/nwg/ - Naval Wargames General

File: USS_North_Carolina_front_view_NARA_19LCM-BB55-4891-42.jpg (3MB, 4535x5650px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4535x5650px

Showbote a cute

>>54122848
Periplous. Less dramatically successful, perhaps, but more flexible and you're not as fucked easily hard-countered as the diekplous.

>>54122957
This is a sail thread, leave your ugly grey and smokey shits out of it for once.

File: DisdainForPlebs.jpg (24KB, 400x462px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 400x462px

>>54123379
>sail

Man the only way to propel a ship is through the exertions of thickly-muscled and virile free men.

File: Kaiser post Lissa.jpg (61KB, 800x529px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 800x529px

>>54123379

There, now you've made the SMS Kaiser cry.

>and all it did was end the Age of Sail on a high note
>partially dismasted leaking hulk and most beautiful thing on the water both

This isn't quite relevant, but do drydocks really help with speed when it comes to building/maintaining a fleet?

File: b5df0-ferdinand_victor_perrot_-_the_battle_of_grengam_on_27th_july_1720.jpg (444KB, 1600x1062px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 1600x1062px

>>54123500
My fellow gentleman of Nubian descend.

>>54123593
Modern day? Drydocks are essential for maintenance. Otherwise instead of 50 dudes with power tools scraping and repainting your hull its 4 divers with chisels.

File: USS_California_(BB-44)_-_NH_82114.jpg (8MB, 5056x2948px) Image search: [Google]

8MB, 5056x2948px

>>54123379
Bitch I roll coal where I want

File: belgian_dutch_floating_battery_1584_1585_by_roodbaard1958-dahmpa8.jpg (8MB, 4601x3601px) Image search: [Google]

8MB, 4601x3601px

>>54122848
I got too many images to post, so here they are:
http://imgur.com/a/yZDSn

Mind that it's mostly ancient and up to XV, XVI century ships.

>>54124213
Gorgeous.

>>54123605
>>54123500
Galleys had sails. Deal with it.

>>54123996
Better than the WWII shitpiles at least.

>>54125436
Well yes, you could use the sails. If you were a filthy Germanic

File: USS_Louisville_(CA-28)_off_the_Mare_Island_Naval_Shipyard_on_17_December_1943_(19-N-57222).jpg (102KB, 1280x947px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1280x947px

>>54125448
Don't hate the player, hate the game

>>54125667
If you only like those junkpiles you don't belong in /nwg/ you belong in /fagswhohaveuglyboatfus/

Long time lurker here, and after over a year and a half writing my (as yet incomplete) thesis on the origin of the Commonwealth Naval Forces I've come down hard with a desire to actually build and fight with all these ships that have been progressively taking over my life. So what are the best rules for Naval Warfare 1900-1918?

Also does anyone else agree with the idea postulated by Liesle Rose that of the Hochseeflotte had left port and tried to interdict the Channel in June 1914 it could have successfully kept the BEF from landing in France and helped German win the War? Ever since I read that little theory it's been sitting in my head.

Lieb vaterland, magst ruhig sein
Die Flotte schläft im Hafen ein

File: 2832908_orig.jpg (70KB, 958x538px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 958x538px

>>54125694
You just mad because you can't exceed 10 knots

>>54125757
What're you looking for? Crazy simulationism? Easy rules? A balance of both?

>>54125925
Leaning towards the more complicated side, if only because I'm hoping to convince my supervisor to join in. But if there's a good balance I'd be happy to use that.

>>54126068
There's Naval War; it's a pretty good starting balance. Check the last thread for the site link.

>>54126108
Oh wait a second, I derped. You're looking for WWI, not WWII.

Ah, there's Age of Dreadnoughts, if you can find it.

File: Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-J19316,_Norwegen,_Schlachtschiff,_Zerstörer.jpg (52KB, 799x526px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 799x526px

>Pinin' for the fjords

File: 1280px-Dvenadtsat'Apostolov1889-1931Sevastopol-1.jpg (164KB, 1280x989px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1280x989px

>>54128558
Pre-dreads a qt

File: MzkWH3o.jpg (816KB, 2577x2000px) Image search: [Google]

816KB, 2577x2000px

hello i am bote

>>54130479
I've heard the popovkas weren't as awful at seakeeping and gun stability as often portrayed, despite the shorter-than-a-flaccid-cock freeboard.

So what naval games do you have in your collection? I have 3rd Fleet and PQ-17.

There's also Empire of the Sun and Conquest of Paradise, both with strong naval themes.

>>54131213
I'd lay her guns.

File: CSSShenandoah.jpg (68KB, 740x581px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 740x581px

THE SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN

>>54126068
Try GQ3 Fleet Action Imminent, or Grand Fleets, both are available for perusal in the OP mediafire.

File: 18056342_1637807532926875_3623048373794754346_o.jpg (261KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 2048x1536px

An anon pointed out earlier that we didn't post enough models, I'll dump some from a commission modeller that does age of sail stuff, since the fluyt fondlers are out today in force. I like age of sail stuff too, but I disagree that my lifeless smoke belchers are ugly.

File: 17038701_1561123523928610_5185996798985942165_o.jpg (275KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 2048x1536px

>>54134454

File: 17807350_1617592264948402_1830145696746020531_o.jpg (332KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 2048x1536px

>>54134482

File: 18121112_1637809956259966_6311944900425546105_o.jpg (293KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 2048x1536px

>>54134494

File: 18193886_1637893466251615_2558159897464177381_n.jpg (106KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 960x960px

>>54134565

File: 18814904_1679514565422838_5683338274598791176_o.jpg (184KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 2048x1536px

>>54134573

File: 19400342_1710975378943423_5017834170914037353_o.jpg (260KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 2048x1536px

>>54134591

File: 18891784_1687821204592174_2254714321252813326_o.jpg (238KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 2048x1536px

>>54134609

File: 18836760_1687820874592207_7797574755630867875_o.jpg (264KB, 2048x1537px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 2048x1537px

>>54134741

File: 18839761_1687822154592079_9031329620900252786_o.jpg (260KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 2048x1536px

>>54135036

File: 18880258_1687821027925525_3156771804858737457_o.jpg (182KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 2048x1536px

>>54135054

File: 18880290_1687821454592149_7408379864751141_o.jpg (308KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 2048x1536px

>>54135193

File: 18922701_1686591551381806_3474715894045269091_o.jpg (310KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 2048x1536px

>>54135216

File: 20170520074508_1.jpg (580KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

580KB, 1920x1080px

I love botes!

Bismark was a shit bote. Get over it.

File: GHQRevenge.jpg (125KB, 714x230px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 714x230px

>>54134573
I'd love to do Age of sail but the rigging would make me want to kill someone. So I stick with my modern-ish stuff.

>>54135423
Is that a galley with mostly centerline guns in the background?

File: 68698550.jpg (22KB, 338x338px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 338x338px

>>54135849
What the fuck am I looking at

>>54137086
Steel Ocean's version of one of North Carolina-class's preliminary studies if I remember correctly.

>>54137086
North Carolina Proposal, Plan B.
Speed, armor, 9x14 inch guns.

File: 20170520074641_1.jpg (403KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 1920x1080px

>>54137086
Motherfucking Freedom Boats.

File: 20170314110510_1.jpg (412KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 1920x1080px

>>54135849
More a fan of the Tosa myself. Or as I like to call it, Nagato++

File: 26.jpg (371KB, 1922x1514px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1922x1514px

>>54137316
>everyone else was either moving towards triple/quad turrets or had already adopted them
>ijn still clung on to double ones

Cute.

File: British_battleship_HMS_Vanguard_(23)_underway_c1947.jpg (187KB, 1280x956px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1280x956px

>>54137656
And then the British gave the last battleship ever laid down double turrets.

>>54137656
>dataft.jpg
Love me some cruiser stern.

File: USS Los Angeles.jpg (135KB, 740x605px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 740x605px

>>54138029
That's a battleship anon. This is a cruiser.

File: Le_Redoutable_(1889).jpg (2MB, 4000x1941px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x1941px

For anyone else that is wondering about the reasons for using inverted prows, have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_bow

>>54138053
No anon, that's what that particular shape of stern is called.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/712ya5z1pybep3h/Ship+Shapes+%281942%29.pdf

http://www.marineinsight.com/naval-architecture/different-types-ships-sterns/

File: Zell_Dincht.jpg (164KB, 640x448px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 640x448px

>>54138103
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern#Cruiser

I will be damned.

>>54138151
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtn0PuxgfkM

File: X Bow.jpg (175KB, 600x496px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 600x496px

>>54138072
And here we have the X Bow, the new hotness. Hopefully we'll start seeing more of these.

File: Zum-wall.jpg (28KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 600x450px

>>54138291
Needs more tumblehome. A slightly less ugly ship than Zumwall though, at least.

>>54138319
I kind of like the Zumwall. Reminds me of the pyramid space ships of Stargate.

>>54138336
I could believe there are evil hitler snake aliens behind some of the stupider shit going on in Washington right now.

>>54137686
That was because they had so many spare turrets and guns laying around, they could rush a new BB into production despite wartime constraints.

Vanguard wasn't really hampered by the turrets, in fact it was notable that she had almost no teething problems.

>>54138901
That's what happens when you use a design you have several decades of experience with.

>>54138938
Guess that is one of the advantages that comes with using refurbished WW1 turrets&guns.

>>54138336
Remove goold

File: image.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>54141304
I'm gonna have to upload all the 3rd party conversions I have for Babylon 5: A Call To Arms. There was a pretty good Stargate one someone had posted on the shitweasel's forums a long time ago. Pretty fun BSG and Star Trek ones too.

>>54141243
Goddamn Iowa Class BBs are among the sexiest military botes ever devised by mankind.

File: 18 MISSOURI juillet 1944 0163042.jpg (199KB, 1600x1245px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1600x1245px

>>54143836
Hull forms optimized for speed (even if at some slight detriment to seakeeping) do have a way of catching the eye in a pleasing manner.

File: Anton_Romako_001.jpg (398KB, 1576x2017px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 1576x2017px

>>54123560
The Battle of Lissa was by far the most metal thing to ever happen on the ocean. There really needs to be a movie about it.

File: 1366787396807.jpg (83KB, 762x668px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 762x668px

>OPfK or OPf(K)
>Obus de Perforation dispositif 'K'. APC with dye bag. Unlike many nations, French APC dye shells included a nose fuze and a small explosive charge to disperse the dye. This made it possible to not only color the shell splashes but also to color hits.

>mfw the fucking Frenchies didn't just shoot your ship full of holes, they made it so they splattered gaudy paint everywhere too

File: 1280px-Courbet-Marius_Bar-img_3152.jpg (167KB, 1280x750px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1280x750px

>>54144517
hon hon hon~

>>54147417
Are there any naval wargames that specifically focus on the general era of 1860-1890 or thereabouts?

BROADSIDE OR PINTLE/MORTAR

CHOOSE YOUR SIDE

File: image.jpg (34KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 300x200px

>>54147687
I choose BOMB KETCH!

>>54151489
>>54153176
Ironclads are love.

>>54130526

The design was a result of post-Crimean War treaty restrictions on Russian naval assets in the Black Sea. Russia was limited to a few corvettes and had to dismantle all naval shipyards. The Popovkas exploited a loophole allowing defenses for the Kerch straits and Dneipr estuary. They worked very well when you consider the treaty restrictions.

>>54147661

Far too much technological improvement in all aspects of design occurred during that period for one rules set to handle.

A system which successfully models the 1890 Victoria/Sans Pareil class battleships would model the 1860 Warrior class armored frigates as a slow moving targets.

Guns, armor, engines, searchlights, torpedoes, the advances are so great and so widespread you might as well ask about a wargame which deals with air combat between 1920 and 1950.

>>54155474
>Guns, armor, engines, searchlights, torpedoes, the advances are so great and so widespread you might as well ask about a wargame which deals with air combat between 1920 and 1950.

Bah, that can't be so ha--

>Looks at War Thunder

...ugh.

>>54155514
>>54155474
More seriously, though, do any good games cover at least parts of those eras?

>>54155625

There are any number of ACW and ACW-ish games which cover 1860-70. Yaquintos' two Ironclads games detailed hex & chit examples while minis games like Smoke on the Water or Hammering Iron. Boardgame Geek is a good place to ask and there are most likely already lists posted there.

While there are hundreds of "pre-dred" rules covering 1890 to 1914 and waqrs like Span-Am, RJW, Sino-Japan, and various "what-if" scenarios, 1870 to roughly 1890 is a little harder.

ATO published There Must Be A Victory covering AH v Italy in the Adriatic in 1866. It's operational with tactical flourishes. There's also Corpen 1889 minis rules which were based off GDW's VSF I&EF rules. I've seen it played and the people were having fun.

File: USS New Jersey BB-62.jpg (459KB, 2200x1550px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 2200x1550px

>>54156228
Thanks!

>>54156455

No problem, Anon. Glad to help in some small way.

Along with BGG, look at grognad DOT com for links too.

File: Connie v Java NEA.jpg (4MB, 2328x4752px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2328x4752px

>>54123379

File: swivel-guns-S.jpg (26KB, 410x253px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 410x253px

>>54122848
Ah damn, I should have just posted >>54160291 in this thread. I'm planning out how I'm gonna run an Age of Sail naval campaign in 5e D&D, sort of inspired by that Pirates of the Caribbean RPG vidya from 2003. I'm going with black powder being common and magic being rare, so hopefully the ship-to-ship combat won't become a game of who's wizard can fuck up the other ship the fastest. I also plan to give my players a fair bit of direction with plot hooks instead of just doing a sandbox like how a lot of naval campaigns I've heard about do. Any advice?

>>54161064
We do kind of run more towards historical stuff in this general, and to wargames more than RPGs, but...

Generally, a ship is commissioned for a specific task, or set of tasks. Assuming your players are in the service of a navy, either directly or perhaps as privateers, they'll basically have been given a task to complete within a certain span of time. The latter should be faaairly generous, given that sailing ships are kind of not very fast.

>>54161379
Oh, also. You said your setting does have magic. Does this include the ability to magically send messages at speeds that IRL would be reserved for radio communications? If so, this will drastically shake things up because it means the ship can in fact receive new orders on the fly very rapidly.

>>54161064
Hearts of Oak and the associated RPG Privateers and Gentlemen might be good to look at to get ideas. They're more historically oriented, but they'll give you and your players a good vocabulary and introduction to fighting sail.

I'll give you bonus points for adding bomb lances as whatever might pass for exotic weapons in 5e.

>>54161480
I forgot to mention, we don't have Privateers and Gentleman, but we do have Hearts of Oak in the OP Mediafire.

>>54161379
>Generally, a ship is commissioned for a specific task, or set of tasks. Assuming your players are in the service of a navy, either directly or perhaps as privateers, they'll basically have been given a task to complete within a certain span of time. The latter should be faaairly generous, given that sailing ships are kind of not very fast.
Yeah, that's privateers is about where I'd start them off. It provides a good balance of direction and freedom, I think. They get missions from whatever kingdom they're employed by and a generous timeline to accomplish it in, but otherwise they operate under their own discretion and are mostly free to go about these missions however they want. Of course I won't stop them if they want to go full pirate, or even just become merchants and do escort missions with their cargo ships. Plus I'll have world-events running in the background regardless or sometimes influenced by what they choose to do, they can choose to either ignore or investigate these events.

>>54161460
While magic does exist and it can do stuff like that, it's rare enough in the setting that the average person would tell you magic isn't real and that you should stop believing in fairy tales and superstition. Casters like wizards and druids are either directly employed by monarchs and rarely leave court, or crazy old hermits that live in the middle of nowhere, and even then you'd be hard-pressed to find one over level 8 or so. I don't plan on letting the players take levels in any class that has access to spells except Paladin and Ranger at first, and taking levels in full-casters would require special circumstances and training. I'm only really allowing Ranger and Paladin because I can flavor their weaker spells as mundane stuff.

Otherwise I plan on going for historical-ish, just with orcs and elves and shit and Pirates of the Caribbean physics.

>>54161480
>>54161518
Thanks, I'll take a look.

File: Sea_Pattern_Brown_Bess.jpg (22KB, 769x154px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 769x154px

>>54161651
Hope it goes well. Good Age of Sail roleplaying can be a little hard to come by at times.

>>54130479
Their biggest flaw was the totally exposed gun pit

>>54137086
Rodney done right

>>54161745
Thanks. Speaking of firearms, that's a hurdle for me to get over while running this in 5e. The official rules have stats for precisely 3 black powder weapons; a flintlock pistol, a flintlock musket, and a big ass cannon. I've been stating out some stuff based on those as guidelines and looking to Pathfinder for inspiration, but so far all I have added is blunderbuss, pepperbox pistol, dragon pistol, grenade, and swivel gun. I'm moving on to cannon now, and this Heart of Oak game seems to be exactly the source of nomenclature I was missing on that. Would you happen to know of any handheld Age of Sail firearms I'm missing? I'd like them to play a major role in boarding actions and some encounters while at port or on remote islands.

>>54161953
You've got most of them down. Maybe also include duckfoot pistols? There's also some oddities like flintlock grenade launchers ("hand mortars", they were called) and if you really want to get stupid, the Nock gun.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nock_gun

>>54162024
All of these seem pretty cool, and I anticipate a such a level of ridiculousness in combat that I already wrote out some hesitant rules for taking a swivel gun off it's mount and firing it from the hip, so these should fit right in.

File: 1280%20dpi%20full%20view%20with%20harpoon[1].jpg (143KB, 1280x612px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1280x612px

>>54161953
Like I said, you might consider adding the bomb lance, particularly if you're going to have larger aquatic beasties roaming the waters. It's a later 19th century sort of thing, so it may be higher tech level than you're looking for, but essentially was a harpoon/grenade that was fired into a whale to quickly kill them.

File: battleship-roma-deck-and-turret-seen.jpg (194KB, 1024x727px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1024x727px

>>54163563

>>54164660
That's metal as fuck.

>>54165536
Big botes

>>54137656
Their last battleships completed before the builders' holiday were pre-Jutland designs, mate. This was back when triple turrets were considered a serious risk even by US naval theorists, and the only real experience with them was the Austro-Hungarian navy which had some serious performance issues.

They never built triple turrets for their 36cm and 41cm guns because they never built new ships carrying weapons in those calibers, and retrofitting the older ships would have negative effects on performance.

File: Regia Marina DD's FL FG OT NB ST SA BR.jpg (491KB, 2196x1048px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 2196x1048px

>>54169404

File: Regia Marina in Gaeta.jpg (366KB, 2107x1400px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 2107x1400px

>>54169497

>>54164660
The great-great-grandfather of the bolter?

File: Regolo,_Mitragliere,_Fuciliere,_Carabiniere.jpg (25KB, 600x344px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x344px

>>54169517

>>54166778
Turret whip, shells striking one another in flight, etc?

>>54164672
I find it amazing that the Italians managed to make a 15 inch gun that hit with 16-inch power and had amazing accuracy...so long as the shell lots weren't fucked.

>>54172647
>Those guys on the boards painting
That's what my grandfather did, but on a much smaller bote.

Also, nice pic of washingtons ass end.

File: USS_San_Francisco_(CA-38)_off_the_Korean_coast,_28_September_1945.jpg (188KB, 1280x965px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1280x965px

hey

post cruisers.

any era.

more cruisers.

cruuuuuissseeeeeerrrrrs.

File: 1280px-Averof_Today2.jpg (229KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1280x960px

>>54174464

Imagine if the Chinese Treasure Ships actually made their way all the way to Europe instead of just stopping halfway in Saudi Arabia.

Scare those white folks to submission.

File: ZhengHesShipbyLarsPlougmannFlickr-56a040e65f9b58eba4af8b6c.jpg (93KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 640x480px

>>54175220

>>54175220
>>54175242
I've heard those dimensions aren't very well founded, though.

>>54175125
>Georgios Averof

Aw yeah, clearin' the high seas of kebab.

>>54175696
>critical weakness:blue cheese

Good looking boat though, she's a favorite of mine.

>>54175509
They found a rudder that probably would've been on a 60-meter ship, but that doesn't necessarily mean the bigger ships didn't exist.

File: image.jpg (27KB, 450x335px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 450x335px

>>54174464

File: image.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>54177275

File: image.jpg (17KB, 740x339px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 740x339px

>>54177300

File: image.jpg (124KB, 740x615px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 740x615px

>>54177370

>>54178607
>variag during his weaboo crossdresser period

>>54181049
No matter how often I see it that triple superfiring over double never stops looking awkward.

File: I-176.jpg (51KB, 1164x324px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1164x324px

>sure is a lot of slack-jawed surface ship faggots in this thread

File: Hedgehog_anti-submarine_mortar.jpg (77KB, 800x614px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x614px

>>54181970
Yes that's nice. Now if you would be so kind as to hold still for just a moment...

>>54181970
>japanese submarine tactics

confusedu-bote.png

File: Georgios Averoff.jpg (577KB, 1200x679px) Image search: [Google]

577KB, 1200x679px

>>54175696

>>54183232
>Put in the work
>To sink a Turk

>>54175509
Given that even during late 19th/early 20th century wooden ships of that size had extremely serious seakeeping issues the largest treasure ships either didn't exist at all or we're imperial penis extenders that rarely if ever left the harbor.

File: HMS Trenchant.png (1MB, 1024x708px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x708px

>>54181970
>not posting superior macross torpedo massacre bote

>>54184506
dem tubes

File: SB2C-5_Helldivers_roll_into_dives_during_exercise_in_1947.jpg (99KB, 804x1024px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 804x1024px

All y'all are obsolete anyway.

File: Porpoise_Class_Minelaying_Submarine.jpg (74KB, 800x267px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x267px

>>54184506
>Not shitting out your own minefield while torpedoing enemy merchant ships

>>54188393
>American submarines
>not getting sank by their own shit tier torpedoes

>>54188558
Wrong Porpoise class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grampus-class_submarine

Want maybe half a dozen Napoleonic frigates for a single box wargame. Who does the nicest?

>>54191327
GHQ, Langton, Tumbling Dice. Tumbling Dice are probably cheapest, GHQ and Langton nice, but GHQ is US and Langton is UK, so order according to your pond side.

File: British M1 Submarine 2.jpg (781KB, 2678x1532px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 2678x1532px

>>54184506
>torpedoes
>not heavy artillery

>>54191680
>"Yes you see when I say 'put a deck gun on her' you know I am not bloody well joking about."

>>54191680
It is a most efficient bote that sinks itself.

File: Surcouf_FRA.jpg (92KB, 909x391px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 909x391px

>>54191680
>>54191752
>>54192190
And then France

>>54187232
Just a reminder that the US Carrier Aviation Forces never won a wargame against a US Surface Warfare Force after 1938 (almost all of which assumed modern AA weapons) until 1976.
Carrier Supremacy Dickwavers can blow it out their asses - COMBINED FLEETS win naval wars.

>>54191680
>>54193495
Naval Treaties produce funny things.

>>54193714
I would honestly chalk that up to US anti-aircraft crews and shipboard AA weapon suites being generally the best in the world for most if not all of that period.

File: British X1 Submarine 2.jpg (57KB, 846x382px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 846x382px

>>54193495
>only one gun turret
Do try to keep up, frogs.

>>54193799
That is kind of the point, anon.
The US' Surface Warfare Fleets are the US' Anti-Air Fleets, and the primary defensive arm of the USN in general. The US' Surface Warfare Fleets' only real offensive strategy was 'defend' a new battle line that was X yards ahead of the old battle line ad nausium.
Carriers joggled this up like crazy because they could strike way beyond the battle line, suddenly and almost without warning, which surprised absolutely everyone - even Billy Mitchell.
The US' Surface Warfare School took a few years to adjust to this and plan a counter. Judging from the fact the US entered WW2 with more than half an idea on AA and the single best Heavy-AA gun in the war already, I would say they were at least a little successful.
Once the Surface Warfare School had adapted to the existence of Naval Aviation, they started routinely crushing the Air Arm of the Carriers with little problem in theory (wargames) and in practice proved adequate against the Japanese (discounting the A2A kills of Naval Aviation).
In the end, Carrier Fleets are great at attacking, but extremely horrible at defending themselves; Surface Fleets are excellent at defending, but too short ranged to be good at attack.
Combining the two gives the best application of power.

>>54194807
Right, but it still must be kept in mind that not every other navy had AA warfare as down to an artform as the United States did. An American surface warfare group may hold up, but others probably wouldn't. The Japanese sure didn't.

Where is a good place to buy Victorian/WW2 minis?

>>54195255
Shit, I meant WW1.

So, in one of the articles I was researching it was claimed that the German Nassau-class dreadnoughts were exactly 19% superior to their British St Vincent-class counterparts. Would you agree with that?

>>54195645
I feel it was more like 18.75%.

>>54195645
19 percent superior in what, exactly?

It was a known and acknowledged thing that German warships of the period tended to outperform British ones in a few ways. German fire control practices were better and their shells were more reliable at bursting after penetration, for example.

>>54195797

>'Not only is Germany rapidly increasing the number of her warships, but her latest battleships are being more heavily armed. For instance, the Rheinland, the third German battleship of tho Dreadnought type to take the water, her predecessors being the Nassau and Westphalen, is slightly larger than those two vessels, being of 17,960 tons, compared with 17,760, but is similar to them inessential details. Her armarnent will comprise twelve 11in. guns, so arranged that all can be fired on either broad-side and twelve 6.7in. weapons mounted on the lower deck. Tho weight of the shell fired by these two types of gun is 760lb. and 132lb. respectively, so that the weight of metal discharged in one round from all the guns will be 9,120lb. for the 11in, and 1,5841b. for the 6.7in. weapons, a total of 10,7041b. The armament of the St. Vincent, tho latest British Dreadnought, is ten 12in. and twenty 4in. guns, and tho weight of one discharge 9,00lb., so that the German vessel will have a superiority of about 19 per cent.

Official British Naval Documents are fascinating to read with 20-20 Hindsight. They really were deeply concerned and very much helped drive the Naval Arms race and War scares. And then neither side ever actually fought a real battle with one another, rendering all that build-up for naught.

>>54195929
Heh. Well, they did get things wrong about the Nassaus in the end. They did have twelve 11'' guns, but they could only fire 8 per broadside (which incidentally was the same number of guns the St. Vincent class could bring to bear). They also overestimated her shell weights and the size of the secondary guns; the 11'' guns fired 666 lb. shells, not 760 lbs, and the secondary battery was twelve 15 cm (~5.9'') guns firing 99.9 lb shells.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassau-class_battleship

>>54196071
It's a trend I've seen in a lot of the documents of the time that the British consistently overestimated the German Warships in both firepower and armour, even moreso than they eventually turned out to be.

>If we assume for the moment that the whole of Germany's seven battleships will be of the same pattern as the first four, and that the cruiser "G" will be similar to the "F," and, at the same time, that our battleships and cruisers of this year's programme will be of the. St. Vincent and Inflexible type respectively, it will be found that the completed Dreadnoughts of tho two Powers in 1911 will mount the following totals of guns:
>British total .112
>German total .204

On a side note, does anyone else here study Naval Military History professionally? I mean, sure there's hardly a good job market for it, but they say to do what you love and making a career out of it has been an experience.

>>54196214
>It's a trend I've seen in a lot of the documents of the time that the British consistently overestimated the German Warships in both firepower and armour, even moreso than they eventually turned out to be.

This is part of a fairly common and more general phenomenon throughout the history of early modern and modern warfare; assuming the enemy's kit/vehicles/etc... are unequivocally better than one's own. This is probably because soldiers and sailors in these sorts of warfare tend to experience the effects of the enemy's equipment much more viscerally than they do their own.

Granted, in WW1 this was aggravated by things like the British Lyddite-filled shells being much more prone to ineffectual or premature detonations than the German TNT-filled shells.

>>54196071
>>54196214
Here's Navweaps' pages on the respective main battery guns:

>http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_12-50_mk11.php
>http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_11-45_skc07.php

File: due079.jpg (1MB, 1400x819px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1400x819px

USS Lawrence vs HMS Detroit: The War of 1812 on the Great Lakes (Osprey Duel 79)

Most of the critical naval fighting during the War of 1812 took place, not on the high seas, but on the inland lakes of North America: the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain. Carrying between 12 and 22 cannon, the British and American sloops-of-war were ship-rigged, brig-rigged or schooner-rigged vessels with their guns on a single deck. Actions often involved two ships facing each other broadside to broadside, the best example of which was the battle of Lake Erie in 1813 where HMS Detroit led a Royal Navy squadron against the USS Lawrence -led US Navy. Featuring full-color artwork, this lively study investigates the prolonged struggle between British and US sloops-of-war, highlighting the differences between the war on the lakes and the war on the oceans during the Age of Fighting Sail. It reveals the circumstances under which these ships were built, how they were armed, and the human story behind their construction and use in battle.

https://mega.nz/#!G0kQSRID!0TuOsRravPMqLJwir8kcbudaJwJjlgKZg0_ogv_Z2Uk

>>54195929
>Her armarnent will comprise twelve 11in. guns, so arranged that all can be fired on either broad-side

Guess that someone in the intelligence service either fucked up or they really didn't expect Germans to go for a hexagonal turret arrangement.

File: Photograph_of_the_Battleship_USS_Michigan_-_NARA_-_19-N-13573.jpg (5MB, 3728x2768px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 3728x2768px

>>54197921
To be totally fair, it wasn't without precedent at the time in battleship design. The Americans had the South Carolina and Delaware classes in service by then; both of which had all-centerline turret arrangements (though the wacky placement of the aft turrets on the latter ships caused a fair number of issues) capable of firing their full complement to either broadside.

>>54197921
Claiming the British had an 'intelligence service' at the time is a bit of a stretch, though Room 40 were far ahead of the curve in reading signal traffic. Most of what the British knew came from attaches and reports from people spying on the shipyards. In fact one of the best British sources of intelligence on the German naval construction was the manager of the Coventry Ordnance Works.

File: Algerie.jpg (160KB, 1280x854px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1280x854px

>>54193739
Like contretorpilleurs, for instance.

The weird thing was that France was actually really good in some cases at working within the treaties. Pic related is regarded as one of, if not the best treaty cruiser built.

>>54198622

>honestly surprised that those damned things never sunk themselves

>>54195929
>>54197921

Bear in mind they were trying to get money out of Parliament. A *lot* of disingenuous shit went down on both sides of the Naval Race for a lot of various reasons, not least of which was taking out the House of Lords.

>>54199022
Nelrods did pretty damn well considering their status as the OG treaty cripples.

>>54201464
Quit trying to make me sad about those awful reds molesting a sexy old pasta bote.

>>54201493
Such is life. Sometimes you win, other times you lose.

>>54198622
Funny thing about Nelrods is that they start off ugly as fuck but as you see them more and more they constantly keep getting prettier.

>>54125758
>I have no idea what knot is and how much speed is that
Not him, but if you are going to hurl insults, at least make sure what the fuck you are talking about

>>54161745
What's the difference between this and standard Brown Bess?

>>54204127
It is somewhat shorter and lighter than the infantry Besses but not to the same degree as ones used by cavalry units.

>>54206739

>Mommy, why did that ship eat two perfectly good armored cruisers?

>>54208299

Lord Nelsons and Deutchland battleships... such tragic designs. At least the Deutchlands gave long service.

>>54195255
What, no one here knows any good mini manufacturers?

>>54210220
GHQ and Hallmark are kind of the big names.

>>54210220
I use Tamiya Waterline Models because I play in a gym for the maximum space and I love actually making really pretty and detailed models.

>>54208495
Such is life, every transitional period is bound to make something obsolete even before it enters the service.

>>54211074
What is the biggest scale for nwg before it gets too ridiculous? (Ridiculous being playing games on a gym floor due to space requirements)

>>54212808
Probably 1/1200th. 1/700th models are big and incredibly detailed, but expensive as fuck and you really can't play it anywhere smaller than a large living room floor.

>>54213459
it depends doing fleet actions in 1/600 or 1/700 sure. Coastal actions with corvettes/sloops MTB etc can all be done in 1/600, is useful for aircraft as well.

>>54214537
>no butt bote

>>54215283

>my god
>Rodney and Nelson have no ass
>none

>>54213459
Where would you find 1/1200 miniatures?

>>54220073
For what era? WW2? WW1? Russo-Japanese/generic late 19th&early 20th century? Age of sail?

After watching Master and Commander the other night, I feel like doing a 1/1200 scale diorama of the Acheron and HMS Surprise. I'm not 100% fussed on accuracy (I mean it's fictional, so); what would be some good ships to use? 40 gun frigates from GHQ?

>>54220864
Late 19th, early 20th.

File: Richelieu 4.jpg (72KB, 744x523px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 744x523px

>>54217915
Richelieu is the superior all-forward main battery ship. She's got a nice butt with seven little turrets.

>>54221915
I think that at least WTJ makes models for that era in 1:1250.

>>54203980
most age of sail vessels struggle to exceed 3 senpai

>>54225327
Constitution could do 13 in a good wind, but she was a fairly late AoS vessel.

>>54225345
huh. well then maybe he should've said 15-20.

>>54221973
>cute french butts

>>54228904
What is this strange and wonderous vessel?

>>54229855
Royal Navy's Colossus-class ironclad.

File: neat.png (401KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 600x450px

>>54230136

File: USS_St._Lo_Cve63.jpg (62KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 800x532px

>>54231463

>botes that lost their names to prettier botes

>>54233134
>>54231463
>>54228904
Ah the mid to late 19th century, the promised era of weird looking ship designs.

>>54233584

Well, of course: it's the birthdate of Mad Science!
And do you know a Mad Scientist who DOESN'T like to Experiment?
Why, I think not!
It's a Frankenstein-ship building (so to speak) time, my friend.
(It is aliiive! Alive, I tell you!!! Alive!!!!!)
Ahem.

>>54233584
I'd say this thread needs more torpedo rams but even IRL there weren't that man.

>>54235687
Blame the fact that the only worthwhile thing that came out of that fad was HMS Thunder Child.

>>54235967
The funny thing is even then the torpedo ram part tended to get forgotten--a lot of artwork depicts her instead as a Canopus-class pre-dreadnought.

>>54237079
>the guns go on TOP of the turret, right?

File: image.jpg (72KB, 900x461px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 900x461px

>Beware our gunship, HMS Ladybird!

I dearly wish that someone would make gunboats like the insect class available at my chosen scale. Even more so than those, I'd like the Terrible Twins.

>>54195255
http://www.wtj.com/store/

Shapeways has a fair amount of WW1 era stuff, particularly in the realm of minor navies.

Sorry to barged in but any one of you folks know any good mechanic for submarines?

>>54242975
Good mechanics for subs to interact with surface vessels are harder to find than the lovechild between bigfoot and loch ness monster.

>>54244207
I know, i have searched for it...and barely found anything

>>54242975
The Hunters and Silent Victory are pretty fun solitaire sub games. Silent War and Steel Wolves are the "I have autism and 300+ hours to run an entire nation's sub campaign" options.

Has anybody here played Seekrieg V?

What era is the most ignored when it comes to naval wargames?

>>54254794
There's apparently not that many games set in the 1870s and 1880s; most non-AoS games set in the 19th century either go straight to the 1890s and pre-dreadnoughts or go further back into the ACW era.

>>54254906
Ironclad series on Steam...

http://store.steampowered.com/app/602860/Ironclads_2_Boshin_War/

http://store.steampowered.com/app/549400/Ironclads_2_War_of_the_Pacific/

Those are two I can think of. But yeah, not a lot of wargaming centered around that weird not quite steam period.

>>54255683
To be fair I was thinking mostly tabletop.

That said, if vidya is included, you can also add the Shogun 2 Total War DLC "Fall of the Samurai" to that list.

>>54254906
I wish there were more pre-WW1 ships available. Hard to run a long-term campaign without ironclads.

File: Exhibitor_Hall_Map.pdf (206KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1x1px

So I'm going to Historicon this week, and I was interested in picking up some naval minis. Any distributors I should look out for?

>>54122848
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftl6hjmqSnA

>>54258351
What a goofy movie.

File: Blood-and-Plunder-Ship-fight-1.jpg (430KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 2048x1365px

Other than Blood and Plunder, what games have crew mechanics?

>>54261977
In what sense?

>>54262050
Like, actual crews.

File: Torpedo-Squad4.jpg (40KB, 652x485px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 652x485px

TORPEDOES IN THE WATER!

>>54262146
I'm not sure if I can think of any else off the top of my head.

File: Bad Day for Bolzano.jpg (128KB, 806x518px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 806x518px

>>54263654

File: 1430129236330.jpg (411KB, 1024x957px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 1024x957px

>>54262146
I feel like I've seen some games ran at Salute that were sort of like that, but no idea what system. Could be some sort of ancients equivalent.

No idea what system pic related was, as an example.

The oddest thing about naval games is that most spaceship combat games are literally just naval ships with a black coat of paint, yet the former barely has anything out in the mainstream

>>54265938
It's the whole "historical" thing, being perceived as groggy keeps it from being popular. The other aspect is visibility and shelf space. We've had three games in recent memory that even have had potential to have any visibility in anything other than a very atypical gaming store in recent history. Pirates of the Spanish Main, Axis and Allies: War at Sea, and now Sails of Glory. I suppose you may or may not consider Dystopian Wars and Uncharted Seas too (but both have suffered under Spartan ADD). You don't have any especially crunchy historical naval games (although hopefully Sails of Glory becomes this) out there really capturing people's imagination and time the way spaceship games do, again because there's this perception even within our smaller world that "historical" somehow equates to extra nerd.

>>54266323
I was actually gonna bring up Dystopian wars

A real shame it's basically gone now, though my LGS still has a lot of their stock

>>54266346
I'd love to have an excuse to pick up some Italians and some French. Unfortunately, it's hard to justify acquiring what amounts to more "stuff" when you already have sufficient stuff to keep you occupied just on modeling for quite a while.

>>54266323
Just how many potentially even somewhat successful games Spartan Games' ADHD has killed by this point?

>>54269966
Uncharted Seas, Dystopian Wars (sort of), Dystopian Legions, Firestorm Armada (sort of), the really sexy models that were originally going to be for Planetfall, not even sure what else. It's about as frustrating as Catalyst, but fails to inspire the utter rage in me that Mongoose does.

>>54269966
At least seven.

>>54270640
I forgot they had some kind of Ancients or fantasy ancients skirmish game way along time ago. What else did I miss?

>>54270719
The two Halo games.

>>54270811
Really? I thought they were pretty well doing okay, being their current "thing."

>>54270832
Not really. Even Spartan fans aren't buying it, mostly because it doesn't offer anything new from Firestorm.

>>54258351
>300

Stylish film even if it makes Top Gun look straight.

File: Uss_pc-815_1.jpg (129KB, 800x556px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 800x556px

[muffled Scientologist fapping in the distance]

>>54265845
What about just 6mm, 15mm, or 28mm ships?

>>54274375
What ship is this? Google claims it's SMS Tegetthoff but the gun arrangement is quite wrong for that to be the case.

>>54274873
Pretty sure it's a Radetsky-class pre-dreadnought. It's a little hard to tell because of the angle and because the Radetskies were semi-dreads.

>>54272229
>Elron thought he found a submarine
>dumped literally his entire load of depth charges
>got several other ships and aircraft involved
>it was very probably a magnetic anomaly

>>54274873
SMS Zrinyi

>>54280499
>the freeboard isn't high enough
>more freeboard
>more
>mooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooore

>>54280534
Turn of the 20th century naval architecture at its finest.

>>54281476
>>54280499
I love the one bow mounted gun that looks like it has no travel at all. I guess those are hatches that would be opened on action I'm seeing that would allow it some play, but it looked pretty odd to begin with.

>>54282840
>>54282840