The joy of destroyers

[Myrm]

If you do that I would recommend the WRG 4 and add system or similar, as it means you are simply adding two d6 together for a figure rather than having to remember that 4=7, 5=8 etc.

For exact numbers that duplicate the probability to the GW system you would need to roll 3s again if you needed a target of 7 or more.

 

[Myrm]

Makes a stand off battle line of cruisers and/or Kagero DDs very nasty. You daren't move in for the kill. At least they'll be showing their beam to your long range guns.

Steam straight in with the lighter ships with high target numbers (6+ ideal), if they fire at 10-20 inches you get to use evasive orders to make it near impossible or impossible to be hit by the torps. If they wait to avoid this penalty you at least get to shoot your torps too and you are bombarding from long range at the beam. Combine the second round with a range closing by the big ships and they have to target prioritise between the little ships firing torps, or the big ships bombarding from shorter range now (who also get the chance to evade).

Once fired you have a further round to close and let rip to sink 'em or step away again to range to prevent the reload fire.

At least thats what I would try

 

[Darilian]

DM-
Not to be pedantic, but there are battlefield conditions and there are battlefield conditions. From the accounts that I have read (and I admit, I am not a complete expert in this field), it took the Japanese about an hour and half to reload- while not being shot at. That means they were not moving at flank speed, not doing erratic manuevers, and not being shot at. Given that the torpedoes had to be lifted from the horizontal, and then dropped into vertical mounts, that makes sense.

So I guess what I'm saying is that to give the IJN complete reload capability, with no conditions to be met, is a bit generous. Either they have one shot, or you say that reloading is subject to certain conditions- move at half speed, no special actions, etc. Or, make reloading subject to a special action check- Difficulty 10+, again subject to moving at half speed etc.

Also, the above doesn't take into account the issue that in the rules, the IJN has several reloads available to them, instead of the one that they had on board.

Right now, the way rules stand, the 'infinite reloads' of the IJN is ahistorical and down right unbalanced. A 'fleet' of IJN destroyers is monstrous- and ahistorically so.

Cordially;
Darilian

 

[DM]

The accounts I've read suggest that reloading was completed in anything from 20 minutes upwards. IIRC this has been discussed elsewhere so I'll not go over old ground (he said hoing that it wasn't actualy the GQ yahoo group where it was discussed, or maybe it was both - heck, there are sooo many places where I've seen this come up in the last few months!). However, I don't see that placing restrictions on a reloading ship would be unrealistic.

I'm aware of the fun and joy in reloading weapons at sea from a personal perspective. One of my more "enjoyable" trips to sea involved taking part in reloading drills for paarticular weapon where the book said "reloaing times for the complete mount is ten minutes". Only we were in heavy seas (Sea State started at 6, got up to 8 ) with goffers coming over the bow every minute or so and the deck (and us) awash. It took us over an hour.

Mind you. I've also seen reload times for guns similarly extended in adverse conditions.

and then dropped into vertical mounts, that makes sense.

I'm not sure where this came from. The mounts were horizontal (I've never come across vertical torpedo tubes), the stowage was horizontal and from what I've read the reload systems used rails. I have some general arrangement drawings of japanese warships somewhere that show thereload systems. I'll see if I can dig them out.

 

[seldon]

It does seem that more than one reload would be unrealistic and also gives to much of an advantage.

In most of the diagrams I've seen the reloads are on horizontal mounts just as the torpedo tubes.

I see that in DM rules he recommends a limit of one reload, seems very reasonable, would you consider also making it a special action ? So that it requiers some effort from the crew and it would also be affected by weather. Any thoughts ?

Seldon

 

[DM]

Again, seems reasonable.

 

[Fitzwalrus]

It does seem that more than one reload would be unrealistic and also gives to much of an advantage.

In most of the diagrams I've seen the reloads are on horizontal mounts just as the torpedo tubes.

I see that in DM rules he recommends a limit of one reload, seems very reasonable, would you consider also making it a special action ? So that it requiers some effort from the crew and it would also be affected by weather. Any thoughts ?

Seldon

Some other rule sets and references I've seen indicate that the larger IJN ships with reloads (CAs and CLs) carried more than one set of torps, but I'm certainly willing to go along with a single reload in the name of simplicity. I particularly like the "Special Action: Reload Torpedoes" idea, with the Command Check becoming more difficult in Bad Weather.
The whole concept of SA's is one of VAS's better points IMHO, and this is a perfect use of it.

 

[Darilian]

I'd love a SA roll. I'd even remove the 'slow loading'- let the player try reloading the turn after firing. (Especially if DM feels it could be done, by good crews, in a reasonably speedy time). Make the SA check at 10- that way the better crews would be able to do it more readily, and the more inexperienced ones take longer.

darilian

 

[Fitzwalrus]

I'd love a SA roll. I'd even remove the 'slow loading'- let the player try reloading the turn after firing. (Especially if DM feels it could be done, by good crews, in a reasonably speedy time). Make the SA check at 10- that way the better crews would be able to do it more readily, and the more inexperienced ones take longer.

darilian

I think I'd still go with the "Slow Loading" rule, even though VAS really doesn't specify a time scale per turn. IRL a 20-minute reload time could be an eternity in the middle of a battle. In game terms allowing an IJN destroyer or cruiser division to pump out two Long Lance broadsides in two turns (assuming they made their SA rolls) would be seriously devastating and more than a bit unbalancing IMHO.

EDIT: Hey, I'm a Mongoose!

 

[seldon]

The nwe Mongoose makes a valid point.
What about a SA that allows you to reload, but maybe Torpedoes should not be able to be fired at the same time as performing a special action.
Firing torpedoes could be considered a special action ( automatic ) on itself.

BTW, I am only debating this in the realm of house rules, under no cicumstance I am advocating for rules changes, but I like getting your thoughts on possible house rules !

Cheers,
Seldon

 

[mbtanker]

I posted this in another thread but it seems more appropriate here.

Interestingly Decision Games' 'Battlestations!' rules have turns of 30 minutes for day and 60 minutes for night. They also allow for reloads in just one turn. I've been reading folks complaining THAT is too fast as well!

I haven't paid too much attention I'm afraid, in either game, to how many torpedo mounts exist on a ship, how many tubes they have, and what a volley is supposed to be but is it possible a 'reload' is either a second round of shots from a mount or just another mount firing? In other words, is a torp 'shot' really 3 torps of 5 (for example) and the 'reload' the other two? Or is the 'reload' possibly a second mount firing?

 

[Myrm]

I get the impression that each AD is one or two torps.

 

[mbtanker]

I just got 'General Quarters III'. They handle the Japanese torpedo issue by only allowing reloads if the ship steers a straight course for six turns (36 minutes) and is NOT under fire or conducting fire. I would guess VaS turns are around 10-30 minutes (Do we know for sure?) so a one turn reload is perhaps not totally unreasonable, but I like the idea the ship has to not be in action while doing it.

 

[Kevin Clark]

I must admit, I've not experienced a major problem with the IJN slow loading trait as most scenarios are limited to 10 turns and in every engagement I've fought so far, I've not been able to reload more than once before running out of turns.

Also, I think working from the gun ranges and ship speeds a turn works out at approx 30 mins. Only done it roughly in my head though. Will check on paper.

 

[Keith]

Also when Kevin passed my destroyers he loosed torpedoes (nothing to loose because he could reload). I reciprocated (nothing to loose because the odds of my destroyers surviving to hit a better target were almost nil). Overall result: scratch 2 destroyers and no Japanese reload.

Maybe If he held his fire? .... Naaah the long lance is just too nasty.

 

[Jack Tar]

I am new to Vas and the untouchable destroyer with its torps seems to be a big issue on the forum, and i can see how it would ruin a game.

I had a thought on the fast moving destroyers (and their torps), and i would be interseted in seeing what others think about it:

Fast moving destroyers have a penalty to hit any target they fire at due to the hight speed - it isnt easy to accurately target something when you are moving fast.

Thus if they want to accurately use their weapons they will have to slow down first, making them easy to target in return.

 

[Court Jester]

I am new to Vas and the untouchable destroyer with its torps seems to be a big issue on the forum, and i can see how it would ruin a game.

I had a thought on the fast moving destroyers (and their torps), and i would be interseted in seeing what others think about it:

Fast moving destroyers have a penalty to hit any target they fire at due to the hight speed - it isnt easy to accurately target something when you are moving fast.

Thus if they want to accurately use their weapons they will have to slow down first, making them easy to target in return.

Essentially this is already covered in the rules undert he flank speed rules.

Although considering the whole untouchable destroyer game me and a friend played a 5 point raid this evening.

A balanced Russian fleet (a couple of raid levels ships, a couple of skirmish level ships, four patrol level ships and 6 flights of fighters!!!) faced off against 10 Kagero Destroyers.

The Russians won with 2 destroyers and 2 cruisers left on the table.

The Kagero destroyers loosed on average 2-3 volleys of torpedos each throughout the game.

 

[Jack Tar]

Essentially this is already covered in the rules undert he flank speed rules.

Maybe to balance things Destroyers have an additional -1 penalty for moving at flank speed, or they are treated as moving at flanks speed when moving at their maximum rate.

I would hate to think how hard it would be to hit a frigate if they provide stats for them.

 

[Swiss Tony]

I'm off to the Victory at Sea Tounament so I got a few practice games in at the weekend, my friend was using an Italian Fleet with Navagatori Destroyers which have a base speed of 8". As long as he was moving his full move I was -1 to hit(greater than 7") therefore virtually impossible unless he was stupid enough to present a broadside and I had no real way of stopping him unleash his torpedoes amid my cruisers. Most destroyers will have a base move of 7" so will need to use Flank Speed to get the -1 to hit and that will affect their accuracy, but there are a few that can move 8" naturally and do not therefore get -1 to hit for using Flank Speed. I could see a force of 10-15 fast destroyers winning this tournament as they totally outclass cruisers and if you get bad weather......

 

[Faron Bell]

I am new to Vas and the untouchable destroyer with its torps seems to be a big issue on the forum, and i can see how it would ruin a game.

We used the hitting on 7+ rule in our first game and were satisified the results (so far, anyway)...we had several DD's sunk but they also were able to do some damage as well...seemed balanced.....fb