1 reply to this topic

[Rick Brown]

In using the design sheets for the GQ3 game, we have come accross some strange ships. One would be the HMS Terror, which although having a BB armored turret and CA armored hull, is smaller than the average BB. Our calculations would come out to about 5 hull boxes. But on the chart what would be the Equivalent hit size? CA? BB? or something in between.
The same can be said for the Eidsvold Class ships of Norway. How would one calculate this. Would all Coastal defense ships be treated by their gun size, armor or some other factor?
Thanks

[Cpt M]

In using the design sheets for the GQ3 game, we have come accross some strange ships. One would be the HMS Terror, which although having a BB armored turret and CA armored hull, is smaller than the average BB. Our calculations would come out to about 5 hull boxes. But on the chart what would be the Equivalent hit size? CA? BB? or something in between.
The same can be said for the Eidsvold Class ships of Norway. How would one calculate this. Would all Coastal defense ships be treated by their gun size, armor or some other factor?
Thanks

The ships you mentioned (coastal defense battleships and monitors) fail into a different catatgory. Most were built during or to WWI designs that are quite outside the standards of post WWI designs. Consequently, they almost all fall into catagory B* for Equilvalent Hits and Damage. (I say almost since a very small number with very thin armor, such as the Finnish Vainamoinen class, are classed as CL). The B* catagory is on the Amendment 1 and Amendment 2 CRTs (if you haven't already done so, I highly recommend downloading these Amendments as they include many clarifications and updates to the original rules. These were developed over the years since the games original release).

BTW, the Eidsvold class (and the rest of the Norwegian navy) will be included in the upcoming free Northern Navies supplement (along with the Finnish, Swedish, Polish and Danish navies).