• Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

Do you really think that, having seen what's going on in space, any new player is going to enter the race without FACs (for example), or at least a way to counteract the other players' FACs?

You're misunderstanding....or I'm not being clear. 

I don't care if everyone and their mother has FACs  big_smile I think that's just fine.

I DO think it's a bit much to think that you're going to have a combined arms ubership featuring huge primarires and aetherkatapults in every military.  Not going to back down from that.  I do think it's a stretch to have Siam's  military thinkers saying "we have the PERFECT ship we're going to order from Vickers" and then produce a vessel that will have the RNES saying "Holy S--t, how did we ever let a foreign power buy that off of us?!?!" 

There are designs coming from the Greeks and Danes and Chinese that rival anything, strength wise, that have come from the evil Commie menace, Germans or British -- who are supposed to be the leading power.

Play-wise....taking a pickup game and going to the hobby shop and using them -- they're fantastic  big_smile  big_smile Read my posts in the other threads and you'll see people liked the Siam heavy cruiser, and I myself have shown the Dane stats to other IS gamers.  The consensus -- mean-ass ship.

It's just that fitting into the universe setting, I have a few problems with them. 

I understand they're not official, and I don't think it's dissuading people form contributing their ships if we're talking about personal preferences.

  • Registered: 2006-05-03
  • Posts: 44

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

All of these factions, or nearly all of them, are suddenly fielding BIG hybrid battleships/carriers with powerful guns (primary and secondary), rockets to take down FACs, and attack craft of their own.

Just have to interject- since all these new factions are John's, I want to point out that John simply likes big ships a lot (I've learned this by long association).  So I don't think these new factions reflect how the board as a whole expects the factions to be, but are just a product of John's peference for designing and using the big fellas.  I mean, as you say, many of these ships could easily be British or German or another major nation in origin and fit in with the 'cannon' designs just as well.  John is just trying to design the type of ships he likes and make them a little different.  At least that's how I see it (and if I'm way off base here John feel free to verbally smack me down).

In general I agree with the rest of your post though.

At the same time, I disagree with the premise that minor players taking notes is somehow "unrealistic" -- this is exactly what happens. Someone takes the plunge on a new idea, tactic, or technology, and everyone else hops on the bandwagon.

On the other hand, do the minor navies have the money to be that innovative?  If I was budgeting the construction fund a small nation I'd favor 'tried and true' approachs as much as possible.

-Will [/code]

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

Just lil things in thinking like that to keep things a bit more in touch with events, timeline, and capabilities. Cuba suddenly launching a size 35 DN would be crazy...but they may scrounge enough for a corvette or two and some FACs as a 'coastal patrol' umbrella.


EXACTLY.  My point.  Other countries will respond as best they can....and as best they can should include at least one or two models of Fast Attack Craft.  I will never dispute that.  But canon-wise, there have to be hull-size considerations.

Again, I know they're not official.  I just figure it's great if folks post their ships, and it's great if they spark conversation, pro and con.  If Murtalianconfederacy (can I have your first name, that's long)  is ever ticked by my comments, then I'll be the first to say sorry.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

themattcurtis wrote:

I understand they're not official, and I don't think it's dissuading people form contributing their ships if we're talking about personal preferences.

That's just the point -- the tone of this discussion has often led me to wonder if people are going to want to go through the trouble of contributing.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

Well I think it would be a shame to lock it.  Murtalian has offered the French, and they're canon.  It's been acknowledged that he has some cool ideas in ship design.  As long as we're not knocking his mom, or he doesn't start making fun of my kids, I think it can remain constructive.

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

John.  His name is John.  big_smile

My name is Frank.....err Matt.....er boss to my staff.  But they like me because I let them work flex.

  • Registered: 2022-11-15
  • Posts: 1,286

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

Well...I can honestly say it isn't my intent to be "shouting down" anyone or their designs.  What I've been trying to do is illustrate the thought process behind developing a fleet in a manner consistent with the time line and national conditions of the period. smile

I don't necessarily agree with a lot of the designs presented...having a lot of the same issues as Matt.  But the game is meant to be played for fun...and if you enjoy uber-ship battles great! 

I guess the issue should simply be left at 'just cause it's posted doesn't mean it's official canon until you see it printed.'  So don't panic.  The game isn't ruined until everyone stops playing! :wink:

Tournament or official games should be with canon ships IMO...pick-up games are whatever folks agree to be playing with and I don't think anyone of us is trying to say yea or nay about what designs are used....
( Oo )

  • Registered: 2005-03-29
  • Posts: 859

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

Hey, thats top secret information you've just leaked out there! Im sorry...

/Matt's door is suddenly kicked in by dozens of Secret Service dudes...:D

As for the designs...

There is actually precedent for minor navies trying to put everything onto one hull. The Swedes did so with their Gotland design--they tried to make a light carrier-cruiser of the hull, and it actually worked quite well.

Navies such as the Germans, British and Russians have the resources to build dedicated carriers or battleships. Smaller nations haven't got those resources, and they also have seen just what FACs are capable of. They've also seen how potent rockets are against FACs. So, to get the maximum bang per buck, they're likely to want a craft such as the ones I've designed--powerful primaries, hopefully secondaries if they fit, and rockets with capability to carry FACs in their atherkatapults.

And you can see that the British have started to go the same way--the Cornwallis design, were it to carry rockets as well, would be excellent against any of the designs I've fielded. Lightning projectors would laugh at the armour, and having dedicated FAC 'interceptors' would make life hard for any Niels Juel FACs to attack...:D

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 379

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

I love the Cornwallis  big_smile

But that's just my ego talking.

I started plunking FACs on battleships because I saw them as being the equivalent as the floatplanes carried on dreadnoughts starting in the 1920s.

They just have offensive capabilities.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Brit exchange = New Japanese Destroyer

kevinsmith67206 wrote:

> I seriously doubt that you'd see any kind of restrictions in
> a tournament setting. I imagine Dan would handle an Iron
> Stars tournament in the same manner that his Starmada
> tournaments are handled. That being anything goes.

Perhaps. But then Starmada has never had a clear background behind it, and has always been intended as a generic game. Iron Stars is a tad different in those respects...

> All of this talk of "canon ships" is kind of amusing. The
> only thing canon about them is the fact that they're in the
> supplied setting. No more, no less.

Exactly! That's what canon means: "in the book". wink

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website