Jump to content


Photo

Sudden Storm-Questions


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Christopher Cafiero

Christopher Cafiero

    Private

  • Members
  • 32 posts
  • LocationRichardson, texas

Posted 16 July 2011 - 04:04 PM

I'm diving into this campaign...initial impression, very well done! I especially like the extra reaserch on the world of 1937 to get you in the right mindset, and the loads of extras.

I've come across two questions thus far:

1) There is a bonus article on the Lexington-class battlecruisers, which refers to ship stats for various configurations that does not seem to be attached, is that true or am I missing them somewhere?

2) I understand you assign squadrons in an area by mission, but I'm unclear how to determine how many areas the missions can "move", just to the adjacent area? What is the rule reference or page?

A neat bonus item to add later might be to pitch out the Washington Treaty, and add some Lexington-class CC's and South Dakota-class BB's to the US, and the 8-8 battleships and battlescruisers of the Japanese. Of course without Washington, there likely would not have been the "treaty cruisers", which might require some thought as to what would have taken their place.

Another consideration; without Washington, the Anglo-Japanese alliance may have been renewed...a possibility US planners considered several times...might be interesting to see an Japanese-allied British Squadron!
Christopher J. Cafiero

"I shall have no connection with any vessel that is not fast, for I intend to go in Harm's way..."

#2 Jim O'Neil

Jim O'Neil

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 217 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 06:31 PM

I'm diving into this campaign...initial impression, very well done! I especially like the extra reaserch on the world of 1937 to get you in the right mindset, and the loads of extras.

I've come across two questions thus far:

1) There is a bonus article on the Lexington-class battlecruisers, which refers to ship stats for various configurations that does not seem to be attached, is that true or am I missing them somewhere?

2) I understand you assign squadrons in an area by mission, but I'm unclear how to determine how many areas the missions can "move", just to the adjacent area? What is the rule reference or page?

A neat bonus item to add later might be to pitch out the Washington Treaty, and add some Lexington-class CC's and South Dakota-class BB's to the US, and the 8-8 battleships and battlescruisers of the Japanese. Of course without Washington, there likely would not have been the "treaty cruisers", which might require some thought as to what would have taken their place.

Another consideration; without Washington, the Anglo-Japanese alliance may have been renewed...a possibility US planners considered several times...might be interesting to see an Japanese-allied British Squadron!


Chris,
Lets see if I can answer your questions...
1. Bonus articles are in the downloads 'bonus' section. Essentially freebies there was no room to include.

2. Ships/squadrons etc. spend the entire turn in one 'Area' performing their mission, with a few exceptions, those being transits from home mostly.
There is a provision for a USN unit to perform a mission while traveling from PH to Sequoia.

We considered all of those... the problem is that without the Sara and Lex as CV's, things don't balance well AND the determination to make the Carriers had been made as part of the Washington Treaty many years before, anyway. I think CoA is going to do the earlier era with all those BBs and BCs; but don't know that as a fact...just a rumor. We tried to be very faithful to the era and it's considerations. Scouting was a major concern, thus the Flight Deck Cruiser, the Airships carrying airplanes etc. Had Sara and Lex been finished as BCs, they would likely be in conversion to CVs by 1937! The RN had done that right after WW 1 and everyone else did it too. If you pull the Washington Naval Treaty, nothing else makes sense ... 10, 000 ton cruisers, 8" guns and much more become irrational decisions. We aren't against the concept, but the 'fantasy' campaign then needs new ships, new doctrines and a new history. We looked at it and decided it was way more than we wanted to try and build. That said, I think we have made a bonus file where one of these ships is built by each navy as a what if...

Jim

#3 Christopher Cafiero

Christopher Cafiero

    Private

  • Members
  • 32 posts
  • LocationRichardson, texas

Posted 16 July 2011 - 08:39 PM

Agreed; I like that the campaign is a realistic appraisal of a 1930's conflict, rather than a completely reworked alternate history. I suppose various merchant and liner conversions coudl replace the Lex and Sara, but your points are otherwise well taken.

In regards to #2 (below), so if a squadron starts, say, in the PTO it can be assigned a mission (say 'sweep') ONLY in the PTO, short of a transfer mission? I guess I don't understand how ships ever move out of their areas...the americans can do a transfer mission, are the japanese stuck in the areas forever?

Chris

Chris,
Lets see if I can answer your questions...
1. Bonus articles are in the downloads 'bonus' section. Essentially freebies there was no room to include.

2. Ships/squadrons etc. spend the entire turn in one 'Area' performing their mission, with a few exceptions, those being transits from home mostly.
There is a provision for a USN unit to perform a mission while traveling from PH to Sequoia.

We considered all of those... the problem is that without the Sara and Lex as CV's, things don't balance well AND the determination to make the Carriers had been made as part of the Washington Treaty many years before, anyway. I think CoA is going to do the earlier era with all those BBs and BCs; but don't know that as a fact...just a rumor. We tried to be very faithful to the era and it's considerations. Scouting was a major concern, thus the Flight Deck Cruiser, the Airships carrying airplanes etc. Had Sara and Lex been finished as BCs, they would likely be in conversion to CVs by 1937! The RN had done that right after WW 1 and everyone else did it too. If you pull the Washington Naval Treaty, nothing else makes sense ... 10, 000 ton cruisers, 8" guns and much more become irrational decisions. We aren't against the concept, but the 'fantasy' campaign then needs new ships, new doctrines and a new history. We looked at it and decided it was way more than we wanted to try and build. That said, I think we have made a bonus file where one of these ships is built by each navy as a what if...

Jim


Christopher J. Cafiero

"I shall have no connection with any vessel that is not fast, for I intend to go in Harm's way..."

#4 gregoryk

gregoryk

    GQ3 Product Manager

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 1,048 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 11:20 PM

Agreed; I like that the campaign is a realistic appraisal of a 1930's conflict, rather than a completely reworked alternate history. I suppose various merchant and liner conversions coudl replace the Lex and Sara, but your points are otherwise well taken.

In regards to #2 (below), so if a squadron starts, say, in the PTO it can be assigned a mission (say 'sweep') ONLY in the PTO, short of a transfer mission? I guess I don't understand how ships ever move out of their areas...the americans can do a transfer mission, are the japanese stuck in the areas forever?

Chris

Chris, ships are based at their home bases, e.g. Sequoia for the US, or Japan for the IJN, the act of assigning a mission to the PTO includes the transit time there and back and the action of performing the mission. The time scale of the turn was decided upon to allow sufficient time for all these actions.

#5 gregoryk

gregoryk

    GQ3 Product Manager

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 1,048 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 07:23 PM

I'm diving into this campaign...initial impression, very well done! I especially like the extra reaserch on the world of 1937 to get you in the right mindset, and the loads of extras.

I've come across two questions thus far:

1) There is a bonus article on the Lexington-class battlecruisers, which refers to ship stats for various configurations that does not seem to be attached, is that true or am I missing them somewhere?

2) I understand you assign squadrons in an area by mission, but I'm unclear how to determine how many areas the missions can "move", just to the adjacent area? What is the rule reference or page?

A neat bonus item to add later might be to pitch out the Washington Treaty, and add some Lexington-class CC's and South Dakota-class BB's to the US, and the 8-8 battleships and battlescruisers of the Japanese. Of course without Washington, there likely would not have been the "treaty cruisers", which might require some thought as to what would have taken their place.

Another consideration; without Washington, the Anglo-Japanese alliance may have been renewed...a possibility US planners considered several times...might be interesting to see an Japanese-allied British Squadron!

Our decision was to go with an historical campaign. Historical in re: 1937. So all the ships and land forces in 1937 are represented, and there were some plausible "what if's" such as the flight deck cruiser and the LTA option. They are included as chrome and to see what effect the technologies might have had on combat. I find the flight deck cruiser intriguing, and easily added to your games, now that Panzerschiffes has a model for it, a nice one too.

#6 DAVID THORNLEY

DAVID THORNLEY

    Private

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 24 July 2011 - 03:57 PM

A neat bonus item to add later might be to pitch out the Washington Treaty, and add some Lexington-class CC's and South Dakota-class BB's to the US, and the 8-8 battleships and battlescruisers of the Japanese. Of course without Washington, there likely would not have been the "treaty cruisers", which might require some thought as to what would have taken their place.

The General Board recommended that three battlecruisers be converted to aircraft carriers just before the Washington Naval Treaty, and I rather think this would
have been carried out, so no more than three battlecruisers, and add a third Lexington-class carrier just as a start.

Also, if you're going to add all the Japanese 8-8 ships, remember that the US wasn't going to stop building after the Lexingtons and South Dakotas. Those US ships were in construction (along with the one additional West Virginia-class), while some of the Japanese 8-8 ships were just ideas as to what would be reasonable to build in the future. The next class of US battleships would have been similar to the South Dakotas, most likely, but follow-ons would have increased in size and capability to at least match Japanese building. The Japanese were projecting straining their economy with the 8-8 plan, and the British were probably overoptimistic with their 4 and 4 plan, but the additional US capital ships were just things the US would rather not spend the money on.

Stick to the WNT, or the Japanese are going to be blown out of the water early on.

#7 Blue Leader

Blue Leader

    Major

  • Deactivated
  • 400 posts

Posted 24 July 2011 - 04:21 PM

I'm diving into this campaign...initial impression, very well done! I especially like the extra reaserch on the world of 1937 to get you in the right mindset, and the loads of extras.

I've come across two questions thus far:

1) There is a bonus article on the Lexington-class battlecruisers, which refers to ship stats for various configurations that does not seem to be attached, is that true or am I missing them somewhere?

2) I understand you assign squadrons in an area by mission, but I'm unclear how to determine how many areas the missions can "move", just to the adjacent area? What is the rule reference or page?

A neat bonus item to add later might be to pitch out the Washington Treaty, and add some Lexington-class CC's and South Dakota-class BB's to the US, and the 8-8 battleships and battlescruisers of the Japanese. Of course without Washington, there likely would not have been the "treaty cruisers", which might require some thought as to what would have taken their place.

Another consideration; without Washington, the Anglo-Japanese alliance may have been renewed...a possibility US planners considered several times...might be interesting to see an Japanese-allied British Squadron!

Christopher,

Japanese ships based in Japan or Mako may conduct missions in the ETO and CTO, they return to their home base when done. US ships based at Pearl may conduct missions in the ETO only, if they conduct a transfer mission to SEQUOIA, those ships my perform one mission in the ETO en route. I hope this clarifies things. US ships at SEQUOIA may conduct missions in the ETO as well. the only restrictions are one mission per turn. The exception is a US transfer mission which may have an ETO mission during its transfer, though it may not Patrol off an island objective during a transfer, that would require too much time on station. It would be able to Patrol the SEQUOIA route, since that takes it in a direction towards its new base.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users