What about giving convoys a pump?(1/2 or 1 unit depending on weight) I think that this would increase convoys and allow more playability it regular meets. Also, because they will have more of a chance, the rules can be lessened, as to make it more fun for the warships. Also, possibly increase points value as to make them more important. Any ideas? Changes?
Without a pump, a single hole will eventually take out a convoy ship. WCC has set up some fairly long courses in the past. We haven't played with the cargo ships in a few years so maybe some changes may make it interesting again. I'm interested in the idea of a capacity limited pump. My Liberty ship has lots of unused space inside...
I wont be at NATS until thursday, and maybe not at all. Otherwise, i would do that myself. Im looking for a captain willing to submit it, and maybe write it, as im not sure of the wording to use.
Im thinking something along the line of this: Replace Rule Part 5 Section C Number 5 with :" All convoy ships may have one (1) .5 unit pump only". Remove Rule Part 5 Sections D, E, and within G, ( sections 2, part c) also, cut the values in the table of Section K, part 5 in half. Any ideas, help, ectetera.
Hello all we up here in NABS in Canada have upgraded the Bismarck class to a class 7 three years ago and it has worked out great. The ship has turned into a real threat for the allied ships. We have had no problems or complaints about the change, have you thought about doing the same thing? I do have one question why was nagato moved from a class5 with 5.5 units, as her as built specs clearly put here in the class 5 with 5.5 units.
Why do you want to give convoy ships pumps? Remove Rule Part 5 Sections D, E, and within G, ( sections 2, part c) also, cut the values in the table of Section K, part 5 in half. So you want to remove the parts about convoy ship duties and attacking them and make them worth less points? What are you trying to do with this? Have you ever taken part in a campaign battle? I dont get what you're trying to do or your reasoning behind it. Does a 7 unit Bismarck get dual sidemounts? A dual stern sidemount in a Bismarck would be pretty nasty.
I armed mine with a set of duels in a and b turret one faceing each side and a duel stern. The other bismarck here has a 2 sets of duals in the stern at 15 degress of to each side and a set of duals on one side. Both setups are good. It has given the Bismarck class some much needed teeth as we have found at 6.5 units it was under gunned for its size.The one other change we made was that the Iowa class has a speed of 23 sec as it was faster than any other battleship and was as fast as alot of cruisers.
Boomer seems to be quiet lately, I'm not seeing the 100+ post a day. IRCWCC has the bis at 6.5 for now but we are going to add changing it to 7 at the rules meeting. We'll vote on it and see what happens.
It might be exam time, the two complete bismarcks up here have work really well and it gives the axis a counter to the Vanguard.
We just did the Bismarck as most sources list him at about 42000 tons but in reality he was closer to 45000 - 46000 tons when his atlantic bow was installed. Tirpitz was even heavier at aout 48000 - 50000 tons as tirpitz was completed as bismarck was not. Bismarck was missing some equipment and did not have torps. These were the reasons only the Bismarck class moved.
sorry rob, been busy with school, life has been getting in the way. No real progress since i was last up in NY
I know how that life thing goes.... Littorio class has never been discussed . It's not that it couldn't be bumped up, I just don't think the club as a whole wants it bumped. There is much discussion about the Bismarck, probably for the same reasons as listed.
Wasn't there some discussion a while back about bumping heavy cruisers to 23 seconds and light cruisers/smaller ships to 22 seconds? It might help the small ships survive against the 24 seconds BB by giving the cruisers an option to run. It may even promote more people building cruisers.
I agree Mike the light and heavy cruisers with a speed advantage would stand a better chance of survival.
Just a thought, why not knock a second off of the bigger ships? 24 to 25 seconds and 26 to 27 seconds. That builds in the speed advantage of the cruisers to at least a useful difference. J
Oddly enough I think the bumping down by one might be the better option (rather than speeding some ships up), simply from the power supply side perspective. It would end up reducing the power consumption (and hence energy storage requirements) of the smaller ships when compared to the option of speeding them up by 1.
There's a lot better chance of speeding them up. It also matches MWC (I think) and every other captain won't have to change their boat. I understand about the inflation and the energy requirements but cruiser captains can change out their batteries and ought to be able to make most battles.
