Rules change question

Discussion in 'MWC (defunct)' started by buttsakauf, Jun 11, 2011.

  1. buttsakauf

    buttsakauf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Posts:
    695
    Location:
    Waycross, GA
    Recently a rule was added where a pre-dreadnought could have a side mount cannon if it met the beam requirements even if it is just a class 3. I noticed though that rotating cannons are only allowed in class 4 and higher. It seems logical that if a sidemount is allowed because the platform is deemed stable enough, then it should be allowed to rotate too just like the bigger ships with sidemounts. I think it is keeping within the spirit of the game and not really adding any significant advantage. Just a little more flexibility. I by no means am proposing anything being that I am not an MWC member yet. I would just like some feedback on my thoughts.
    Mike Butts
    MN2 USN
    FNS Normandie (refit)
    RM Capitani Romani (construction)
     
  2. mike5334

    mike5334 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Posts:
    1,877
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Other than "that is the way it is", I cannot think of any real reason why PDNs shouldn't have a rotating sidemount.

    On the other hand, even if it was allowed I wouldn't put in a rotate on my Verite PDN. The ship is fairly well packed with stuff already and would be kinda tough to put in a rotate. Additionally, I wouldn't be gaining much by putting in a rotate. The ship already turns better than most all ships on the water and it is pretty easy to get the single sidemount on target.
     
  3. Kotori87

    Kotori87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Posts:
    3,524
    I agree, Mike. It has bugged me ever since I noticed that predreads get sidemounts but not rotation. It bugs me almost as much as the exclusion of every single ship that fought the biggest decisive gun-battle of all time, Tsushima Strait, does. But I'm also in the same boat as you, not a member of MWC so I don't get a say.

    As for why it is, my bet is a simple oversight by whoever proposed sidemounts for predreads. It is actually quite common for an idea of a rule change to affect more of the rulebook than intended, and in this case I'll bet the person writing the proposal either assumed that rotation would be included, or forgot about it completely.
     
  4. mike5334

    mike5334 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Posts:
    1,877
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Actually, I am a member of MWC. :)

    Not having a rotate on my PDN doesn't bother me one bit. Rotates are rather rare on fast gun ships because they tend to add complexity and something else to fail on the ship. Not to mention having a rotate adds more workload for the captain during the fast paced fast-gun battles.
     
  5. jadfer

    jadfer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Posts:
    1,576
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I have yet to see one and the only one I heard of was not working well enough to use. With a good turning ship who needs one!
     
  6. rarena

    rarena Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Posts:
    1,221
    The sidemount was a recent addition in IRCWCC also. There is no reason that you can't propose a rotate as a member of either club. Then the club votes on it. If you are not a member, why worry? The rule doesn't affect you til you join. Also small ships have weight limitations which may make it more difficult to have a rotate.
     
  7. MWC13

    MWC13 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Posts:
    44
    The omission of rotate for PDNs was intentional for that rule.
    As for a functional rotate, we've had one in a Derfflinger working out here for several years. However, they have a somewhat limited effectiveness within the MWC and are therefore uncommon.
     
  8. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    I had one in the Courageous that worked just fine. I had it set up on the landing gear switch so it was left/right, and I didn't spend time fiddling with it when I tried to aim it. it was simply flip the switch and treat it like it was a fixed sidemount.
     
  9. warspiteIRC

    warspiteIRC RIP

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Posts:
    756
    Location:
    Annapolis, MD
    Steve Baker (years ago) had on on his Invincible that worked the same way, flip to one side or the other. One of the few ways a side mount rotate works well in fast gun. As you approached Steve from the stern you would see that gun switch to your side.
     
  10. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Yes, it was actually your description of how that worked that made me change from using a knob to try and aim the rotate to the switch. You don't get caught up focusing on trying to aim the gun, it's just flip the switch and go. It's nice and simple. I like simple...simple is generally more reliable.
     
  11. Kotori87

    Kotori87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Posts:
    3,524
    Nothing wrong with using a knob for rotation, as long as you've got it set up properly. The position of the knob must correspond 1:1 with the position of the gun. And you've got to add a false barrel to the knob, so you can feel the position of the knob (and the gun it represents) without ever looking at either knob or gun. Lastly, you've got to have a fast rotation mechanism, so the gun is in position and ready to fire by the time you push the fire button. I have used this setup on SMS Prinz Eugen for years and it is both intuitive and highly effective. I'd love to try the same setup on a Fast Gun ship, as soon as I can get one.

    The other trick to remember is that you point the gun then aim the ship. Set your gun at an appropriate angle for your current tactical situation, then maneuver your ship for precision aiming. It's no different than having a side-switching turret, just more flexible.