> Ground Zero Games wrote:
...Snip...(JTL)
> 3) NSL: Another beam-heavy force, using few SMBs or Torps, but HBSs
...Snip...(JTL)
> Jon (GZG)
XXXX This message concerns FT 2.5/3.0 XXXX
Jon T. The current FT background (as I see it) Is an extension of the modern
era (Cold War) and the continuation of the WWII fleet design principals. This
makes me wonder how the NSL ends up with big slow ships. A very reasonable
argument can be made that the construction of Scharnhorst and Gneisneau
triggered the WWII fast battleship construction programs for the French,
British, and Americans. The Schornhorst and Gneisenau are not really
understood by most gamers, being considered as 'battlecruisers' when in fact
they are fast battleships mounting 11" guns. The 11" guns are
also not really understood as they are rated as 'B' batteries in the 'Wet
Thrust' rules, when they should be rated as 'A' batteries due to the range and
velosity of the projectiles.
Sorry, starting to wander. Basically the NSL would inherit this tradition of
fast, well protected
battleships/cruisers mounting weapons of exceptional range and accuracy.
The alliance with the NAC would bring in Superior sensors, more than likely
limited to larger ships, or squadron leaders. While the size of the NSL fleet
may be a problem, the quality of the ships and crews would not.
Oops, this is starting to sound like a lecture, not really intended that way.
Bye for now,
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
[snip]
> XXXX This message concerns FT 2.5/3.0 XXXX
[snip]
> Bye for now,
You're reading WAAAAY too much into the 20th-century parallels... the
NSL fleet doctrine is planned to be in keeping with the look of the ships, and
to give interesting variations between the different fleets. The NSL ships
look chunky, armoured and ponderous, so that is what we've made them. The idea
is that NO fleet should be made of "super" ships, so we've balanced the NSL's
strength with low mobility.
This is the first time that I am writing to the list (and only the second time
that I'm writing something in english for over 10 years), so please excuse if
not everything is the way that it should be.
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
> You're reading WAAAAY too much into the 20th-century parallels... the
The
> idea is that NO fleet should be made of "super" ships, so we've
> Jon (GZG)
Although I understand your point (concerning the look of the ships), I'm not
totally at ease with slow NSL ships. Because of the ´´historic´´ evolution
of German Warships,I think it is unlikley that they (or better: ´´we´´
because I am German) would go for slow capital ships. In my opinion capital
NSL ships would be most likely equipped (at least in ´´reality´´) with
average Speed & Armament plus superior Firecontrol & Armour. I just think this
gives a more German (Navy) feeling to the NSL fleet (but I trust you in this,
you did it right with FT&MT and your fleetbook will be great too).
TschüÃ!!! HAUKE
Oh...and by the way, concerning the letter from John L.: The 28cm guns of the
Gneisenau/Scharnhorst battleships where choosen out of political reasons
(Germany wasn't allowed anything bigger after WW1), so I don't think that they
are a good example.