Jump to content


Photo

BBs on DDs


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 sgberger

sgberger

    Private

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 13 March 2012 - 02:15 PM

For anyone interested:

I recently ran a hypothetical TF-1 meets 'Main Body' at Midway in a surface action.

While players enjoyed the game, there were two issues for the GQ3 designers:
1) Yamato, which was almost 20,000 heavier than any other warship at the time and took 22 bombs/torpedoes to actually sink, has but one more hull
box than other large BBs. Yamato and Musashi were unique. They should have at least 4-5 more hull boxes than any other ship's log card.
2) BB's would almost never fire main batteries at DDs if other targets presented themselves. The game system with 'equivalent hits' of 4x or 5x
encourages BB fire on DDs despite the 'up row' penalty. Real life would suggest that many BB hits on a DD would pass through without detonating.
BB equivalent hits on a DD should be no more than 2x, thus compensating for the up row penalty, but making BB on DD a suboptimal use of firepower.

#2 Dave Franklin

Dave Franklin

    Captain

  • Members
  • 321 posts
  • LocationColorado Springs CO

Posted 13 March 2012 - 07:34 PM

For anyone interested:

I recently ran a hypothetical TF-1 meets 'Main Body' at Midway in a surface action.

While players enjoyed the game, there were two issues for the GQ3 designers:
1) Yamato, which was almost 20,000 heavier than any other warship at the time and took 22 bombs/torpedoes to actually sink, has but one more hull
box than other large BBs. Yamato and Musashi were unique. They should have at least 4-5 more hull boxes than any other ship's log card.
2) BB's would almost never fire main batteries at DDs if other targets presented themselves. The game system with 'equivalent hits' of 4x or 5x
encourages BB fire on DDs despite the 'up row' penalty. Real life would suggest that many BB hits on a DD would pass through without detonating.
BB equivalent hits on a DD should be no more than 2x, thus compensating for the up row penalty, but making BB on DD a suboptimal use of firepower.

Regarding #1, and using the Amendment 2 charts as a reference, in a surface battle, all Yamato and Musashi have to do is keep the range > 12000yds, and no other gun will be able to penetrate their BA+ hull, so all hull hits will be halved - effectively giving them 18 hull hits. Of course historically they never engaged in a surface fight against other BBs, and also admittedly if they were up against opponents who had actually managed to get a few hull hits, they might be able to close within 12000yds...

Regarding bombs, looking on the Bomb Damage chart, an "H" bomb only penetrates BC, so it does at best 1/2 Hull half the time. The best shot is to get the Fire result on a hit (and hope it isn't put out), or a near miss. Either way it will take a lot of bombs.

Regarding torpedoes, both Yamato and Musashi were only hit be aerial torpedos, hull hits from which are halved on the Mine & Torpedo Damage table - and that assumes they were set to run deep. So it's still going to take quite a few.

#3 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 15 March 2012 - 09:54 PM

For anyone interested:

I recently ran a hypothetical TF-1 meets 'Main Body' at Midway in a surface action.

While players enjoyed the game, there were two issues for the GQ3 designers:
1) Yamato, which was almost 20,000 heavier than any other warship at the time and took 22 bombs/torpedoes to actually sink, has but one more hull
box than other large BBs. Yamato and Musashi were unique. They should have at least 4-5 more hull boxes than any other ship's log card.
2) BB's would almost never fire main batteries at DDs if other targets presented themselves. The game system with 'equivalent hits' of 4x or 5x
encourages BB fire on DDs despite the 'up row' penalty. Real life would suggest that many BB hits on a DD would pass through without detonating.
BB equivalent hits on a DD should be no more than 2x, thus compensating for the up row penalty, but making BB on DD a suboptimal use of firepower.


Dave has pretty much covered Point 1 (thank you, Dave!). Given Yamato's armor, it will take a considerable amount of time and effort to bring her down (even under the best of circumstances). Additional, two other caveats need to be mentioned. First, Hull Boxes are determined on a logarithmic scale, not a linear scale; as you approach the upper end, hull boxes represent more and more "hull". Consequently, while a 2700t DD will have the same number Hull Boxes as 50000t BB, the impact of hits are considerably less for BB and moreso for the DD (thanks to the Equivalent Damage table; this also applies to your second point). Adding 4 or 5 hull boxes would represent be a major increase in Yamato's resistance (one not supported by her historical performance). Second, there is a tendency with certain ships to imbue them with near mythic qualities. The Yamato class and the Bismarck class seem to garner the most of such attention. It would be very easy to overstate such a ship's combat qualities. Which is why so much time was spent in research and playtest to get to realistic values. As it stands, Yamato is about the toughest ship in the game; increase its resistance anymore, and she'd be beyond what is historically supportable.

Regarding Point 2: While DDs are a suboptimal target for a BB's main battery, it did happen on rare occasions. As to reducing the Equivalent multiplier to 2x (as opposed to 4x or 5x), keep in mind that the combat model assumes that the shells fired are the ones best suited for the target. This is done since the game does not differentiate between firing HE or AP rounds (to do so would've required a whole new and complicated set of tables and slow down the game considerably) and assumes that the commander's gunnery officer is using the right shell for the right target (that is part of his job, afterall). And while there are cases of large rounds passing clear through unarmored targets (DDs, CVEs, etc), these are mainly cases of firing large AP rounds at unarmored targets (ie, wrong shell for the target). (Conversely, one could also argue for a reduction of the equivalent multiplier for the opposite case, where large HE shells are used against armored targets. Once again, the wrong shell for the target). Such a reduction might be realistic for a specific one-off scenario; but not as a general rule.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users