Destroyers in Battleship Row/WWII

[meesch56]

I have been using my personal preference for all Torpedoes to be plotted and launched simultaneously by all classes during the cruiser targeting phase as a "House rule" for my games. So, once the "fish" are in the water they run their course. It adds some excitement to the games. Torpedo hits are hard enough to get let alone multiple ones. I have run my Savo game 9 times now and have only had successful torp hits in 5 of them. Multiple hits in 3 of the games.

[aman]

We've only played once, the Komandorski scenario. I admit that as the American, I targeted and destroyed the IJN destroyers on turn 2. On the other hand, he was being aggressive with them and getting close enough for a torp run. Since they do 25pts of damage, I was quite fearful of losing my measly two cruisers. Later in the battle, after losing my two USN cruisers, my destroyers tried to close with the IJN cruisers and were wiped out. However, I didn't use smoke (new game, no optional rules used) and I played aggressively to try out the rules. I can't say I have an informed opinion, but I like the idea of the 10+ To Hit and the Evasive Action being 2" or 3" flat. I tried to use the DDs evasively, but they were so slow that the enemy gets twice as many shots at them, negating it's usefulness. I'd even say a 2" Evasive might be OK. Or perhaps a more aggressive evasive action like the suggested "Chasing the Salvoes" that makes it +2 to hit, costs 2" flat, but the evader can't fire weapons. Just a thought.

I'm in favor of history. If captains wouldn't bother shooting at destroyers if there were capital ships around, then a simple rule saying Main Batteries can't target destroyers is fine. I've no idea what the targeting priorities were historically. But I'm certain that DDs on a torp run got "priority shooting" at them!

[regiamarina]

Had another game last night and this time the destroyers had a massive impact. We played the 2nd battle of Guadalcanal scenario and used the to hit number 10+ for destroyers and a flat 3" movement penalty for evasive action. The US battleships did fire very poorly, especially their secondaries, however the Sweeping Element managed to put one torpedo into the Washington from the Sendai before it turned and left the board with one hull point left. However the crowning moment was when the two Fubuki class destroyers managed to fire their full torpedo spread of 18 torpedoes at the untouched South Dakota. 8 of them penetrated and the South Dakota went to the bottom. In return the lead Fubuki had only suffered two turrets knocked out and the other was unscathed despite both ships being fired at by all the starboard secondaries on the South Dakota and Washington.

Harry you had asked previously if these rules made the destroyers too powerful and I would say, despite what happened above, they still feel about right. Having used the changed to hit number and evasive cost for a while now my play group is happy as it does give destroyers a chance to pull something like this off but the -2 to hit from secondaries within 20" still gives larger capital ships a reasonable chance of stopping them. I would definitely suggest you add these as a change when you update the rules.

Martin

[TheDreadnought]

Yeah, I'll probably go with those. They also involve a minimum of changes, so that's a selling point too.

You can probably go ahead and consider these official changes to be added to the 'to do' list.

Thanks for testing them out and all the ideas.

[aman]

Fought Komandorski for the third time today. We used all the optional rules recommended. We think the "Overpenetration" rules help keep DDs afloat. An 8" gun hit goes from 4 to 1 damage, altho you still get the critical and could knock the ship out.

Overall, I think that using the optional rules helps a lot. My recommendation is to package the optional rules in groups that are relevent. So perhaps the base "to hit" for DDs is 10+, but optional rule "Overpenetration" includes the drop back down to 9+ to hit, as you've compensated for some of their vulnerability. Same with the optional squadrons rule.

Finally, when you look at Scott's orders at Cape Esperance, it might be historically accurate to say that you can't target DDs with Main Guns unless there is no other target and/or they're under 20" (getting into torpedo range).

[regiamarina]

We've always used the over-penertration optional rule in our games. 9+ to hit with overpenetration still leaves the destroyers too vulnerable to fire in my opinion. Our games usually ended up with the larger ships pounding away at each other surrounded by the debris from all the sunken destroyers. The changes to 10+ to hit and 3" flat evasion cost at least give them a shot at playing a part in a battle. They still get hammered pretty hard by secondaries but at least they have a chance of putting in a torpedo run now. Not a good chance but a chance.

Martin

[aman]

Well, the question is are you getting historical results? If you make attack runs with DDs during the day against pristine capital ships without supporting fire and no smoke, shouldn't you get blasted?

I guess another question, would be are your capital ships getting knocked around by the opposing ones while you pick on the DDs?

Certainly, one can play a game understanding that players won't have the same motivations to keep their ships alive, and compensate for that. Depends on the group. But what should the basic rules represent? Historical realities or the reality of gamers?

My vote would be that the basic rules should be as close to history as possible. The optional rules could then include optional rules to protect weak ships from callous gamers, or otherwise make up for it. Maybe the basic rules would just simply say that Main Batteries can only target other ships with MBs unless the smaller ships are within 20" Open question, really.

[TheDreadnought]

Well part of the problem is not just the destroyers getting shot at too much. . . its destroyers putting themeselves in a position to get shot at.

In a game, gamers will immediately throw all their DDs into a torpedo run against enemy heavy ships, figuring one or two torpedo hits would be worth the loss of the destroyers.

It never happened that way in real life. Both the men on those destroyers, and the commanders of the task force felt very different about throwing those destroyers away like that. But gamers never hesitate - and then raise questions when the destroyers get obliterated charging a fuly functional battleship in broad daylight.

If you REALLY want realistic destroyer behavior. . . use the in-game sub attack rules. All of a sudden the destroyers become much more valuable as screens for your own capital ships than as disposable torpedo launchers.

Sub attacks on powerful surface groups may have been fairly rare - but the commanders at the time didn't know that.. . and its the behavior of the destroyers that is key here, not necessarily whatever is the stated cause. Besides, it adds a very interesting tactical element to the game.

[afilter]

Aug 2, 2011 9:00:19 GMT -5 TheDreadnought said:

Well part of the problem is not just the destroyers getting shot at too much. . . its destroyers putting themeselves in a position to get shot at.

In a game, gamers will immediately throw all their DDs into a torpedo run against enemy heavy ships, figuring one or two torpedo hits would be worth the loss of the destroyers.

It never happened that way in real life. Both the men on those destroyers, and the commanders of the task force felt very different about throwing those destroyers away like that. But gamers never hesitate - and then raise questions when the destroyers get obliterated charging a fuly functional battleship in broad daylight.

If you REALLY want realistic destroyer behavior. . . use the in-game sub attack rules. All of a sudden the destroyers become much more valuable as screens for your own capital ships than as disposable torpedo launchers.

Sub attacks on powerful surface groups may have been fairly rare - but the commanders at the time didn't know that.. . and its the behavior of the destroyers that is key here, not necessarily whatever is the stated cause. Besides, it adds a very interesting tactical element to the game.

Mostly true...although there are several historical examples to dispute your assertion. I would enourage you start by reading up on the battle of Samar. "Last Stand of the Tin can Sailors" is a great book on the subject. Desperate men do desperate things in time of crisis.

[bede19025]

Samar is an extreme example. The DE's ran what was in essence a suicide mission.

I don't see how you can point to that as an example of how destroyers operated normally.

[afilter]

Aug 2, 2011 15:41:12 GMT -5 bede19025 said:

Samar is an extreme example. The DE's ran what was in essence a suicide mission.

I don't see how you can point to that as an example of how destroyers operated normally.

Battle of Narvik, HMS Gloworm, Savo Island...my point is there are significant historical examples although it may not be what the trained tactics/battle plans were at the time. Few battle plans survice first contact.

[TheDreadnought]

Correct me if I'm wrong though. . . but I don't think that in any of these examples a destroyer successfully torpedoed anything larger than a cruiser correct?

But gamers want to make daring, and successful, torpedo runs with destroyers against mint-condition battleships all the time.

Despite what it seems like they ought to have been able to do on paper. . . the historical record just doesn't support that as an effective strategy.

[shigure]

One example of a successful daylight attack was the torpedoing of the Scharnhorst by the RN DD Acasta. However, one can point to many mitigating circumstances. Here again the RN DD's were almost making a suicide run to protect the RN CV Glorious. The cirucmstances which probably assisted in the chance hit were the German BCs had no DD screen of their own and the main gun directors were used by the 11" main armament against the carrier. This meant the secondary batteries were using either the aft director which was mounted much lower on the ship or the guns were possibly on local control.

[regiamarina]

There are historical examples of the heroic destroyer taking on the capital ship but this is usually as a last ditch effort to save a more valuable ship or to distract the enemy so the destroyers can retreat. Players just want the glorious destroyer charge no matter how likely it is to be successful.

In the Second Battle for Guadalcanal scenario which we played the other night the Sweeping unit made a torpedo attack whilst the battleships were being hit by the Kirishima. They also start fairly close to the US units in comparison to the rest of the Japanese force. Historically in the battle the Japanese made numerous torpedo runs against the two battleships but all failed to hit, in this game everything was pretty much as happened historically except the torpedoes hit instead of missed.

The shift from 9+ to hit to a 10+ to hit and the flat 3" cost for evasion just means that destroyers have some small chance of getting close enough to a capital ship for a torpedo run instead of no chance. I still think it will be highly unlikely to occur very often because as soon as they come within 20" all secondaries are at -2 to hit and suddenly the destroyers are looking really vulnerable. As I mentioned we've been using these changes since they were mentioned and this was the first truly wow moment we've had so I thought I'd pass the feedback on to you Harry, wasn't planning on reigniting this debate.

Martin

[TheDreadnought]

I'm happy with those changes. . . so that's what will be made when the updates get done. Thanks for the feedback.

[aman]

My vote is that historical results should trump everything. Daytime torpedo runs v. BBs or CAs get all your DDs sunk? Sounds like history to me. If you are cagey and radar isn't a bit part of the equation, you can use smoke to close in for your torpedo run, etc. Most of the very successful Japanese torp runs were at night, which is a very different situation. If your gamers want to run destroyers heroically, play a night game.
No idea what the changes will do in the long run, but happy to try them out to see.