Jump to content


Photo

French and US and Japanese and Turkish, oh my!


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 DAVID THORNLEY

DAVID THORNLEY

    Private

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 20 January 2008 - 10:27 PM

Quick question: Are there plans to introduce the French, US, Japanese, and Turkish fleets in later supplements?

#2 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 21 January 2008 - 02:22 AM

The IJN, USN and French are in the works. Exactly when they will be released hasn't been determined.

#3 DAVID THORNLEY

DAVID THORNLEY

    Private

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 21 January 2008 - 04:06 AM

Glad to hear it. I can doubtless fake up reasonable Turk gunnery and ship logs on my own.

#4 Philippe Albouy

Philippe Albouy

    Private

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 21 January 2008 - 12:46 PM

If I understand well, this means there are no French ships in FAI at this stage. So it is not possible to set a game in the Med.... very sad and disappointing. The WW1 French are extremely difficult to model and I was eager to see how GQIII FAI performs in this regard (most other naval game products fail utterly). It is somewhat surprising that the most important fleet in a major theatre has been "forgotten". Are the Austrians and the Italians pictured ?I was about to buy but I will wait until I can play something else than Jutland.

#5 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 21 January 2008 - 01:38 PM

FAI includes the British, Germans, Italians, Austrians, and Russians. Unfortunately, the French got left on the cutting room floor due to the press of page count concerns (which drives the price). The good thing, however, is that the French (along with the others already mentioned) will most likely be released as a PDF which means more ships can be included (no need to edit down the number of ships to keep the page count in line). Thornley,The Turks will probably be included since they're not the big (not counting the Goeben and Breslau, their navy only fielded, according to Conways, 2 old ex-German battleships, 2 smalll cruisers and about a dozen DDs and TBs of various sizes). Frankly, they're not that hard to do since, like a lot of the smaller navies, their equipment was bought off the shelf from the major powers.

#6 DAVID THORNLEY

DAVID THORNLEY

    Private

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 21 January 2008 - 03:07 PM

Yup, as I remember those pre-dreadnoughts were bought from Germany. I don't remember offhand where the cruisers and destroyers came from, but those are easy to fake up if not standard models.The French older stuff is particularly awkward to model in a game, including those pre-dreads with the single 12" fore and aft, and the single 10.8" along the sides. (Of course, when you get that far back, it's all awkward, since the characteristics of, say, a 12" gun vary so widely from model to model.) Those older cruisers had so much tumblehome they look to me like they'd roll real nicely when they took on some water.I assume that that which got dropped on the cutting-room floor will be mostly ready to issue separately on PDF, once everybody's recovered from getting FAI out the door, and so should be along before too very long. At least you don't have to deal with the printers this time.

#7 James McConnell

James McConnell

    Private

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 25 January 2008 - 05:21 PM

Yes, let's have the data for the French as soon as possible, please. Just got my FAI rules yesterday, and since I'm in the midst of painting my 1/6000 French fleet, I'd love to be able to use them in battle :) .

#8 James McConnell

James McConnell

    Private

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 26 January 2008 - 05:32 PM

In the interest of pursuing a line of idle speculation ;) , I wonder what the maximum gun ranges for the French capital ships will look like when the French data sheet does appear.French main caliber guns were almost universally limited to less than 15,000 yards range in WW1 due to limited elevation & internal turret/loading configurations. I would think this would put the French at a real disadvantage in FAI given the lack of ammo use rules. A faster fleet (not hard to find :) ) could beat the French up badly at longer ranges if ammo use were not an issue, it seems to me...Has anyone who might have played in an FAI demo game where the French were in play any light to shed on this? Perhaps a house rule to track ammo use might have been used?

#9 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 28 January 2008 - 07:50 AM

In the interest of pursuing a line of idle speculation , I wonder what the maximum gun ranges for the French capital ships will look like when the French data sheet does appear.

The prototype French CRT used in the Fall In! game did reflect the shorter range of the French guns. (IIRC, the absolute maximum range for the 12" came in at 18000yds with the effective range starting somewhere about 15000-16000yds).

French main caliber guns were almost universally limited to less than 15,000 yards range in WW1 due to limited elevation & internal turret/loading configurations. I would think this would put the French at a real disadvantage in FAI given the lack of ammo use rules. A faster fleet (not hard to find ) could beat the French up badly at longer ranges if ammo use were not an issue, it seems to me...Has anyone who might have played in an FAI demo game where the French were in play any light to shed on this? Perhaps a house rule to track ammo use might have been used?

An ammo limit rule was discussed early on during the developement of GQ3, but it was rejected. The problem with such rules is that in most of the stand alone games (the most commonly played) the ammo expenditure rarely runs longer than what the average ship's ammo load out would be. So, most of the time, ammo exhaustion doesn't come into play. Additionally, most gamers have a almost manic adversion to such rules and drop them forthwith. That being said, for a scenario specifc situation (say, a hypothetical Battle of Samar using the old US battleships after their action in Suriago Strait), some form of ammo rule may be appropriate. In the Fall In! game, the length of the game was such that an ammo rule was not really necessary; the battle ended well short of either side expending their ammo load-out.

#10 James McConnell

James McConnell

    Private

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 28 January 2008 - 05:52 PM

Thanks for the response, Coastal :) . Yes, an ammo use house rule would be a solution if the battle lasts long enough for it to matter ;) .

#11 DAVID THORNLEY

DAVID THORNLEY

    Private

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 29 January 2008 - 02:45 AM

The Battle of the Komandorski Islands is another case where an ammo limit might be historical.Anyway, suppose I were to play the Battle of the Gulf, where Oldendorf's old battleships tried to stop Kurita's force. I can tell you, with a bit of looking up and figuring, exactly how many AP shells each battleship had at that point, and on some of them there weren't very many per gun.What would be a reasonable conversion figure between battleship rounds per gun and turns? Five, assuming six-minute turns, and a desire to conserve ammo?

#12 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 30 January 2008 - 07:15 AM

What would be a reasonable conversion figure between battleship rounds per gun and turns? Five, assuming six-minute turns, and a desire to conserve ammo?

Well, given that the game uses 3min of activity within a 6min turn (to account for the breaks in fire due to host of causes; Lonnie goes into this in one GQ3's sidebars) and that, on average (for the USN), the rate of fire for the big guns ranged from a low of 1.25 (for the oldest unmodified WWI designs) up to 2.00 (for the newer WWII designs) rounds per minute, a rough number would fall between 3.75 to 6.00 per turn. So, I'd put it at 4.5 to 5.0 rounds per turn (and probably lean towards 5.0 since most of Oldendorf's BB's had gone through considerable upgrading before and during the war). You could go with a lower number to refect a desire to conserve fire, but I'd go with the higher number to put that decision in the player's hands (give 'em one more thing to worry about!). Oldendorf vs Kurita has always been an intriguing scenario. BTW, I believe a work-up for this scenario is in the General Quarters yahoo group files.

#13 Kevin Broomhall

Kevin Broomhall

    Private

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 20 April 2009 - 06:13 AM

Just wondering, have we got any clue when the missing WW1 nations will be out?It has been over a year with no sign of from what I can tell.Thank youKevin

#14 Bob Benge

Bob Benge

    Mein Panzer Guru

  • ODGW Staff
  • 1,211 posts
  • LocationLas Cruces, NM

Posted 20 April 2009 - 12:24 PM

They're coming... Personal economic situations over the past year have slowed the progress, but they are definitely in work. :)

#15 Roland Labelle

Roland Labelle

    Private

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 05 September 2010 - 12:59 AM

Hi there!Any word on the missing countries yet?

#16 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 05 September 2010 - 08:56 AM

Any word on the missing countries yet?

They're in the Fleet Acton Imminent WWI Navies Supplement (available for sale as a download in the online store). It includes the French, US, Turkish, Greek, and Japanese navies, plus the South American Big Three (Argentine, Brazilian and Chilean navies). The supplement includes Gunnery Charts, Ship Logs, Small Craft and Aircraft stats plus several scenarios for these fleets.

#17 DLSpurlock

DLSpurlock

    Private

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 12 May 2011 - 08:34 PM

Okay, paint me purple and call me stupid but I cannot find where the FAI WW1 Navies Supplement can be purchased. I would very much like to have these "missing" navies.

Thanks

Dave

#18 DLSpurlock

DLSpurlock

    Private

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 12 May 2011 - 08:39 PM

Never mind, I found it.

Now purple and stupid Dave

#19 Tom Oxley

Tom Oxley

    Private

  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • LocationDayton, OH

Posted 25 May 2011 - 03:04 PM

Has anyone prepared the ship data for the earlier pre-dreadnoughts that might have seen combat early in the war? I'm working with a couple of board games as campaign game systems and have a pretty large list of ships available, and have many of them in 1/6000 scale, but they arent on the list for 1917-1918. I will start tinkering with the information if I need to, but always nice to not have to reinvent the wheel. :) I do appreciate the work that went into the making of the expansion with the other US vessels, but would just like to be able to field these earlier vessels as well. Thanks.

Tom Oxley

#20 Cpt M

Cpt M

    Colonel

  • ODGW Retired Staff
  • 939 posts

Posted 26 May 2011 - 10:00 AM

Has anyone prepared the ship data for the earlier pre-dreadnoughts that might have seen combat early in the war? I'm working with a couple of board games as campaign game systems and have a pretty large list of ships available, and have many of them in 1/6000 scale, but they arent on the list for 1917-1918. I will start tinkering with the information if I need to, but always nice to not have to reinvent the wheel. :) I do appreciate the work that went into the making of the expansion with the other US vessels, but would just like to be able to field these earlier vessels as well. Thanks.

Tom Oxley


What specific ships are you looking for? Keep in mind, that by WWI most of the earlier pre-dreadnoughts had been placed in reserve or secondary duties with little or no plans for use during war time. In the case of the USN, only the newest classes were used and that was for primarily convoy escort.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users