Tweaking fleets to historical ratios

[Derek]

So leave US at 1 BB and 1 CA (OOB) and reduce UK by 1 each BB and CA (to count for pacific presence)
I like it

[CWO Marc]

@almashir:

First, here’s a brief description of what was implied by the terms “cruiser” and “battleship.”  Ships of this era typically had three different sizes of guns – primary, secondary, and tertiary.  For battleships, the primary guns were usually 10”–12”, the secondary battery was 6”- 9”, and the tertiary battery was 3”-5”.   Cruisers would go down a notch, with their main guns being 6”-9”, and secondary/tertiary armament in the 3”-5” range. To complicate matters a bit, there were two distinct types of battleships:  Dreadnaught and pre-Dreadnaught.  (I’ll abbreviate Dreadnaught as DN, and pre-Dreadnaught as PDN).  Prior to the launch of HMS Dreadnaught in 1906, a typical battleship would have one primary gun turret forward, and one aft, with 1-2 guns per turret.  Their secondary/tertiary armament was arranged in broadsides of 4-6 guns of each type per side.  DN class battleships, on the other hand, usually had 8-12 guns of the primary caliber, in forward/aft turrets, meaning they could bring most or all of them to bear in a broadside to either starboard or port.  DNs also tended to be bigger, faster, and more heavily armored (except for battlecruisers, which sacrificed armor for even greater speed).

Just to expand on this a bit: dreadnought-type battleships and battlecruisers had no secondary gun batteries.  They had multiple turrets carrying heavy guns of a uniform caliber, plus some lighter guns for defensive purposes, but nothing in between.  Pre-dreadnoughts carried a mixture of heavy and intermediate calibers, plus defensive guns, but the Battle of Tsushima (where the opposing fleets opened fire at each other at enormous ranges) demonstrated that the intermediate guns were wasteful and inefficient: they didn’t shoot far enough compared to the main guns, they produced a confusion of shell splashes which complicated the range correction process, and they and their ammunition consumed valuable space and weight that could be better used by “maxing out” the number of heavy guns (the real ship-killers) that a battleship carried.  Dreadnoughts were thus given small guns (generally 5-inch caliber or smallr) for defense against destroyers (and later against aircraft), but carried no cruiser-type intremediate offensive guns.

The rule of thumb for distinguishing a dreadnought battleship from a dreadnought battlecruiser was that a battleship carried armour proportional to its firepower (very roughly meaning a maximum belt armour thickness equal to the caliber of its main guns) while battlecruisers had much thinner armour relative to the caliber of their main guns (which they also carried in smaller numbers than a battleship).

[Aristokles]

About the “Turkish” fleet:

In 1914, two German cruisers, the Goeben and the Breslau (somewhat lighter than the Goeben) after being pursued by the British, fled to the Dardanelles.  The Ottoman Empire was still neutral at this point, and being courted by both sides (although leaning toward the CP).  After some hemming and hawing, the Turks eventually let the German ships in, while denying access to their British pursuers.

At Constantinople, the Germans “gave” the ships to the Ottomans.  However, the “gift” was essentially meaningless, while the ships were given Turkish names, they retained their German crews, captains, and most importantly, they remained under German control.

Acting on orders from Berlin, the two ships, bearing Turkish flags, sailed North, and began shelling Russian facilities on the Black Sea.  The Turks protested to the Russians that it was the Germans, not the Ottomans, attacking.  The Russians responded to the Turks that they could prove their good intent by expelling the Germans advisors in Constantinople and elsewhere in the Ottoman Empire, reparations to the Russians, and internment of the two “Turkish” ships.  This the Ottomans could not do, the Entente declared war on the Turks, and the Ottoman Empire joined the CP.

[WILD BILL]

So if you look at in sheer numbers, the OOB isn’t that far off on most powers when you consider the Indian fleet as part of the Pacific fleet (and remove the rest)). UK is king of the hill (and probably under represented as far as battleships/cruisers), they will  loose the home fleet (as in every other A&A game), but can rebuild easily. The Germans should be second (but also reduced to match the UK home fleet so they can’t obtain naval supremacy). The French are the main problem and over inflated as ppl have said (Atlantic BB needs to be down sized to a cruiser). This would make the French at about the same as the Germans (still out of proportion), but when you consider one of the Turk cruisers as a gift from the Germans it helps to bring things around. Russia should probably cut one of the Black Sea cruisers, but because the Turks get 2 cruisers it should stay IMO.

Keep in mind that Germany is the only power to start with subs, and they get 4. This somewhat makes up for the surface fleet being undersized IMO, and the UK fleet is defiantly undersized as well. Fix the French fleet, and call it a day LOL

Taken from above quote:

Battleships                 cruisers                  What they have OOB

Britain: � 6               Britain: � 7             2BB, 5cr  (BB under represented, but understandable)
Germany: � 3           Germany: � 3          1BB, 2cr + Turk cr (gift)  (not to far off because UK is reduced)
France: � 2               France: � 2             2BB, 1 cr (over inflated, should be 1 BB, 2 cr)
Austria: � 1               Austria: � 1           1BB, 1cr  (good)
Italy: � 1                   Italy: � 1               1BB, 1cr  (good)
Russia: � 1                Russia: � 1            1BB, 2cr  (maybe 1 cr over, but matches the Turks)
USA: � 2                   USA: � 2                1BB, 1cr  (Atlantic fleet, so good)
Turkey: � 0               Turkey: 1                 2cr (over sized but ok, one of them gifted from Germany)

[Derek]

I am enjoying the history lesson  :-D

[Imperious Leader]

This is totally accurate and posted in another thread about the same thing. All you got to do is take the OOB units and construct ratios that accommodate them. Doing this will discover a few instances where the setup is not accurate in some cases.  You have to also downgrade the value of pre-dreadnoughts, but combine them with the Dreadnought count. Combine Battle-cruisers with Dreadnoughts ( the difference is closer to DN than Cruiser). Combine cruisers but note that PC and Other cruisers are typically less than an armored cruiser.

France:
Dreadnought 8
Pre-Dreadnought 14
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser 19
Protected Cruiser 9
Other Cruiser
Destroyer 81
Submarine 70

should have in game: 1 DN, 2 AC, 2 DD, 2 SS

2BB, 1 cr

UK:
Dreadnought 22
Pre-Dreadnought 40
Battle-cruiser  9
Armored Cruiser  34
Protected Cruiser  52
Other Cruiser  35
Destroyer  221
Submarine  73

should have in game: 4 DN, 5-6 AC, 5 DD, 2 SS

2BB, 5cr

Italy:
Dreadnought  3
Pre-Dreadnought  7
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  7
Protected Cruiser  11
Other Cruiser  3
Destroyer  33
Submarine  23

should have in game: 1 DN, 1 AC, 1 DD  ( being very generous)

1BB, 1cr

Russia:
Dreadnought
Pre-Dreadnought  10
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  6
Protected Cruiser  6
Other Cruiser
Destroyer 25
Submarine  22

should have 1 AC, 1 DD

1BB, 2cr

USA:
Dreadnought  10
Pre-Dreadnought  23
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  12
Protected Cruiser  22
Other Cruiser
Destroyer  50
Submarine 16

Should have: 2 DN, 1 AC, 1 DD

1BB, 1cr

Aus-Hun
Dreadnought  6
Pre-Dreadnought  6
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  2
Protected Cruiser  3
Other Cruiser
Destroyer  18
Submarine  5

should have: 1 DN, 1 DD

1BB, 1cr

Germany:
Dreadnought  15
Pre-Dreadnought  22
Battle-cruiser  5
Armored Cruiser  7
Protected Cruiser  17
Other Cruiser  16
Destroyer  90
Submarine  31

should have : 3 DN, 1 AC, 3 DD, 1-2 SS

1BB, 2cr + Turk cr (gift)

Ottomans:
Dreadnought
Pre-Dreadnought  2
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser
Protected Cruiser  2
Other Cruiser
Destroyer  8
Submarine

should have: 1 AC

2cr

I also have merchant marine totals by nation, ask and i can post that if need be.

Battleships                cruisers                  What they have OOB
                             
Britain: � 6              Britain: � 7            2BB, 5cr  (BB under represented, but understandable)
Germany: � 3          Germany: � 3          1BB, 2cr + Turk cr (gift)  (not to far off because UK is reduced)
France: � 2              France: � 2            2BB, 1 cr (over inflated, should be 1 BB, 2 cr)
Austria: � 1              Austria: � 1          1BB, 1cr  (good)
Italy: � 1                  Italy: � 1              1BB, 1cr  (good)
Russia: � 1                Russia: � 1            1BB, 2cr  (maybe 1 cr over, but matches the Turks)
USA: � 2                  USA: � 2                1BB, 1cr  (Atlantic fleet, so good)
Turkey: � 0              Turkey: 1                2cr (over sized but ok, one of them gifted from Germany)

[xxstefanx]

If you want to expand the history lesson you can also discuss LOCATION!

Example UK:
-> The Indian fleet did not possess any DNs!
-> UK sent a big pre-DN-fleet in the Meditteranean for Gallipoli, the main Grand Fleet was stationed in Scapa Flow.

So - of course - no Indian DN!
One DN piece (representing the Pre-DNs) in the Med en route to Alexandria, 2 or 3 DNs depending on how many you want to give them in the Firth of Forth.

[knp7765]

Okay, here is something I don’t get. You divided total battleships by 10 to get roughly what should be in the game setup, yet you divided the total cruisers by 15. Why the different numbers for the two types of ship?

[almashir]

“Okay, here is something I don’t get. You divided total battleships by 10 to get roughly what should be in the game setup, yet you divided the total cruisers by 15. Why the different numbers for the two types of ship?”

Well, mostly to keep it close to OOB, and because of the limited number of playing pieces included with the game.  You could just as well divide by 10 instead of 15 if you want.  For cruisers, you’d come up with:

Britain:  10.2 (10)
Germany:  4.7 (5)
France:  2.4 (2)
Austria:  1.1 (1)
Italy:  0.8 (1)
Russia:  1.4 (1)
USA:  3.3 (3)
Turkey:  0.4 (rounded up to 1 by tossing in their single DN and 4 PDNs)

Assuming you have enough playing pieces, there is some benefit, IMO, to increasing the raw numbers, while keeping the ratios between nations the same.  For one thing, it allows tactical flexibility.  You can split off task forces to cover more threats, instead of having to keep all your eggs in one basket.  Also, if you end up with a grand Jutland-style slugfest, having more ships present means rolling more dice.  The more dice that are rolled, the closer the results will be to the statistical average.  Games are less fun (to me, at least) if they are largely decided by a few lucky dice rolls, as opposed to deliberate strategy and tactics.

[BJCard]

Other issues with this is how do you account for British ships in the Pacific?  How much of the fleet was over there in WWI?

[almashir]

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/fdrn0002.htm

Royal Navy ships stationed outside of Home Fleet or the Mediterranean in August, 1914.
NB: this includes ships of the Royal Australian and Royal Canadian Navies.

Summarized below:

Australia/New Zealand/China/East Indies:  1 battlecruiser, 14 cruisers

South America:  1 cruiser

North America:  7 cruisers

So that would leave about 80 cruisers between the Home Fleet and the Med.  The vast majority (pretty much all) of the British battleships were stationed with the Home Fleet or in the Med, with all the Dreadnaughts operating from the British Isles.  This made sense, given the size and relative quality of the German fleet in the Baltic.  The construction of the German fleet was one of the causes of the war.  The British saw it as a direct challenge to their naval supremacy, which they relied upon to maintain their far-flung empire.  Germany (and Italy) were not unified until late in the 19th Century.  So they were late to the colonial conquest game.  It was assumed Gemany wanted to acquire an empire, but with all the most lucrative and strategically located colonies in Africa and Asia already taken, the only way to achieve this would be to grab some colonies from Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, etc.  This made the British (and everyone else with colonies) nervous.

[BJCard]

Interesting, thanks!

[Flashman]

So, what about adding 2 dreadnoughts each to the UK & German home fleets?

(along with reducing the French Biscay BB, and maybe the Russia, and adding one to the US fleet)

Would this ruin the game balance, or would the 4 new ships effectively cancel each other out?

Would it make German dominance of the Baltic too easy, or would the UK be able to nip in and smash the rest of the HSF if the Germans sent a task force to the east?

Would a decisive R1 Jutland effectively decide the game right at the beginning?

[xxstefanx]

@knp7765:

Okay, here is something I don’t get. You divided total battleships by 10 to get roughly what should be in the game setup, yet you divided the total cruisers by 15. Why the different numbers for the two types of ship?

It would be more logic to divide by 4 or multiples of that. So 8, 16, 32 would be more appopiate numbers.

UK:
Full Cruiser Squadron = 4 Ships
Full Destroyer Flottilla = 8 Ships

DIfferent number are correct as more powerful ships are accompanied by larger numbers of lesser types.
Say 4 DNs, 8 CR, 16 DS

[almashir]

I was thinking something along the lines of this.  Note that I cut the number of German subs in half (They had less than 30 when the war started).  I also put one of their cruisers off the coast of Africa (This represents ships they had there plus the West Indies, as well as the Far East Squadron, which historically made its way to the Atlantic to cause mischief).  I also gave the Germans a transport, because it seems implausible they wouldn’t have one.  I did not do likewise for the US, since they would not yet have paid the cost of diverting civlian ships to military use.  I also subtracted 1 British cruiser and half the US Navy to represent units assigned to the Pacific.  Does anyone see any obvious game breakers here?

Austria-Hungary
• Sea Zone 18: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Russian Empire
• Sea Zone 12: 1 Battleship
• Sea Zone 21: 1 Cruiser
Germany
• Sea Zone 5: 1 Submarine
• Sea Zone 7: 1 Submarine
• Sea Zone 10: 3 Battleships, 2 Cruisers, 1 Transport
• Sea Zone 24:  1 Cruiser
France
• Sea Zone 15: 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
• Sea Zone 16: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 2 Transports
British Empire
• Sea Zone 2: 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
• Sea Zone 9: 4 Battleships, 3 Cruisers, 1 Transport
• Sea Zone 19: 2 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
• Sea Zone 29: 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Ottoman Empire
• Sea Zone 20: 1 Cruiser
Italy
• Sea Zone 17: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
United States
• Sea Zone 1: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser

[Flashman]

Seems a little too many UK BBs for balance; I’d have 3 in the home fleet, 1 in the med.

OR split up the home fleet with some ships in SZ 8? (and start a German BB in SZ11?)

The German cruiser off Africa I’d place in SZ 26, within striking distance of the British  Med fleet:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Königsberg_(1905)

[Derek]

France should not have 3 transports

Just split the uk home fleet into 2-3 SZs like in G40

[xxstefanx]

Too many DNs makes shore bombardment FAR too strong!

I agree with Flashman for UK:
3 DNs Home Fleet, 1 in the Med;
all other nations accordingly!

Without detailed check IL’s numbers seem fine!
(I would distribute submarines differently though)

[Imperious Leader]

If you add all sorts of new ships, you need a mechanism to protect the navy from annihilation like allowing ports to safeguard ships from naval combat.

Once a super naval power sacks a poor nation of her navy, the propensity to rebuild over time is impossible. I would have ships in port some protection, either total immunity from naval combat or all ships in port take double hits.

[oztea]

Perhaps allow ships to be built on land territories as an option. So you can build up a fleet in safety.
While on land, it can’t be attacked, it also can’t move any farther than into the adjacent sea zone.

Likewise, if you lose that land territory, you lose that ship as well.
You could start with more ships on the board, if you move some on to land (imagine they are in a dry dock)

I don’t think I would allow ships to WILLINGLY move on to land, but only allow new ships to be built there.