Yamato

[Burger]

I'm just wondering how on earth did this get through playtesting?

I've calculated the damage potential of all the ships... that is, the AD x DD added up for all guns. That is the maximum damage dice that can be rolled in a broadside attack. Pretty much all War level ships are either 24 or 27, except the King George V at 20, and the Yamato at... wait for it... 36. It has basically 50% more firepower than most other ships in its PL. Not only that, this firepower is Super AP and its range is 46".

But surely you say, there must be some disadvantages that balance it out? Err... Armour 6+, Armoured Deck, Torpedo Belt, pretty good secondary armament and excellent AA, 54 damage points (well above average) and on top of that it is Agile.

This ship should be Armageddon level.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Is it in service in 1939, like the KGV? There's your disadvantage.

 

[Burger]

Why should ISD affect the PL?
What about tournaments or campaigns or "what if" scenarios, where ISD is irrelevant?
Can I suggest reading page 46, paragraph 2:

Every ship detailed in this book has a Priority Level, which is derived from how powerful the ship is in game terms and for what engagements the vessel is commonly used. Ships with heavier armour, greater speed or more weapons have a correspondingly higher Priority Level.

Thats it, Yamato is going in Butt-head's fryer.

 

[DM]

Ah, the fun we have had suggesting PLs, especially given the 5-PL limit! My view on PLs are that they are nothing more than a guide to relative performance and that if you really want to balance scenarios then you have to look beyond the PLs to the actual capabilties of the vessels. But then I'm not into tournament games, being more of a fan of historically based (or at least historically derived) scenarios. However, I can appreciate the issue (and will quite understand if all we ever read about from tournaments is slugfests between lines of Yamatos!)

EDIT - one day I'll get that hang of this typing b*****ks!

 

[DSV1]

Are you saying its stats are wrong compared with other BBs or that its gaming PL is wrong ?

If its the former then it needs looking at if not whats the problem, it was built, it saw action and got sunk

 

[Burger]

I'm saying it's gaming PL is wrong.
I'm no historian so I can't comment on the historical accuracy or whether the stats reflect RL... but a ship with these stats, is far better than every other War level ship.

 

[Chernobyl]

I've played a Yamato against TWO Iowas, and it took their pounding without sinking (4 points left, only 4 crew dead) Our fleet wound up sinking the Missouri, but the Essex got away...hid behind an Island!

Chern

 

[Soulmage]

There is always a tendancy to calculate theoretical maximums and such in wargames. But I've found that in actual gameplay, the Iowa compares favorably against it. Die roll luck generally determines the outcome.

Sure, the Yamato gets a slight edge, but it was the largest and most powerful battleship ever built!

It is true that Iowa and Yamato class will blow pretty much anything else out of the water with the greatest of ease. But then, somebody has to be the best!

 

[Soulmage]

Now. . . an Armageddon level ship would be the Montana if they ever release stats for it!

 

[Burger]

There is always a tendancy to calculate theoretical maximums and such in wargames. But I've found that in actual gameplay, the Iowa compares favorably against it. Die roll luck generally determines the outcome.

Great, if we ever play each other then I'll have 5 War points, you can have 5 Raid points. Since its all determined by dice rolls anyway then that's fair, right?

 

[Reaverman]

There is always a tendancy to calculate theoretical maximums and such in wargames. But I've found that in actual gameplay, the Iowa compares favorably against it. Die roll luck generally determines the outcome.

Great, if we ever play each other then I'll have 5 War points, you can have 5 Raid points. Since its all determined by dice rolls anyway then that's fair, right?

Burger, you want some cheese with your wine

 

[Burger]

Mmm cheese!

 

[Soulmage]

Great, if we ever play each other then I'll have 5 War points, you can have 5 Raid points. Since its all determined by dice rolls anyway then that's fair, right?

Ummm. . . no. Cetaris Parabis die rolls are the deciding factor between approximately equal ships.

When you play me there is the additional factor of my tactical and strategic genius to consider! A more fair game would probably be my 3 point raid fleet against your 5 point war fleet. LOL!!!

Just kididng.

 

[Reaverman]

Great, if we ever play each other then I'll have 5 War points, you can have 5 Raid points. Since its all determined by dice rolls anyway then that's fair, right?

Ummm. . . no. Cetaris Parabis die rolls are the deciding factor between approximately equal ships.

When you play me there is the additional factor of my tactical and strategic genius to consider! A more fair game would probably be my 3 point raid fleet against your 5 point war fleet. LOL!!!

Just kididng.

Burger,

thats fighting talk where I come from

 

[Bob Hume]

On topic, on another thread it was mentioned that the Armageddon level would be coming out in S&P. I think that the Yamato, Iowa, Z39 and other hypothetical ships should be moved up to that level. What say you?

 

[Reaverman]

On topic, on another thread it was mentioned that the Armageddon level would be coming out in S&P. I think that the Yamato, Iowa, Z39 and other hypothetical ships should be moved up to that level. What say you?

Though I'd change the name of the PL, I mean 'Armageddon' seems a little OTT

 

[Soulmage]

I'm not sure Iowa would make the cut for a hypothetical "Armageddon" PL. (I agree, a better name could be found.)

That PL would probably include the Montana, which is a Iowa with heavier armor, and 3 more 16" guns. Iowa would be rendered totally obsolete. Not a good fate for a class that played such a high profile role in WWII. After all, the Pacific war was concluded on the deck of the Missouri! (Been there. . . its really cool!)

I say leave at least the Iowa as a top dog at war level. I'm iffy on moving the Yamato up a notch. Wasn't she IJN planning to build a "Super-Yamato?" If so, and they release stats for that, put that in the top PL, leave Yamato at secondary PL.

I think the problem is not that the Iowa and Yamato are War level, I think that the problem is that RN and Kriegsmarine do not have a ship in the same fighting class at the War level.

Really, the RN and Kriegsmarine are pretty well matched up, just as the US and IJN are a pretty good match. If you start playing US vs. RN or US vs. Kriegsmarine, or IJN vs. either of those two., of course you will get some wonky outcomes as the game is based on historical stats and the naval action in the Atlantic was largely a sideshow compared to the conflict in the Pacific!

 

[Jammybee]

Yeah sounds good, also all RN war ships should get shuffled down to battle.(the Hood is a 1" faster Queen Elizabeth and the KG V is severely under gunned) Its Embarrassing when your opponent wheels out the Iowas or Yamotos.

 

[BuShips]

If I had any vote I'd say to keep the Iowa and Yamato at the War level. They were built in the real world and as such they existed at the top of their class. Any "Armageddon" parallel needs to include the "never-weres", as in H-class, Montanas, Super-Yamatos (20") etc. As to what to name the classification, now let's see. Hmm.

How about Priority Level "Apocalypse", hmm? It's similar to the B5 version, it also begins with "A" and could be linked to a world without the 1922 Washington Naval Arms Limitation Treaty and the 1930 London Treaty. It needs to be scaled also to the meanings of the other five levels. There isn't much left after you use "War" now is there? :wink: Consider also that while there were no nuclear weapons in this time period the battleship was the closest thing to a "WMD" that a Nation-state could own.

 

[DM]

Actually lots of nations were, in today's parlance, "WMD Owning States" since gas is regarded as a WMD and quite a few of the major nations had it and had used it. RN ships even exercised against the threat of gas deployed from submarines in the 1930s.

EDIT - I recall looking at achildren's book on the Royal Navy from the 1920s that included a piece on "war at sea in the future". Lots of good stuff on carriers (although battleships would still be the rulers of the sea - perhaps VAS portrays a 1920s view of the world? ) but also the use of gas (from subs and also delivered by aircraft and shells from battleships, radio controlled anti ship "drones", cruiser submarines and other odd stuff. That got me investigating a bit deeper and I found that thr RN had started trials with radio controlled "anti ship missiles" (pilotless aircraft) in the 1920s, launching them from a destroyer in the Bristol Channel and using them to attack simulated targets on anges in Wales. Another interesting idea for VAS perhaps?