| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject: for your feedback and your review: Japanese Navy (1st part)
|
 |
|
Forumini Navies Project
This will be a long series of threads to discuss the stats of as many ships as possible from world war 2. You can submit your own cards in here for review too. I will produce all cards in my template, so that they will look consistent, but the stats and S.A.s can be chosen by everyone here. The main template is the one I've already sent to many of you, with the new forumini Logo that EvilKobra made for the project.
Hopefully, we'll soon have an almost complete database of the World War 2 naval units, that we can play with for historical scenarios and online tournaments.
We use as base the official WoTC cards, except when they have glaring mistakes (e.g. Wildcat). The costs depends also on the year of appearance. Something that would cost 7 pts if it appeared first in 1939, with the same stats it would cost 5 pts if it appeared first in 1943 (that's the famous italian-american torpedo boat peudo-"paradox"  .
When we consider the cards to have been sufficiently reviewed and corrected, I'll post them as reviewed units in the corresponding stickies of this subforum and they will be available for online games here.
Let's continue with the draft version of some Japanese ships (in reduced card size). Your comments will be greatly appreciated.
_________________
 
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
 Sun Mar 16, 2008 7:26 pm |
|
|
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
         
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today).
Last edited by NeuralDream on Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:07 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Sun Mar 16, 2008 7:28 pm |
|
|
Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 1888
|
|
|
| Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:39 pm |
|
|
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Mad Ghost/0331 wrote: | | Agano is listed as a scout cruiser but doesn't have the Tone scout SA. is that right? |
With only 2 floatplanes (tone had 6) it probably doesn't qualify as a scout cruiser. I'll change that to light cruiser.
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:41 pm |
|
|
Moderator
Posts: 938
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Yes, Agano was a modern successor to the old 5500-ton light cruisers serving as destroyer flotilla leaders. |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:25 am |
|
|
Posts: 3120
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
First a general comment:
I believe that the cruisers here (as in WAS in general) are simply too expensive. They put the Japanese player at a severe unit disadvantage. I'd like to see the Takaos, Furatakas, and Aganos come down in price 2 each.
Now specific: Ise as a floatplane carrier had 4 of her 12 14" guns removed. But this is barely reflected in the gunnery stats. (14 14 13 11) I'd like to see them at 12 12 11 10. Fuso - which had 12 X 14" guns gets 15 15 14 11
I love Shinano - great job on that SA. And great on the armor stats! Should make the game interesting!
One last thought on the really large cruisers - Takaos here, Baltimores for the US. Prinz Eugan for Germany. These were MASSIVE ships. It seems a crime to give them 3 hull points along with smaller cruisers such a Atlanta, Jintsu, Ajax, et... These super cruisers displaced over 15000 tons, while the smaller ones displaced around (some more, some less) 5000 tons. I'd say as a general rule, if a large cruiser displaced more than 15K tons combat load, then it deserves 4 hull points, not 3.
_________________
TimK
IJN FUSO
www.modelwarshipcombat.com |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:55 am |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| IJN Fuso wrote: | | Now specific: Ise as a floatplane carrier had 4 of her 12 14" guns removed. But this is barely reflected in the gunnery stats. (14 14 13 11) I'd like to see them at 12 12 11 10. Fuso - which had 12 X 14" guns gets 15 15 14 11 |
Number of guns generally doesn't affect the gunnery rating very much in WaS. The general rule is that a difference of 3-4 guns only results in the gunnery rating changing by one die. In this case, however, we don't have to guess because we already have an example. Kongo has eight 14inch guns of the same model and mounting as the Ise. WaS rates Kongo's main battery at 14/14/13/11. That's what Ise's main battery should be rated at after conversion and that's what Neural gave her. |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:08 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Shinano's SA rocks! I'm gonna have to convince someone to let me try your cards ND! I'd have to agree, I think the cruisers should come down a point or two. I'd really like to see one for the Oi. 
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:00 am |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Duck Crusader wrote: | | I'd have to agree, I think the cruisers should come down a point or two. I'd really like to see one for the Oi. |
If you think the cruisers are too expensive now, I don't know if you want to see the Oi. Given the number of long lances she's got she'll cost as much as a battleship. |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:24 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
She's a special case, naturally!
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:28 am |
|
|
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| IJN Fuso wrote: | | One last thought on the really large cruisers - Takaos here, Baltimores for the US. Prinz Eugan for Germany. These were MASSIVE ships. It seems a crime to give them 3 hull points along with smaller cruisers such a Atlanta, Jintsu, Ajax, et... These super cruisers displaced over 15000 tons, while the smaller ones displaced around (some more, some less) 5000 tons. I'd say as a general rule, if a large cruiser displaced more than 15K tons combat load, then it deserves 4 hull points, not 3. |
They were not really massive. If you notice, the custom cards also include the displacement of the ship. The general rule is indeed approximately 15,000-27,500 tons standard displacement for hull 4, but the Takao was at 9,500-10,000 tons standard displacement. Same for Baltimore. That is the size of County-class Canberra for example, which gets 3 of course.
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:43 am |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| NeuralDream wrote: | | They were not really massive. If you notice, the custom cards also include the displacement of the ship. The general rule is indeed approximately 15,000-27,500 tons standard displacement for hull 4, but the Takao was at 9,500-10,000 tons standard displacement. Same for Baltimore. That is the size of County-class Canberra for example, which gets 3 of course. |
The Baltimores were actually quite a bit bigger than the 10,000 ton treaty cruisers like Canberra. Cruisers of World War II lists them at 14,472 tons standard displacement.
Takao and the other Japanese 'treaty' cruisers are a bit of a special case. Japan claimed they were under the 10,000 ton treaty limit (they claimed the Mogamis were less than 8,000). Their actual standard displacements were probably somewhat above that, particularly after the measures that were taken to strengthen them and improve their stability in the late 1930s.
Edited: It's the Mogami class Japan claimed were 8000 tons, not the Myokos as I originally wrote.
Last edited by Blackeagle on Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:20 am |
|
|
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
True about the Baltimore. Also, the Myoko was about 13,300 and has hull 3. The Takao was smaller.
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:46 am |
|
|
Posts: 904
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Just to be clear, I don't think the big cruisers should be Hull 4. They're big, but not that big. Put a Baltimore next to, say an Essex class carrier and it's pretty clear the Essex is in a different league. |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:57 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Just an aside here; Do either of you have a card for the Oi?
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:16 am |
|
|
Posts: 9282
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Duck Crusader wrote: | | Just an aside here; Do either of you have a card for the Oi? |
Not yet. It will be a nightmare to put a cost on it.
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:17 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Yeah, I can see that. But with the conversion mill at work (and an easy conversion it seems to be) I thought I might try my hand at converting/running one.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:18 am |
|
|
Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 1888
|
|
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:50 am |
|
|
Posts: 3120
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Oi comments: Too expensive (but you knew I'd say that!) 
Oi should cost 19. But this is where I think Jintsu should cost 16-17. In fact, I've played 2 house rules games where Japanese ships cost 2 less. And that seems to be a good rule (at least as far as I'm concerned!)
Back to Oi - I think you might want to reduce the gunnery stats further, as 3 of the 5" guns were removed for the torp tubes. Give it 4 4 3. Also I think AA suffered as well, so maybe 4 AA. Oi was especially vulnerable to aircraft.
An 8 torp long lance broadside translates to 3 3 2 1. So Oi's stats with a 20(!) torp broadside should probably be 8 8 4 3. After Savo, the US avoided night action as best they could, so Oi never really fired that nasty broadside!
_________________
TimK
IJN FUSO
www.modelwarshipcombat.com |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:22 pm |
|
|
Posts: 3120
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Blackeagle wrote: |
Number of guns generally doesn't affect the gunnery rating very much in WaS. The general rule is that a difference of 3-4 guns only results in the gunnery rating changing by one die. In this case, however, we don't have to guess because we already have an example. Kongo has eight 14inch guns of the same model and mounting as the Ise. WaS rates Kongo's main battery at 14/14/13/11. That's what Ise's main battery should be rated at after conversion and that's what Neural gave her. |
Nice - I obviously hadn't considered that!
_________________
TimK
IJN FUSO
www.modelwarshipcombat.com |
|
| Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:25 pm |
|
|
|
