Nut, We tried fishtail rudders one time,but more bad than good balancing scale vs competition . In order to be competitive all ships would need to have the new rudders (fishtail) So we banned the non scale rudders,since they were never legal to begin with there is nothing to grandfather. All ships batteling in the M.N.C.C in both scales will follow the existing rule set or be spectators. We will be much more particular this year about pump, rudders,rate of fire,gun tweek, and speed. After the mauling we took by the Washington with all the aforementioned wavered, ( Those who choose to ignore history, are doomed to repeat it ). I am not complaining about the Washington because I said fight as is. I did not expect (as is ) to be so overwhelming, MY BAD
It is verry hard to have someone who is used to 6 to 10 rounds to slow down in the heat of battle.I am used to 2 per second and I still speed up when alongside and smell blood so I cant fault anybody else for the same. Once again MY BAD
I did have fishtails but I observed rate of fire, pump and speed also I did not prop wash ( which is allowed in IRCWCC) I did try to follow your rules, you are a GREAT bunch of guys/battlers kas recently IRCWCC has reduced the size of fishtails
Yeah that's the issue. So that's why I am building the second one to treaty rules specifically. And trust me I will either find a way to make it turn BETTER than my current one or it won't ever see the pond. I think rules that make a ship undesirable should be undesirable rules. Its supposed to be fun and we need to get more people involved not push em away with rules that make the boat they want to build less useable than it should be. And before anybody goes on about how not scale something is, the entire way we fight our ships is not scale. To be scale we would need binoculars and a LAKE. So lets focus on promoting the entry of new participants over making rules that are prohibiting. I personally will just build a more better boat, but not everyone is like me. Just something to ponder.
I am not smart enough to determine what are desirable or undesirable rules. I do know that there are a lot of captains using IRCWCC rules I do respect anyone that can build a boat and battle it. the MORE THE MERRIER Kas
Before this decides to blow up.... The Treaty ruleset exists for a reason, lets not start holy wars on opinions over rulesets. We are too small of a hobby to go stepping on eachother's toes over flavor preferences.
Agree with Nick 100%. Decide on a ship, decide on which style of battle you like and enjoy the hobby. There is no right or wrong, just what you enjoy doing with your spare time and money. That's why they call it a hobby.
Nick, you hit the nail right on the head. We started treaty for many reasons with semi scale speed,handling,and rof at the top of the list. We believe in fun above all else, fishtales make a ship more competitive and for those who dont have them ,less fun . We dont want to stifle creativity we just want to have fun. The batteling I had with Kas against a detuned small gun ship showed me just how incredibly competitive those ships are .It also reminded me why we formed treaty . I have 4 ships that have gone 3 years without reskining thru dozenens of sorties and battles. I dont think I could have done that in smallgun format.Treaty is laidback by design . It is not for everybody, but we like it. Thank you for your wisdom
Kas you definitely followed the rules as agreed upon. A wolf in sheeps clothing is still a wolf. We sheep learned our place in the food chain.I think even if you drove a stock treaty boat the result would have been the same because of your competitive experience. You cant blame the gun,just the person holding it.
Don’t worry pba the MD IRC boys will help remind Kas what it’s like to be on the receiving side of things this weekend
My point was not about any particular rule. Just that if someone doesn't like something they BAN it. And with all the left leaning ban EVERYTHING Crap going on in the world I am not likely to side with ANYONE who decides to ban ANYTHING. Just my two cents. I was told it was legal then someone came and complained so I offered to change the rudders. I was then told not to worry about it as there were no current rules against it. Then a week later or even less I was told that they had been banned but since mine was already done I was to leave it alone and that was that. Went to 3 more battles that year with em on the boat and not a word was said. Suddenly when I post a pic of it now I have to change them. I'm just sick of whiney people. Make a decision then STICK with it. I have seen more butthurt over rules than anything else and it is KILLING us on getting new people in. Would it kill someone to allow them on boats like P.E. and Scharnhorst that are not often built competitively in treaty for the reason they supposedly don't turn well. But when up against a ship like the Montana that ties in its own axis it gets mauled and that's ok if your the guy doing the mauling. Now that being said nobody was overly impressed with how many sinks I got due to my super illegal banned rudders. A big fat ZERO. But everyone had fun as there was a new boat to shoot at. AND THAT GENTALMEN SHOULD BE THE POINT. Ok rant off. I will go back to building too many ships for too many formats now.
Based on the logic you presented the only natural response from others in the group would amount to an arms race. If you can’t outlaw anything, then the ships that don’t benefit from one particular rule would need to find another performance increase to keep up, which I don’t think is a good thing on any format. That’s why I always recommend looking at rules from a relative perspective, ie how does this rule impact performance of one set of boats relative to others, and is that relative change in the ‘right’ direction, to promote fairness and an even playing field for both sides/many ship classes. In the IRC I think most ‘restrictive’ rule changes only really impact the absolute top tier of battlers, as the change restricts something those battlers figured out how to exploit, but in all cases recently the battlers that were exploiting the issue were IN FAVOR of the change to help level things out. I have also found that rules discussions can be civil and productive, but it is very much up to the individuals to keep their own feelings in check
I can tell you point blank the idea was to have a style of battling that someone can take a stock ship from a vendor with all off the shelf items, put it in the water and be able to compete. We tried to eliminate as much of the competitiveness as possible due to only counting sinks and rams, and not holes. To be able to battle, enjoy the ships, the company and being able to see a huge variety of ships on the water I one of the most rewarding thing when we created this version of combat. I personally have battle IRC (last major battle for me was 24 years ago), big gun, back to a version of IRC then with 3 friends created the Treaty format. A lot of thought went into developing this format. I still have the emails Mikey, Bob and I were sending back and forth when we were developing it years ago. We did it to have fun battling, and as Phil said, in a laid back fashion. The Treaty format is better fit for my likes. If I do not ever battle in the Treaty format ever again, I'll just build scale ships and leave the hobby that I've been a part of for 35 years. Not going to hijack this thread with rules talk or that sort... Just pick a version you believe you will enjoy and have fun... We all want the same thing.
Again I am not upset just trying to make the point that bringing in more participants should take priority over everything else. You seem to be missing that point and focusing on my particular kink. Its not about me, its about growing the hobby. And for the record I do like treaty better and have said that many times. Why else would I go all the way to Ohio when I live in Oklahoma? I just don't like banns because of so many things being banned at tightly regulated in our lives I don't like to see reality bleed over into the FANTACY WORLD I like to escape to. Its just a particular kink of mine. I am not crying about this rule. Just the fact that someone couldn't stick with a deciction and changed things after they told me it wasn't an issue. Now of you seriously won't let that boat run that's fine. I will build something else for treaty. But if the rules set changed again I need to be made aware this time before it becomes another "missed point" disscussion.
The only point I see that was trying be be made and the reason they were outlawed in treaty is simply; if a Battleship can turn and handle as well or better than a standard cruiser or destroyer, then everyone would just build Battleships. What would be the point of the building the smaller ships. If the full sized ship turned like a pig then the model shouldn't turn much better. That is the reason you choose a ship that has the abilities you want. You can't just choose the you like and make it do what you want. Now lets get back to the building that this thread was all about!
You still missed the point. Oh well. Nevermind. I see now that you never will see my point. But that's ok. I will go along happily without you agreeing with me 100% as diversity is often a good thing. Just try not to take my musings too seriously ok.
