PDA

View Full Version : Converting NWS WW1 to table top



themattcurtis
04-09-2008, 01:36 PM
Ordered NWS WW1 and the Russo Japanese War expansion yesterday. While I'm waiting, I've taken the WW1 rules and tried to convert them to tabletop/hexless play where we use individual ships instead of counters representing divisions so we can use minis at the local shop. FGDN is great for one or two divisions per side, but larger battles would be labor intensive. We wanted something faster.

Here are some notes so far. Can anyone think of other stuff that would make sense for minis, but keep the fast play factor intact, at least somewhat?

Scale -- halved the time scale. Gun Ranges remain unchanged, but ships scoot across the table at half their original rate. This is to keep ships from flying around the game table. Each NM is 4", meaning each hex is now 8" and I've converted the Short, Medium, Long Range bands along those lines. We're going to use the Even/Odd Turn movement rule, too.

Turning -- Battleships, merchant hulls and monitors may all turn up to 60 degrees after each inch advanced across the board, but see their speed reduced as a result.
Up to 30 degrees= 1” per turn.
Up to 60 degrees = 1.5" per turn.


Smaller hulls may turn up to 60 degrees after each inch advanced across the board (capping at 180 degrees during any given Movement Phase), but see their speed reduced as a result.
Up to 30 degrees = .5”
Up to 60 degrees = 1”


That way an armored cruiser with a Speed Rating of 4 could move 8" during a single Movement Phase if chugging ahead in a straight line. But if he turned turn 60 degrees his movement would be reduced by 1" to 7". If he wanted to conduct a second 60 degree turn he would have to advance 1" before that second pivot, and would only end up advancing 6" that Movement Phase. If he wanted to end up turning 180 degrees, he would repeat the process and would only end up moving 5" during the Movement Phase.

Should Evasion reduce speed?

All the combat rules I've left pretty much unchanged. The only thing I've added is an optional plunging fire rule for main guns at Long Range. Roll D6, and on a 4,5 or 6 the shell is NOT on a flact trajectory and the Defender subtracts -1 from his Armor Rating.

I also want to add +1 to the Defender's Rating if he is being targeted through an End Arc. I was also thinking of halving an Attacker's base Firepower if he's firing through one of his End arcs.

Finally, I was thinking of applying the optional British faulty shells rule to the Japanese, to reflect the problems their Shimose using munitions had penetrating enemy armor during the first part of the war.

That's about it.

William Miller
04-09-2008, 06:48 PM
Matt,

Your modifications appear reasonable. Note that evasion is mainly intended to model the various 'salvo-chasing' techniques used by many navies at various periods -- actual 'salvo-chasing' apparently was not in either the IJN nor Russian Navy official doctrine sets at the time of the RJW. Ships not in formation certainly could (and did) use 'weaving' turns or 'fish-tailing' (for smaller vessels) to attempt to throw off enemy gunnery during this period, so those could in effect use the evade maneuver. A ship division in formation generally cannot effectively individually evade no matter what time period they are in -- however if the division consists of only 2 or 3 ships (and were maneuverable, say CLs or smaller) it could still evade as a division.

I would reduce the actual distance moved by 20% (-1" per 5" move in your scheme) for ships that evade during the time period you are modeling.

kirkoa
12-02-2009, 05:29 AM
I was wondering what scale you were using for the 8" per hex, 1/2400 or 1/6000?