MWC Top 10 Elite Ships

Again. You are correct, and I will never build a single rudder ship under the current rules.
But, WE wrote THE rule that gives an advantage to dual rudder ships. It is NOT something that just is.
Keith

 

I agree, it could be changed if a club's membership wanted to change it. However when it has been tried there isn't the overall desire to change it so it hasn't been changed.

Maybe one day it will happen? Probably better to spend time figuring out the best way to get it done and what exactly your end goal really is. add 50% to single rudder ships? remove the 50% bonus to dual rudder ships? Build some single rudder ships and determine what they need to turn better but still not as good as dual rudder ships? how do you measure turning between two classes of ships anyway? is a slow pivot better than a faster but larger circle? what about a slow pivot on the ship's center vs a faster pivot on say A turret?

You seemed to be saying you wanted more variety yet at the same time are only willing to battle a ship that has as many advantages as you can get. With that line of thinking there will never be a lot of variety on the water since some ships are always going to be better than others.

Ship performance is determined by a lot more than the "numbers" anyway. Bismarck's & Vanguards are recent examples of boats that were "dogs" until they weren't.

IRCWCC recently downgraded Bismarcks from 7 units to 6.5 even, so there's hope for you to get people to give stuff up. It just takes a bit of work and persuading.

 

Vanguard???
The only thing a Vanguard has going for it is turret position. I have a tremendous amount of respect for whoever made the Vanguard “appear” not to be a dog.
No desire? Just out of curiosity. What is the argument to keep the 1 rudder boats at a disadvantage?
Keith

 

Yes, the current Vanguards in the MWC are in no way dogs. People figured out how to set them up and make them turn and have been using them well. (Dual sidemounts can do a lot of damage quickly if used properly.

A lot of the disagreement is due to the meta-game. The one rudder ships in question tend to be Allied with few similar Axis ships. There is also disagreement on how much to change and which way (buff single rudder or nerf dual rudder) Also as I said before people typically don't like giving up any advantage (even a perceived one, which this isnt) that they might have.

 

OK
I haven’t seen an effective dual side mount ship. Seems to me that bow side mounts sit too high to be effective. I can only envision eating them up with trip aft N.C. I will take your word for it.
Keith

 

NC's typically try not to shoot up the bows of their teammates....

 

I drive a Baden. However, I'd be perfectly willing to allow 1-rudder ships to have the 50% rudder bump. In return, can I have my hard casements back? They're a pain to window, and at IRC Nats, I think they netted the allies 20 points all week.

 

Since we arn't ever pretending scale anymore with the 50% rudder bunus.
How about, everyone gets the option for dual rudders.

 

Sounds like an idea. Draft up a rule proposal and submit it.

keith, you have been out of the hobby for 10 years, right? Things have changed. Paradigms have changed. Perhaps keep an open mind until you can see for yourself what we are talking about.

 

Not all Badens are built alike... however the Weevee is also 26 seconds, while most/all German casements ships are short/dual rudder and 28 seconds. Its a trade-off.
I agree with the other guys, if anyone else spent the time to test/tune a single rudder ship like Tim did with the Vanguard.. watch out!!!
In any case I don't think a single rudder ship SHOULD turn as well as a dual rudder. Its an inherent feature/design that you must take into account when choosing a ship.
If the QE was a German ship I would build it... Is that a single rudder?

 

Keep in mind too that the rules are balanced by trade-offs, many (most?) based on the historical ships. For Example:
Baden & QE are almost identical in RL performance. 2 knot difference in top speed, identical gun layout & bore size, very similar armor layout. Because Baden is slightly shorter, she turns better. To balance that, QE got 26 seconds vice Baden's 28.

Axis fleet has a few 24 second BB's (Nagato, Bis, Scharney, Littorio), but the two w/ trip sterns are... a less than stellar turners. Allies OTOH have a bunch of trip stern boats, some of which are also quite nimble (SoDak). Allies fleet strength is in sterns & speed, Axis is in maneuverability & sidemounts. If you're trying to enhance Allied ship maneuverability, what are you going to balance that with?

 

I have all but pulled the trigger on a Q.E. I like the look of the West Verginia better, but not THAT much better.
German casement ships have....... well casements. That in and of its self is a huge advantage over the WeeVee,

 

I said all ships. The trade is Derflinger and Molke. NASTY casment ships and dual rudder

 

..and you forgot oh, so very purty. OTOH, recent rule changes have minimized casements advantages (penetrable areas gone way up)

 

Well actually here in the PNW we kinda said screw that to the casemate rules. We are lazy and only count sinks so hits up high dont matter and well we are lazy and didnt want to patch stupid little areas way above the water line. So penetrable area is totally not up out here.

As to single ruddered vanguards they are big enough to get the bonus rudder area. Yeah I would hope some one could make one turn decently. Still one example with bonus area doesnt not explain the why of such a huge advantage is justified. The WeeVee might turn decently but never seen one or a video so still doesnt make all that compelling of an argument. So a few ships that dont have bonus area can do well on the water. Still kind of stupid but I know it wont change anytime soon.

Keith-Let them do their thing and we will do ours. It is a big part of why we have our own rule subset. There seems to be some traction to change the rules locally anyway.

 

Little late for that Nick. ;-) Normal conversations tend to naturally flow and not stick to whatever the initial topic was, happens all the time in the real world.

Hovey's got it, there really isn't much reason for a local club NOT to have "house rules" if they want. Sure the rules nationally might be different but grab some NAMBA insurance and play however you want. You lose what? Sanctioning? Ohhh...wait...who cares? (easy enough to have one battle "sanctioned" during the course of a weekend if that is really a big deal.) The "national" rule sets are focused around NATS, local variations/flavors should be encouraged (as long as you're still welcoming to others) as it lets different ideas get tested out before being adopted at the "national" level.

 

All,
I am currently negotiating on a Q.E. Hull. Thanks for keeping the discussion civil.

Nick,
Sorry about hijacking the thread. It was old so I didn’t worry too much about it.

Jeff,
You need to be consistent on casements.

“ I drive a Baden. However, I'd be perfectly willing to allow 1-rudder ships to have the 50% rudder bump. In return, can I have my hard casements back? They're a pain to window, and at IRC Nats, I think they netted the allies 20 points all week.”

“recent rule changes have minimized casements advantages (penetrable areas gone way up”
The German ships sit considerably lower in the water making them much harder to score hits on.
Keith