Hovey, I would hate to see us get too far away from the National format. Someday I would like to experience NATS. I will do my best to comply with the rules, even when they don't make sense.
Keith- I wouldn't worry about us moving too far away from National rules. We have made we a few changes that better represent how we play, but the only construction change has been to casemates and allowing hypothetical ships (allows a little more variety). If you wanted to build to NATS standards you would still meet local rules. Rudders may or may not change, and maybe a limit on the number of pumps, otherwise I don't see much else changing in the near future.
Vanguard is actually a good example of what I am talking about. It was a dog! It got the 1.5 rudder bonus. Now it’s not There is no question that changing the rudder rule would help more Allied boats than Axis boats. The question is does it give the Allies an advantage? Is the Vanguard a “best of class”? I would say that it gives the Allies something similar to the Bismarck. South Dakota, and Negato are still hands down better boats, so it is not a game changer. Would a West Virginia be best of class? With dual rudder….. maybe? But not significantly. With 1.5 rudder bonus….. I think the Q.E. would still be better, but not by much. Would that be a game changer? I don’t think so. The West Virginia has the same issue as a QE when they go up against the German boats. They have much greater vertical target area. P.S. It would also help the Bretagne & Coubet. Think about it. Maybe there would be some relevant French boats in the hobby Keith
Vanguard was a dog WITH the 1.5x rudder, people putting the time and effort into it to make it good made it not a dog, not giving it extra rudder. Why does changing the rule give the Allies an advantage? Because they have significantly more capable 1 rudder ships that would all increase than the Axis have. Therefore they benefit from it more than the Axis do. It's really the fault of the guys that designed these ships 100 years ago that they didnt take our hobby into account....jerks... And South Dakota hands down better than a Bismarck???? In what rule set? A good Bismarck out classes a good South Dakota in pretty much everything except going straight in reverse. (which isn't that big a factor if you setup the Bismarck to take advantage of it) Bismarck is faster, turns better, has better gun placement, can push a SD around, and can even carry a second pump without losing the weapon coverage that a SD would lose if it choose to do so. Most of these ships have similar target area where it counts, below the water....10 points vs 50 points and increased sink potential. Arguing about casemates is just silly, shoot belows and you dont have to worry about them, also you get to sink people.
This would be a lot more fun over a pint of beer, but we will have to make do with an internet forum. What part of our hobby is realistic to what the capital ships did back in the day?...... Um….. NONE! So why adhere to a rudder rule that makes some ships unusable in the hobby. Well maybe not unusable, but unadvisable. I applaud your defense of the superior Axis ships. In what world does a Bismarck at 12” longer than a South Dakota with the same rudder area turn better?:blink: I will ask again: What single rudder Allied ship do you fear would become a game changer Keith
I know I shouldn't say it, but I just cant help it. Second pump on the Bismark??? there is a reason it gets used Bad Keith, BAD
In my opinion the Bismark with its single propeller has more effective wash over the rudder. I have seen examples of both ships in both fast gun and big gun. Bismarck can take the cake every time in turning circle diameter if properly built. HOWEVER, the SD can give it a solid run for its money in Rate Of Turn (ROT) if properly built. SD also tends to be the better accelerating ship.
Bismarck can be made to turn better because it has one drive prop for two rudders and two drag props where the SoDak has two drive props for two rudders and two drag props. The thrust is concentrated right between the rudders (or right on them, depends on builder preference, etc). I don't see Bismarcks dramatically outperforming SoDaks but they are hardly bad. There are a LOT of allied 26-second dreadnoughts out there with one rudder, as Herr Kessler says. The second-order effect of allowing them all 150% rudder cross section (since area is not really used any more with all the variations in airfoil shape) would be to give a boost to a bunch more allied ships than axis ships. I don't have a dog in this fight since I'm already locked into my QE build and battling it for the next 4 years (promised wife to do so). Just my take on it. Even if a 150% bonus across the board passed, I would not change my SMS Scharnhorst rudder. Tim's Vanguard turns amazingly, and I've looked inside it at a local battle so there are no secrets at this point. He just worked hard to get it set up well. So conceivably, anyone could do the same with their ship, without any rule changes.
Agreed, the internet isn't the best for a lot of discussions. I'm with you that being limited to historical designs is pretty silly but that's how the hobby is at the moment for better or worse. However at the same time the historical aspects of the hobby (however small that might be) is one of the reasons that people get into it so getting rid of it wouldn't be without a different set of problems. Like anything there isnt a solution that makes everyone happy. Bismarck and SD both have dual rudders that are the same size (class 6). Bismarcks only run the center prop with the two outer props being drag props, SD's run the two inboard props with the out props being drag props. Since all the thrust of the Bismarck is concentrated in a smaller area due to only having one drive prop the rudders can more effectively turn that flow by covering the entire prop wash area which gives the Bismarck better turning ability. (At the cost of needing a beefier drive train and the inability to reverse in a straight line, both of which are very minor compared to the turning ability gained) The extra 12" matters a lot less than you might think. If you don't think Bismarcks can turn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMxN_V3Bapc I don't fear that any single rudder allied ship that doesnt already have the +50% area will be a world beater, I don't think I ever have said that I do. (I also don't think that giving them +50% area is a good solution, I think taking away the 50% from the ships that have it would have a better impact on the game) I've just been providing you with the reasoning and rational on WHY things are the way they are. That said it would change the game, otherwise why even do something about it? As for the second pump on the Bismarck I was trying to illustrate that when setting up a Bismarck there are a lot more options that when setting up a SD which is an additional advantage, not that I think s second pump is a good/bad idea. Heck with a Bismarck you can even have extra sets of decks with completely different and still very effective gun arrangements to keep people guessing, the SD really doesn't have other effective gun arrangements. I see a SD I have a 99+% chance of knowing how it's guns are setup without even taking a close look, with a Bismarck there are a lot more options.
The rules (mwc, maybe ircwcc too) specifically call out "area (measured by cross-section)" why would people use anything else? (And yes that was the intent of that rule since accurately measureing surface area of even relatively simple 3D shapes isn't the easiest thing to do quickly, accurately, and repeatably at lakeside. Hovis and I had that discussion back when the rule was changed in the early 2000's. Cross-sectional area is easy and quick, even if it does allow thicker rudders than "traditionally" used.)
I was not arguing for a change in that rule, merely being precise Really, does anyone who's ever hung with me lakeside ever thought that I seemed like a rivet-counter?
Normally I charge extra for that, but if you really want, Doc Tyler can probably give you a 'cut-rate' discount
Than is interesting. Sure does throw up a rooster tail while turning. What did he do? Jack the RPM's WAY up when the rudder is turned over? Keith
Haha, nope. No cheating there. That works due to exactly what I explained earlier. Well and A LOT of effort (time/testing/tweaking) was put into making it capable of doing that.
I can see that. Wicked high RPM in turns and in acceleration, but never exceeds max speed in straight. Now THAT looks like a rule change is needed.:cry:
Sorry if my last post came off as sarcasm, it wasn't meant to be, there is nothing illegal about that Bismarck. Changing the RPM while turning like you're suggesting is already against the rules in the MWC, not sure about the IRCWCC.
The rule that says that 'motors cannot be run at different speeds when turning' can be read two ways (at least)... First, that you cannot use differential thrust between two motors when turning to assist the turn. Second, that you cannot have it set such that the motors speed up only when the rudders are turning the ship. Can it be interpreted either way by reasonable individuals? Yes. Do you want to assume that a CD will interpret it one way or the other? Probably not. I like to keep it simple and not go looking for trouble. If someone had a super-cool programmable radio that did increase prop speed only during turns, I'd probably see it as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage. I'd probably just go shoot other people and generally not bother myself with said ship as best I could. Or, throw my Scharnhorst in instead of my battleship, and enjoy watching them try to sink it. It was hard to sink in the past, but now it's built to IRCWCC specs and gets a full unit pump. If competition got REALLY fierce, I have room to install the Angry Bees pump. Don't make me do that. It's scary. BIRTH OF THE ANGRY BEES PUMP
Here are the relevant MWC Rules: C. Rudder Specifications 1. The ship shall be equipped with a scale number of rudders. Only rudders shall be used to turn ships (no "turning motors" or other systems may be used to assist in turning). Rudders may not have horizontal features such as wings, etc. a. Turning motors can be defined as any of the following: Turning off/on motors only when the ship is turning. Turing motors at different RPMs only when the ship is turning. Running any drive motor(s) in reverse when the other drive motor(s) are running forward. Running any drive motor(s) with significant RPM differences between them. Side of ship thrusters are turning systems. Using a pump stream to turn the ship is a turning system.
