Talk about botes, bote based wargaming and RPGs, and maybe even a certain bote based vidya that tickles our autism in just the right way.
Games, Ospreys and References (Courtesy of /hwg/)
mediafire.com
Models and Manufacturers
pastebin.com
Rule the Waves
mega.nz
Previous
Other urls found in this thread:
pugliese.imgur.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
Please post cool bote models and tables.
...
hard to do when you do most of your wargaming on roll20
My shit, at least that I have pictures of.
This thread sucks.
no u
...
...
Nice stuff, dude.
ded thread
ded botes
...
Piss poor WW1 UK shells aside, the Wilhelmine Germany built their ships TOUGH.
Yes. They did have the saying 'The first duty of a warship is to remain afloat', and it showed in their designs.
But make no mistake, if the British fuzes had had a bit of delay, most of the German BCs would have suffered the same fate as Lützow.
Several threads back, an user posted a link to a navweps essay describing the pre-WW1 German design process with the post-WW2 process. It was quite an eye-opener.
Ya'll got any little pointers to add realism and depth to a one-shot CoC campaign modeled after the story The Temple? (i.e. Spooky u-boat adventures?)
Well, grab the floor plans for a u-boat, use Das Boot to get realistic references for how shit lookes.
...
Nice!
>But make no mistake, if the British fuzes had had a bit of delay, most of the German BCs would have suffered the same fate as Lützow.
Yep. The official reports and inquiries into Jutland opine that they would have sunk at least six more German ships if the fuzes hadn't been shite.
...
If you haven't already, I'd recommend giving U-boote Heraus a listen over on RPPR Actual Play, as it's basically a WWI CoC game on a U-boat, and pretty cool from what I remember. Might give you some inspiration if nothing else.
Thank you, this is my first time hearing of this! I'll go and have a look!
...
What is the encircled portion, user?
Something that the wartime authorities felt was worth of encircling.
I think it's to signify that the thing inside the circle was to be censored or edited. No expert on this but there's a few pictures like that around that have circles around the radar installations with notes that request them be edited out.
I did a bit of digging, and it turns out it's a picture of the USS Alabama:
"August, 1943 post refit trials off Norfolk. Flag bridge is plated in, she carries ten quadruple 40mm mounts, and circle indicates enlarged radar platform for the soon to be fitted, SK-2 dish air search unit."
The wreck of Australia's first naval submarine has been found after a 103-year search.
The HMAS AE-1 was the first Allied submarine lost in World War One, vanishing off Rabaul, Papua New Guinea with 35 Australian and British crewmates onboard on 14 September 1914.
The 13th search mission for the vessel found it in waters off the Duke of York islands in Papua New Guinea.
The discovery solves Australia's oldest naval mystery, the government said.
"This is one of the most significant discoveries in Australia's naval maritime history," Defence Minister Marise Payne said on Thursday.
"It was the first loss for the Royal Australian Navy and the first Allied submarine loss in World War One; a significant tragedy felt by our nation and our allies.
The search team used an underwater drone floating 40m (131ft) above the sea bed to scour the area. The wreck was found in more than 300m of water.
She said the search team had conducted a brief commemorative service for those who had lost their lives onboard.
The government will try to contact the descendents of the crew, and also work with PNG authorities on commemorations for the site.
"I truly believe this will bring peace of mind to the family and descendants of the crew who lost their lives onboard and perhaps, in time, we may discover what caused the submarine to sink," Ms Payne said.
The exact location has not been revealed in order to protect the submarine, but it appears to have survived in one piece.
There are no plans to return AE1 to Australia, but work will now begin on trying to establish why it sank.
Twelve search missions over the last century had failed to find its resting place.
...
>Japan celebrated the sinking of the Hermes like it was some top tier victory
>all of its planes had been offloaded and, as a ship, it was older than Hoshou
I wouldn't mind more material about Hermes though, she's a neat carrier.
Realism wasn't one of 1940s Japan's strong points.
>Realism wasn't one of Japan's strong points.
There. Fixed it for ya.
Rule of thumb: Circled things are recent changes, if the cricles are still there chances are the photo is teh archived original not the retouched one for public release.
...
In terms of sexiness South Dakota > Alaska > North Carolina > Iowa
Eh, I prefer the dual stackers to the singles, myself.
...
...
Never understood why early british dreadnoughts had such ass backwards turret layout desu.
All early dreadnoughts had various layout issues because the type was still kind of coming together.
...
...
...
These weird sail-to-steam-to-iron transitional ships are even worse than monitors.
I dunno. They have a certain charm.
Wow, crumple zones have quite a history.
...
>hates monitors
>hates early ironclads
You just hate boats, don't you?
Not at all. The purpose of a boat is to transport the plane or missile that does the actual work. Those boats are fine. It's just the ones that aren't built for such tasks that suck.
...
It's unfortunate that the best way to do something always seems to end up being the most boring.
There are plenty of interesting looking missile age boats, like USS Long Beach.
Even if in her case the interesting factor comes form just how fucking ugly she is.
...
From 1900 to 1919ish did the Germans build better ships than the British?
I've read they had better guns.
How did American and French battleships, cruisers and destroyers compare to British and German vessels of the same classes?
Including pre-dreadnoughts.
The pre-dreads and pre-BC cruisers were a clusterfuck on both sides.
The Germans always put a bit more emphasis on armor, subdivision and survivability, the British generally had slightly bigger guns.
The British switched to turbine propulsion in 1905, the Germans took several years longer because their admiralty didn't like this newfangled turbine stuff, so their ships were 1 knot or so slower.
The Germans built the last ararmored cruiser after the first BC was finished, which resulted in the rather unique SMS Blücher. A noteworthy oddity.
The US unleashed the mother of all building programs when they built the standard BBs, and later did the same with the four-stacker DDs.
the French really dropped the ball. They kept building pre-dreads, they kept building completely obsolete armored cruisers
>From 1900 to 1919ish did the Germans build better ships than the British?
Yes, but no, except yes?
The Germans had all the advantages of being a young, technical-orientated (they actually tested shit. Worth pointing out because functionally no one else did, even when they did. They kept spending money and sinking stuff until they got useful answers, not just the answers people wanted), and well-funded service with the disadvantages of starting from functionally zero- before the 19th century they had some good cruiser-types, some Far East service, but that was kind of it. Everything was done by german engineers with german industry though, so it even at its most uninspired and tactically substandard, it was superlatively designed.
The British had all the disadvantages of being a well-established, social-orientated, large, well-funded service, with the advantages of having done everything, everywhere. The Fisher interlude ("scrap the lot!"), while an ever-green target, probably made the difference in their ships being actually good in mass and not being that. Their national industrial plant just wasn't 1st-rate anymore though, everything ended up slightly shoddy, even at its most innovative and late-generation design.
>The US unleashed the mother of all building programs when they built the standard BBs
Why?
The US build 12 standards between 1912 and 1923, the RN built 12 QE/R class between 1912 and 1917
IIRC there was a whole hell of a lot of experimentation and tech testing going on throughout the span of the Standards too.
British guns were bigger, but German guns were better made. This meant the Germans could mount slightly smaller guns that were just as effective (if not more) than their bigger British counterparts, and with the weight saved mount more armour.
...
...
>It's unfortunate that the best way to do something always seems to end up being the most boring.
Not really, the best way is often 'too expensive' to maintain out of the actual task, but then the actual task rolls around and people realize that it would have been cheaper and better in the long run to have done it the best way.
Compare Fleet Carrier to Super Carrier. Ironically, unless you have the same number of Super Carriers as Fleet Carriers (even the USN won't do that, even though they could), the Fleet Carriers will be better at the job, but that isn't done because crew costs outside of war.
Of course, you could just bring in Ultra Battleships (1990s sense), but military intelligence is an oxymoron.
>Even if in her case the interesting factor comes form just how fucking ugly she is.
Just remember, it didn't have to be that way.
...
How many more miles did the Long Beach have in her, provided she was refueled?
>miles
Hull life is measured in years, user, and in her case it was between 15 and 18 if she got the refit as pictured in that painting.
The obvious downside in that measurement system is that it's optimistic and assumes adequate upkeep and maintenance, but even then bad upkeep is paid for in extra time coming off the hull.
It's highly likely that she would have been able to have rode out the entire life of the reactor if they had wanted to keep her in service.
Since a refuel in her case would have been equivalent to that proposed rebuild you see there, the answer is 'as many as you want to pay for'.
But from an electronics and weapons point of view, you could have gone on upgrading her right until today, and ended up with a nucler powered AEGIS cruiser with a pretty big number of VLS cells, plus space for three helos.
The space set aside for th Talos, Terrier and Polaris missiles could actually house a metric shit ton of VLS cells, now that I actually look at it.
Oh, and given the timeframe, they could even used that 8" gun that turned out too big for the DD and FF hulls.
I think that is the gun in the drawing there.
Pic related.
>But from an electronics and weapons point of view, you could have gone on upgrading her right until today, and ended up with a nucler powered AEGIS cruiser with a pretty big number of VLS cells, plus space for three helos.
>The space set aside for th Talos, Terrier and Polaris missiles could actually house a metric shit ton of VLS cells, now that I actually look at it.
user, I hate to break it to you, but that proposed plan was rejected specifically because converting the rod-arm system to VLS was simply not possible.
They concluded it would be both cheaper and simpler to build an entirely new otherwise identical ship.
>that 8" gun that turned out too big for the DD and FF hulls.
user, the Spruance-class, Ticonderoga-class, and Arleigh Burkes were all designed with that gun system in mind. Designs are out there (on the internet) showing the layout of the Burkes with the gun.
Stupidity saw the gun system canceled.
>user, the Spruance-class, Ticonderoga-class, and Arleigh Burkes were all designed with that gun system in mind. Designs are out there (on the internet) showing the layout of the Burkes with the gun.
>Stupidity saw the gun system canceled.
That is really sad.
>They concluded it would be both cheaper and simpler to build an entirely new otherwise identical ship.
I know.
Which is why I said the refit is going to be as expensive as you want it to be. If the whole thing had come up five years later, they'd probably have gone thoguh with it.
>Stupidity saw the gun system canceled.
I thought there were a bunch of reasons given that came down to 'might be too heavy, might overstress the lightly built modern ships, has limited AA capability'
Which is obviously a load of political bullshit one might call 'stupidity'. I rest my case.
Pic vaguely related.
>AEGIS
Aegis is not an abbreviation.
Can you really blame him for thinking it was an acronym user?
Yes I can as he should know better.
>Aegis is not an abbreviation.
Seems like a major oversight, AEGIS would had been a perfect acronym.
Exactly, and it would have been a logical assumption given how hot and bothered the US military is for forcing acronyms to get cool names.
It's not? Well, fuck me, I always thought they'd gone and at least backronymed it by now.
Look like a major oversight to me.
>Please post cool bote models and tables.
Nobody actually plays naval wargames. We just talk about botes. I don't think I've ever seen or heard of someone posting actual play models in these threads, much less a batrep.
We had an AAR a couple threads back, actually.
Didn't we have an AAR not long ago about somebody doing a "what if" regarding Hipper intercepting the British troop ships on the way to France? Seydlitz was a holy terror.
...
...
...
I was about to ask why this was still on Veeky Forums and not Veeky Forums, but then I remembered that no one talks about tabletop games on Veeky Forums anymore.
Also because we can actually TALK about votes here; it would be nothing but /pol/ shitflinging if it was on Veeky Forums. Like every other topic on Veeky Forums.
/hwg/ doesn't see many AARs either. An image board is a poor venue for AARs especially considering the text limits.
The large number of rules covering different eras and at different levels plays a factor too. Forex, I'd have no interest in a VaS AAR because, IMVHO, VaS might as well be "Battleship". Others might only have interest in an Age of Sail AAR and so on.
That being said, RtW reports, questions, and campaign results all but dominated these generals for most of the year so it's more an issue of /nwg/ having AARs which certain anons find interesting rather than no AARs at all.
Generally I post aars when I actually have time to play, and pics of fresh botes when I paint them up. With the damn holidays I've had neither time nor energy for either. The last shit I painted/built was for the most recent community challenge over in /Hwg/, pic related being WIP of the two Insect-class I scratchbuilt. Others occasionally do the same. I agree though, it would be nice to see more shit actually on the table and less autismally bottled whine. I've been meaning to play out Coronel using Fear Naught and my Topside stuff that I picked up about this time last year. Maybe time permitting I can do so sometime after the first of the year.
...
Formatting constraints alone make this place a bad venue for AARs.
I don't come here for AARs when sites like grognard, consimworld, and hundreds of blogs already provide them and in much better format than can be posted here.
ooh la la
Typically why I just post my Naval War ones on the forum and then link along with an image of good bit. I actually went through the trouble of posting the whole report to /Hwg/ exactly once before I realized how much easier it would be to do the alternative.
That's a good way to do it, user. A pic, a short intro, and a link to someplace where a "real" AAR can be hosted.
...
...
man, is-a nice-a day today. clear-a skies, and notta a fritz-x in-a si--
...
>Fisher and Churchill actually thought this was a good idea
Guten Tag.
Captcha made me identify Italian street signs. Google knows.
...