I know from my limited experiance that in treaty boats from 1895-1946 are alowed to be fought, however their is a fairly large amount of warships that fought in WWI that were built prior to that. Not trying to be snooty, but I dont think alot of battlestations battling has been done, so if somone was to build a boat that predated the "norm" dates like something completed say 1892 or what have you, I doubt highly that thier would be much of a stink about it. I agree their should be a period in order to avoid a nimitz super carrier fighting the c.s.s virgina.... what about any ship the fought in either World war on was under construction during the dates of conflict, that way everyone can build what they want to build?
I think the rules say "were in service" during that time frame. So a Brandenburg is fine and would certainly be appreciated. I think the difficulty may be finding good plans for ships pre 1900. Other than French ships that is. They have good online archives. Anything that fought at Tsushima is more than welcome. As to hypotheticals, I think it was decided that if a ship were actually laid down then it is playable. Makensens, Tosas, South Dakotas et al. are just fine. Was any decision reached on Lexington class BC's? I guess if we allow Tosa's we will have to let those in too.
The rules say.... ' replicas of warships and civilian ships that sailed during the 1905-1945 period. To be "legal" for this hobby, the hull must actually have floated, even if just sliding down the ways. Concept ships, or even ships that were approved, but not built, are not allowed.' So as written, anything on the water within those years is legal. The Normandie-class DNs are legal, as the hull of at least one hit the water (actually, all 4 floated, but only one has to to meet the legal requirement).
Okay, what about the Lexingtons? Mackensens and Tosa's are still good. No good hypotheticals for the allies save for Normandies.
Which is okay and gives you some flexibility as you could be Japanese or Russian. Iwami v. Slava HEAD TO HEAD GRUDGE MATCH!!!!!
Is there an interest in putting together a Battlestations ships list to help answer some of these questions? I'll offer up the Treaty ship list as a start. I can delete the units column and quickly change the numbers on the model dimension and weight columns so they give the right numbers. The hypotheticals are all marked, so we could do a sort and eliminate those that are not legal for Battlestations. The only concern I have would be the armor thickness column. We have armor thicknesses, but because Treaty doesn't use the information we really didn't take care to make sure it was completely accurate. Mark
Actually, there is already a couple shiplists out there ... but there are still a lot of ships not covered.
Heres my take on everything, I feel like either we let the ships that were laid down (in regards to hypos) or we don't allow any hypos, just ships as built, or refitted in a later guise, and speed,armor etc must be relative to that guise. So bearn allowed because it was an actual ship, but normandy, lyon isn't because no battleship of they lyon class was completed as such. so the kaga, and akagi, lexington, can be built as the the ships were built, not as the battle cruisers/battleships they were originally designed as. My rational is their needs to be a finite line between yes and no, not a maybe, not a "okay ill let this ship be built because one was floated/was a carrier, if it was a carrier then it wasn't a battleship or a battlecruiser. either we let people build the ,Lyon,BB-49, etc or we just make it simple and say no hypos. I don't think any hypos have an unrealistic advantage over any ship actually completed. I dont know about the rest of the battling community, I build the ship I want to build, because I want to build it, not for what its stats were. Ultimately, since their is so few battlestations boats finished (apparantly) I also feel like if somone showed up to a battle with a ship from 1890s, or a lexington battlecruiser, or even an H-39, I'd still put my ship in the water regardless, I think the goal should be getting boats on the water and battling them, weather its a 16 gun french dreadnought, a spahkreuzer, or a predreadnought from pre WWI era. P.S. I promise not to build a tillman battleship if the consensus is to allow hypos, well atleast not a first lol
Hypotheticals don't offend me but it's hard to get plans to build to... like Sovietski Soyuz, I have plan and profile, but I'd likely have to fake it with US BB plans for the shape. Some are easier because pics of BuShips models are available to work from (i.e. get it built in a hull modelling program such that it looks more or less like the model). The 'hits the water standard was adopted (tentatively, the rules aren't cast in stone) as a compromise between the common 'commissioned' standard and all-out hypothetical. Getting a hull in the water, whether it goes further forward from there or not, represents a huge investment by the nation and seemed reasonable to use. I agree, if someone showed up with a hypothetical ship (that I'd actually heard of) I'd likely let them throw it on the water and battle, so long as all other legal requirements were met. If the collective decides that we want to allow hypotheticals, I will change the ruleset posted online and drive on with no grief If we as the collective decide to go by a 'commissioned' standard, I'll humph, change the posted ruleset, and drive on with no grief.
True. The French ships are obvious exceptions (Thanks Froggies!), but floated is a bit stricter than paper ships.
Carl, as an added bonus, you could probably get sponsorship money from local orthopedic docs, or chiropractors!!
I like what we are doing in Treaty.. Ships which were launched between 1895 and 1946 inclusive and were completed are legal to model. 2) Hypothetical ships. Any ship that was authorized for construction or had an order placed between 1895 and 1946 will be allowed. I looked at the poll, which didin't mention authorized, or ordered. But the last one did mention having plans drawn. I do like allowing hypos. But perhaps not to the point of allowing the ships that were drawn up, but never authorized for construction, or ordered. Mikey
