Playtest Northern Patrol

[Greg Smith]

The Scharnhorst and Gneisenau vs HMS Rawalpindi.

Historically the Rawalpindi lasted 40 minutes.

In Victory at Sea the Rawalpindi didn't last a single turn. If the cruisers had turned to bring all their guns to bear, it wouldn't have been worse. There is no way it could survive 5 turns.

Historically the Rawalpinidi scored a single hit and did minor damage.

In Victory at Sea the armoured transport's guns couldn't damage the Scharnhorst even if it did get in range.

Quite frankly this was an utterly pointless scenario. But then the battle was pointless too.

I am inclined to think Captain Kennedy incredibly brave. But then I consider the 238 men he lead to a pointless end.

 

[rbax]

The Light Gun versus Heavy Armor has always been a bit of an issue. With destroyers you at least have the threat of Torpedoes. The HMS Rawalpindi has no such option, just World War 1 era 6 inch guns supported by minimal fire control. The thing is, while a old 6-inch shell cannot possible penetrate Scharnhorst's heavily armored belt, deck, control tower and main turrets, they should still be able to damage her Light Guns, Torpedoes, and AAA. One option is as follows:

Minor Hits
While Light Guns are typically unable to penetrate heavily armored ships, scoring a hit still has the potential of causing a degree of damage. When a Damage Die fails to penetrate the armor, but the roll is 4+ (excluding AP), roll and additional d6 and consult the following chart:

DD Roll Effect
<3 No affect,
3 Search Lights destroyed
4 One floatplane is destroyed
5 AAA AD reduced by 1
6 Light Guns/Torpedo/Depth Charge AD reduced by 1 (determine randomly).

The advantage is Light Guns can now cause some damage. The disadvantage is its more rules, which complicates what is intended to be a fairly simplistic set of gunnery rules.

--- Rich

 

[Condottiere]

Just like in the Ironclad era, quick firing six inchers are meant to shoot up the superstructure, possibly setting it on fire, harassing the bridge, and knocking out rangefinders.

 

[Greg Smith]

The Light Gun versus Heavy Armor has always been a bit of an issue. With destroyers you at least have the threat of Torpedoes. The HMS Rawalpindi has no such option, just World War 1 era 6 inch guns supported by minimal fire control. The thing is, while a old 6-inch shell cannot possible penetrate Scharnhorst's heavily armored belt, deck, control tower and main turrets, they should still be able to damage her Light Guns, Torpedoes, and AAA. One option is as follows:

Minor Hits
While Light Guns are typically unable to penetrate heavily armored ships, scoring a hit still has the potential of causing a degree of damage. When a Damage Die fails to penetrate the armor, but the roll is 4+ (excluding AP), roll and additional d6 and consult the following chart:

DD Roll Effect
<3 No affect,
3 Search Lights destroyed
4 One floatplane is destroyed
5 AAA AD reduced by 1
6 Light Guns/Torpedo/Depth Charge AD reduced by 1 (determine randomly).

The advantage is Light Guns can now cause some damage. The disadvantage is its more rules, which complicates what is intended to be a fairly simplistic set of gunnery rules.

--- Rich

There needs to be something in the game for this. The introduction of armour 7+ also renders some main guns on heavy cruisers unable to inflict damage.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Yeah, this scenario has always had a big question mark over it - we have tried a few approaches to make it work, but we have never really been satisfied. Likely not going to be in the final book...

Also, you would all be welcome to include Mr Bax's rules for Light Guns vs. Heavy Armour in your playtests. I shy away from their added complexity, but if you find they greatly benefit the game we can certainly look at adding them.