Hey, I post this here for your information and hopefully to sway your vote This is not the MWC rules list, so please take serious discussions there Anywho, I sent this to Brian E for inclusion on the List, based in large part upon input from you wonderful peoples: MWC Rule Proposal 2012 Title : Quarter-unit gun and pump in class 0.5 ships only Author : Clark Ward Co-signers : Proposal: Adding a section c to Rule H.5 (Cannon rules), stating: H.5.c) Ships in class 0.5 only may split their half unit into a quarter-unit cannon and a quarter unit pump. No ship may mount more than one quarter unit cannon or pump. A 1/4 unit cannon fires 12 BBs if fired single shot, or 5 BBs if spurted. Changing Rule G.1 to say: 1.A pump shall be defined as one, one half, or one quarter defensive unit and shall not be of a positive displacement design. Only class 0.5 ships may use a quarter unit pump. Changing Rule G.2 to say: 2.A one unit pump shall have one round 1/8" inside diameter discharge port; a half unit pump shall have one round 3/32" inside diameter discharge port; a quarter-unit pump shall have one round 1/16" inside diameter discharge port.The port diameter must be measurable from the outside of the ship.A one unit pump may not be subdivided into two 1/2 unit pumps, nor may a one-unit pump nor a half unit pump be divided into multiple 1/4-unit pumps. Affected Ships: All 0.5 unit ships Author's Reasoning: Under the current rules, there is no reason to deploy a 0.5 unit ship. With advances in technology, these ships are buildable, but have no give-and-take on the pond because you can either mount a gun OR a pump, but not both. They will never be superships nor game-changers, but with a quarter-unit gun and pump, they can at least participate in battles.
MWC Rule Proposal 2012.G Title : Correct Japanese Tsukuba and Ibuki (Kurama) Classes Author : Brandon Smith Co-signers : Proposal: Modify the classification of these two classes to reflect historical reality. This would lower each class by one unit on the shiplist and change their speed to be in line with other Armored Cruisers. Affected Ships: Japanese Tsukuba and Ibuki (Kurama) Classes Author's Reasoning: Currently the shiplist has these two classes of ships listed as Pre-Dreadnought type battleships when they were in reality very large armored cruisers. Altering their entries would change their battle class, units, and speed (3/3.5 and 28 seconds changed to 2/2.5 and 26 seconds respectively) but leave all other values, such as displacement, unchanged. The Japanese navy rated them as cruisers despite their heavy guns being 12" caliber. This change in the shiplist entry would more accurately reflect the historical ships' design and use.
So they're in a niche kind of like Frau Blucher, eh? Not quite a battlecruiser (or PDN) and big for a cruiser. Sounds like something fun to build! My post-Nats project for next year is Frau Blucher so if someone builds one of these, we could have a squadron! Brandon, do you have plans? Side note: Brian E reworded my proposal a little (not for content, just massaging the verbage), and signed on as a co-signer!
They blurred the line between CAE's and PDN's quite a bit. The Ibukis were armed like a Connecticut with the speed of a Tennessee. Handsome ships but they don't hold a candle to Frau Blucher.
Having reviewed the ships' history, I would be happy to co-sign. They are clearly labelled as cruisers.
I have plans for the Kurama class, very nice looking ships. I have too many projects as it is, going to be playing with wood again with the Haguro (Myoko class) and still have much work to do to finish Musashi. Blucher is definately the most powerful CAE built, I'd even say she was as powerful as some of the last generation of PDNs. Hard to compare her to Fylgia, which is one of the smallest CAEs built both having 2.5 units. Oh well, such is sometimes how the rules shake out.
I rarely build something that is good by the rules. Usually build because no one else has one, or something that's at least not seen often. I built Evstafi before the PDN sidemount rule was proposed and still loved it.
was that cereal box legal by the rules? Out of curiosity, since I'm going to nats, am I allowed to cosign proposals?
Absolutely legal!!! I forget who claimed the $1.37 bounty that was put on it. Many tried. In the end, it was blown off, but lost at sea If you've paid your dues for this year (which I assume you have since you're going to Nats), you should be able to cosign proposals.
As a member you can vote on rules after battling in one sanctioned event. As long as you keep your membership current you can keep voting without ever battling again. To cosign or propose a rule change you need to be a member and have battled in the last year. Since you just joined you can't propose or cosign. But at NATS you can vote. Then in the fall vote again. Our rules our voted on by the NATS captains to get on the offical fall ballot. If they pass both they become a rule.
I built the Emden because its one of the most famous ships from WW1, not because I thought it would be good. I love that little boat, even with not having her quite up to the latest technology. But having a ship that fits in a briefcase is pretty neat. Of course people might say "why battle that thing when a destroyer is the same units and way faster?" Ask the shore targets from Nats last year that
