None that I know of in IRCWCC, maybe MWC or treaty.... I know, what does the bismark need to counter? In reality, NC and sodaks. There are many more of them then class 6-7 axis ships
We have three here under construction. One will battle this year the other two are going to see the water next year. There is one Vanguard in th US it is a wooden hull, I think it is in the MWC I have seen pics and it is a fast gun ship. The Guys name is Brian K and the ship is in the MWC, he has a web site for the ships build. Just type in BrianK's Vanguard and it should come up on google.
Steve Hill's Vanguard is a bit of a speed boat right now. Half of the guns are in, the SS is done and it will run, but it can't hide!! J
It doesn't need to hide. It will rule the waves. Just like an Allied ship should. Hopefully Steve will get the ship completed soon
I like the proposed rule changes,pumps and lower points now a larger convoy ship like the Altmark = class 8, would that get a full unit pump or would they all get a half unit pump? Regardless I am putting a pump in my convoy ships as when we do practice they sink too fast without a pump, yes without a pump just one below or even a on with a little wave action and she will eventually go down. (by the way if just practicing, fill your empty parts of the hold with ping pong balls).
Bryan I agree that convoy ships do need pumps. Maybe it the pump size could be calculated by ships weight or length. An idea we have been throwing around for points is that a ship is worth 200 points per unit for a sink. Yammy would be worth 1600 sunk, a QE would be worth 1100 points. One of the reasons there are many more NC's, Sodak's and Nagato's is that the larger slower turning ships like Bismarck and Hoods are under gunned for thier length. Giving Bismarck the extra half unit makes alot of difference in how you can arm these ships. The other thing we have noticed is that all the battlecruisers in general are under gunned for thier length and are easy targets for the shorter ships. If the battlecruiser's had a real speed advantage then they might get built more as they could run away if they were outgunned as the real ships were designed to do. It would also bring more tactics into the game, insted of just boxing a ship in then pounding it until it sinks. It is hard to sink a ships you can't catch/hit.
1 So when is the vote? 2. I like this one too (If Bismark goes to 7 what does Hood go to?) 3. I think thats what distroyer captains have been telling us for years
As I understand it Bryan Hood stays put. and I agree with your points 2-3 in NABS we are looking several different ideas of how to correct these and other small problems that keep popping up.
What we do in our club is to allow other rule sets to be used as they are fairly close in the building rules etc, SO if you wanted to build a aircraft carrier you would have a nice transport ship under IRCWCC but if another rule set is used you would have some pump and guns aboard also, so it makes the selection of ships more diverse. I actually like my SMS Scharnhorst under IRCWCC better as she is 3 units rather than 2.5 under MWC so there are pros and cons to each side, but these changes make sence and are not too overboard, and a half unit or on larger transports a full unit pump would make those long convoy runs so much more fun. I do like keeping the `No Touchy rule``.
What about giving BC's simular units to battleships, giving them a real speed advantage but restricting them to half unit pumps. This would more accuratly repersent a battle crusiers battleship grade firepower and there speed advantage but lack of armor. I think this would make BC's more compeditive and you might see more built and used. Just a thought.
I like the idea or BCs being faster than the Battle Wagons, but they should be slower by a noticable amount from destroyers though so we do not take away a destroyers speed as it is its best weapon/defence. Oh and I am REALLY pushing for Bismark to get her 7 units now! (Your welcome Ron and Mark).
Rule Proposal: Merchant ships/Unarmed Ships: To be allowed to ad, a 1/2-unit pump for this type of ship if their scale length is 0-48". If their length is longer than 48" they are to be allowed to carry a full unit pump. These pumps are to make these ships more survivable and to simulate compartmentization and pumping abilities and just plain ingenuity on the part of the crews, lets face it, one or two BB holes should not be the cause of one of these ships sinking. The sinking of a larger merchant/transport ship should require a concerted effort on the part of the attackers and not be just a case of one or 2 ships making a quick run at these models in the begining of their cruise, and then just waiting for them to sink later. I want to keep the no-touch rule, but there can be any number of attackers. Ideas.....Thoughts......When do we vote....(Yes I know when)
Keep the no touch rule, to keep all at range and to prevent boxing in, but allow any number of attackers.
Interesting rule proposal, We are going to try something at IRCWCC nats called capture the flag. Plato and I will be captaining carriers for the opposing sides. The object is to sink the carrier or "capture the flag" As far as rules go we will be allowing a 1/2 unit pump in each carrier and they will be 26 seconds. The battle continues until one is sunk or everyone is out of ammo/gas (on 5). Points will be awarded as a mini fleet battle with a carrier worth 6000 points. There will be no attacker or defender rules. It should be brutality.
Class 2 and lower can still rearm. We don't plan on changing any ship rules to do this other than the carriers themselves.
MY Bismarck is set up for 7 units also, it has 3 dual mounts, and a full unit pump, I can load one cannon to half if anyone has a issue, but so far no problems, so Canada likes a 7 unit Bismarck.
We sure do, it gives it the punch it should have always had. the allies now fear one when they see it. Good speed, maneauverability, and firepower. A true predator. It gives the smaller ships a moment of pause as you never know all the cannons are. This is offical in Nabs for three years without one complaint, axis or allied captains agreed that the change is a good one.
