Sure but then you have the quadrant rule so you can’t do a broadside anyway since only one gun can cover per side.
You wouldn't really want to though. You would want to keep it at the lowest possible angle to try and get hits below the waterline. Its what is known as a haymaker. If you rotated it, you could only go into the stern quadrant. Going to the opposite side would make it illegal as the B turret is on that side.
Not to mention, there's going to be a lot of equipment under that stern deck. Mine was a maze between drive motors & gearboxes, expansion tanks & solenoids for 3 guns, rudder servo and gears plus the guns themselves. Oh and good water channeling from the back of the gearboxes to the stern.
One gun per side* as in port or starboard. You could make every gun a stern or bow if that's what you wanted to do. * There are exceptions to this rule. I would suggest reading them as that might clear up some of the questions you are having. http://ircwcc.com/main/home/rules/
I have been, been pouring over the rules to be honest. Lots of things to take in and easy to miss stuff. So, you could (not saying it's competitive) have A or B turret firing in the forward quadrant, D turret firing in the rear quadrant, and C turret could then rotate to cover either side quadrant (and the rear), which would leave one side quadrant always unprotected. Probably not the best overall use of the cannons, but a fun engineering project. I'm more interested in having fun than being top tier competitive. Onto units: a 5.5 unit ship could have 4 1unit guns, a 1 unit pump, and for it's 1/2 unit could have a second half unit pump right? Under 11 D line one: d. Any authorized ½ battle unit may be used as any of the following: 1) A ½ unit pump, primary or additional. Seems like a little extra pumping might be handy?
I’m of a similar mindset. I would rather engineer something I enjoy than build a ferrari and be super competitive. My Bismarck has rotating turrets because I too enjoy the engineering side.
you could in theory, but I'm not too sure on that rule. I'm not sure if having a gun be able to move into each quadrant counts as leaving one undefended or not, I would think it would be up to how the CD reads the rules. I think the rotating part would be better used for a ship to be able to move the dual sterns, or bows in some cases. you can aim bow and stern guns off each side 15 degrees. I'd use a 3 way switch to have them change which side they would be aiming off 15 degrees, or centered. But it's for sure a lot more work than I want to do, I'd rather build more ships myself (because I want a lot of ships anyways lol). you could have the extra half as a pump, correct. On a ship of this size, it might not be too helpful, while a ship like Jean Bart or Bismarck could for sure use it. Some people run 2 full pumps even. If you went with like the later West Virginia (an ultra wide ship) it could really help there though. One thing to consider is how many BBs you have vs how long you'll be out there taking extra damage. If you are out of ammo and just collecting hits, it might be better to sink instead of taking more hits that end up being worth more than the sink value of the ship. you aren't doing any damage while out of ammo,
How the rules were explained to me. You could have, on a 4 turret ship, the B and C be rotating just so long as they are not both facing the same side at the same time. So if B is to port, C is to starboard and vice-versa.
assuming D is a stern gun (or guns) and C was fixed to say port, if B could be moved between bow and starboard, is it considered 4 quadrant coverage? Technically the gun can only fire into one at a time of course, but since it can be moved into both, is it considered all 4 quadrants covered? That I do not know, and don't plan to make the question come up when I'm at the pond. maybe if I had 6 other ships to choose from. I've talked with a few people, some say yes, some say no.
Do sorties vary in length or is it always the same? What are the thoughts on the other American ships, such as the SDakota and NCarolina, Texas, etc?
They can vary. Depends on how aggressive everyone is. North Carolina is good, SoDak is not as fast in IRC, so it's not as popular. I do believe there are decent Texas ships out there. I myself want an Arkansas after my German Trio is going, little shorter in length, only 5 instead of 5.5 units, but it has 4 shafts.
Sorties last anywhere from 10 min to 15 min usually, at least the local battles. Like wdodge said it varies based on how cautious people are and how many boats are on the water. North Carolina is great, I have one and battled it a couple times now and it’s a fun ship. It’s a bit big and conplex for a first ship. You get stern triples and 2 sidemounts. 24 second ship + triples means you can do run and gun quite well. Sodak is a 26 second ship so Id personally pick the NC. I dont have personal experience on the other US battleships, but the US standards have a speed advantage over the texas. Texas is a 28 sec boat. As always though, pick a ship you like. I agree fun is always the priority.
Welcome. A few notes/recommendations: Try to watch some recent/relevant battle videos to get a better feel for how the battles play out - ideally videos from your local group. If they don't have any, you can check out some from regional IRCWCC battles. A couple good youtube channels for IRCWCC battles (probably more viscous than local stuff but probably same general idea) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMttI-qiz7txx_vGigptjoQ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCb6-zvgkozQPiH6LvVAG0NA When seeking advice, local battlers are the best option, they have the most applicable information and will be the ones helping getting your ship running. If not them, then captains with experience in the applicable format For tactics, I would recommend Chris's page. I read it probably 20 years ago but most is still relevant today - way more detail than could be included in a forum post. https://www.scrapcombatships.com/commodore/tactics/tactics.html The goal for new people I always recommend is to make a functioning ship - many people underestimate what that takes. The fanciest gizmo on the bench doesn't provide much satisfaction if the boat doesn't function. Get the functioning boat together and battle tested first, then work on the gizmos Short write up on rotates. Plenty more that could be said but I wanted to hit on the key topics/considerations. I'm working on a FAQ so I drafted it in that form, since new people typically ask similar questions Why don’t more ships use rotates/pivots/elevates? It is common for new people to ask questions about these features because they seem like a logical advantage over a fixed gun. Given the maneuverability of most IRC ships, rotates are an unnecessary complexity that can detract from the effectiveness of those guns and are only beneficial on a very limited number of ships. Only a very small percent (1-3%) of completed IRC ships have a gun that pivots, rotates, or elevates. “Pivot” is the word we use to describe a gun that moves within its quadrant. When used, pivots typically appear on stern guns, traversing 15 degrees either way from centerline. “Rotate” is used for a gun that traverses from one quadrant to another, such as from one side to the other. “Elevate” would be for a gun that changes elevation to change the range of the gun. In terms of ship control, a rotate adds a degree of complexity that can be hard to manage in the heat of battle. It is common for people to shoot the wrong gun, so adding another switch to the mix doesn’t help. In terms of reliability/serviceability of the gun, a rotate would either have to be a tight coil magazine or a 3D printed gun, both of which either have less reliability and/or more difficult serviceability than a straight magazine gun. From an effectiveness standpoint, rotates typically have less down-angle than a fixed gun, which means enemy ships can more easily drive under the guns of the ship with the rotate. This is especially true for rotates in elevated turrets, where the gun barrel must either ride over the top of the lower turret, or have such low down angle that it’s completely ineffective as a sidemount. While the former has been done before by a few experienced captains, it’s not something recommended for someone just starting out given the complexity and the low likelihood of success. From a build complexity / internal real estate viewpoint, rotate gear can take up a fair amount of space. The better setups will mount a servo inverted in the superstructure to minimize the internal impact. Considering that sidemounts are the most effective single-barrel gun in the hobby, using a rotate in most cases will detract more than it improves the battling effectiveness of a boat. With the recent rule allowing ships to mount a ½ unit gun, the need for a rotate on ships like DKM Scharnhorst has gone away (where you can now mount a ½ unit gun on one side and a 1 unit gun on the other side). Ships that do benefit from a rotate would be KGV and long semi-useless BC’s like Alaska.
Is there an inherent advantage or disadvantage of a ship with large torpedo bulges? Or one without for that matter. I've wondered if it matters in this before I purchase a hull.
Bulges can be harder to sheet, particularly for those without experience than un-bulged hulls. they do often get stringers, but with how the game is typically played out here (we generally follow IRCWCC rules but almost never score battles, instead going based on which side is still afloat), the stringer advantage isn't as big a deal here. What ships are you looking at in particular?
Queen Elizabeth class, Colorado/Tennessee, etc. I'm not set in stone but I was thinking something in the 50"+/- length would be a good starter for me. SDakota is 56" so that's right in there too. The stringer represents the belt armor or torpedo bulges right?
Mainly what bulges bring to the table is a improvement to the ship's length/width ratio. Shorter & Fatter ships turn better than Long & Skinny ones given equal rudders. If you look at class 4, for example, SMS Westfalen (479' x 88') is probably the best turning ship in the hobby. Compared to HMS Courageous (786' x 81') which ...well... not a great ship.... It would be one of the worst turning out there if anyone built one for combat.
Good to know, so a fat ship with a good rudder layout is the way to go. Now with the larger rudder options for single rudder ships it seems there is a lot of viable ships to try for. Leaning towards a Colorado class. Very clean looking in the earlier models especially and the twin gun turrets are visually appealing to me. Thanks for the information!
