Italian Light Cruisers
- Thread starter rokassan
- Start date
on paper the italian ships rawk.
and their later condottieri's were very, very good. I might mention Harpoon. I might mention that the Italians kept the Garibaldi in service until the late sixties...
Their light cruisers were some of the best in the world and performed very well later in the war (after some early abberations!).
most of the early ones were lost due to bad luck - caught with their pants down. everyone has simelar tales, and usually more embarrasing ones.
Also, the battleships weren't bad at all. mostly let down due to bad rangefinding and faulty munitions.
and their later condottieri's were very, very good. I might mention Harpoon. I might mention that the Italians kept the Garibaldi in service until the late sixties...
Their light cruisers were some of the best in the world and performed very well later in the war (after some early abberations!).
most of the early ones were lost due to bad luck - caught with their pants down. everyone has simelar tales, and usually more embarrasing ones.
Also, the battleships weren't bad at all. mostly let down due to bad rangefinding and faulty munitions.
Thanks wishbone.......believe it or not Soul I did manage to win a couple of games against my buddy who plays the Brits with my useless Italians. Amazing huh? The last Condottieri Cruiser was decommissioned in 1976 after decades of quality service. Not bad for those stupid Italians.
Soulmage
Mongoose
I don't believe it.
LOL! J/k!
I got stuck with a couple Caio Duilio BBs, some Trento and Zara class CAs and a handful of the IMO worthless Navigatori class DDs. I was totally underwhelmed by all of them.
My perfectly orchestrated and executed destroyer torpedo attack run resulted in no significant damage, and my BBs seemed to be shooting spitballs for all the damage they were doing to the Brits.
I would have traded my entire fleet for a single Iowa or North Carolina, or South Dakota class BB! Hell. . . even a couple New Yorks would have been better!
But. . . I'm glad somebody is enjoying playing the Italians. Hopefully they will get some better ships in OOB!
LOL! J/k!
I got stuck with a couple Caio Duilio BBs, some Trento and Zara class CAs and a handful of the IMO worthless Navigatori class DDs. I was totally underwhelmed by all of them.
My perfectly orchestrated and executed destroyer torpedo attack run resulted in no significant damage, and my BBs seemed to be shooting spitballs for all the damage they were doing to the Brits.
I would have traded my entire fleet for a single Iowa or North Carolina, or South Dakota class BB! Hell. . . even a couple New Yorks would have been better!
But. . . I'm glad somebody is enjoying playing the Italians. Hopefully they will get some better ships in OOB!
unfortunately, the way VaS is set up, the Navigatoris lose their most powerful advantage over most destroyers in the Med Theatre - their 6 4.7" guns. That gives them the same firepower as any other 4 gun destroyer under the rules, and not quite enough to qualify for the 2 AD of the Tribals.
In effect, that just makes them torpedo boats without enough torpedos!!
how to fix this? take more of them.
As for the Duilios, I like them. what they lose in damage they gain in the number of guns. they're easily a match for the Queen Elizabeths out there. The trento's? no complaints from me. very fast, big guns, long range. With those I'll gladly face down most cruisers in the world. Shame about the Zaras. They come off in VaS as not quite so good as the Trentos. They should have more armour, which was the big distinction. Not much point taking them when you can take Trentos.
In effect, that just makes them torpedo boats without enough torpedos!!
how to fix this? take more of them.
As for the Duilios, I like them. what they lose in damage they gain in the number of guns. they're easily a match for the Queen Elizabeths out there. The trento's? no complaints from me. very fast, big guns, long range. With those I'll gladly face down most cruisers in the world. Shame about the Zaras. They come off in VaS as not quite so good as the Trentos. They should have more armour, which was the big distinction. Not much point taking them when you can take Trentos.
captainsmirk
Mongoose
Wishbone said:
Not surprising their both upgraded WW1-era battleships!!!
You wouldn't expect them to match up against the big new, state of the art (in battleship terms) US battleships.
The Duilios were laid down in 1912 and originally armed with 12" guns, which were bored out to 12.6" later on.
Although it is interesting that the Russians attempted to aquire Italy's battleships after their surrender but were fobbed off with HMS Royal Sovereign.
Nick
Ruski's also got the Conte di Cavour, which blew up under suspicious circumstances in the Black Sea.
In other systems I would gladly take the duilios up against more modern ships. their guns are long ranged, they're not slow ships by any means, and their armour isn't too shabby either. failing that, they do very well in a traditional battlecruiser role of hunting down cruisers.
In other systems I would gladly take the duilios up against more modern ships. their guns are long ranged, they're not slow ships by any means, and their armour isn't too shabby either. failing that, they do very well in a traditional battlecruiser role of hunting down cruisers.
Captain_Nemo
Mongoose
What I find ironic about the complaints and insults laid against the Italian ships for the game in this thread is that I usually demo with Italy vs. France in the Med.
They are very very even against each other.
My demo fleets:
Italy
BB - one Vittorio Veneto Class
CA - two Trento Class
CA - two Zara Class
DD - six Navigatori Class
France
BB - one Richelieu Class
CA - two Suffren Class
CA - two Algerie Class
DD - six La Fantasque Class
In one case I ran the Denmark Strait scenario using Richelieu and Dunkerque trying to stop Vittorio Veneto and Caio Duilio.
The French got trounced badly! Mostly due to really bad die rolls on the guy playing Richelieu though.
Anyway, I like the Italian Navy.
They are very very even against each other.
My demo fleets:
Italy
BB - one Vittorio Veneto Class
CA - two Trento Class
CA - two Zara Class
DD - six Navigatori Class
France
BB - one Richelieu Class
CA - two Suffren Class
CA - two Algerie Class
DD - six La Fantasque Class
In one case I ran the Denmark Strait scenario using Richelieu and Dunkerque trying to stop Vittorio Veneto and Caio Duilio.
The French got trounced badly! Mostly due to really bad die rolls on the guy playing Richelieu though.
Anyway, I like the Italian Navy.
Scuzzlebutt142
Mongoose
We've looked at the Italian Navy, and every conversation about their Battleships ends with "and then the destroyers get there torpedoes off".
as far as the Battleships Littorio and her sisters had a torpedo belt, but apparently because it wasnt as effective as other types they completely left it off of the ships. The belts DID work although not as well as hoped.
The Italians alway get a bum rap in any WW2 game(I play Flames of War as well...although they did their research and the Italians get their just due).. Do your research and you'll see they were better than previously thought. Most of the crap you hear is from British propaganda exaggerating defeats. Remember 70% of Rommel Afrika Korps consisted of Italian troops and equipment and they almost pushed the English into the Suez...until they ran out of supplies.
As for the Italian Navy they were well equipped and had excellent ships. They lacked fuel and aggressive commanders. That was their problem ,not their ships.
The Italians alway get a bum rap in any WW2 game(I play Flames of War as well...although they did their research and the Italians get their just due).. Do your research and you'll see they were better than previously thought. Most of the crap you hear is from British propaganda exaggerating defeats. Remember 70% of Rommel Afrika Korps consisted of Italian troops and equipment and they almost pushed the English into the Suez...until they ran out of supplies.
As for the Italian Navy they were well equipped and had excellent ships. They lacked fuel and aggressive commanders. That was their problem ,not their ships.
juggler69uk
Mongoose
Unless someone has already thought of this, at this stage it may be a tad late to add insteveburt said:
Depends what you base your research on. If you rely solely on wartime reports produced for general consumption ten you might be right. However, there are plentiful references available giving accurate technical details of Italian kit together with realistic assessments of the performance of said kit in action and, wherever possible, that is the data that a sensible author of rules and stats will use. It is what was used where possible in the derivation of stats for VAS (even to the extent of reviewing the damage reports of ships damaged at Taranto, Matapan and other actions that were drafted by the Italian Navy - which is where the poor performance of the Pugliese side protection system was noted).
