Because the other thread is expired, and I want to hear more about Naval games.
Has anyone here played Victory at Sea? I'd like to know how it plays, how long it takes, what sort of money I need to invest into it to get a good play experience, that sort of thing.
Or stories about battleships smashing other ships with cannons and fire!
>>47764063
It's a little like battlefleet gothic but with real units, and not in space.
Only uses D6, record keeping for ships is minimal. Game plays using an alternating turn, so I move my ship, you move your ship, until all units have been moved. Then we shoot at each other, same way.
Big games can take about three hours, average game time is about 1.5 hours if you know what you are doing. 45 minutes for small skirmishes with cruisers.
Balance is kind of achieved using the Priority system. It works well enough, but it's not perfect.
Game gives a good idea of naval combat, but it is not perfect. But usual naval combat strategy functions well enough.
Pocket Battleships for the win! Diesel powered, great range, great speed, amazing firepower for their size.
I use one or two of them in my fleet of cruisers, as a hard hitting core element. Enemy cruisers have a tough time dealing with them. Shattered Myoko cruisers using them.
The previous thread:
>>47728962
OP, Victory at Sea is a good starting point, I like that it models the armour piercing effect of plunging fire.
>>47764063
I don't think enough peopel here play naval games op.
First (and probably only) for Dystopian Wars, A.K.A. Impractical Tumblehome Ships: The Tumblehoming.
Anybody else get started by focusing on a major power, and instead find themselves trying to collect entire navies of minor powers for the lulz?
>>47768215
>Implying tumblehome doesn't make for a sexy ship
>Disregard Zumwalt
Postan some French, because ridiculously large destroyers are what keep the Italians up at night.
[spoilers]Unfortunately, Swordfish didn't, at least not to begin with [/spoiler]
>>47769558
>Implying practical = sexy
If I liked practicality, I wouldn't love pre-dreadnoughts.
>>47770067
Just as long as we're in agreement then!
>>47765076
On the other hand the "pocket battleships" (the term itself is a misnomer; the original German name for them was simply "armoured ship", and they were never designed to be battleships, more like heavy cruisers) were rather slow and lightly armoured for their size. They were primarily used as commerce raiders, but for that role their guns were actually overkill, while the slow speed meant they couldn't outrun enemy capital ships, which could easily cripple or destroy them due to their light armour.
Generally, big guns but light armour rarely goes in your favour; theoretically you have a ship that packs battleship-level firepower on a faster hull, but in practice you're more likely to get a bigger and slower cruiser that has big guns, but dies easily against the kind of targets you'd want to fight with such guns.
>>47771335
They are a very cool concept though - a fair few admirals thought big guns on a fast ship was the way to go for quite a while.
Also Battlecruiser is an awesome name for a ship class
>>47771533
There were plenty of good battlecruisers (although those tended more towards "up-armoured cruiser" than "lighty-armoured battleship"). But the German "pocket battleships" were little more than them trying to skirt the limitations of the Versailles treaty, and not particularly great as warships.
>>47768215
>Not a tumblr firlename
>>47772720
>notsureifjokingorserious.png
You do know Tumblehome refers to a particular hull shape, right?
>>47771335
They couldn't outrun Battlecruisers, they could outrun everything else.
>>47771673
They were, in the 20s and 30s, plenty capable compared to similar ships in every other navy. By the 40s they were out of date, but so were most ships from the 20s.
>>47771673
Nigga, do you even
> Graf Spee
Planes and Mercs was going to run a campaign but then it died
Furthest I got was fleet building, which was fun, though I had no idea what I was doing.
>>47773945
That's usually when we have the most fun!
>>47773945
Planes and Mercs still has a campaign going, called Bloodwake. It is ongoing currently with two active fleets and a semi-active fleet. The semi-active fleet is looking for members currently.
>>47773998
Yeah, I'm referring to the one run by Jake? Jack? I don't even remember it was probably two years ago.
My squadron died a year and a half ago.
>>47774069
Jake has his own site. The Bloodwake one on the planesandmercs site is a team based game, you control one ship, rather then a fleet, working together to accomplish the objective.
Two active Fleets are Kraken and Osprey. Semi Active is Esox I think.
Actually in Bloodwake, one player can control up to three ships in a squadron, but the largest ship can only be a cruiser.
Kraken:
Courbet Battleship
Andrea Doria Rebuilt Battleship
Salamis Battleship
Takao Class Cruiser
Hatsuhara Destroyer
Visby Destroyer
Pensacola Cruiser
Yakov Sverdlov Destroyer x2
Osprey:
Hood Rebuilt Battlecruiser
KGV Battleship
Reknown Battlecruiser
Hermes CV
Tribal DD
Baltimore Cruiser
Fletcher DD + Tribal DD
Esox:
Indefatigable Battlecruiser
Von Der Tann Battlecruiser
Gotland Seaplane Cruiser
Bunch of DDs, I can't remember.
>>47774279
Mind linking his site, I'm curious what his shenanigans are about now
>>47774403
Jake's? Sure.
http://w11.zetaboards.com/Fluffy_Tails_RP/forum/4157468/
>An example of a turn report from Bloodwake (note ship names Furious=Hood, Audacious=Tiger, Steadfast=Reknown, the others are cruisers or destroyers)
The Furious shudders as her guns go to maximum fire rate, and the volley scores on the Bismark. As the minutes go by, the two ships envelop each other in fire, the Bismark managing to penetrate the hull of the Furious, and the Furious in return knocking out almost all of the massive ship's secondary weapons, and drops the conning tower, dramatically reducing the Bismark's fighting capability. Heavy explosions shake the Bismark, and she slows as a partial ammunition explosion bends her hull, knocking boilers and turbines out of place, savaging the engineering spaces.
The Unstoppable and Épée both score hits on the speeding destroyers, but nothing catastrophic. In the North, the Unrelenting scores hits with it's secondary armament, but again, not punching through to the ship's vitals. The Steadfast takes fire from the Hipper class, but her large hull handles the punishment with almost no problem. The Scharnhorsts fire on the Steadfast somehow ranged incorrectly and misses the battlecruiser! The Steadfast's gunnery team makes no such mistake, and the shells from the BL15s pound the Scharnhorst, destroying smaller turret mounts and slamming into the maneuvering gear for the big ship!
The Northern K Class ships fire on the Unrelenting, with one of them scoring a hit, whilst the southern DDs fire on the Unstoppable, one of them striking the large ship, but it's like throwing pebbles at a charging bear...
The Audacious suffers a fault in her loading systems, and the guns rate of fire drops dramatically, some barrels not even putting a single shell down range. The issue is fixed after several tense minutes, but the limited fire rate means that the Audacious' fire was not effective.
>>47774686
>Bismarck vs Hood
>Hood not assploding
>>47774686
That sounds awesome!
I'd love to command a New York class in a game, or have one in my fleet. Always liked the look of it. Looks tougher then a rhino with a bad attitude.
>>47773928
Didn't Graft Spee get her ass rather ignomously handed to it when it got into a fight with three Briths cruisers? Granted, seeing how the ship was essentially an upgunned cruiser, that's not all that suprising. but she did possess weapons that theoretically should've let her heavily damage the attackers. However, turned out her too big turrets were unable to effectively track the three cruisers.
>>47775441
It took three cruisers to damage it a bit. The British heavy cruiser had to limp away, and the other two were not in good shape.
>>47775736
Yep, the York was beat to shit. The Graf Spee could still maneuver and fight. Battle of the River Plate.
>>47764063
Any favorite sub-games?
>>47775979
Tabletop? None.
Vidya? Sub Command, or Silent Hunter 3 with the grey wolves expansion.
Serious question, destroyers kill subs and battleships, battleships fight battleships, carriers fight battleships.
What is a cruiser useful for? Just seems like a lightly armed target.
>>47777425
Destroyers kill battleships?! Only in world of warships would that be true :D
Cruisers are for killing destroyers and serve as commerce raiders, I believe.
>>47764063
Hi
I played VaS for a few years and stopped, mostly because I'm a magpie (aren't we all).
I started it up again last month, found out I now no longer appreciate it any more, (I mostly disliked the way torpedoes are modelled in the system) and went searching for alternatives.
Found a beta set that's very nicely done - Naval War - and am gearing up for a try out this coming week
You can learn more about it here:
http://calltoarmsmwg.blogspot.pt/2015/08/preview-of-naval-war-wwii-naval.html
(not mine, just so you know - not that anyone cares either way)
>>47775979
Yes.I feel entirely sure it's not what you are looking for though
>>47778900
Sorry I couldn't be arsed to actually post the damn image.
>>47777877
Post a report over in /hwg/ if you would, another anon had brought it to our attention there, and it looks like fun. I was geared up to run some games using the Norway OOB and then my time completely evaporated. Hopefully one day.
>>47777425
Optimally, yes. But most destroyers tend to be annihilated by battleship guns, or their escorting cruisers.
Cruisers are generally used for force projection, in that they have much better range than destroyers, and are cheaper than battleships. They did the bulk of scouting given that destroyers were very much fleet escorts and didn't carry much fuel.
But that was in WW2, in all but name, current destroyers and cruisers are close to identical. One may focus more on air threats, another more on subs, but they tend to have the same sorts of gun mounts and missiles.
>>47775979
Harpoon. Best modern naval game I've ever played.
For subs you really need a referee and double-blind play. Detection and evasion is half the fun
A couple of years back the LGS owner decided to run a sci-fi blue water navy campaign using the expanded Battletech rules. Not the best system to use I'll admit but damn if we didn't have fun building our fleets and watching a future !Yamato brawl with a future !Price Of Whales.
>>47775957
>>47775736
Although her surface fighting capability was relatively unimpaired, the Spee was mission killed after the battle. A shot from the Exeter destroyed her fuel processing machinery, leaving the Spee unable to reach a friendly port. 2/3 of her AAA guns were knocked out too. After the Uruguayans kicked him out Langsdorff had no choice but to scuttle.
>>47766304
They're probably playing Rule the Waves or Steam & Iron
>>47780394
Langsdorf was fooled by the British into thinking that the whole grand fleet was sailing to sink him in port, or capture the ship, so he scuttled it. When he learned he had been tricked, he shot himself in disgrace.
>>47781656
The French didn't call 'em "Perfidious Albion" for nothing.
>>47764063
If you do decide to try VaS out, it would be helpful to check out
>http://www.ibisfightclub.co.uk/
It has official stats, plus a bunch of unofficial stats and fleet builders and record cards for both. If you want to give the rules a spin before buying, VAS and the expansion Order of Battle are both in this mf.
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/lx05hfgbic6b8/Naval_Wargaming
I have some Signs and Portents (Mongoose's magazine they used to put out) that has some of their own battle reports that I'd be happy to dump provided I can find them.
>>47785359
Oh, I also had made up some counters for orders, effects and that sort of thing a while ago. They aren't spectacular, but they're free!
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ki0h4flghof5dkr/VAS+Counter+Sheets.pdf
>>47785629
What are these from?
>>47768215
any scans for the 2nd ed? does it have the smaller factions in?
on a wider note, the /hwg/ naval is pretty thin on ospreys- are there any other resources hiding in tg?
>>47791109
These are repainted Axis and Allies: War at Sea minis with the bases that Gale Force 9 made for them. They're the reason I've been making my own lozenge shaped bases. Scale on those is 1/1800 which is a bit bigger than the common scales which are 1/2400 and 1/3000.
See >>47778973 These are also WaS minis, but they've been yet to be repainted to anything resembling the standard that the ones you were asking about were. My French >>47769641 will give you a good idea of what I'm shooting for in terms of making them look good. (Now I need to make bases, and since I don't have a jig saw I have to do an awful lot of sanding)
>>47791422
Seconding both of these.
anyone ever tried "They come Unseen"?
>>47794345
I hadn't heard of it before now, but I might have to pick up a copy, because it sounds like a lot of fun. Might even be good to incorporate as part of a larger campaign. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
>>47795642
saw it when I went to my local game store and saw it there. Looked interesting but I wanted to know what others thought of it before dropping 40 shekels for it
>Play General Quarters
>Greeks use British chart
>Because the British chart is ridiculously better than the Italian one they crush the Regia Marina
Italians can't rapid fire until they close to 1,000! yards. Good god do they suck hard.
>>47796283
We talking Fleet Action Imminent, or vanilla WWII? If the latter, were are the Greek stats found?
>>47796644
Now its not my system or my ships, I was playing with my uncles friends who have gamed together for 30 years. Apparently the Greeks use the British charts for range, night acquisition, etc. all of which are far superior to Italian charts.
Whether or not this is bullshit on their part, I cannot say, although Greeks did use ships purchased from Britain and did have their ships fixed and upgraded by the British in Alexandria.
KUK
U
K
>>47791422
Not that I know of. It's still one rulebook and a multitude of pdfs for fleet rules.
The smaller version of the rulebook is a free download direct from Spartan; http://www.spartangames.co.uk/wp/wp/wp-content/spartanimg/Dystopian_Wars_DigiAdmiral.pdf
I have the larger 'Commodore' rulebook and it's mainly just nation background stuff and stats for the models in the 2nd ed starter boxes.
No news on the quick-play rules either.
