In recent times, inspired by the elegantly simple naval rule set published on Kev Robertson's blog spot, I tailored them to 'fit' the heavy units of my Mighty Armadas battleship navies. These comprised vessels of the German Bismarck class, the Japanese Yamato class, and the United States' Iowa class (the identity of the last being for some time a matter of uncertainty).
The KEV set gave 1D6 per gun for each vessel, with 10 hits being required to 'sink' the target. I took that as my yardstick for a vessel of 40,000 tons, armed with 15-inch guns as the main armament. To cater for variations in size and hitting power, for it seemed to me 'wrong' for even Bismarck to be a direct match for Yamato, made the following adjustments:
1. That a battleship's protection be arrived at by dividing tonnage by 4000, and rounding. I did think to look at belt armour, but as that would contribute to tonnage anyhow, I decided to keep it simple.
2. That gun calibre be taken into account by adding or subtracting 10% of the number of gun barrels per inch difference from 15". This did make the 10 and 12-gun 14-inch carrying battleships rather more formidable than expected, but, unless I discover different I'll stick with the result. It would appear, then, that the Prince of Wales on its own ought to have been at least an even match for Bismarck!
So it dawned on me to build a table of battleship 'stats' for WW2. A further number of points to note:
3. I have added stuff that never appeared in KEV's rules, nor in my battles so far, the Heavy AA and speed in hexes.
3A. The Heavy AA is to be the yardstick for AA capability, which is the number of guns divided by 4. Apart from that arbitrary decision I haven't yet formulated rules for air attack and air defence. So they are there for ... inclusiveness, so far.
3B. KEV's rule set was for an 'open board'; I played it out on a hex field. There seems to have been some difference between modern 'fast' units and the older, slower types. I gave the 'fast' ships 3 hexes of speed compared with 2 for the slower, the cut-off point being above 25 knots.
This would probably indicate that my present maximum gun range of 6 hexes ought to be extended to 9, which puts rather a strain on my 4'x4'4" board!
4. The other point is my inclusion of the German 'pocket battleships'. Of course, they could never have occupied a place in a battle line, being in size no bigger than a heavy cruiser. Earlier designated 'panzerschiff'', they were indeed redesignated as some kind of armoured cruiser. I have included them for the sake of 'completeness', but they would probably be better placed among the stats for cruisers and smaller craft, with a whole different yardstick than those chosen here.
At any rate, I have posted them for what they might be worth to anyone.
Ultra-simple
Naval rules for Battleships - Stats
|
|
| Vessel |
Main |
Gunnery |
Tonnage |
Protection |
x |
Hv AA |
AA |
Speed |
Hex |
|
|
SP |
|
SP |
|
|
|
|
|
| British |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Queen Elizabeth |
8x15" |
8 |
31,000 |
8 |
|
20x4.5"DP |
5 |
24 |
2 |
| Valiant |
8x15" |
8 |
31,000 |
8 |
|
20x4.5"DP |
5 |
24 |
2 |
| Warspite |
8x15" |
8 |
31,000 |
8 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
24 |
2 |
| Barham |
8x15" |
8 |
31,000 |
8 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
25 |
2 |
| Malaya |
8x15" |
8 |
31,000 |
8 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
25 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Revenge |
8x15" |
8 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
22 |
2 |
| Resolution |
8x15" |
8 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
22 |
2 |
| Royal Oak |
8x15" |
8 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
22 |
2 |
| Royal Sovereign |
8x15" |
8 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
22 |
2 |
| Ramillies |
8x15" |
8 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
22 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Renown |
6x15" |
6 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
20x4.5"DP |
5 |
29 |
3 |
| Repulse |
6x15" |
6 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
30 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hood |
8x15" |
8 |
41,000 |
10 |
|
8x4" |
2 |
31 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nelson |
9x16" |
10 |
34,000 |
9 |
|
8x4.7" |
2 |
23 |
2 |
| Rodney |
9x16" |
10 |
34,000 |
9 |
|
8x4.7" |
2 |
23 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| King George V |
10x14" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
16x5.25"DP |
4 |
27 |
3 |
| Prince of Wales |
10x14" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
16x5.25"DP |
4 |
27 |
3 |
| Duke of York |
10x14" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
16x5.25"DP |
4 |
27 |
3 |
| Howe |
10x14" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
16x5.25"DP |
4 |
27 |
3 |
| Anson |
10x14" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
16x5.25"DP |
4 |
27 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
France
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Courbet |
12x12" |
8 |
22,000 |
6 |
|
5x2.9" |
1 |
20 |
2 |
| Paris |
12x12" |
8 |
22,000 |
6 |
|
7x2.9" |
2 |
20 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Provence |
10x13.4" |
8 |
22,000 |
6 |
|
8x2.9" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Bretagne |
10x13.4" |
8 |
22,000 |
6 |
|
8x2.9" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Lorraine |
10x13.4" |
8 |
21,500 |
5 |
|
8x2.9" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dunkerque |
8x13" |
6 |
27,000 |
7 |
|
16x5.1"DP |
4 |
29 |
3 |
| Strasbourg |
8x13" |
6 |
27,000 |
7 |
|
16x5.1"DP |
4 |
29 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Richelieu |
8x15" |
8 |
39,000 |
10 |
|
12x3.9" |
3 |
30 |
3 |
| Jean Bart |
8x15" |
8 |
43,000 |
11 |
|
12x3.9" |
3 |
30 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USSR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Oktyabr. Revolutsia |
12x12" |
8 |
23,000 |
6 |
|
|
0 |
23 |
2 |
| Parizhskaya Kommuna |
12x12" |
8 |
23,000 |
6 |
|
|
0 |
23 |
2 |
| Marat |
12x12" |
8 |
23,000 |
6 |
|
|
0 |
23 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Arkansas |
12x12" |
8 |
26,000 |
7 |
|
8x3" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| New York |
10x14" |
9 |
27,000 |
7 |
|
8x3" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Texas |
10x14" |
9 |
27,000 |
7 |
|
8x3" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nevada |
10x14" |
9 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
20 |
2 |
| Oklahoma |
10x14" |
9 |
29,000 |
7 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
20 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pennsylvania |
12x14" |
11 |
33,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Arizona |
12x14" |
11 |
33,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Mississippi |
12x14" |
11 |
33,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| New Mexico |
12x14" |
11 |
33,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Idaho |
12x14" |
11 |
33,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tennessee |
12x14" |
11 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| California |
12x14" |
11 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Maryland |
8x16" |
9 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| Colorado |
8x16" |
9 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
| West Virginia |
8x16" |
9 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| North Carolina |
9x16" |
10 |
37,000 |
9 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
28 |
3 |
| Washington |
9x16" |
10 |
37,000 |
9 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
28 |
3 |
| South Dakota |
9x16" |
10 |
37,000 |
9 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
28 |
3 |
| Indiana |
9x16" |
10 |
37,000 |
9 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
28 |
3 |
| Massachustts |
9x16" |
10 |
37,000 |
9 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
28 |
3 |
| Alabama |
9x16" |
10 |
37,000 |
9 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
28 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Iowa |
9x16" |
10 |
46,000 |
12 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
33 |
3 |
| New Jersey |
9x16" |
10 |
46,000 |
12 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
33 |
3 |
| Missouri |
9x16" |
10 |
46,000 |
12 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
33 |
3 |
| Wisconsin |
9x16" |
10 |
46,000 |
12 |
|
20x5"DP |
5 |
33 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alaska |
9x12" |
6 |
28,000 |
7 |
|
12x5"DP |
3 |
33 |
3 |
| Guam |
9x12" |
6 |
28,000 |
7 |
|
12x5"DP |
3 |
33 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Schlesien |
4x11" |
2 |
12,000 |
3 |
|
4x3.5" |
1 |
18 |
2 |
| Schleswig-Holstein |
4x11" |
2 |
12,000 |
3 |
|
4x3.5" |
1 |
18 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Lutzow |
6x11" |
4 |
12,000 |
3 |
|
6x3.9" |
2 |
26 |
3 |
| Admiral Scheer |
6x11" |
4 |
12,000 |
3 |
|
6x3.9" |
2 |
26 |
3 |
| Admiral Graf Spee |
6x11" |
4 |
12,500 |
3 |
|
6x3.9" |
2 |
26 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gneisenau |
9x11" |
6 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
14x4.1" |
4 |
31 |
3 |
| Scharnhorst |
9x11" |
6 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
14x4.1" |
4 |
31 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Bismarck |
8x15" |
8 |
42,000 |
11 |
|
16x4.1" |
4 |
29 |
3 |
| Tirpitz |
8x15" |
8 |
42,000 |
11 |
|
16x4.1" |
4 |
29 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Italy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Giulio Cesare |
10x12.6" |
8 |
24,000 |
6 |
|
8x3.9" |
2 |
28 |
3 |
| Conte di Cavour |
10x12.6" |
8 |
24,000 |
6 |
|
8x3.9" |
2 |
28 |
3 |
| Ciao Duillio |
10x12.6" |
8 |
24,000 |
6 |
|
10x3.9" |
3 |
28 |
3 |
| Andrea Doria |
10x12.6" |
8 |
24,000 |
6 |
|
10x3.9" |
3 |
28 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Vittorio Veneto |
9x15" |
9 |
41,000 |
10 |
|
12x3.6" |
3 |
30 |
3 |
| Italia |
9x15" |
9 |
41,000 |
10 |
|
12x3.6" |
3 |
30 |
3 |
| Roma |
9x15" |
9 |
41,000 |
10 |
|
12x3.6" |
3 |
30 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kongo |
8x14" |
7 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
30 |
3 |
| Hiei |
8x14" |
7 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
4x5" |
1 |
30 |
3 |
| Haruna |
8x14" |
7 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
30 |
3 |
| Kirishima |
8x14" |
7 |
32,000 |
8 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
30 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuso |
12x14" |
11 |
35,000 |
9 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
24 |
2 |
| Yamashiro |
12x14" |
11 |
35,000 |
9 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
24 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ise |
12x14" |
11 |
36,000 |
9 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
25 |
2 |
| Hyuga |
12x14" |
11 |
36,000 |
9 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
25 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nagato |
8x16" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
25 |
2 |
| Mutsu |
8x16" |
9 |
38,000 |
10 |
|
8x5" |
2 |
25 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yamato |
9x18.1" |
12 |
65,000 |
16 |
|
12x5" |
3 |
27 |
3 |
| Mushashi |
9x18.1" |
12 |
65,000 |
16 |
|
12x5" |
3 |
27 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Any plans to expand into cruisers and destroyers?
ReplyDelete--Chris
Hi Chris -
DeleteUmmm... Maybe. But it would really require redoing the battleship stats, I think, because light cruisers and destroyers would be 'below the grain' of this set.
My first thought is, instead of dividing the ships' tonnage by 4000, is to divide by 1000. That still gives the 'flotation'/'protection' value for a destroyer of 2 or maybe 3 - even just 1 for the US 4-funnellers and the RN V and W classes - compared with Yamato's 65. At that, the gunnery thing gets complicated as well. My +/- 10% per difference from 15-inch simply won't work - or at least, i don't think it will.
You will also note that I ignore secondary guns (the AA being mostly tertiary) in this set.
I still have to work on bringing in carriers and aircraft, and am inclined to prioritise on that as being still 'in this scale', and having some carriers and aircraft to play with.
Having said that, I still want to keep it as simple as possible. I'll give the matter some thought. Promise.
Cheers,
Ion
No worries. It seems like a pretty playable set of rules. Looking at your description of how you went about working out the stats, I can see that smaller ships would be a major overhaul.
Delete--Chris
Good point. I'll post my 'stats' method in a future article.
DeleteNow these are very interesting. Are you going to integrate into the full set of rules and post for us all to try? :)
ReplyDeleteHi Duc -
DeleteYes, I believe I will incorporate this stats list into a rule set, which will be based upon Kev Robertson's 'Toy Battleship Naval Rules' - which set, by the way, occupies 15 lines of text, including titles and headings.
I'll see if I can add a link to my posting above to Kev Robertson's blog or rule set.
Cheers,
Ion
I have found the blog, and even the posting with the naval rules, but can't access it to give a direct link. I have no idea what the problem is. What I'll do is write up and post a 'beta' rule set as they currently stand for my own games.
Delete