[Andrew Cree]

Ah, not seen that one yet, so presumably don’t have the set that introduced the card.

[Andrew Cree]

Having both, and having played both, the Hold Fast version is the one to play. The ‘Smuggling Run’ scenario looks to be actually winnable now whereas before it was a killer. The new version is also set up for multiple players rather than just 2.

 

Note that the Hold Fast supplement also includes more British, French, Spanish and US Characters and Ships of Renown; several other nations; the rules for the Terrors of the Deep; the new ships and some useful new rules – so you do get a decent amount of extra stuff.

[Andrew Cree]

Just roll off for what happens.

You could set up the board for a game, but seriously it would be incredibly one sided in favour of the attacker.

Close Quarters page 50 denotes transport capacity for a number of units. The LCM-3 is noted to transport 30 men or 1 light tank/armoured car/APC or 1 Medium tank/self propelled gun…meaning a typical 1,000pt platoon would require between 3 and 5 depending on composition. No navy is going to detach a CV or BB to escort that force. For example, in ‘These Men are Dangerous’ Ulster Monarch – landing SAS-trained raiders – operated without escort*.

 

Likewise, if an air unit attacks a surface target…they get to operate more or less unopposed. You could set up an ‘Airstrike’ mission with the platoon as a target but…other than the flak, what defences are there? Heck, if you have an air spotter then you might even be able to whistle up a single fighter…against a heavily escorted raid.

Now I will allow that using VaS and a force with one or more CVs would allow for a more spirited air defence, might even want to rule for planes launching from carriers (start disadvantaged, 1-2 planes per turn?).

For the most part though, I’d apply KISS and just roll off.

 

*This did lead to an interesting exchange with a cruiser:

Cruiser (C): Where the hell do you think you’re going?

Ulster Monarch (UM): Am going in

C: Proceed south at once

UM: Am going in to land troops

C: What support do you want

UM: Everything

[Andrew Cree]

After finding my copy of Close Quarters (the Cruel Seas expansion), turns out they have ‘Invasion Rules’ on page 50.

A Reinforced Platoon would barely be noticeable in VaS. You can fit the standard 1,000pts into about 5 LCM-3s (British/Americans) , a Marinefahrpram (Germany/Italy) or 3 Daihatsu Landing Craft (Japan). Tank War force would be a bit bigger but not by much.

I suppose you could rule for diverting the airstrike from it’s initial target to defend a new target but…how often did that happen? AFAIK, only the RAF, RN – and later the USN – had a system in place for in depth fighter control of the sort you are advocating. Consider as well that if an air unit has made it’s attacks for the time period it would be out of fuel and weapons and therefore unable to defend a second location.

 

This should really have been made clear in the books, but from a practical side I think it’s best to just roll the dice for these particular match-ups due to their one-sided nature.

[Andrew Cree]

Whilst I don’t see any reason you can’t play out an air-raid on a unit using Airstrike, or an attack on transported units using VaS/CS I would point out that in the first case there is no air defence, so it would simply be attack aircraft vs. Flak with no real penalty for the attacker.

In the second case, again there should be no warships in the transported unit, it would be warships vs. sufficient transports to ship the reinforced platoon. Sure, if you’re playing Germany you can take Siebel Ferries and Artilleriefahrprams to provide some escort in CS – but if your opponent has decided to field a British Black Swan-class Sloop (or equivalent) as their command ship you’re outgunned, outranged and outmanoeuvred.

 

I’d say in those two cases keep it simple and just roll the dice as indicated by the rules, inflicting the standard losses on the loser.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by Andrew Cree.

[Andrew Cree]

Sloops are already in the game, covering any unrated ship with 18 or fewer guns – ships with 20+ guns were usually rated.

Although called Brigs, the term is a contraction of Brig (rigged) Sloops and were a successor to the Snow Sloop. There were also Bermuda Sloops.

In game, I think the Brig is based on the 18-gun Cruizer-class and the Sloop is based on the contemporary 10-gun Cherokee-class

[Andrew Cree]

Flamethrowers (and Molotov cocktails) were very effective against WW2 tanks…if they were careless enough to let a flamethrower-armed enemy get within range.

The carburettor-fed engines were inefficient at burning fuel, resulting in large quantities of vapour in the exhaust fumes, allowing you to “brew up” an enemy tank

A fire over the (thinly-armoured) engine compartment would reduce oxygen flow and cause the engine temperature to increase

Vision and ventilation slits would be vulnerable to fuel and smoke entering the crew compartment whilst glass can be obscured by soot if it doesn’t crack or shatter.

[Andrew Cree]

Mine finally turned up today. A good book indeed, but…I’ve already spotted an issue with the [i]Nelson[/i]-class battleships on page 133.

*Q Turret is shown to be super-super-firing, instead of broadside only

*The 24″ MkI torpedoes are shown as forward firing, which doesn’t match the reality of a single submerged tube in each broadside.

Other thoughts:

*I’m surprised the Short Sunderland flying boat doesn’t have the “Very Tough” trait, the 1943 attack by eight JU88C heavy fighters saw a badly damaged Sunderland nonetheless travel 350 miles to reach the UK before breaking up after making land.

*The B17 looks too powerful. The range with full bombload is quite limited. Furthermore, level bombing by heavy bombers tended to be carried out at high altitude, with a very low hit rate – mainly due to the bombs continuing to travel as much as 2 miles during their descent. At the very least, I feel they are undeserving of their “Heavy” trait.

[Andrew Cree]

I’m still hoping to see the British Royal Navy’s SGBs (theme name was Grey “Animal” such as Grey Owl) and some of the Far East vessels such as the Insect Class gunboats

[Andrew Cree]

Agreed. It’s even worse when you consider HMS Abercrombie’s twin 15″ monsters go from 15D6 to… 16D6 by virtue of the extra barrel. Having said that, the big guns would be more often be aiming to straddle the estimated position of the target vessel, so as to increase the chance of a hit overall, rather than trying to hit with both guns together, meaning the target is more likely to get hit by splinters rather than full up hits.

One thing I have considered is whether a +1 damage per barrel per would be more useful than the +1D6 die. Though that in turn would be ludicrous should the aforementioned HMS Abercrombie receive her aft octuple pom-pom in place of her current double quad system – an average of 42 damage per hit would simply be obscene.

[Andrew Cree]

I think it’s simply the number of sprues – 3rd rates and Frigates are 1 per sprue, Brigs are 2 per sprue.

Thus the Frigates and Brigs box contains 4 sprues whilst the 3rd Rate box contains 3 sprues.

[Andrew Cree]

Had to work through this today. I think the rules are a little unclear and overly wordy.

If the wind direction would point into the red turn zone at the front of the ship, you are in irons, and need to make a skill test.

If the skill test is successful you turn the minimum amount needed to allow the ship to move under light sails and move as normal (thus effectively getting a turn-move-turn activation).

If failed, you move your rate of knots and become anchored – it is not clear whether you make a turn or not after this movement.

We chose to play that you did get the turn, effectively meaning the benefit of succeeding at the skill test is the ability to potentially move at Battle Sails in the next turn instead of being limited to light sails.

[Author]

Posts