Naval Wargames General

>>52618311
>Japan names ship after dominant ethnicity
>Yamato

>US names ship after dominant ethnicity
>WASP

File: r8Q3Dva.jpg (798KB, 3559x1910px) Image search: [Google]

798KB, 3559x1910px

There is just something so charmingly idiotic going on with most early dreadnought designs.

File: plsnobully.jpg (37KB, 800x511px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 800x511px

>>52618955
So this ship?/s

>>52620955
>There is just something so charmingly idiotic going on with most early dreadnought designs.

It's pre-dreads for me. Technology advancing rapidly, all sorts of tactical/doctrinal theories, and next to no actual combat experience led a veritable freak show of designs.

18-inch muzzle loaders, "storm of shells", torpedo rams, pneumatically fired dynamite shells, cruiser carrying "parasite" torpedo craft, nothing was too weird to try.

At one point in the early 1890s, France's MN had so many one-off designs afloat it was hard pressed to deploy a squadron with the same cruising speed and endurance.

>painting Zuiho
>green on green hull is tolerable, but god DAMN would that deck look horrid
So I'm thinking about modeling on a little texture with a coat of watery Milliput: kind of like a slip with deliberate brushstrokes to give it some depth where there would have been teak, then painting it as teak. Even the IJN studies thought that painting the deck in funny colors would be a complete waste of time.

>>52621987
>18-inch muzzle loaders
That's ironclad era, pre-pre-dread.

File: Railgun.jpg (335KB, 850x1117px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 850x1117px

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/product.asp?gid=693


NEW! Communications disruption by network/cyber attack or any other arbitrary factor: Isolated units realistically limit their tactical awareness to only what they themselves can detect and engage, and are completely of their parent side's control. Say goodbye to Borg-view of the battlefield!

NEW! Cargo, landing and airdrop operations. Load mobile forces on ships, aircraft and even submarines, and unload them on any suitable point on the battlefield. Platforms are realistically limited by volume, weight and crew on what they can transport.

NEW! Comprehensive damage model for aircraft. Aircraft may be shot down outright or receive damage that will still allow them to limp back home. Different aircraft can absorb different punishment on their fuselage, cockpit and engines. Depending on the amount of damage received a plane may be "mission killed" if its repairs take so long that it misses the fight.

NEW! Advanced weapons for the new age of war. Tactical EMP weapons, railguns, high-energy lasers and more

>>52618311
Is Age of Sail era games for this thread? What are the options available on the market?

>>52624054
Sure are, as for what games though, don't have any experience myself but I've heard good things about Wooden Ships & Iron Men in the past.

Is there a game comparable to Rule the Seas?

>>52624054
Wood Ships and Iron Men is a classic. Fire as She Bears and Frigate both look good as well, and I'm currently trying to learn Heart of Oak. Sails of Glory by all accounts is a pretty good introductory sort of system even if the models are pretty expensive, because FFG level printed goodies that accompany the figs.

>>52622649
Ironclad/Pre-Dread are basically the same era. 1970~1900 or so.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_ironclad_Caio_Duilio

File: 20170409182300_1.jpg (400KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1920x1080px

MOTHERFUCKING VANGUARD!

>>52625482
>improvised POS with the turrets off the Follies
yeah nah

>>52626576
>not liking the boat that pretty much perfectly sums up britain's state after ww2

File: Photo01bbVanguard2NP.jpg (96KB, 1065x840px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1065x840px

>>52626576
Why you hating on Vanguard?

File: 1078fe63f5790a4baffcf43693748eb5.jpg (570KB, 1800x1224px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1800x1224px

>>52632688
>a hash battleship built from whatever old trash you had sitting around
>still probably would had been more than match to biscuitmeme

>>52633403
Vanguard was arguably better then Bismark. Essentially the same armament, better armour, superior Fire Control, modern hull, more efficient propulsion.

Rather then scrap the lion hulls, they made a battleship out of spare parts, which is pretty clever. She was delayed a lot throughout the war due to shortages, and really, the British building CVs was a better use of time/material. Still, if they needed a battleship, they could have had her afloat in 41.

After painting the deck onto a 1:2400 carrier, I can safely say... fuck that. Next time I'm putting a fucking sticker on it.

It came out okay but damn was it ever a nightmare.

>>52636426
Art is suffering.

Blood Wake campaign is starting it's first mission, hunting down Russian ships attacking the Japanese in the Kuriles.

File: Greenbirch_Turn_00.png (81KB, 2000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 2000x1500px

>>52640795
Banshee's the St Vincent, Vermont's the Connecticut, William I's the Rurik, Horizon's the Omaha, Zenith and Nadir are Clemsons, Essex is the Kent, and Tsushima and Port Arthur are Kerches

>>52644757
Jap CLs are pretty cute.

So /nwg/, CLs or CAs?

>>52644775
CLs for basically everthing outside long range open water engagments and trying to gunfight battlecruisers. 6' ROF advantage over 8' can get huge, especially for Americans and their lunatic obsession over CL ROF in the interwar. Also torpedoes are a hellova drug.

>>52644775
In general, CLs. But as cute as they were the IJN's light cruisers were kind of lousy at anything other than being big, angry destroyers. So if I had to choose based on utility, probably a CA there.

>>52645155
>Implying big angry destroyer isn't the best role for a CL.

>>52645380
For the 20's and 30's they were fine. By the 40's their "big angry destroyers" couldn't engage aircraft properly and became a liability rather than an asset.

By that point the Akizukis were essentially pushing light cruiser territory anyway, and the competing design was in fact a Tenryu conversion with 127mm DP guns.

>>52645380
But why use the shitty IJN CLs when you can have the hilarity that are the Brooklyns with their 150-180 6" shells per minute main battery. Torpedoes are for pussies.

>>52644897
Yeah, I think the Brits had the right idea, basically ditching the CA concept after the Counties and Yorks.

>>52644897

CLs were really better Escorts, being more reliable against small, fast ships and boats than the slower firing CAs; but when it came to generalized Surface Warfare, CAs were really the 'jack of all trades' of the ships, being the real medium ground between the fast firing speed of Destroyer Guns and the slow, deliberate fire of the Battleships and made excellent flag ships.
As it is, if you pit a CL against a CA, with the sole exception of the American (may as well be a CA in everything but guns) Brooklyn-class and later CLs, the CL was going to the bottom as basically their gunfire would have only limited effect verses the CA.
Torpedoes are really a non-factor in this comparison as both could easily have them.

And then you had the US' Des-Moines-class that the US was trying to build during the war (and finished 3 of post-war), with their 90 x 8in Super-Heavy shells per minute which basically just eliminated the difference in results entirely.

>>52646066
Blame the fact that 10k tons wasn't enough for designing a satisfactory heavy cruiser, there was a reason why Japanese and post-treaty American heavy cruisers tended to be around 13k-15k tons.

File: IMG_20170411_122938577.jpg (1MB, 2592x1456px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1456px

Progress report: Nagato next to Zuiho (unfinished). The plan is to put meatballs on the planes and red striping on the aft end of the flight deck, then see where we stand.

File: Bearn 2.jpg (463KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 1000x750px

>>52647707
The planes are a nice touch. I know they make decals for carrier decks at 1/2400, but you can also take and mask off your lines and drybrush them on, if you've got the patience. It's a hell of a lot easier than freehand. Did that with pic related.

>>52649642
That looks good, did the Surrenderbote come with teak texture on her flight deck? Zuiho didn't, they intended you to paint her flight deck in full suicide-mission regalia which looks hideous and (by IJN estimation) wouldn't even have worked.

>>52649642

Looks beautiful but what actual use is Bearn in a game?

At ~20 knots she's slow for even a 1920/30s scenario and the aircraft she carried made the Fleet Air Arm's kit look modern. Even after the refit in the US, she was only useful as an aircraft transport.

Her aircraft are shit and she's too slow to launch better ones, so in which rules set is she worth painting? Or are her flaws below the level of granularity for the rules?

>>52650164
>what actual use is Bearn in a game?

Make Kaga and HMS Eagle feel better about themselves, they might be crippled battleship conversions but at least they'ren't Bearn.

>>52650210
>Make Kaga and HMS Eagle feel better about themselves, they might be crippled battleship conversions but at least they'ren't Bearn.

That's not an answer. Which rules set is Bearn worth painting for? Is it one which handles 1920s and early 30s carriers? Or is it one so general in nature that Bearns fatal flaws aren't taken into account?

I'm asking because I'd love to find a 1920s/early 30s carrier game. Something that could handle Hector Bywater's "Great Pacific War".

File: Clemson-Wickes gaggle.jpg (665KB, 1200x618px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 1200x618px

>>52649937
Thanks, texture was part of the sculpt (1/1800 WaS repaint).

>>52650164
>>52650274
Grand Fleets is a game that covers the interwar period, and might be suitable for actual making her useful (ish).

I've got her more just because she and Commandant Teste are really all there is for French carriers, and I've got an unhealthy love for weird and non-optimized designs.

She's probably most useful in Victory at Sea (where her loadout is a couple flights of Dewoitine D. 520's rather than her historical complement before they were all landed). There had been plans for a D.520 derivative that would have been a carrier plane, but none that I know of were ever built.

She's of passable utility in Naval War. She's got her historical complement, and special rules and the like give her some utility. It's more a case of, if you want any kind of close air support as the French, that's pretty well what you're stuck with (or Teste, depends on if you're playing with OoB's or just straight up points).

Dunno if she's any actual use in GQ3, but I'm sure all the optional rules would make her interesting to play with, at least.

She's always gonna be a shitbote, but sometimes all you've got is shitbotes.

>>52651334
Ah, mine's 1/2400 GHQ. I didn't do a WONDERFUL job with the pinstripes but I hid that with rubber marks. So she's basically done unless I decide I want to hit some of her lines with a super-light layer of highlighting.

I'd take a picture, but I've lost the light and my shitty phone camera would just make it look like a green and brown blur.

>>52651334
>Grand Fleets is a game that covers the interwar period, and might be suitable for actual making her useful (ish).

Thank you very much for that title.

>>She's always gonna be a shitbote, but sometimes all you've got is shitbotes.

True, but if she can keep the other gun line's spotter aircraft away from your gun line, she may be all you need.

>>52653701
Funky ass lattice masts. Didn't realize they were used that long.

File: 014502.jpg (56KB, 730x542px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 730x542px

>>52654981
Lattice masts stayed around for a quite while.

>>52654981

They were replaced in stages, just like anything else. The replacement mast designs had to be tested and tweaked, newer ships got tripods faster, etc.

File: 014462u.jpg (857KB, 1750x1112px) Image search: [Google]

857KB, 1750x1112px

>>52655384
>newer ships got tripods faster

Which is exactly why Tennessee and Colorado-classes kept sporting them well into 40s while earlier battleship classes lost them during 20s&30s.

>tfw you make a quick game to check something out in "Rule the Waves" - and end up playing on 'cus kicking British ass is so much fun ...

Damn you, Fredrik, for making this awesome game!

>>52662465

I must have mis-remembered Friedman's book.

>>52618863
There's something charming about those cage masts even if they ended up being inefficient.

File: r6xuIGu.jpg (390KB, 1450x828px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 1450x828px

Probably one the worst warship designs of 20th century.

>>52671186
There is literally nothing wrong with Furious.

>>52671186
I'm furious you would say this.

>>52671186

Oh, it's the good 'ol Spurious.
Where have his brothers Uproarious and Outrageous gone off to?
Off drinking with Argus again, I bet.
Those guys are becoming too chummy for comfort.
Way too chummy *if you know what I mean*.

File: Japanese Dolphin Polishers.jpg (180KB, 414x654px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 414x654px

>>52671927
Can't fathom what you might be implying.

>>52640795

Bloodwake and all that is still happening? Wow...

File: shrunk image USS Texas Launched 1892 commisioned 1895 photochrom print circa 1898.png (5MB, 1920x1421px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 1920x1421px

>>52618311

File: French pre dreadnought battleship Charlemagne.jpg (460KB, 1280x898px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 1280x898px

>>52673345

File: USS TEXAS 1895 9cabea58.jpg (187KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1280x960px

>>52673358

File: unknown French pre dreadnought battleship Good colourized image.jpg (202KB, 1244x734px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1244x734px

>>52673374

>>52673422
God, I love French pre-dreadnoughts.

>>52673345
>>52673374
American pre-dreadnoughts are cute! CUTE!

File: French ironclad Carnot underway sometime before 1896 Warship Battleship 1880 1910.jpg (476KB, 2048x1197px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 2048x1197px

>>52674711
>>52674437

>>52674835
Unf!

File: 1200px-Yokosuka-mikasa-08-2010.png (1MB, 1200x613px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x613px

>>52674853
>>52674711
>>52674437

find me more info in english on these than what is available on wikipedia.

File: USS Charleston at Guam.jpg (134KB, 737x502px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 737x502px

>>52674868

File: inflexible_unk_a.jpg (83KB, 743x489px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 743x489px

>>52674886

File: Cruiser Aurora.jpg (3MB, 3000x2084px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3000x2084px

>>52674913

File: Le Grand Hotel Hoche french pre dreadnought.jpg (287KB, 1242x748px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1242x748px

>>52674940

>>52674940
Do you have more of Russian ships?

I know Russia doesn't have a great naval history, but I'd like to see more of its ships.

File: russian_monitor_navarin_by_soload-d4rtqrt.jpg (304KB, 2194x1224px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 2194x1224px

>>52675039
>Do you have more of Russian ships?
>I know Russia doesn't have a great naval history, but I'd like to see more of its ships.

I wish I did but I currently don't. I do have this drawing and a Russian helicopter painted up in US coastguard livery though

File: MI-24 US Coast Guard Liverly from a Russian Movie 1.jpg (19KB, 636x473px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 636x473px

>>52676193

File: MI-24 US Coast Guard Liverly from a Russian Movie 2.jpg (27KB, 636x424px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 636x424px

>>52676203

File: pic.png (334KB, 1915x1080px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1915x1080px

>>52675039
You can find plenty here.

I'd love to see some pics of Japanese warships.

>>52676248
yeah but I'm looking for photos and lithographs of them from before the they were sunk or destroyed or scrapped.

File: HMS_Rodney_1943_Malta.jpg (84KB, 450x472px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 450x472px

hail britannia
also
>>52676467
see
>>52674868

File: 54883b79a47070dc5d719804430c2c1c.jpg (1MB, 1795x1205px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1795x1205px

>>52677561
Have an ex-pasta bote in Soviet service.

>>52674868
>>52678384
More?

File: 822a31c62465226e612b5ebeb5f98acf.jpg (780KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

780KB, 1280x960px

>>52676467
I can deliver a few.

File: Haruzuki.jpg (238KB, 2244x1303px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 2244x1303px

>>52681420

File: Japanese_cruiser_Tenryu_in_1936.jpg (93KB, 1599x628px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1599x628px

>>52681437

File: 1486662091576.jpg (907KB, 4194x2800px) Image search: [Google]

907KB, 4194x2800px

>>52681450

File: Yamato_sea_trials_2.jpg (81KB, 744x451px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 744x451px

>>52681472

File: ijn-myoko2.jpg (141KB, 1024x664px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1024x664px

>>52681479

File: 300px-Momi_II.jpg (8KB, 300x184px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x184px

>>52681493

File: 9665917e07fac3339a306fd9afbb49f8.jpg (52KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 736x552px

>>52681500

File: Japanese_cruiser_Yahagi.jpg (115KB, 1200x600px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1200x600px

>>52681503

File: IJN Fuso drydock.jpg (297KB, 1260x1024px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1260x1024px

>>52676467
This is the only thing on Reddit I will ever claim to appreciate.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/

File: IJM Takao seatrials colorized.jpg (125KB, 1280x926px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1280x926px

>>52681654

File: IJN_battleship_Nagato_and_her_all_crewmembers.jpg (387KB, 1417x1066px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1417x1066px

>>52681660

File: Hyuga.jpg (367KB, 2400x1552px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 2400x1552px

>>52681672

I appreciate the IJN dump

File: IJN Ashigara 1.jpg (178KB, 1450x646px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1450x646px

>>52681687

File: IJN Ashigara.jpg (253KB, 1450x648px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1450x648px

>>52681698

File: IJN Akagi.jpg (276KB, 1920x1152px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1920x1152px

>>52681706

File: IJN Hiei.jpg (792KB, 3121x2055px) Image search: [Google]

792KB, 3121x2055px

>>52681714

File: IJN Mutsu fitting out.jpg (395KB, 1450x1023px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 1450x1023px

>>52681720

File: IJN Nachi deck.jpg (200KB, 924x1280px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 924x1280px

>>52681741

File: IJN Nagato Akagi at Youkuska.jpg (52KB, 736x479px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 736x479px

>>52681754

File: IJN Shokaku_pre-launch.jpg (685KB, 1671x2438px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 1671x2438px

>>52681776

File: IJN Takao superstructure.jpg (798KB, 1549x1048px) Image search: [Google]

798KB, 1549x1048px

>>52681786

File: Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Akagi_1925 Fitting Out.jpg (458KB, 3594x2355px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 3594x2355px

>>52681799

File: Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Ryūjō.jpg (389KB, 3860x1652px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 3860x1652px

>>52681831

File: Japanese_destroyer_Hayate_Taisho_14.jpg (341KB, 1016x612px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 1016x612px

>>52681841
I may have some more good ones somewhere, but if I do, they aren't labeled for easy dumping. I could have sworn I had more destroyer pics than that too.

File: Commissioning_of_the_Aircraft_Carrier_USS_Ranger_1934__Portsmouth_Virginia- 2.jpg (312KB, 1600x1239px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1600x1239px

>all these ugly nip botes

File: HMAS_Australia_bridge.jpg (425KB, 733x1000px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 733x1000px

>>52681945
Anon asked for them, we delivered.

>>52681714
>single deck - the norm
>double deck - sorta strange but can see what they were going for
>triple deck - just fuck my shit up senpai

>>52691968
This is the sort of stupidity I love in Rule the Waves.

File: rtw_Settsu.png (46KB, 914x299px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 914x299px

>>52691968
you can't stop me

>>52692315
>outpagoda'd the frame
Doing God's work anon.

>>52681945
damn, that is a sexy ship.

>>52692649
Because when it sinks he wants to have a visible reminder of it.

File: rtw_enough.png (37KB, 641x313px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 641x313px

>>52692649
I try

File: IMG_0022.jpg (628KB, 960x1299px) Image search: [Google]

628KB, 960x1299px

>>52692778
>lattice mast on superstructure on turret
You grasp exceed grasp! You am play gods!

File: rtw_sendhelp.png (38KB, 641x313px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 641x313px

>>52693530
I for one welcome our new pagoda overlords

>>52693650
Is it a ship with pagoda or a pagoda with ship?

>>52695385

yes

I just had the worst game in The Hunters.

>second transit box of first patrol, air attack
>flub the dive roll
>4 hits
>damage is only flooding and the radio
>roll auto crew injury for air attack
>snake eyes, kommandant
>6, dead

RIP in peace KptLt Wilhelm Schmidt (someone made a table for rolling appropriately german names, which is great. There's also a brit equivalent for the brit campaign module, which gives names like Desmond Anthony Napier Fitzgerald.)

>>52681660
>Takao without the ugly green latewar camo

Rare

File: 1368263763605.jpg (38KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 480x640px

>tfw you want nothing more than to play out a scenario where Chile, Argentina, Brazil, the European powers, and Japan get dragged into a naval theater in South America, with the US just trying to deal with all these navies having a fight on their lawn
>dreadnoughts slugging it out under carrier escort
>weird alliances forming based on the locations of harbors and shipping lanes
>no, everyone at my shop refuses to play anything but 40k
How do you get a better group, /nwg/?

>>52697955
>>tfw you want nothing more than to play out a scenario where Chile, Argentina, Brazil, the European powers, and Japan get dragged into a naval theater in South America,

Do you have any idea how far the Pacific coast of South America is from Japan? Not only is it in the southern hemisphere, but Chile has basically the same longitude as NYC.

>no, everyone at my shop refuses to play anything but 40k

That's you problem. You need to find a shop which isn't overrun by WarHamster. Instead of a shop, maybe a gaming group?

>>52698088
>Do you have any idea how far the Pacific coast of South America is from Japan?
More importantly Truk is 14,000km from Santiago. A friendly base closer to or IN South America would make logistics easier, but that's still within range of any IJN battleship.

Also, the conceit is that there's a war on in South America. Is the IJN showing up to pursue South American rubber (for example) really that much of a stretch from the initial conceit?

>>52698361
>Also, the conceit is that there's a war on in South America. Is the IJN showing up to pursue South American rubber (for example) really that much of a stretch from the initial conceit?

Seeing as rubber is shipped from Atlantic ports which are even further away, yes it is a stretch - no pun intended.

The IJN can't steam into any old port and receive the specific logistic support it needs. Food and water? Sure. POL? Maybe. Parts and maintenance? No.

They'll need a BASE, like Truk with store ships, infrastructure ashore, etc.

>>52698401
If you can sail Akashi and some oilers into a port you have yourself a South American Truk. Which is what the premise assumes so that all these navies can fight themselves a little war.

But alas, the entire concept is a pipe dream anyway. Partly because shops mostly do Warhams, which means historical wargamers withdraw into smaller groups, which means shop gamers don't get exposed, which means shops only do Warhams. At least in my experience.

>>52693650
>This is the superstructure that has pierced the heavens.
>>52700384
>Back when they still had the cruiser-scale guns
Nice. I never paid attention before just how huge the stacks are compared to the superstructure on Lexingtons.

>>52698603
>If you can sail Akashi and some oilers into a port you have yourself a South American Truk

You have a Truk for as long as you can replenish the Akahi and the oilers. As you already noted, it's 14 THOUSAND km from Truk to Santiago and another ~3500 km between Truk and Tokyo. How much oil are you going to burn getting oil to your expeditionary force? How many more ships are going to be involved in protecting those convoys instead of fighting along SA's Pacific Coast?

In WW2, Japan had so much trouble replenishing Truk from Borneo that it potential BB and CV ops in the Solomans were adversely affected. And as bad as shipping enough oil will be, shipping enough is coal is even worse.

>>52702049
... do you not understand the concept of a "conceit"?

File: RTW-sendhelp.png (76KB, 1897x1013px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1897x1013px

ran out of pagoda pictures, have the austrian navies finest hour.

>>52700789
I love how the pagodas are blinding everyone to my questionable design decisions

File: IMG_2712.jpg (457KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 540x720px

What's on your desk right now?

Currently working on a batch of Fubukis in a bid to polish off the rest of the IJN stuff I have, before I start on a big block of Marine Nationale stuff.

>>52704092
I think it's pretty well understood when pagodas are involved.

>>52704092
It is RTW, if your designs don't cause naval architects to have nightmares you're doing it wrong.

More pics of American ships? Pre-dreadnoughts or vessels built up til the 30s?

File: the grand lets beat up france-alliance.png (8KB, 305x356px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 305x356px

>1903 france
>should we start a war against an alliance of three great european powers (uk, russia, and germany) and one asiatic power (japan) that outnumbers us 36 to 11 in pre-dreads, 40 to 12 in armored cruisers, 60 to 18 in light cruisers, and 170 to 37 in destroyers? - yes
>should we seek any allies to help even the odds? - no, gotta give our foes a fighting chance

File: USS_New_Hampshire_c1910_LOC_ggbain_04455.jpg (2MB, 4917x2893px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4917x2893px

>>52705300

>>52706638
Very sexy.

>>52695840
>Desmond Anthony Napier Fitzgerald

Known to his friends as "Fitzy".

>>52705534
if the kaiser wasn't a retard about pissing off the queen something like this could have been possible

>>52704063
... do you not understand the concept of "plausible"?

If you want some ABC, European, US, Japan naval royal rumble, then just pit forces from each of those powers against each other much like DBM/DBA. There's no need to "explain" why those battles are happening.

In fact, the more you try to "explain" why the match-ups are occurring, the sillier it becomes.

Just fight the battles. Everything doesn't need a back story.

File: bo.jpg (1MB, 2531x1317px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2531x1317px

>>52704170
>What's on your desk right now?

Right now I'm working on organizing the unfinished portion of the WW2 Naval portion of a inheritance I received.

>>52711499
You lucky son of a bitch.

>>52710664
Your argument that it's technically impossible, therefore "silly", is based on a misunderstanding of history AND of the premise. If you have a friendly port and/or neutral ports to operate out of and extend a supply line, you can basically operate wherever you damn well feel like. The Japanese conducted training cruises to Hawaii as late as 1939, stopping over at Pearl Harbor. Their cruisers and destroyers patrolled off British Columbia and Malta at the end of WWI. The Battle of the River Plate was preceded by raiding activities throughout the Southern Atlantic, and the IJN conducted a few (somewhat pointless) submarine missions off the coast of California early in the Pacific war. South America wasn't beyond the reach of the Axis and European powers, they just had little historical reason to do much fighting there and so they never bothered.

That's the important part of the conceit: that America is still neutral-ish, and there's suddenly an excuse to fight there even if it boils down to invoking obscure treaty agreements.

File: I-15.jpg (103KB, 1440x510px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1440x510px

>>52714962
>and the IJN conducted a few (somewhat pointless) submarine missions off the coast of California early in the Pacific war

>One of these was the Imperial Japanese Navy submarine I-17. The I-17 displaced 3,654 long tons (3,713 t) when submerged and was 365 ft 6 in (111.40 m) long. Her armament included six 20 in (510 mm) torpedo tubes and 17 torpedoes, plus a 14-cm deck gun. She carried 101 officers and men, captained by Commander Kozo Nishino.

A naval reserve officer, Nishino commanded a merchant ship which sailed through the Santa Barbara Channel before the war. His ship had once stopped at the Ellwood Oil Field to take on a cargo of oil. Unfortunately, while walking to a welcoming ceremony, Nishino tripped and fell into a patch of prickly pear cactus (now below Fairway 11 of the Sandpiper Golf Course). A group of oil workers saw the Japanese officer having cactus spines pulled from his backside and began to laugh.[1][2] As a result, Nishino chose the oil field as the target for his deck gun. Most of the damage he inflicted was within 300 m (980 ft) of the spot he had fallen.[3]

I don't know, sounds like at least one Japanese sub felt pretty fuckin' justified to raid the California coastline :V

>>52714962
>Your argument that it's technically impossible, therefore "silly", is based on a misunderstanding of history AND of the premise.

The misunderstanding in entirely on your part.

>If you have a friendly port and/or neutral ports to operate out of and extend a supply line, you can basically operate wherever you damn well feel like.[/quote]

Not during a war, fuckwit. Neutral powers, and you're placing the US in that category for your asinine little fantasy, must follow very specific treaty obligations dating back to the mid-1800s. I'll point to Graf Spee issues in Montevideo after River Platte and France's limited support of Russia's 3rd Pacific Squadron during it's trip to Tsushima.

>The Japanese conducted training cruises to Hawaii as late as 1939...[/quote]

They weren't at war, dipshit. If they had been, they would have been limited what supplies they could buy, how long they could stay, how often they could visit, and how many warships could visit. The IJN cannot stage through Hawaii to fight a war in SA and the US as a neutral is obligated to stop it.

>Their cruisers and destroyers patrolled off British Columbia and Malta at the end of WWI.

Those cruisers and destroyers were based and supply out facilities provided by Japan's ally, the UK. (continued)

>>52714962

(continued)

>The Battle of the River Plate was preceded by raiding activities throughout the Southern Atlantic

With what limited supplies Garf Spee required being taken from capture merchants and or pre-positioned supply ships. Despite that Spee was essentially out of main battery shells after the battle and had no repair parts available for her galley, water distillation plant, and diesel purifiers.

> the IJN conducted a few (somewhat pointless) submarine missions off the coast of California early in the Pacific war.

Long range patrols be single subs do not have the same logistical issues as the same by BatRons, CruRons, and DesRons, dipshit.

>South America wasn't beyond the reach of the Axis and European powers

I'm not saying they are, asshole. I am saying that if they're going to do more than just sow the flag they're going to need logistical support.

>That's the important part of the conceit: that America is still neutral-ish

Which is another things you either don't or can't understand. A neutral US has specific treaty obligations under the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions. Among other things, warships are limited to 24 hour stays, extensions can be made for repairs, only one warship per port at any given time, and ships can't leave within 24 hours of an enemy's vessel. The list is extensive and specific.

If you want Japanese and European ships involved in some three-way ABC fight, they'll need to have been allied with one of the SA powers well beforehand so the proper type and amount of stores for combat operations could have shipped and stockpiled.

Don't try and "explain" your dippy idea. Just pit the forces you want against each other much like how Burgundians and fight Polynesians in DBM. The more your try to explain and excuse your "idea", the more problems your players will find until the whole "conceit" collapses. Just pPlay the game. You've neither the knowledge or ability to craft a plausible alternate history.

>>52709953
I love that paint scheme.

>>52713420
And I love the tradition of the Kearsarge being the exception to the BB's named for states rule.

File: visitantesX10.jpg (323KB, 1024x713px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 1024x713px

Here's a curve ball for all of you, Chile had considered selling Rapa Nui (meh anchorage but excellent location) in exchange for naval assets, first in 1926 to the bongs and then in 1937 to the highest bidder.

>>52715628
>>52715779
You, you need to chill, go out and take 10.

File: t3_2fbcwc.jpg (574KB, 3360x2069px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 3360x2069px

>>52717303
I guarantee you've met his type before. Incapable of chilling, ever.

Disregard faggotry, post botes... like these. Early refits were NOT kind to the Japanese battle line from the aesthetic perspective.

>>52717817
Fusos looked like shit when they were launched, looked like shit when they're rebuilt for WW2 and continued looking like shit until the very day when they were sunk.

File: t3_14wcqv.jpg (69KB, 744x459px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 744x459px

>>52718533
To be fair anything with more than four turrets looks like shit to me. But the funnels and not-quite pagodas that were common at that phase of reconstruction just made everything worse, even ships which looked fine before and after.

File: 1407088985266.jpg (106KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1280x720px

>>52718651
I like ugly botes, balanced proportions, flared bows and rational arrangements are just a massive turn-off to me.

>when you get a carrier kill at night on December 24
Merry Christmas, Admiral Lockwood.

>>52719455
>he says, posting a boat with a proportional, rational turret layout that only became prettier when they got rid of the silly serpentine stack
Had it been trunked into a single funnel that would have literally been all of my yes.

All of it.

>>52721308
Single funnel + British mansion superstructure and Nagato would be pure sex.

File: ijn-battleship-nagato-0008.jpg (308KB, 969x598px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 969x598px

>>52722090
The mansions may have been more streamlined than the pagodas, but they've always felt heavier and more cumbersome to me. A pagoda that actually looks decent rather than a series of metallic tumors growing out of each other is taller, but more graceful.

>>52725673
The monolithic nature of mansions is the very essence of their beauty.

>>52727142
I like British style superstructures on DDs and cruisers, but not as much on their battlewagons.

>>52719455
I've always loved those broadside casemate guns.

>>52724438
More German ships?

File: King_George_V_class_battleship_1945.jpg (487KB, 1911x1320px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 1911x1320px

>>52725673
>Tumours

What? If anything looks cancerous, it is the Pagoda.

>>52733039
British and American battleships were definitely the sexiest.

File: 1454099470767.jpg (251KB, 1011x554px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1011x554px

>>52733080
I think Germans are a strong contender.

>>52733039
>dat reading comprehension
Both "decent" and "tumorous" refer back to pagodas, just different extremes of what pagodas CAN look like.

>>52733169
Counterpoint: Scharnhorst&Gneisenau managed to be among the ugliest battleships of WW2 without having billion turrets and cancerous pagodas like their competitors.

>>52733655
And they were still better lookers than the Bismarck and Tirpitz.

>>52733080
Are we ignoring the Standard Class Fatasses in the assesment of the Americans?

File: f0oB5UQt60.jpg (1MB, 1426x1126px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1426x1126px

>>52733784
>not liking thicc ameribotes

File: Heavy_Cruiser_Aoba.jpg (65KB, 740x583px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 740x583px

>Aoba... had a hard life.

File: 1454075309204.jpg (127KB, 778x470px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 778x470px

>>52733655
>Scharnhorst&Gneisenau managed to be among the ugliest battleships of WW2
You take that back.

>>52734605
They looked better then the Turdpitz, I will give them that much.

>>52734605
>ugly turrets
>ugly superstructure
>ugly bow

What is not to hate?

>>52738024
Turrets look like every turret in ww2.
Superstructure looks modern.
Atlantic Bow like every ww2 ship.

So you don't like WW2 boats?

>>52734433
>Nearly wrecked at Cape Esperance because the Admiral in charge sailed his fleet through an American broadside
>Didn't even finish repairs before getting bombed to shit at Kavieng, ended up beached and on fire
>Irreparable damage to her engines cut her speed by 8kt
>Torpedoed, limps to Manila and gets bombed there
>Limps to Kure, repairs STILL not complete
>Declared literally irreparable, as in just fucking replace her
>Bombed AGAIN during the first Kure raid
>Strap some more AA to it, she'll be fine
>Sunk again in the second Kure raid
>Set on fire and broken in half in the third Kure raid
Man, never caught a break but kept on trucking.

File: 1487134006748.jpg (36KB, 480x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 480x400px

>>52741658
>Set on fire

>>52733784
they look fine to me

thin enough to go through the panama canal is thin enough

>>52749669
>short and curvy

Pretty much a perfect look for a battleship.

File: t3_2esx25.jpg (108KB, 960x581px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 960x581px

>>52750547
>he likes short and fat boats
Manlet detected.

File: hmsHoodVanc.jpg (443KB, 3000x2055px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 3000x2055px

>>52750547
>ShortCurvy

Counterpoint
Long and Thin.

>>52693650

My father, an admiral, is laughing at these designs. He thinks they're hilarious!!

>>52751347
ugly

>>52751347
>Long and Thin.

And horribly overweight since the day 1 of her career.

>>52752269
When i saw people reposting these it made me very happy, i knew people in their hearts loved pagodas

File: 74e2c2bbcab2103d12de94bbb4d8763b.jpg (69KB, 959x568px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 959x568px

>>52756446
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with pagoda masts. Some of them were quite stately. Others... less so.

>>52755493
Best ship of the Interwar period until the Nelsons. The first true fast battleship.

Only overweight because the admiralty learned from Jutland and added more armor.

Easily the best looking ship the UK ever built.

>>52752499
>Calling Hood Ugly

Hood might have had her flaws, but ugliness was not among them.

>>52756555
Kongo pagoda: Sexy
Ise pagoda: Meh
Fuso pagoda: Abomination.

>>52756707
A half-completed pagoda ala Bongous is far uglier than fully a blooming Fusou-type pagoda.

File: still_better_than_a_bongo.jpg (78KB, 800x550px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 800x550px

>>52757021
The Fusos, Ises, and Bongos all had tripod masts. The Ises and Bongos more closely followed the lines of their respective tripods, resulting in a filled-in superstructure that looks balanced on the ship. These superstructures are passable. The Fusos don't even come CLOSE to the profile of their tripods, and so they look like shit.

The Nagatos had heptapodal masts that were solid enough that the central leg had an elevator in it. Again their pagodas follow the structure of the mast itself, and have much more of a solid feeling to them. That makes theme the best imo, both to look at and from the perspective of structural integrity.

>>52756580
>Best ship of the Interwar period until the Nelsons.
maybe for Britain, but that's not saying much

>>52756580
Battlecruisers are not fast battleships. Both Japan and Britain learned that lesson the hard way.

>>52758034
I really wish we had a period where radar hadn't been invented yet so that pagoda-style masts proliferated across all navies.

File: HMSHoodVictoria.jpg (30KB, 600x278px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x278px

>>52759864
>Hood not a fast battleship

Hood has the same amount of armor on the belt as an Iowa class battleship. Same as North Carolina Class. Same as a South Dakota. Only 1/2 inch less then Bismark.

So either all those other ships are battlecruisers, or Hood is a Fast Battleship.

>>52759760
Name a better interwar ship then Hood or Nelson?

No one could match Hood's speed until the late 30s which isn't interwar anymore. No one could match Nelson's combo of firepower and armor until... Well no one ever did. Nelson's only real flaw was speed.

The only ship better protected then Nelson was Yamato and KGV. Yamato would arguably be better then Iowa one on one, but with the displacement disparity, not surprising. Montana would have been a good match, as would Lion.

>>52760948

Iowa would have had superior fire control. Not sure how that would have worked out.

>>52761260
Against Yamato? Depends.

In a visual fight, Yamato has a definite edge in a stand up fight.

Even with the 16 inch super heavy shell, Yamato would be a tough customer. The 18.1 hits on any part of Iowa would be penetrating. Iowa could disengage in theory if her powerplant was not damaged. The Japanese visual fire con was excellent. Radar was pretty behind the times. Of course, given most battle reports, radar only helped up to a point, since it tended to fail in battle more often then not, especially the more sensitive fire con sets.

Iowa could always choose where to engage, unless Yamato forced the conflict (by approaching a strategic objective).

It would be interesting.

>>52761583
>it tended to fail in battle more often then not, especially the more sensitive fire con sets.
???

Literally the only case I can think of is SoDak, and she blew out her entire electrical system.

>>52760948
Yamato had some pretty significant flaws in her protection scheme, particularly at the waterline.

>>52761583
Iowa had less armor, but superior damage control and generally better construction. And while Yamato's shells were bigger, their actual penetration was comparable to the Iowa's 16 inchers. The only way Yamato can win is if she scores a lucky hit early on and takes out Iowa's fire control radar.

>>52764259
Don't forget that Hotel & Palace apparently had major subdivision issues that could prove fatal when combined with Japanese fondness to counter-flood their boats.

>>52764259
>>52761583
See, this is the part of the argument that frustrates me. On the one hand you have empirical formulae which are fairly simple and straightforward calculations of maximum penetration under ideal circumstances based on studies of penetration by weight, diameter, and velocity. On the other hand you have computer programs which take so many factors into account, many of which involve unreasonable extrapolations (one Type 91 APC decaps against SoDak's deck and barbette at oblique angles equating to ALL Type 91 APC being prone to decapping), or which fail to take account of discrepancies in the *production* of data (British shells actually being used against battleships more than once, and the RN taking meticulous notes which SURVIVED the war), or in questionable use of said data once produced (reducing quality control to a ratio based on incomplete samples of batches over time, when it's already known that one ship's armor can sometimes produce the worst AND best samples per thickness in-type). Often the number of variables is so great that it becomes nearly impossible to isolate their individual effects, and some of the results that end up being generated are highly suspicious to a critical observer (IJN and USN shells under-penetrating 2-3" relative to their theoretical performance, British shells over-penetrating 2-3" relative to their theoretical performance) or have literally no historical basis in fact (the 12" shells of the Courbet performing literally worse than a light cruiser).

The Royal Navy in WWII had the most well-informed attitudes regarding the subject: that there are so many variables at play, many of which are outside your control, that if you're shooting well and none of your shells are duds you're having a good day. Anything else is fairly well required for reenactment and wargaming, but beyond a certain point is essentially trying to calculate the incalculable with little evidence in most cases to tell you if you were right.

>>52764259
The Iowa's damage control is overrated. Her armour scheme lacked, well armour. The 18 pen comparable to 16 pen was US propaganda. The Superheavy 16 had comparable pen to the 18, but a standard 16 did not. The famous armour pen test on the Yamato plate was done at point blank range. You can say a lot of shit about the Yamato, but you can't take the post-war BS published by the US Navy seriously. They had ordered the battleships to not engage her and to avoid battle. Air Power was deemed the safer option.

>>52766671
>They had ordered the battleships to not engage her and to avoid battle.

Which is exactly why yanks didn't gather up a task force of 6 battleships + support elements to greet her during Ten-Go.

>>52768454
Objectively the most attractive IJN capital ships.

>>52766797
If only...

>>52768525
The joke is that's what the plan was before Mittscher went kill-stealing.

>>52768620
He couldn't even let the BBs have that could he?

>>52768620
It could be argued that had the strike on Pearl Harbor been less successful that would have been what most Admirals would have done from the very beginning. Part of the reason you had a force of six (iirc) battleships in the screening force which met the Kido Butai on its way back was because of the chance that the US Navy would have sent their surface fleet after the attackers.

As usual, Hara got it right.

>>52768666
You said it Satan, at that point it was just bullying really, he probably called the BB Captains dorks over the radio too and used the arrestor hooks on his planes to give their crews wedgies on the way back.

>>52768677
Could you imagine what the pacific would have been like had the Carriers were at Pearl instead of the Battleship squadron?

File: 1433915620349.png (2MB, 4177x2026px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4177x2026px

>>52768703
Bullied TO DEATH!

>>52768892
> All the bombs had "lol kys faggot" written on them.

File: IJN Nagato.jpg (576KB, 1200x637px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 1200x637px

>>52768484
Agreed.

>>52768620
Such a shame it didn't happen. It'd have been a win for everybody: Japanese get to have Yamato die in glorious battle againt superior enemy force (when they sent her on her final mission they knew full well it was suicide, so that kind of end was exactly what they intended), Americans get to actually use their battleship for something, and we get one last epic battle to serve as the last hurrah of the battleship.

>>52769640
If getting bullied to death was good enough for rest of IJN's capital ship then it was good enough for Yamato.
>hiei bullied to death by cruisers and airplanes
>kirishima bullied to death by washington
>kongou bullied to death by sealion
>fusou bullied to death by aircraft and destroyers
>yamashiro bullied to death by battleships and destroyers
>ise & hyuga bullied to death by ijn's half-assed carrier-battleship hybrid conversion and airplanes
>mutsu bullied to death by a butthurt crew member
>nagato bullied to death by two nukes
>musashi bullied to death by airplanes

>>52770878
Yamashiro had a better end than nearly any battleship destroyed in the war. She steamed through the USN destroyer screen, seemingly ignoring the damage she took, untill broadsides from enemy battleships brought her down. The initial volley set her ablaze, but she still kept firing untill a later shot destroyed one of her turrets and set off the ammunition.

One of the USN battleships' captains later referred the final volley that destroyed Yamashiro as the funeral salute for the era of the battleship. She was the last to die by the guns of her own kind.

Why are so many space wargames basically just reskinned navalwargames?

File: yamato_comparison.jpg (167KB, 800x446px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 800x446px

>>52766671
The Yanks were playing it safe because they didn't know it was a paper tiger yet.

>>52771665
You know the reason.

File: uss_pope_dd-225.jpg (87KB, 800x454px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 800x454px

So where do you guys go for little ships to paint and play? GHQ has some, but there must be other companies selling them.

File: Nagara Sendai Jintsu.jpg (805KB, 1200x887px) Image search: [Google]

805KB, 1200x887px

>>52772663
Navwar does 1/3000, Panzerschiffe, CinC. Shapeways, old AA: War at Sea stuff.

File: Haruna_sea_trials_1915.jpg (665KB, 3060x2008px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 3060x2008px

>>52772798
Sweet, thanks. I like the selection Panzerschiffe has, and the prices are good. Pity there aren't any photos, though.

If I wanted to do small scale battles, what would be a good system? Last time I played was more than two decades ago, and I can't even remember the system.

>>52773176
You want small scale, like a a few ships per side? Check out GQ3. Has enough optional rules and crunch to make small fleet actions enjoyable. You might also cruiser on over to
>https://www.naval-war.com/

Naval War is a living ruleset that is under development, but largely playable, and small actions can still be quite fun despite playing quickly.

>>52773401
Sweet, thank you. And yeah, I've always liked smaller fights, a few smaller ships mixed in with a cruiser maybe, than the larger fleet actions (as fun as those are). Also had a bit of a boner for DD's lately, not sure why.

>>52770878
>nagato bullied to death by two nukes
On top of dozens of near misses at Yokosuka, the damage from which was never really repaired. To put it in human terms they popped open her stitches and let her bleed to death.

>>52771724

I still can't beleive it took them this long to put Space Battleship Yamato into SRW.

File: BoatGC.jpg (527KB, 2369x1457px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 2369x1457px

>>52772663
Just to toss into the conversation for comparison here are two Fubuki DD's
Left = GHQ Right = C in C

>>52774960
Huh.
GHQ's has a lot more detail, obviously, but CinC's is still clean and noticeable. Not sure which I like best, honestly.