VAS: What angle exactly is considered "crossing the T&q

[BuShips]

Someone mentioned earlier that by crossing the T you would limit the firepower of the enemy ships to the forward turrets. Tell me how this would benefit you if you were in combat with the Dunkerque Rodney or Richelieu. Their advantage would be to come at you head on presenting as small a target as possible and eliminating the +1 modifier for large silhouette. You get no advantage at all by crossing THEIR T. Although these were solidly built and reliable ships they weren't exactly successful designs but this rule gives them a substantial advantage early on in the game especially the Nelson Class with their larger calibre weapons

You are better off leaving the Nelson (and Rodney) out of this discussion. No, I take that back :idea:. It's probably better for me to initially use that ship, as the "X" turret (the third one back) was masked behind "B" turret. The Nelson class was not built to outmaneuver being "crossed" as much as it was to concentrate the armor into a single protective belt in order to save weight. Thus, the Nelson needs a broadside as much as any standard battleship layout does. Another problem with the Nelson's layout (and I say this while always having an admiration for the two ships) is that you can cross her stern "T" and completely mask her 16" guns until she can turn out of that position. The same goes for the French designs you mentioned. You just make every attempt to cross their T from the aft profile, and all that can they can throw at you is secondary (non-penetrating) fire. I've always known that they were excellent primary gun layouts for pursuing Pocket Battleships with while firing the equivalent of full broadsides while chasing them. It also gave you incentive to finish the fight, as retreating with all of your primaries masked was not a good thing to show the enemy . Of course if any of the ships you mentioned were in an interior line position using my squadron rule it wouldn't matter anyway, as their bow and aft fire arcs would be "greyed-out". As for the British or the French, I would not place any of the three ships in the trailing position but rather use them up front as leaders, Nelson at least bearing turrets A & B forward like a KGV. Using my squadron restriction in fact would allow a French line formation with Richelieu in the lead to bear through all normal arcs, but the Jean Bart following her in line astern within 4" would be masked from firing through all but the side arcs. The main advantage in crossing the T even besides this is that all of the enemy ships at the head of the T would be able to bear upon the Richelieu, smothering her with enfilade fire. With the current rules, both French battleships would be allowed to return fire while gaining a shooting bonus on the enemy silhouettes. :roll:

 

[Hugbiel]

Someone mentioned earlier that by crossing the T you would limit the firepower of the enemy ships to the forward turrets. Tell me how this would benefit you if you were in combat with the Dunkerque Rodney or Richelieu. Their advantage would be to come at you head on presenting as small a target as possible and eliminating the +1 modifier for large silhouette. You get no advantage at all by crossing THEIR T. Although these were solidly built and reliable ships they weren't exactly successful designs but this rule gives them a substantial advantage early on in the game especially the Nelson Class with their larger calibre weapons

This whole discution would be better placed on the regular Vas forum. As i say ther IMHO because of the evolution of ships, a crossing the T rule is useless except on a few situation : ship will not be one behing another but a little to port or starboard. The main disadventage of squadron is that a squadron is more fixed and predictable as many units. But more efficient since it what it is made for.

Imho Richelieu was a successful design it is notted suchas a good competitor here ( post New York refit ) : http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm#categories .

As a treaty ship it was not made to handle all threat but to be cost and mission effective. It use quad gun turret, less resistant to damage and hazard but more weight effective for fire power. Same for engines. Their turret was all ahead because it mean to be used as a spearhead in raider hunting or convoy escort ( against the Italians who was said to try to keep their ship safe ). The fourth ship was suposed to revert to a more classic setting, then the new Alsace class will have more of all, enought to be all purpose. ( and cost so many time more ... )

In a WWII setting ( better radio, better light, better optic , ... ) the squadron layout will be loose enought to allow the interior ship to not be "greyed-out". but these ship was not intended to be squadronned anyway.

 

[BuShips]

Hugbiel, I just left a comment in the section of the regular VaS forum that you requested, but I do have a quick comment here about something that you just mentioned (here). The reason that ships would want to "keep station" directly astern of a ship ahead of them in line formation is for a very important reason; that of not coming to collision if the ship directly ahead was to suddenly turn from an offset position ahead and come across into collision danger (I suppose this could be termed as a 'crossing of the T' of the collision category :shock. Also, if an enemy force was at a quarter angle ahead to a ship wishing to fire, it would be in danger of receiving friendly fire or masking it instead from being able to fire. If you study it out, these were formations that were time-tested and had multiple benefits to be gained from their use. There are others, such as reduced risk when running through minefields and limits to visibility and others as well. Oh, and I'd LOVE to have a ship like the Jean Bart as my squadron leader. It's T would never get crossed if it were at the lead of my line.

 

[Hugbiel]

Oki, for other reader : I answer in the regular forum now.