Forum Replies Created
Although it’s a chunk of cost and effort, I’d recommend looking into selling at wargames conventions too – this is the kind of thing that I suspect benefits from people being able to take a look at it close up.
Even if it’s the other side’s ASR. “Now, we could let you rot in jail for what you did to us. But it turns out, we have a little job that needs doing by untraceable assets…”
Sorry, thought I’d subscribed to this. OpenSCAD and Blender mostly.
Do you have some design briefs? I.e. when someone went to the bureau and asked for an aircraft design, what did it need to do? Dogfighter, missile first stage like an F-104, etc.? Otherwise I might start looking at the Avro 730…
Interested, and I have some 3D design experience (blender and openscad), as well as a printer.
Really by the time war came the Amiot 140 series was obsolete – the French used it because it was what they had, but they replaced it with more modern bombers as soon as they got the chance.
I was very sorry to miss it, but I was busy on the Saturday and it was too far for a day trip…
A modern RAF fast jet squadron is usually 12 aircraft, but “12-24” is the usual range given for all types.
No worries, but shall we take it off the thread? 3dprint [at] firedrake [dot] org will reach me.
So something like this, maybe?
(That’s a 5mm hole in the middle, 2mm thick, roughly 25mm shaft, and I could run them off for about 10p each.)
https://web.archive.org/web/20130516192527/http://axgig.com/images/79016160811542429413.jpg certainly makes it look like one per hardpoint at most, and probably one per side.
Down at the excessively detailed end, Shaw’s Fighter Combat: Tactics and Manoeuvering is pretty solid.
Any chance of a full force list? It might be interesting to run this with one of the other modern naval rulesets.
In a modern naval game I mixed in a bunch of umpire-controlled merchant ships so that side blue had to get a proper target identification before engaging. It didn’t help side red much, though:
Very annoyed not to be able to make it. Hope it’s a great day, and I’ll look forward to the reports.
I think of the Flowers as being mostly trans-Atlantic escort, but I know very little about the coastal convoys. Hill class are not in commission until 1941, and Bangor not until November 1940. But if you take them as representative of the general class, I think you wouldn’t be far wrong – I certainly wouldn’t spot the difference on the table!
Well, let’s see. A V-class destroyer is 363 feet long, which at 6cm is more or less 1:1800. Popular naval scales are 1:1200, 1:2400 and 1:6000. https://www.magistermilitum.com/ has a decent range in stock to give you some idea of what’s available.
Don’t neglect shapeways for custom work. (I’m working on some custom designs of my own for 3d printing, but very very slowly.)
A male voice choir humming “When Johnny Comes Marching Home”?
What I want in any game is meaningful decisions, ideally that I have to make with imperfect information. Do I take the long safe route to the target or the short dangerous one? High or low? Take the secondary target or head for home?
This may mean dropping some degree of realism – a real bomber crew don’t get to choose their own targets or routes to them. But letting the simulation slide up a bit to include the strike planning level makes the final game seem a bit more meaningful and less of a dicefest.
Yes, the perfect situational awareness that comes from having models on a table seems to go directly against the “lose sight, lose the fight” principles of air combat – and I’d like to look at the early WWII era where various powers were trying different approaches to tactical unit size, before everyone settled on the lead/wingman pair.
Speaking for myself:
Generally no models, though I’m working on 3D-printed designs in 1:6000. I like to keep figure and ground scale similar, but it’s really not possible with naval combat.
Blue cloth, no hexes. Or a printed chart.
Usually two players, or two plus referee.
Not video games as such, though I’ve done Harpoon by email with assistance from software I’ve written.
I’m always interested in modern naval – will take a look at these and get back to you when I have a chance. Thanks!
Um. etymonline can’t find “moxie” meaning “courage” before 1930.
I don’t think “pluck” carries negative connotations in BrE – nobody gets blamed for being over-plucky. “Flair” might be better.
For the Americans, maybe “wahoo”?
That’s fair enough – I’ll certainly release them without base for anyone who wants to give that a go. But if they are mounted, would say ½” × 1″ be too fiddly?
That could also be 3d-printed on, though it would make setup more complex. I’ll certainly include a flat area for this purpose.
And if you were to extend the system to Finns (not so much in the Great War, clearly) it would undoubtedly be sisu.
Thanks – I was trying to get some idea of the level of complexity/detal. I think the scale, as in number of units, in a wargame is one of the most important decisions for a designer to make: you’re clearly optimising for one-on-one or at least small battles (noting the role-playing element), rather than huge dogfights as some games do.
Would you be willing to post a photo of an aircraft record sheet in play? I’d love to get an idea of the practical level of complexity.
Great to hear it’s continuing. Any pointers on the Jutland thing?
Yes, you can get the Full Thrust rules as free downloads at:
(You’ll want at least Full Thrust and Fleet Book 1, which changes quite a lot of the rules as well as having a list of pre-built ships. Fleet Book 2 gives you more ships and more weapons.)
One drawback to the rules as published, if you design your own ships, is that it can get a bit rock-paper-scissors: a fleet that’s all fighters and very light carriers can kill a conventionally-armed flight, which can kill an anti-fighter-specialised fleet, which can kill an all-fighter fleet. But if you stick with ship designs from the books or inspired by them, this shouldn’t be a problem.
Lovely minis and fire markers. But ouch, that’s a very one-sided fight; any feeling for why it went that way?
The problem I’ve always had with limited activation mechanics for naval (and air) warfare is that a sailing ship suddenly standing still in the water breaks my sense of disbelief. Maybe the admiral isn’t telling you what to do, but surely you can stay on the same course as before rather than stopping dead.
Does this ruleset deal with that at all?
Good stuff! Clearly the Italians were rolling British dice that day.
Perhaps an Arctic convoy, loosely based on engagements like the Battle of the Barents Sea?
I think many wargamers have a tendency to focus on the hardware and its capabilities; I’m certainly prone to this. Calibres, rates of fire, g loadings… The thing I love about Chain of Command is that it gives you a ruleset in which you have to use not just good tactics but the right tactics for your force mix: handle a British platoon as if it were a German one and you’ll get nowhere.
Not sure how much that can be achieved in an air combat game, since the physics seem to have forced everyone into a single tactical approach, but NATO pairs vs Soviet ground-controlled formations might well be doable.
I think it would be fair to sum up the American approach as basically “the aircraft do the hard work (and defend the carrier), the carrier is a base for the aircraft, the escort ships and subs defend the carrier”. So American ships were (and are) similarly lacking in big missile reloads; one serious engagement and they’re close to dry. (This is true even now; a modern British T45 only carries 48 SAMs, and reloading those is a dockyard job.)12/07/2015 at 07:49 in reply to: How Do Aircraft "Mine Sweepers" Work or Is There Such a Thing? #27556
It’s worth noting that the induction loop approach only works well in very shallow water: it was used in the Suez Canal, and the harbour at Alexandria, but it’s not much good for coastal approaches. The version mounted on the Wellington was called the Directional Wireless Installation, to confuse the innocent.
Currently planning to be there on Sunday, looking forward to it! We naval gamers seem to be a rare bunch compared with all the skirmish stuff that’s out there these days.
I’m just an enthusiastic amateur…
I think the satellite idea is an interesting one, but the RORSATs don’t seem to have been as great as everyone thought they were at the time, and the process between “there is a ship- or aircraft- shaped blip at location X” and “launch missiles” is still complex. (I’m a techie in real life so I tend to think a lot about the things that can go wrong in what the vendor promised was a perfect system.)
I’ve heard good things about Gorshkov’s The Sea Power of the State, even though it was published in 1979, but haven’t yet read it.