R/C Naval Combat

None that I know of in IRCWCC, maybe MWC or treaty....

I know, what does the bismark need to counter? In reality, NC and sodaks. There are many more of them then class 6-7 axis ships

We have three here under construction. One will battle this year the other two are going to see the water next year. There is one Vanguard in th US it is a wooden hull, I think it is in the MWC I have seen pics and it is a fast gun ship. The Guys name is Brian K and the ship is in the MWC, he has a web site for the ships build. Just type in BrianK's Vanguard and it should come up on google.

Bryan I agree that convoy ships do need pumps. Maybe it the pump size could be calculated by ships weight or length. An idea we have been throwing around for points is that a ship is worth 200 points per unit for a sink. Yammy would be worth 1600 sunk, a QE would be worth 1100 points.                                                                                                                          One of the reasons there are many more NC's, Sodak's and Nagato's is that the larger slower turning ships like Bismarck and Hoods are under gunned for thier length. Giving Bismarck the extra half unit makes alot of difference in how you can arm these ships. The other thing we have noticed is that all the battlecruisers in general are under gunned for thier length and are easy targets for the shorter ships. If the battlecruiser's had a real speed advantage then they might get built more as they could run away if they were outgunned as the real ships were designed to do. It would also bring more tactics into the game, insted of just boxing a ship in then pounding it until it sinks. It is hard to sink a ships you can't catch/hit.

Posted By Chris Easterbrook on 29 May 2009 05:10 AM

1. Bryan I agree that convoy ships do need pumps. Maybe it the pump size could be calculated by ships weight or length.

An idea we have been throwing around for points is that a ship is worth 200 points per unit for a sink. ....

 

 

2. If the battlecruiser's had a real speed advantage then they might get built more as they could run away if they were outgunned as the real ships were designed to do. It would also bring more tactics into the game, ......

 

 

 

3. . It is hard to sink a ships you can't catch/hit.

 

Bryan's Reply:

 1  So when is the vote?

2. I like this one too (If Bismark goes to 7 what does Hood go to?)

3. I think thats what distroyer captains have been telling us for years

What we do in our club is to allow other rule sets to be used as they

are fairly close in the building rules etc,   SO if you wanted to build a

aircraft carrier you would have a nice transport ship under IRCWCC but

if another rule set is used you would have some pump and guns aboard

also, so it makes the selection of ships more diverse.  I actually like my

SMS Scharnhorst under IRCWCC better as she is 3 units rather than 2.5

under MWC so there are pros and cons to each side, but these changes

make sence and are not too overboard, and a half unit or on larger

transports a full unit pump would make those long convoy runs so much

more fun.  I do like keeping the `No Touchy rule``.

Posted By Chris Easterbrook on 03 Jun 2009 05:42 AM
What about giving BC's simular units to battleships, giving them a real speed advantage but restricting them to half unit pumps. This would more accuratly repersent a battle crusiers battleship grade firepower and there speed advantage but lack of armor. I think this would make BC's more compeditive and you might see more built and used. Just a thought.

I like the idea or BCs being faster than the Battle Wagons, but they should be

slower by a noticable amount from destroyers though so we do not take away

a destroyers speed as it is its best weapon/defence. 

Oh and I am REALLY pushing for Bismark to get her 7 units now!

(Your welcome Ron and Mark).

Rule Proposal:

Merchant ships/Unarmed Ships:

To be allowed to ad,  a 1/2-unit pump for this type of ship if their scale length is 0-48".  If their length is

longer than 48" they are to be allowed to carry a full unit pump.  These pumps are to make these ships

more survivable and to simulate compartmentization and pumping abilities and just plain ingenuity on

the part of the crews, lets face it, one or two  BB holes should not be the cause of one of these ships sinking.

 The sinking of a larger merchant/transport ship should require a concerted effort on the part of the attackers

and not be just a case of one or 2 ships making a quick run at these models in the begining of their

cruise, and then just waiting for them to sink later. I want to keep the no-touch rule, but there can be any number

of attackers.

Ideas.....Thoughts......When do we vote....(Yes I know when)

Posted By SnipeHunter on 14 Jun 2009 08:56 PM
Are you going to get rid of the touch rule and single attacker rule as well to make it fair?

Keep the no touch rule, to keep all at range and to prevent boxing in, but

allow any number of attackers.

Interesting rule proposal,

We are going to try something at IRCWCC nats called capture the flag. Plato and I will be captaining carriers for the opposing sides. The object is to sink the carrier or "capture the flag" As far as rules go we will be allowing a 1/2 unit pump in each carrier and they will be 26 seconds. The battle continues until one is sunk or everyone is out of ammo/gas (on 5).  Points will be awarded as a mini fleet battle with a carrier worth 6000 points. There will be no attacker or defender rules. It should be brutality.

Posted By Iceman on 14 Jun 2009 11:19 PM

Interesting rule proposal,

We are going to try something at IRCWCC nats called capture the flag. Plato and I will be captaining carriers for the opposing sides. The object is to sink the carrier or "capture the flag" As far as rules go we will be allowing a 1/2 unit pump in each carrier and they will be 26 seconds. The battle continues until one is sunk or everyone is out of ammo/gas (on 5).  Points will be awarded as a mini fleet battle with a carrier worth 6000 points. There will be no attacker or defender rules. It should be brutality.

will the smaler class 2 and below ships still be able to re-arm?

Class 2 and lower can still rearm. We don't plan on changing any ship rules to do this other than the carriers themselves.

Posted By Chris Easterbrook on 22 May 2009 11:51 AM
It might be exam time, the two complete bismarcks up here have work really well and it gives the axis a counter to the Vanguard.

MY Bismarck is set up for 7 units also, it has 3 dual mounts, and a full unit pump, I can load one cannon

to half if anyone has a issue, but so far no problems, so Canada likes a 7 unit Bismarck.