4 replies to this topic

[Klebert Hall]

I realise that the bombardment/counter-bombardment rules are highly abstracted, and that the ship DVs are representative of the 'general' structure of the ships and not the armor values. It seems possible though, that some people playing beachhead games (Anzio comes to mind) might want to engage bombardment vessels with tanks and such... Are the Naval DVs supposed to be in the same scale as the vehicle DVs?I know that (for example) destroyers weren't 'armored' in the naval sense, but they were made of thicker metal than the side of a halftrack, for example. Seems like there's a disconnect.-Kle.

[Bob Benge]

Well, suffice it to say that they are based on the best armor rating of the ship to. Destroyers were not well armored and the books I used gave me armor ratings in the sam scal as vehicles. These values directly port to armor values as do vehicles. Yes, destroyers are armored that badly and do deserve the ratings I did give them as based on their published armor ratings. Believe it or not thin sheets of aluminum do not work well for armor ratings. :)

[Klebert Hall]

Aluminum? Who was welding aluminum for destroyers in WW2?-Kle.

[Bob Benge]

Aluminum? Who was welding aluminum for destroyers in WW2?

I was half joking. :P In all of the data I poured over destroyers, frigates and escourt destroyers were not armored. No source lists any armor values for destroyers. The ship structure and size account for its DR which is what you'd be dealing with with a purposely unarmed vehicle or ship.

[Klebert Hall]

Sorry, slow on the uptake.I might be misremembering, I should go up to the Cassin Young again, and check it out - it's been years.-Kle.