Victory at Sea Supplement - Order of Battle
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
Twin-Linked Aldades
Mongoose
As far as I can find on the radar systems (some old navy book by Hugh Lyon, Encyclopedia of warships 1900 - 1978 or so, I have a dutch translation so not sure on the english name) of the Regia Marina, it was lended system from the germans with italian development on them...
Doesn`t say much on the search or FC though...
Doesn`t say much on the search or FC though...
Twin-Linked Aldades
Mongoose
Oh, I found it in the following piece as well, the details on operation Bona
Soooooo Littorio has a radar then hehe :wink:
Soooooo Littorio has a radar then hehe :wink:
Twin-Linked Aldades
Mongoose
He, no worries, I`m used with fighting with what I have, I`m not letting sleep over it anyways...
I once posted in another threat the list of ships the RM missed (the thing about the hypotethicals, apart from the airplanes.
I would already be very happy if the airplanes made the cut (I believe I once read something about a -1 on initiative rule due to lack of co-ordination, why don`t the germans have like -50 then... Luftwaffe had issues with like, every other branch hehe) and would be a very happy camper if at least Aquila (we had a carrier, the germans hadn`t, they can play Carrier Clash while we can`t though...) and the Condottieri classes (perhaps divided in at least two `classes`, first 3 groups and last 2 groups at least had some similarities, but between group 1 and 5 is a huuuuge gap in statistics).
I once posted in another threat the list of ships the RM missed (the thing about the hypotethicals, apart from the airplanes.
I would already be very happy if the airplanes made the cut (I believe I once read something about a -1 on initiative rule due to lack of co-ordination, why don`t the germans have like -50 then... Luftwaffe had issues with like, every other branch hehe) and would be a very happy camper if at least Aquila (we had a carrier, the germans hadn`t, they can play Carrier Clash while we can`t though...) and the Condottieri classes (perhaps divided in at least two `classes`, first 3 groups and last 2 groups at least had some similarities, but between group 1 and 5 is a huuuuge gap in statistics).
Twin-Linked Aldades
Mongoose
I already was very happy when VaS came out...
Sure it isn`t by far the most `realistic` naval game around, but it is the ideal `step up game` which allowed my group to `get in` historical gaming, and get a FoW / VaS campaign running...
This news however, makes me think happy things on a few fronts...
* Half my cabinet of ships can now be used in VaS
* That bloody german [biep biep] will no longer boss us around
* Die limey die...
:wink:
Seriously, thanks for the info.
Sure it isn`t by far the most `realistic` naval game around, but it is the ideal `step up game` which allowed my group to `get in` historical gaming, and get a FoW / VaS campaign running...
This news however, makes me think happy things on a few fronts...
* Half my cabinet of ships can now be used in VaS
* That bloody german [biep biep] will no longer boss us around
* Die limey die...
:wink:
Seriously, thanks for the info.
chaos0xomega
Mongoose
How about those crazy 40-torpedo-tube japanese cruiser/destroyer thingies(whatever they were), did they make the grade?
I believe they dropped off the plot but have been caught in the post-draft review.
Oh yeah, that French cruiser submarine monstrosity is there too - waste of space if you ask me
<ducks!>
PS My 1/1200 Surcouf arrived jsut as I was leaving for a business trip, so I now have the boat in three scales - next stop 1/400
Oh yeah, that French cruiser submarine monstrosity is there too - waste of space if you ask me
<ducks!>
PS My 1/1200 Surcouf arrived jsut as I was leaving for a business trip, so I now have the boat in three scales - next stop 1/400
DM said:I believe they dropped off the plot but have been caught in the post-draft review.
Oh yeah, that French cruiser submarine monstrosity is there too - waste of space if you ask me
<ducks!>
PS My 1/1200 Surcouf arrived jsut as I was leaving for a business trip, so I now have the boat in three scales - next stop 1/400
Let me know when you get the 1/1 scale version... :wink:
Valen is my name
Mongoose
any chance that the following is or could be included?
My grandad served on two of these ships so i'd like to be able to included them in my fleet. The fighters they carried were Corsairs and from Burgers ship viewer i see stats already exist and tmbling dice already sell a mini for it. They would be a good carrier for any scenario including convoys.
Navwar said:
My grandad served on two of these ships so i'd like to be able to included them in my fleet. The fighters they carried were Corsairs and from Burgers ship viewer i see stats already exist and tmbling dice already sell a mini for it. They would be a good carrier for any scenario including convoys.
Valen is my name said:
The Ameer is already in!
Valen is my name
Mongoose
msprange said:
yay!
I noticed on the blog where the manuscript is being looked at by the "experts" now.
Please tell me one of them is an aircraft aficianado who is up-to-speed on Pacific Theater of WWII.
In the original book I was quite dismayed to see a rather large discrepency between the P-51 Mustang stats and the F4U Corsair's. Especially in regards to the speed and dogfight scores. The early versions of these two planes (P-51B & F4U-1 were evenly matched with top speeds just under 400 mph), as were the later versions (P-51D & F4U-4 with top speeds of 440+ mph).
The Corsair, to the best of my knowledge, has the highest kill-ratio score of any fighter aircraft of any war, ever. Most sources agree the Corsair to Japanese aircraft ratio was 11:1 with some even suggesting 19:1. :shock: This should be reflected in the "Dogfight" score for this plane.
I doubt anyone will argue against the Japanese Zero being more maneauverable, but the Corsair could sustain a turn for longer while maintaining lift due to it's raw engine power. It is actually more accurate to think of aircraft as out-powering one another than out-turning them, unless the first turn ends the encounter quickly.
Some may say the ratio was due to USMC & Navy pilots being better trained and experienced by mid-1943 to the end of the war, and I would tend to agree. However, as an historical game, should not the pilots' abilities be part of the "Dogfight" equation?
BTW, I love the P-51 and consider it to be one of the greatest planes ever, perhaps the best overall fighter of WWII (It's range and abilities literally affected the decision to go ahead with daylight bombing raids in both Theaters of the war).
However, raw numbers are hard to argue with. Especially the speed scores, as the Corsair is listed as 2-6 mph faster than the Mustang in the majority of official sources, yet the VaS rulebook has the Mustang's movement at 33 and the Corsair's at 30. :? And the Corsair's kill ratio is just sick. I'm not suggesting the Corsair be given "super powers" or that it is even better than the P-51, but I am confident in suggesting it should at least be it's equal in "Movement" and "Dogfight" scores. :wink:
Please tell me one of them is an aircraft aficianado who is up-to-speed on Pacific Theater of WWII.
In the original book I was quite dismayed to see a rather large discrepency between the P-51 Mustang stats and the F4U Corsair's. Especially in regards to the speed and dogfight scores. The early versions of these two planes (P-51B & F4U-1 were evenly matched with top speeds just under 400 mph), as were the later versions (P-51D & F4U-4 with top speeds of 440+ mph).
The Corsair, to the best of my knowledge, has the highest kill-ratio score of any fighter aircraft of any war, ever. Most sources agree the Corsair to Japanese aircraft ratio was 11:1 with some even suggesting 19:1. :shock: This should be reflected in the "Dogfight" score for this plane.
I doubt anyone will argue against the Japanese Zero being more maneauverable, but the Corsair could sustain a turn for longer while maintaining lift due to it's raw engine power. It is actually more accurate to think of aircraft as out-powering one another than out-turning them, unless the first turn ends the encounter quickly.
Some may say the ratio was due to USMC & Navy pilots being better trained and experienced by mid-1943 to the end of the war, and I would tend to agree. However, as an historical game, should not the pilots' abilities be part of the "Dogfight" equation?
BTW, I love the P-51 and consider it to be one of the greatest planes ever, perhaps the best overall fighter of WWII (It's range and abilities literally affected the decision to go ahead with daylight bombing raids in both Theaters of the war).
However, raw numbers are hard to argue with. Especially the speed scores, as the Corsair is listed as 2-6 mph faster than the Mustang in the majority of official sources, yet the VaS rulebook has the Mustang's movement at 33 and the Corsair's at 30. :? And the Corsair's kill ratio is just sick. I'm not suggesting the Corsair be given "super powers" or that it is even better than the P-51, but I am confident in suggesting it should at least be it's equal in "Movement" and "Dogfight" scores. :wink:
What you have to remember though is that the Japanese planes in the most part did not have self sealing fuel tanks until later in the war and were therefore quite fragile. The P51 on the other hand was pitted against much sturdier planes which could take a hell of a beating. It has also been proven historically that speed was more important than turning ability. When you also tak into account that again until later in the war when the Japanese started arming with 20mm cannon they were also undergunned. The only area I think that the rules may need a tweak is the speed since especially late in the war the Corsair was tremendously fast and I would say at least on a par if not faster than the Mustang
One of the supplement authors has written several sets of air combat rules and looked after the aircraft stat revision. As above I hope you will be pleased with the result (assuming they make it through the production process ). IIRC we have statted out over 200 aircraft types (although not all of them will make it into the supplement by any strectch of the imagination - they will probably be appearing online just after the supplement is launched)
). IIRC we have statted out over 200 aircraft types (although not all of them will make it into the supplement by any strectch of the imagination - they will probably be appearing online just after the supplement is launched)jfox61 said:
I remember these points very well. In fact, I touched on most of them, and for the record, I grew up in Hawaii, and assisted the Hawaiian Historical society with some of the data and aircraft models for the Pearl Harbor Memorial. I absolutely agree the Mustang had to deal with sturdier planes, and I mentioned the whole "speed is more important than turning ability" when I discussed the "out-powering rather than out-turning" part of my last post, which actually supports my point.
As far as the flamability of the Zero and it's lack of armor, you still had to get "guns on target" which required "Dogfighting" after the first pass. Even knowing many could have been downed in the first pass, the Americans didn't always see the Japanese first, and you have to admit, the Corsair's kill ratio is still ridiculously slanted. :wink:
Reverse case in point, the Wildcats and Buffalos were pretty much "owned" by the Zero. In their defense, most of the early war US pilots were untested in battle and unprepared for the extremely talented and experienced Japanese pilots whose numbers were starting to dwindle by late 1943 when the Corsair was taking to the skies in numbers. However, this very same degradation in German pilot ability and number of aircraft occurred in the European theater, giving pilots there the same edge Pacific theater pilot's enjoyed. And there is another point to make re: the Mustang's kill ratio... Stay tuned, as we interupt this post with an announcement from our heroic BoB fighters. 8)
katadder said:
I never compared the Corsair to the fine British fighters which fought the BoB. Although, since you opened the door, the Corsair was faster, more heavily armed (at least more so than the Spit, although maybe not the Hurricane with it's cannons), and more heavily armored. I think the Corsair, in the hands of the same extraordinarily skilled British pilots of the time, would have done smashingly well. I think most Brit pilots of the time flying the Corsair would have considered the FW-190 a tough, yet beatable opponent and the BF-109 a fighter-pilot's dream...
"What's that you say chap? Jerry's sending over 90 Messerschmitts with this next wave?"
*Thinks to self* Hmm, lets see... Who needs to up their score and boost their morale today?
"Tommy, see if you and some of the boys can go up there in your Corsairs, and enter that target-rich environment. Once you're there old boy, send some of those Godless fascists to meet their maker and the rest of the blokes back to France's shores with their tail between their legs! Tell them Winnie sent you!" :lol:
katadder, I wholeheartedly admit the Spitfire and the Hurricane were amazing aircraft during BoB, but I truly believe the Corsair would have done just fine with the same pilots behind the stick. :wink:
Guys, I have to be honest here, I did not even consider looking at the British Fighter's stats.
Just the American and the Japanese, as those are ones I know a considerable more detail about. If there is an anomoly in the RAF/RN planes, then for heaven's sake, speak up man and let's get them looked at as well! 8) Now, back to my point of comparing the Corsair to the Mustang, the only comparison I was trying to make and the only discrepency I just could not swallow. And here is my final point about the Mustang...
Keep in mind the US Army Air Force flew aircraft in the Pacific theater as well: The P-47 Thunderbolt (Now there's a craft that could take a real whallop and still bring you back home), the P-38 Lightning, and "wait for it..." the Mustang! They faced the same pilots and planes the Corsair and the Hellcats did, and none of them put up comparable numbers, even if you limit the comparison to just the Pacific Theater.
Which is why I brought up pilot ability in the USN and Marine Corps was outstanding. Pilots who were unable to land on a carrier could not fly for the the USN or Marine Corps, which weeded out many promising, yet less-skilled flyers who were considered good-to-go by US Army Air Force standards.
Whew! Sorry for the book. Can you tell I'm a little bit passionate about the aircraft portion of this game?
shotgun-toting chipmunk
Mongoose
I thought the Mustang was very limited if not absent from the Pacific campaign, mainly due to their issues with the humidity. Could somebody please support or refute this?
