Our house rule: Once at War the US may purchase one transport (liberty ship) and place immediately for combat. The ability to place immediately reflects the speed in which the were built durning that time.
LINER SHIP
-
Some of you thought about a rule for the Liner ship and others civilian boat?
During WWII, USA, UK, Germany, Italians and the japs requisitioned ships for the transport of their troops.AL.
-
I’ve thought of using the transports from 1914 as heavy NCM transports. They cost more but can haul more units in the non combat movement phase.
-
Yes it’s good for 1914 and 1939.
Can transport 3 infantry.
move 3 zones.
2 hit to destroy. -
Sure. I think the obvious and biggest differentiating factor would have to be arms. I know in an old A&A game (classic?) transports have a defensive value of 1. You could bring that back, and amend the rules to allow transports to be taken as casualties. While you’re at it, maybe have the regular transports be able to hold 2 non-infantry, instead of requiring 1 as infantry, since it’s a militarized unit. I think the 3 movement idea though for the Liner is pretty excessive, but I could see it being used as an additional differentiating factor.
So I guess they could look something like this?
–Military Transport–
Cost: 8 IPCs
Defensive value: 1
Movement: 2
Cargo Space: Up to any 2 land units.–Liner Ship–
Cost: 10 IPCs
Defensive value: 0
Movement: 2
Cargo Space: Up to 2 Infantry and 1 other land unit.
Capital Ship attribute (2 hits to kill, can be repaired at Naval Base)
Cannot be used in amphibious assaults, except to capture an undefended territory.
Cannot be the target of a Kamikaze assault. -
Okay, I can see where you are coming from with this ocean liner used for military transport idea and it has some merit.
First of all, what’s with this “2 hits to sink” idea? That’s just rubbish. These are peacetime civilian passenger liners, not battleships. They were not built to withstand explosive hits by naval gunfire or torpedoes. Have you forgotten the Lusitania? It was a big ocean liner that was sunk by 1 German U-boat with I think just 1 torpedo.
As for their other capabilities, they should move 2 just like all other ships. I really don’t think big ocean liners could go that much faster than battleships, carriers or cruisers. That is, unless you have decided to give certain warships a 3 movement, in which case the liners could then have some protection.
I also think a passenger liner should be able to carry up to 3 infantry but ONLY infantry. Passenger liners were designed to carry lots of people. Re-modeling them to carry tanks, mechs and artillery seems like it would be a costly and time-consuming task which would kind of negate the government consfigating them because they needed ships in a hurry. -
I agree with knp77, Liners should take infantry only. Too much trouble to carry a Tank down the stairs.
I read about this topic some years ago. An infantry division would need more space than an armored division. An inf div have more men. Also, the 1000 horses and tons of hay of an infantry div take lots of more space than the 200 trucks and fuel of an armored div. And that is the reason for that USA in the real war sent so many motorized and mechanized divisions to Europe, they took less space on the trannies. And in the Pacific, the Marine units did not need horses, they got supply directly from the ships.
I read on the Designers forum some years ago, the reason a tranny take one inf and one other land unit, is the designer was afraid that the USA player would stop buying infantry if a tranny could take two Tanks. So, the rational was playability, not historical facts.
About the doubblehits. Bismarck took 800 hits from guns and torpedos and still did not sink, the crew had to open the bottom valves. Tirpitz got bombed and torpedoed many times, and after the last bombing she was so damaged they cut her up for scrap metal, but she never sank. This are the true battleships. As mentioned above, Lusitiana sank by one torpedo, and even Titanic sank by one iceberg. Liners are not unsinkable.
I think that some nations should start with a few liners, since they in fact were confiscated at the beginning of the war. No liners was build during the war.
USA, UK and Ge start with liners. Move 2, carry 3 units, infantry only, debark into friendly territory and during non-combat move only, sink by one hit
-
First of all, what’s with this “2 hits to sink” idea? That’s just rubbish. These are peacetime civilian passenger liners, not battleships. They were not built to withstand explosive hits by naval gunfire or torpedoes. Have you forgotten the Lusitania? It was a big ocean liner that was sunk by 1 German U-boat with I think just 1 torpedo.
As for their other capabilities, they should move 2 just like all other ships. I really don’t think big ocean liners could go that much faster than battleships, carriers or cruisers. That is, unless you have decided to give certain warships a 3 movement, in which case the liners could then have some protection.
I also think a passenger liner should be able to carry up to 3 infantry but ONLY infantry. Passenger liners were designed to carry lots of people. Re-modeling them to carry tanks, mechs and artillery seems like it would be a costly and time-consuming task which would kind of negate the government consfigating them because they needed ships in a hurry.Excellent points about liners having less ability to absorb damage than warships and about liners (in principle) only carrying only troops – like Narvik, I agree on both counts. (I put “in principle” because liners do have some space for cargo, and because suspicions have been raised that the Lusitania was in fact carrying contraband military goods, and that their explosion may have contributed to the sinking of the ship.)
Regarding special abilities, one factor that might be considered is that fast liners like the Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Mary, in addition to their ability to carry an awful lot of troops, were so fast that they tended to travel on their own rather than as part of convoys: their crusing speed was much higher than the speed of U-boats, so a successful torpedo shot against them was virtually impossible, and puttintg them in a convoy (even a fast convoy) would simply have slowed them down to a comparative crawl.
-
KNP 65 and Narvik.
I agree with you but…Regarding special abilities, one factor that might be considered is that fast liners like the Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Mary, in addition to their ability to carry an awful lot of troops, were so fast that they tended to travel on their own rather than as part of convoys: their crusing speed was much higher than the speed of U-boats, so a successful torpedo shot against them was virtually impossible, and puttintg them in a convoy (even a fast convoy) would simply have slowed them down to a comparative crawl.
That’s the reason why I wrote…2 hits….
About the capabilities: yes 3 infantries. Not more than that. No armor, no special unit.
Only during non combat move.
No amphibious assault.
And yes, UK, USA, Germany can have liner ship.
No for the move, I still with 3 zones. Liner ship was fast.AL
-
Okay, I can understand that liners were fast so you want to give them 3 movement.
What I don’t get is how you show a liner being able to outrun a U-boat with the way this game works.
Here is an example: UK has a liner in SZ 106. During UK’s turn, they move 3 infantry from Canada over to SZ 109 and unload them in England. Now, on Germany’s turn, they have a U-boat in SZ 105. They move that sub up to attack the UK liner. There is NO destroyer in SZ 109, just the UK liner. UK could scramble planes from London, but with no DD they can’t hit the U-boat anyway. So in SZ 109 it is just the UK liner and German U-boat.
Since the liner has 0 defense, the U-boat simply has to roll until they get a “2” to sink it (or 2 “2s” if you give liners a 2 hit capability - which I still disagree with).
Another point: if liners have 0 defense, shouldn’t they be automatically destroyed like transports? And if that were the case, how can you give them a 2-hit capability?One other question: If we give liners a 3 movement, do they get 4 movement when leaving from a naval base?
-
Since the liner has 0 defense, the U-boat simply has to roll until they get a “2” to sink it (or 2 “2s” if you give liners a 2 hit capability - which I still disagree with).
Well, sub attack only at 1 against liner ship if not destroy after one round of combat, liner ship can withdraw.
One other question: If we give liners a 3 movement, do they get 4 movement when leaving from a naval base?
No, 3 moves…anyway what the hell…your liner ship is going to do in naval base? :-D
AL
-
Another point: if liners have 0 defense, shouldn’t they be automatically destroyed like transports? And if that were the case, how can you give them a 2-hit capability?
The idea of treating liners like transport ships (with 0 defense) in terms of combat and like fast warships in terms of speed sounds realistic. Liners weren’t tough targets in terms of their physical capacity to take a torpedo hit (they had no armour, and their compartmentalization and damage-control capabilities were inferior to those of warships); they were simply hard to hit because they were a fast-moving target. In other words, the number of hits needed to sink a liner isn’t the same thing as the chances that it’ll get hit in the first place. So I agree that a 2-hit capacity is problematic.
Regarding speed, things need to be kept in perspective. RMS Queen Mary had a crusing speed of between 30 to 32 knots, which is comparable to most WWII-era fast battleships and a bit slower than what a good WWII aircraft carrier could do. Some Japanese destroyers, by contrast, had a top speed in the 37 to 39 knot range. So liners weren’t faster than warships. Liners were, however, fast when compared with what cargo ships could do: in WWII, a slow convoy was defined as one doing 8 knots or less, and a fast convoy as one doing 9 to 13 knots (later in the war, 9 to 14 knots).
-
Don’t forget, we talk about a
groupof liner ship not only one…
So 2 hit it’s not a big deal….
3 moves also…
Anyway, Germany, USA, UK and Italy should only have a limit one liner ship.
So don’t know why you seem afraid of poor liner ship… -
I like this idea of a Liner ship for transporting Infantry. I like the idea of the larger capacity, 3 infantry but no other unit types. I think a happy compromise is WRT the 2 hits, and 3 movement; can be best sum in my mind to a movement of 2, and only one hit to sink, but have a fast flee ability, this ability is after the first round of combat any unit with this ability can withdraw from combat; weather or not it stays in the same sea zone or not.
-
Since the liner has 0 defense, the U-boat simply has to roll until they get a “2” to sink it (or 2 “2s” if you give liners a 2 hit capability - which I still disagree with).
Well, sub attack only at 1 against liner ship if not destroy after one round of combat, liner ship can withdraw.
One other question: If we give liners a 3 movement, do they get 4 movement when leaving from a naval base?
No, 3 moves…anyway what the hell…your liner ship is going to do in naval base? :-D
AL
I like the idea of liner ship unit with up to 3 Infantry units only on board, 3 spaces move, no combat value, and 1 hit but 1 single shot opportunity to hit.
I would not change the combat value of Subs against it.
Is it intended to travel alone and unescorted or what?
In naval combat, if other units can survived the first round, then liner ship is automatically secured (because it fleed combat). -
@Baron:
Since the liner has 0 defense, the U-boat simply has to roll until they get a “2” to sink it (or 2 “2s” if you give liners a 2 hit capability - which I still disagree with).
Well, sub attack only at 1 against liner ship if not destroy after one round of combat, liner ship can withdraw.
One other question: If we give liners a 3 movement, do they get 4 movement when leaving from a naval base?
No, 3 moves…anyway what the hell…your liner ship is going to do in naval base? :-D
AL
I like the idea of liner ship unit with up to 3 Infantry units only on board, 3 spaces move, no combat value, and 1 hit but 1 single shot opportunity to hit.
I would not change the combat value of Subs against it.
Is it intended to travel alone and unescorted or what?
In naval combat, if other units can survived the first round, then liner ship is automatically secured (because it fleed combat).I like this idea better: takes 1 hit to sink a liner, but if they miss the first shot the liner can speed away. Also, remaining in the same sea zone makes sense since each sea zone in this game is a big area.
Didn’t Japan also have access to ocean liners? A while back I was collecting 1/700 waterline Japanese ships from WW2 and a couple of the auxiliary ships were ocean liners. Perhaps Japan should be allowed 1 as well.
Also, would liners be a purchasable unit? Or just whatever each country has at the start is all that’s allowed? -
Ok 1 hit to sink the liner but after 1 round of combat and he can speed away…It sound good.
Also, sub attack at 1 against the liner…
Yes remaining in the same sea zone because sub should not have zone of control.(Neither the liner ship)._Didn’t Japan also have access to ocean liners?_You’re right KNP….
I forgot to wrote it.
Also, would liners be a purchasable unit? Or just whatever each country has at the start is all that’s allowed?
Yes in our rules, all players begins with liner ship. (Limit of 1 liner ship per country).
AL.
-
Ok 1 hit to sink the liner but after 1 round of combat and he can speed away… It sound good.
Also, sub attack at 1 against the liner…
Yes remaining in the same sea zone because sub should not have zone of control.(Neither the liner ship)._Didn’t Japan also have access to ocean liners?_You’re right KNP….
I forgot to wrote it.
Also, would liners be a purchasable unit? Or just whatever each country has at the start is all that’s allowed?
Yes in our rules, all players begins with liner ship. (Limit of 1 liner ship per country).
AL.
How would you play 2 Subs attacking 1 Cruiser and 1 Liner?
Let’s suppose the results is: “1” and “2”.
Is there 2 casualties? According to the best result from attacker’s POV.
Only 1 casualty? Assuming the worst case scenario for attacker in which the “1” was on the Cruiser while the “2” was put on the Liner.Giving different offensive value is overcomplex.
Better increase in a different way the Liner’s survivability.
Such as, at the most extreme: gives Liner a full immunity against Subs.It seems to me that giving a single shot with usual combat value (Sub A2 D1, in this case) for each attacking unit is much simpler but still provide Liner a real chance to escape and survive.
It is the only units which Subs cannot attack again and again until it is over for one side.
Liner A0 D0 Move 3 Cost: 1 is free at the start, carry up to 3 Infantry units?
No SZ of control. Taken amongst last casualty transports.
Can withdraw from any combat after first round. -
How would you play 2 Subs attacking 1 Cruiser and 1 Liner?
Let’s suppose the results is: “1” and “2”.
Is there 2 casualties? According to the best result from attacker’s POV.
Only 1 casualty? Assuming the worst case scenario for attacker in which the “1” was on the Cruiser while the “2” was put on the Liner.No. Sub must choose the liner ship or the warship not both.
It seems to me that giving a single shot with usual combat value (Sub A2 D1, in this case) for each attacking unit is much simpler but still provide Liner a real chance to escape and survive.
It is the only units which Subs cannot attack again and again until it is over for one side.After one round of combat the liner ship can withdraw if surviving the sub attack…
AL.
Suggested Topics
