FoW, where i surprisingly also field the italians (and rule the campagne lol). Technically, a Fucilieri company can field both the Lancia do 90 (a truck with the italian `acht acht` cannon on it) and the Semovente 90/53 (an spg with the same cannon). Historically however, the semo was present in Sicily as the only tank support with the old renault r-35, while the Lancia fought in northern africa.
They haven`t been on the same battlefield together...

Being a `purist`, `grognard`, `greybeard` or other similar type, I personally never field those (and as the ONLY italian in our group I guard the correctness of the regio escrito) BUT a local tournament in a store here, the winner was a player who, in my eyes` abused the list by fielding the minimum needed amount of fucilieri (large, cheap infantry in that gamesystem) combined with the most powerful guns, at`s and such he could `ruleswise` lay his hands on.

I`m not saying every game needs to be correct in the details, as what fun would a wargame be if you knew the result of the war in front, BUT a little general awareness of available material and a step away from the big and better things would be a great step forward to a more enjoyable, less competing atmosphere as you find to much in players lately.

Just my 2 cents

 

[juggler69uk]

@ Vitalis

Personally I would not field more in a class than were actually built, So Iowa's = 4, Hood = 1 etc etc. If that means I lose but enjoy the game thats fine.

What I would not like, and could not forsee enjoying, is having to play agains a fleet of Uber ships that never where, Just because they are included in the book.

And before you say anything about refusing to play, I would not turn down anyone for a game if they asked me to, even if and after me saying yes they produced the aforementioned fleet.

Dont get me wrong Im not saying there is no place in the Hobby for these "in the mind of the designer" ships, I just dont feel they should be in the "main rules" or "historical supplement" without some sort of stipulation that they must be agreed on by the opponent before being used in a fleet

 

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

@ Vitalis

Personally I would not field more in a class than were actually built, So Iowa's = 4, Hood = 1 etc etc. If that means I lose but enjoy the game thats fine.

Isn`t that a rule already? If not, it actually should be then, but i believe I saw something along those lines in the VaS rulebook.

 

[vitalis6969]

Dont get me wrong Im not saying there is no place in the Hobby for these "in the mind of the designer" ships, I just dont feel they should be in the "main rules" or "historical supplement" without some sort of stipulation that they must be agreed on by the opponent before being used in a fleet

I can appreciate your position on this, it is actually pretty close to my own. Except where they show up. I think they should be in a supplement, but yeah, used in "agreed upon" games.

I field H-39s in our group without a problem as my main opponent plays an American fleet and there is just no comparison between the US fleet and the Kriegsmarine historically. He wants to use his Iowa's (he LOVES those things) so we agreed that I get access to the H-39s. Actually, he said he didn't care what BBs of the H series that I use, but I won't use the other personally since they were total pipe dreams.

-V

 

[vitalis6969]

Isn`t that a rule already? If not, it actually should be then, but i believe I saw something along those lines in the VaS rulebook.

Nope, not at all. There is no force constraints at all for pickup games except to stick to the fleet allocation points. In a 8 point War level game you could field 8 Iowas if you wanted to...

-V

Personally, what I think we need is a TO&E or some type of regimented task force list. I think that would work better than prohibiting the paper ships from being included.

 

[juggler69uk]

@ Vitalis
Personally I would not field more in a class than were actually built, So Iowa's = 4, Hood = 1 etc etc. If that means I lose but enjoy the game thats fine.

Isn`t that a rule already? If not, it actually should be then, but i believe I saw something along those lines in the VaS rulebook.

I dont think it is, But there is something about in service dates.

Perhaps the answer is to set the In service date for "what if" ships to after the war finished, and have the rules state something like " If not agreed prior to starting, the date for the battle is... (day before in service for what ifs)"

 

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

Foudn it what I mistaked, under the heading `ship names` but it states `this is not a requirement`...

Well anyways, around here it is, always has been, and always will be. And those blokes in the office better make it a rule or I`ll pound the Mongoose office to pulp with the 15inchers of my personal yacht, the `Vittorio Veneto`

 

[jfox61]

The gist of the question was, I believe, should we use these ships in a supplement or not. Well I don't own any what if, hypothetical or almost built ships. I have no interest in them. But the answer to the question I believe is supplement size related. How many pages will it be. If it is a comprehensive listing of all in service ships and there is space for hypotheticals then by all means yes include them. I wouldn't use them myself but some people would and you can't discriminate the '46' wargamers amongst us just because you don't think it is historically correct. But I think it is important that Mongoose research the manufacturers out there and at least make sure they include stats for all available minis before including hypos you can't even get minis for.

 

[Taellik]

Prefer the supplement have what was present & available than the
what-if's. Signs & Portents alrady has done the German what-ifs so that
venue would be better for publishing that kind of content.

Keep the supplement reality-based with what as present during the appropriate era of hostilites.

 

[Swan]

I think it also matters as to how the players are using the VaS rules. If you are trying to recreate battles from history and play them out then "wha-ifs" have no place. If you are running the campaign rules then "what-ifs" come in real handy. The French are a good example, since they were out of the war fairly early and never had a chance to expand their fleets.

We are currently playing a campaign, and for this first one we are limitted to ships that are in the main rule book and any ships from S&P that were actually built (no German Z Plan). I am hoping for the next campaign to open the build rules to include all ships that were planned, but place year in service restrictions and have an actual time allocation placed on each turn.

 

[DMarcus]

If the supplement contains a comprehensive listing of all in-service ships and there is space for hypotheticals then by all means yes include them. I would include the ones that are most likely to have been built first and only include the more outlandish ideas if there is space left.

Just my 2-cents...

 

[Chernobyl]

I think for a full fledged supplement, it should be left to ships that were built.
What-ifs and other types of ships not completed or built should be left to smaller releases - like an article in S&P.

I think limiting number of ships to numbers built is a good idea also - the above 8xIowa class is pretty over the top. I seem to remember a french carrier that like every weapon type out there (torpedoes!!) but there was only 1 built.

Something worth looking for those who desire more detail is to look into the refits some ship aquired over the war. upgrades to AA, torpedoes, fire control, whatever...in service dates become another factor.

Chern