The 2 pump option greatly helps ONLY certain gun layouts on certain ships <oo[]oo> Read that as the ability to cover all 4 quadrants and have dual haymakers. Read that Nagato, Bismark, Vanguard. I would also say that Vanguard is a dog. Yes if you take Super captains with seemingly unlimited funds to through at super gun systems top of the line batteries and drive systems they can be effective, but not to the average good captain. The other class of ship that dual pumps would help is a slow maneuverable 5 unit slugger. Aka Baden & Kaiser again set up in a dual haymaker format. So lets see. Who gains? AXIS AXIS ALLIED (dog) AXIS AXIS I see an agenda here. I would even go so far as suggest that the save folks who use this configuration are the biggest proponents for the rule change that allowed battery swaps between sorties. I am not all that passionate on this one, but since y’all kept pressing for my opinion….
I saw Bob's Warspite right in the thick of it with dual pump Nagatos last year at the brouhaha, so I'd ask him if he felt disadvantaged. Personally, I'd love it if we could use our units as we want, and cnfigure our gun layouts however we want, on ALL ships, axis or allied. I've got dual pumps in my Bismarck, and dual sidemounts in Caesar and Dora. There's A LOT of wide open real estate on the front end of my Bismarck. I expect to get hurt a lot. Maybe enough to try a different configuration. There's certainly no agenda on my part, nor have I seen any with the folks I've talked to. I just want to shoot ships and get shot back, and hopefully dish out more than I take (that hasn't happened yet, but I'll get there...).
Sometimes I feel at a disadvantage, by it's my own fault. I could take my Warspite and build it like Johnny's Baden. But that's a bunch of work I don't feel like doing. If I did that I think I'd take more damage to sink, but I'm not sure it's worth it. I already take a ton of damage to sink. I'm not sure taking another 15-20 bellows will make my battle experience better. I'm pretty sure I have no chance to sink Jeff/Tyler/Tim... in their two pump ships. So most of the time I battle them by not really battling them. If I stand and trade I'll sink, just the way it is. SO I follow Rule #2 Stay away from Jeff. If there's a two pump ship run by other guys, I'm not as worried. I think I can shoot at a higher % than them so when we trade I'll give more holes and maybe get them to sink. Maybe my favorite ship "I've sunk" the past few years was Leif's Bismarck in NATS 13. He ran two pumps, end of a 2nd sortie (Thurs?) he thought he'd chase my NC while I was on 5. Flugel was kind of helping him. I let him chase me and turn and chase... He drove so hard he started to settle with both pumps on. I thought he was going to sink so I let him almost catch me then turn and run/turn. The pumps couldn't keep up and he sank himself. Both him and Flugel had over 200 aboves that battle. I was pretty proud of the sink.
First of all Maxspin I ask do you have any data that supports the claim that 2 pumps only helps a few ships? I want to believe you but you have only presented an opinion not research. I would be happy to switch my point of view due to your presentation of irrefutable research. I suppose by 'dual' you mean two? Dual suggests two in one turret to me and only the biggest ships get that which does include the Bismarck and Vanguard. Vanguard a dog? Hardly.... it didn't take a super captain to make it work... it took a SUPER CAPTAIN with the COURAGE to make it work... but yes an unskilled Captain in a Vanguard .. would be a dog...A Bismarck with an unskilled Captain would be a dog.. A Baden with 2 pumps with an unskilled captain would be a dog.. most ANY ship with an unskilled Captain can be a dog... The Vanguard built properly is a good ship and we have seen evidence of it. As far as the CHOICE between 2 pumps, two side-mounts and not being fair.... it is just that... CHOICE! You CHOOSE a triple stern ship for its triples.. not for its conversion to two stern side-mounts... An NC is not supposed to have two side-mounts in the stern.. if you want that you need a QE or Iron Duke or Wee Vee. Is there an agenda that is keeping a Nagato from having Triple Sterns??!! I don't see how we can all build 1 ship that serves EVERY purpose or configuration. You choose a ship and live with all its benefits and shortcomings. Are you suggesting that a QE, Wee Vee, Iron Duke can't mount two pumps? Sure they can same as the Baden.. in fact I have less hull volume overall than all of those ships.. I can barely fit my equipment in the Baden and Palmer is fitting 40AH cells into the WeeVee! Folks driving those ships MAY have made the choice to keep armament over defensive units based on their own preferences or building style, which doesn't mean they CANT mount/use two pumps.. they just choose not to. All this about it wont be as effective.. is baloney... they will get the same benefit that Renodemona and myself get.. more movement when taking on water, ability to stay on the water just a bit longer than the guy you are trading with. We all seem to keep forgetting that the ship with 1 pump also has an extra gun and will score more points.. and we DO count holes... so that is a big advantage. As far as the battery rule.. I believe it was proposed by a guy in MN that ran lead acid batteries and wanted folks with older batteries to be able to perform more closely with the new lithium battery ships.... and he had 1 pump. And to settle the controversy .. yes .. there is an agenda.. the Axis mounted two pumps so their ships would perform better and allow us a way to win battles and it has worked we won 2 or 3 Nats since that time (2009). Hope to see you at a battle soon. Which will you be attending? Maybe we can visit and talk about boats. Take Care J
From a different point of view if your class 6 ship has 2 pumps and you take 20 more belows, you have equaled your sink points
Side note for Johnny, how is your Baden set up? Not that I have an empty SMS Sachsen coming Friday or anything...
I never worry about that stuff. I just want my boat to be tough to sink and able to dish out some damage. I never sweat the overall "strategery."
Some thoughts on two pumps as they apply to fast gun ... I don't mind it. A captain should be allowed to allocate units as they wish. It is in the rules that way. Heh. A very good captain with a two pump ship once told me that having two pumps was to ensure he survived the first sortie, since cannons on a 1st sortie sunk ship cannot make points in the 2nd sortie. This is a game of points, not a game of sinks. Sinks are pretty, but holes count more points. Staying in the game to make points is worth an extra pump to some captains. As a side note to the comment of people moving to sidemount ships the last handful of years: sidemounts, even with the lower hit rates compared to sterns, still make more points. Remember, this is a game of points ...
I didn't even realize that everyone could change batteries every sortie. My budget doesn't support that, so.... If anyone is interested in the insides of my boats, ask and you will be rewarded with photos of boat guts. I don't have a secret weapon or anything, I just build boats. Sometimes pretty well, sometimes not so much. 2 pumps biased axis? I'd say its biased towards ships with 2 turrets near the stern. There are a lot of axis ships that are that way. There are a lot of allied ships too. QE, Revenge, Iron Duke, California, Arizona, Arkansas, South Carolina, Florida, Maryland, New Mexico, Orion, Hercules, Neptune, King George V (ww1), Tiger, Provence, Bregtane. Are they all dogs? No. Are some of them? Maybe. Are single rudder ships at a disadvantage to dual? Yes. Should we make everyone have 1 rudder? I don't think so. For me, 2 pumps isn't about axis/allied it is about being in the second sortie and being effective. Sunk guns can't make points. The allies have/had a lot of triple stern gun ships that were very effective. How do I overcome that? 2 pumps is an option. Are there others? Sure! I can run a boat with ridiculous hard area and go go casemate power! I can run a cruiser and zip around stern gunning. I can build an NC myself and we can all triple each other. I can try to get triple stern guns removed. All are options. I chose one that I liked for my Nagato. I have a QE with one pump. I'm building one with 2. Which is better? It depends. I suppose at the end of the day, some folks don't like the 2 pump ships. That's fine. I don't like getting tripled-crippled 3 minutes into sortie one. It's all about evolution. Overcome a limitation. Can't carry load, invent wheel. Can't kill buffalo, invent spear. Can't survive getting tripled, add second pump.
Change or CHARGE, you don't have to spend a ton to get some lithium and a B6 charger and be in it every sortie with a small pocket book.
Hmmm..... how to fix..... put in two pumps. Dang! not enough batteries to run two sorties. Hmmmm..... Change rules to allow battery changes between sorties. Problem solved NC class no longer effective.
[QUOTE="Maxspin, post: 508209, member: 1851] Problem solved NC class no longer effective. [/QUOTE] So I assume that at the root of it all this is the real reason for your objection? As to the battery rule, that's just wrong. With lifepo4 batteries, I'll run two pumps and pack enough ah to NOT have to change between sorties, just to get up to a decent weight. That rule helps folks with the older battery tech. That's not exactly creating any sort of unfair advantages for anyone. Somebody figured out how to beat the NCs. That happens. its not unfair. Instead of trying to rule away a shift in tactics and construction, figure out a counter to it, or something new. Or just master the new reality. I think your QE will be quite dangerous on the water. More so than an NC.
Man Johnny... I ask do you have any data that supports the claim that 2 pumps only helps a few ships? Two pumps don't help any ship class 4 and below. Don't help any ship with a single turret in the stern. That's a lot of ships... As far as the battery rule.. I believe it was proposed by a guy in MN that ran lead acid batteries and wanted folks with older batteries to be able to perform more closely with the new lithium battery ships.... and he had 1 pump. Wrong on a couple points. In the old MWC is was proposed by a guy in CA one year, failed, reproposed the next year, passed. In the IRC, I'm not sure who proposed it, but am sure it was not a MN guy, since we just joined last year.
The IRCWCC had that rule take effect to make old tech still viable, who cares who proposed it. It passed without issue, and it has very little bias unless you want to see some. If you go backwards and make batteries not changed out then that benefits those that spend money and hinders those with NiMh and Lead-acid. Two pumps are effective if you want to drive into the fight and not care about what you are taking. But on the other side a two pump ship can cost the battle in points and not cause the desired effect in damage to the enemy.
Like I said I am not all that passionate on the subject. Just for the record... How come your not calling Johnny a Stats Wienie?
