I think that would be absolutely the way to go.  I would also assume that there would be size limitations and some technology (like lightning projectors and everything in TMW except MGs) that the major powers wouldn't want to be willing to give up (or that the minors could afford).

Technology limits -- most likely (I agree the Brits would not part with lightning projectors). 

But not really size.  In real life, those dreadnoughts the British were going to sell Turkey were very respectable combatants for their time.  That's why Churchill quashed the deal.  He needed them, and with all the question surrounding which way the Turks would go, he wasn't going to let them have that kinda firepower (if I remember my Massie correctly). 

Here is my offering of the Turkish Navy.  I gotta double check and make sure the Young Turks were actually in charge when I have them.  If not, background will need some very minor tweaking. 

I based the three heaviest ship classes off existing British and German ships, using the tweak limits listed earlier in this thread.  I chose fire arrows because I think that fits the region better (the Russian have them, the Chinese have them and I think they should be fielded by Asiatic powers). 

Beyond that, there's some good variation in the kit they're fielding, because I want to reflect the idea that they are ships purchased from different industrialized powers. 

The light cruisers are OK, but nothing special.  They're the only truly original design out of the bunch -- but they're not overwhelming.

The destroyers I think fit really well.  A handful of aging British boats that are stolen shamelessly from the IS rulebook and given a new name.

Lemme know your opinions on the ships and the attached fluff

Matt
PS Aresian -- email address is the same as my ID, just add @yahoo.com at the end.

Got stuck in my spam filter, retrieving it now....

Turks are going up for a playtest session this weekend against the IS rulebook Russians (my figuring is a clash between the Russian Imperial Fleet and the Turks).  We'll see how they do.

I also have a couple of friends wanting to play a TMW scenario, and I think I'll bring the Goalkeeper stats along to replace the Gammas used in the default version

Matt

Coupla things.

AAR for the Russian vs Turk battle fought today is pending (most likely no one cares but yer getting it anyway  ).  I just have to polish up my notes because I wanna do it right.

Setup.... The Uyumayan and Sadik cruisers, along with the Cellat battleship and a handful of Kovala DDs (remember, those destroyers are just British Alphas with a new name) took on two Tsargrad cruisers and the Spiridoff.  The title we offered at the table was "Be Careful What You Wish...." as the ambitious Ottoman Ether Fleet -- whatever its official name -- was about to tackle one of the toughest ships represented in the IS rules so far.

Just to let Aresian know -- The other table saw your Goalkeepers replacing the Gammas normally used in TMW's Scenario 6# "That Dirty Little War."  I didn't get to watch everything, but some general observations.

The British player didn't field his Goalkeepers as a dedicated flotilla/squadron/whatever.  He ringed them about his capital ships to offer an "umbrella."  The Austrian player experimented a bit himself and substituted a few Harpunes with Seraphs (better suited, he thought, to try and cope with the DE's rockets).

Two Seraphs actually teamed up and got lucky by killing one Goalkeeper without loss to themselves (lucky damage rolls).  But the 2 Harpunes that tried to exploit this small victory were shot down by other nearby escort ships.  Which should show you that rockets, at least in this instance, did their job of preventing FACs from completing their runs. 

Austrian Huszars then shifted their priorities and started tagging the Goalkeepers.  The exchange between the opposing destroyers was somewhat inconclusive.  I know the Austrian player lost a few destroyers by the time the game ended, and the British player did as well.  But other than that one Goalkeeper lost to the Seraphs, I don't know exactly what happened.  I do know that the British player liked the Goalkeeper's anti-FAC capabilities (each DE is pretty much guaranteed to down at at least one -- maybe 2?  see below --- of those fast movers when left free to act). 

When the Goalkeepers got pinned in place by the Huszars, a few Harpunes got through and managed to ding up British warships with their torpedoes.  But from what I heard, the Goalkeeper was seen as filling a niche.  The Brit player wouldn't necessarily replace ALL of his standard Gammas with them, but he would use at least a few.

(LAST MINUTE EDIT -- Forgot to mention the Brit player fired a handful of Hales at each of those two Harpunes mentioned above.  Figured a 5+ to hit, five shots couldn't possibly miss.  May have been a bit of overkill, but it looks like he was right).

The "other" table?!? As in, you had two games running at once?

Man, I'm jealous...

That's exactly what I was hoping to hear about the Goalkeeper.  And using them as an umbrella for the ships they're escorting is how I've used them so far.  Definitely a niche supplement to the standard Gamma and not a replacement.  As that great tactician Hannibal Smith would say, "I love it when a plan comes together." 

I'd limit Lightning Projectors to British hulls for now (although yer free to do what ya want) it seems that kit is proprietary to the RNES

Using the suggested guidelines for hull variants, you could take any Brit design and chuck secondaries and lights to make room for upgunned primaries (or tweak the armor and engine performance). 

Taking light guns off a ship's profile and going all big gun -- like Fisher argued -- gives you a cheap ship killer, point wise.  But if you're going to do away with light guns and secondaries, I'd make sure you have supporting vessels nearby.  D12 guns firing point blank at a destroyer with a momentum of 8 are going to need a 9+ to hit, even if that DD is unarmored, and you've just spread yer firepower by attacking a teeny ship that doesn't deserve that kind of attention. 

I actually think it's a good call in terms of their point cost that all big gun ships are relatively cheap.  It can really turn out to be a case of over-specialization if you're not careful (ie -- just imagine what a squadron of Harpunes could do against a battleship that's left in the open with just a ton of primaries to defend itself).

One thing to consider, if you exchange a large number of light guns for a small number of heavy ones, you've also just changed your hit location chart so that your hull is going to get hit a lot more often.  Each hull lost will be worth less (maybe) because your overall cost will probably be lower, but you'll be losing them more often.

That said, the Bantam class is a much better ship with 4d10(x2) LPs as primaries instead of the 4d10(x3) conventional guns.  Those strong secondaries make up for any slight weakness against light-armor targets in my book.

Rich

Type that revised Bantam up and post her 

The first Austrian ship I put up was in MS word format, so you could just type over the existing cells then zip her up as a PDF.  Give her a new name, too.  I wanna see more LPs, which is why I was sad to see one Brit design Dan was talking about miss The Merchant War  :cry:

Matt
PS -- I know we don't have a concrete process for approving ship variants (I work with engineers and we just got ISO audited, so what do you want?) but I'll give my "thumbs up" for the Goalkeeper MK. II variant (haven't seen the first one in action yet).  I don't know how other folks feel or how many 'yea' votes we need to get the thing plunked in as part of the IS official fleet roster  :?: