View Full Version : What other naval campaigns would you like to see using the Distant Guns! engine?
Don Maddox
21 Feb 06, 13:16
The Russo-Japanese War may not be everyone's cup of tea when it comes to naval combat simulations, so where would you like to see the series go after the first title is released?
The Age of Wooden Ships, and Iron Men, from ~1550 to 1850.
Hello all
I would like to see american spanish war( ship battles) WWI( like jutland doger bank, cornel falklands ect) Civil war( mobile bay hampton roads etc) Criemea.
These would be cool
Thanks
Aklua24h
I will be happy and it is my dream with WWI game ... gold period of battleships ...
But first we must test Distant Guns engine to say, if it is better for close battles or for more distant ...
Bullethead
21 Feb 06, 17:49
The Russo-Japanese War may not be everyone's cup of tea when it comes to naval combat simulations, so where would you like to see the series go after the first title is released?
WW1 in the Black Sea. Again, very obscure. In fact, I'm sure far fewer folks are conversant with this than the RJW. However, it was an especially interesting campaign, which I'm sure folks would enjoy if they had the chance to play it.
WW1 in the Baltic. As above.
WW1 in the Med. You could have Austria vs. Italy, as well as the Gallipoli campaign. The Austrians and Italians had some very interesting ships, lots of guns and speed but little armor, so the battles would be really bloody. Plus, they had all kinds of small boat operations, sneaking into each other's harbors and sabotaging ships, as well as MTBs torpedoing BBs. There was an interesting cruiser action in 1917, too.
Steal Paul Shaffer's idea of having a global campaign in early WW1, involving the hunt for Spee's ships and their efforts to raise some Hell and then get home.
If you're not into adding the subs and airplanes employed in WW1, the Spanish-American War and the Sino-Japanese War might work, but neither of these was as close a fight.
Leyte Gulf - can you imagine commanding a DD when the order comes in to attack :surprise:
Edit: I always wondered how long the bridgehead would have lasted w/o supplies or naval support?
Jutland would be awesome in Multiplayer........Grand Admirals and Squadron commanders with FOW..............ohhhhhhhh yessss:cheeky:
Definitely World War 1. There are plenty of WW2 naval simulations, and, as far as I know, only one decent WW1 naval sim - Great Naval Battles vol... five it was? I don't know, I never played it.
And as I said at least twice on this Forum - I want to whip Beatty's battle cruisers again, and see the "Iron Duke" capsize under fire from the Hochseeflotte battle line!
The most obvious is World War II Guadalcanal.
Bullethead
22 Feb 06, 13:07
Jutland would be awesome in Multiplayer........Grand Admirals and Squadron commanders with FOW..............ohhhhhhhh yessss:cheeky:
It's very cool :). Used to be a game called "Raider Operations" by Paul Shaffer, which I helped him with for a long, long time. He eventually tried to market it a couple years back, but it looks like it didn't work out. But anyway, we had Jutland in there and played it with 5 or 6 guys at once. You really don't need more than that. 1 each side for the BCs, 1 each side for the BBs, and 1 each side for the light forces, maybe 2 on the Brit side. I always volunteered for the light force job because I found that much more exciting and interesting that slugging it out in battle lines.
The most obvious is World War II Guadalcanal.
If "Distant Guns 2" would be another game on Allied - Japanese struggle in the Pacific (or Allied - Axis), there should be an option called NO RADARS. Radar, in my opinion, spoils the fun.
The Age of Wooden Ships, and Iron Men, from ~1550 to 1850.
True, it would be popular, but I think that introducing the wind (and "teaching" the AI to use it) might be a much bigger problem, than changing the engine to work in the world wars reality.
Lohengrin
22 Feb 06, 18:26
Naturally, the WWI era is the pinnacle of battleship combat so that would be my choice.
Spanish American War would be second. But I have little to no interest in Pacific WWII operations. Of course, if the copy protection scheme isn't changed to a more customer-friendly method, it may be moot... :whist:
Bloodstar
22 Feb 06, 18:35
The Russo-Japanese War may not be everyone's cup of tea when it comes to naval combat simulations, so where would you like to see the series go after the first title is released? WW1 of course! Lot's of great choices there.
NormKoger
22 Feb 06, 18:46
Of course, if the copy protection scheme isn't changed to a more customer-friendly method, it may be moot... :whist:
Hmmm... We require that you enter a password of your own choosing and a 7 digit number in two fields of a single dialog. You do it once, and never have to worry about it again. If you want to move the game to another machine, you launch a utility from the start menu and follow the prompts: no key disks, no lengthy startup checks, no software than refuses to allow you to install from a cdrw drive, no need for online connectivity after the first time you register, no long strings of alternating alpha and numeric characters that look alike... The only thing that would be more customer-friendly would be no protection at all. It's certainly more customer-friendly than _any_ of the protected software I have installed around here in the last year or so.
Ivan Bajlo
22 Feb 06, 19:09
Anything in Adriatic is fine by me. ;)
Anything in Adriatic is fine by me. ;)
ah where is that?:confused:
:laugh:
Ivan Bajlo
22 Feb 06, 19:54
If you want to move the game to another machine, you launch a utility from the start menu and follow the prompts: no key disks, no lengthy startup checks, no software than refuses to allow you to install from a cdrw drive, no need for online connectivity after the first time you register, no long strings of alternating alpha and numeric characters that look alike... The only thing that would be more customer-friendly would be no protection at all. It's certainly more customer-friendly than _any_ of the protected software I have installed around here in the last year or so.
No problem but if my PC suddenly dies and I lose everything I will be annoying YOU. :laugh:
My current gaming machine is biggest mistake I made last year, bought second hand four months old from magazine company that went bust and PC managed to end up in repair shop twice already! :eek:
First time power supply simply went dead, second time Matrox HD started giving click of death and Windows started crashing and giving me blue screen (bad sectors in boot!). ERD Commander barely allowed me to copy existing data so I don't think it would have been possible for me to run some transfer utility if I had to. :(
I personally like Mount&Blade (http://www.taleworlds.com) copy protection (http://forums.taleworlds.net/viewtopic.php?t=3885) themida (http://www.oreans.com/themida.php) (or maybe I just like there price of $14 :laugh: ), you get serial key which is valid for two PC's which gets reactivated each 60 days so you can simply install game to two new PC each 60 days (or keep it on the old one). Off-line installation is little more complex but don't care about that since I finally got kabel internet which is actually flat at amazing speed of 128/64 kb. :laugh:
Ivan Bajlo
22 Feb 06, 20:07
ah where is that?:confused:
You need to go east across that pond next to you then through that irrigation channel to Atlantic then east until you hit England or France then got south until you run into Spain follow Spanish and Portuguese coast until you run into France again then follow Italian coast until you reach end of the boot, next turn left and your there! :joy:
Lohengrin
23 Feb 06, 10:22
Hmmm... We require that you enter a password of your own choosing and a 7 digit number in two fields of a single dialog. You do it once, and never have to worry about it again. If you want to move the game to another machine, you launch a utility from the start menu and follow the prompts: no key disks, no lengthy startup checks, no software than refuses to allow you to install from a cdrw drive, no need for online connectivity after the first time you register, no long strings of alternating alpha and numeric characters that look alike... The only thing that would be more customer-friendly would be no protection at all.
Thank you Norm, that allays some of my concerns from reading discussions/speculation about DG's copy protection.
My only remaining question is this: If the game is uninstalled (either by user or due to some computer malfunction), would I be able to reinstall the game simply by running the original downloadable and entering my "password of [my] own choosing and a 7 digit number in two fields"? If not, what else would I have to do to reinstall the game? :)
Bullethead
24 Feb 06, 15:30
Anything in Adriatic is fine by me. ;)
How about something from the late 1500s, Ottoman vs. Holy League?
How about something from the late 1500s, Ottoman vs. Holy League?
Lepanto was mostly about boarding enemy ships and fighting it out on the decks; it would be designing a new game, not altering the existing engine.
timetraveller
25 Feb 06, 11:51
WW1 should lend itself nicely to this engine. My vote is for WW1.
TT
WW I would be great, of course, but I've been waiting for years for a computer version of "Ironclads".
Ivan Rapkinov
25 Feb 06, 13:37
[Grandpa Simpson]Jutland!
Juuuuuuuuuttttttlllaaannnnnddddd!!!![/grandpa Simpson]
or anything from the Fear God and Dreadnought series - better than H4 rules imo.
Jutland!
Juuuuuuuuuttttttlllaaannnnnddddd!!!!.
Now that's the spirit!:D
Why the interest in WW1 - I've always enjoyed WW2 myself - there must be many engagements where carriers are not involved :laugh: The battles in Ironbottom Sound could be interesting:cheeky:
Bullethead
25 Feb 06, 15:21
WW I would be great, of course, but I've been waiting for years for a computer version of "Ironclads".
You and me both. The only thing I ever wanted to use HPS's Aide de Camp on was "Ironclads", and I quickly discovered that wouldn't work because it couldn't handle simultaneous movement :(.
I live in the area of the Port Hudson campaign. Some of the scars from the yankee fleet shelling the little town nearest me are still visible, and there was a skirmish fought in my cow pasture. So I've always had a great interest in those ships. My big problem with "Ironclads" as a boardgame, however, was that I could never find anybody willing to play the yankees :D.
WW II would be interesting but radar for location and target acquisiton would throw another programing element into the mix - atleast after 1942.
Also, there's several games out there or nearing completion on this. See nws-online.net. If you want a set of this now - at reasonable prices , check out the Fighting Steel Projecct and Thunder at Sea combo. FSP handles ship to ship combats and TAS provides a campaign overlay for FSP.
You and me both. The only thing I ever wanted to use HPS's Aide de Camp on was "Ironclads", and I quickly discovered that wouldn't work because it couldn't handle simultaneous movement :(.
I live in the area of the Port Hudson campaign. Some of the scars from the yankee fleet shelling the little town nearest me are still visible, and there was a skirmish fought in my cow pasture. So I've always had a great interest in those ships. My big problem with "Ironclads" as a boardgame, however, was that I could never find anybody willing to play the yankees :D.
Come up here and I'll show you how it's done. :laugh:
WW II would be interesting but radar for location and target acquisiton would throw another programing element into the mix - atleast after 1942.
Also, there's several games out there or nearing completion on this. See nws-online.net. If you want a set of this now - at reasonable prices , check out the Fighting Steel Projecct and Thunder at Sea combo. FSP handles ship to ship combats and TAS provides a campaign overlay for FSP.
What would be great is a mixture of the above w/TOAW - land battles & sea battles in the same campaign/theater:laugh:
I used to be an OST front player but I'm being drawn to WW2 in the Pacific - maybe the gene pool can only be diluted so much!
Lempereur1
25 Feb 06, 21:39
Paul Schaffer approached me about a WWI campaign game based on WWI way back in 1994 when I was at Avalon Hill. He had been working on it for a while, but didnt have anything to show yet.
After I left AH in early 1995, we continued to exchange emails about it until I ran into him in 1998. He told me he was still working on it, but the biz side of his coding was taking all of his time.
That was the last time I saw him. I am not sure what happend to him, but he seemed to have excellent design ideas on the subject.
The ships are not as large in Distant Guns, but the battles feel very close to WWI.
Jim Rose
Kapellmeister
Storm Eagle Studios
Jutland would be great, but I am hoping it might include all of the various Battlecruiser raids and "almost" Jutlands. The British broke the German codes so generally new when the High Seas Fleet was sailing, but there was plenty of Fog (pun intended). Jim Dunnigan's Jutland had a campaign portion, but I would like to see something covering the first few years of the war. Hey, how about a Battlecruiser Goeben game? Man I can't wait for this thing!
Lempereur1
25 Feb 06, 22:14
If you tried to do a TOAW style game with ships and land in a 1:1 scale, you would have a serious scale problem.
We designed TOAW to ideally represent Battalion/Regiment sized units. The abstraction scale used to achieve this would not mesh with a game environment with 1:1.
BUT!
Ivan on the other hand....... ;]
Jim Rose
Kapellmeister
StormEagleStudios.Com
If you tried to do a TOAW style game with ships and land in a 1:1 scale, you would have a serious scale problem.
We designed TOAW to ideally represent Battalion/Regiment sized units. The abstraction scale used to achieve this would not mesh with a game environment with 1:1.
BUT!
Ivan on the other hand....... ;]
Jim Rose
Kapellmeister
StormEagleStudios.Com
Oh boy - after reading a lot of recent threads/posts - I know issues exist:laugh:
I do realize scale is an issue but I'm not/never will be a programmer/designer:crosseye: But in a perfect world - I could hold off a naval force trying to attack my transports - and support the marines on the beach at the same time:) Meanwhile - I could launch naval airstrikes against my land opponents while trying to engage the enemy surface fleet/carriers that are trying to cut off my supply convoy units! Is it not possible to scale land or sea hexes at different intervals or would so much code be required that you would need to play w/a Cray for example?
Bullethead
25 Feb 06, 22:51
Paul Schaffer approached me about a WWI campaign game based on WWI way back in 1994 when I was at Avalon Hill. He had been working on it for a while, but didnt have anything to show yet......
I started working with him about 97 or 98. At that time, his game was the whole early WW1 naval war outside the North Sea, before the U-boats came out in force. So besides hunting the Germans, the Entente did amphibous ops to capture their bases and had to move a lot of big troop convoys across various oceans. Over the years, not only did that get polished into an excellent game, but we added other things. We ended up with all of WW1, including the North Sea, the Black Sea, and the Adriatic, plus had made some scenarios for WW2. The engines, both strategic and tactical, worked very well and couild handle all these situations easily. However, that's mechanically--the game never had sound at all and nothing resembling even then-modern graphics.
We parted ways I guess around 2001 or 02. Shortly after that, he tried to go commercial with a subscription-based online-only service. That didn't work so I have no idea what's he's up to these days. I tried to hook him up with various companies like Battlefront, but he had some pretty fixed ideas of what he wanted to do and how much money he wanted, so he could never make a deal. It's too bad, because he had an excellent game there.
Well - I think I just won the moron award for 06 - after reading many other thread posts:laugh: to think that other people just play games for enjoyment:cheeky:
whatever happened to patent rights that I missed?
Jutland would be great, but I am hoping it might include all of the various Battlecruiser raids and "almost" Jutlands.
Well, the campaign should allow you to plan the battlecruiser raids yourself. Imagine that you manage to surprise the BEF on the Channel. Even "Angels of Mons" would not help this time...
I'm reading just now "A Naval History of World War I" by Paul G. Halpern (who chronicles the events of the war by theatre of operations), and two interesting settings for DG surely are the Adriatic and the Baltic. Both were enclosed seas, saw the operation of small, medium and big ships, submarines and aircrafts, and covered a variety of situations in a relatively small geographic area. I feel that both could be a good place for a dynamic campaign covering the events of the war.
Also, there are many "what ifs" that could be explored - since both sides were reluctant to seek a "Jutland" in these areas, and, for example in the Adriatic, the Italian and Austrian battleships glared to each others across the Sea for the best part of the war without never actually engaging.
Bullethead
26 Feb 06, 03:15
I'm reading just now "A Naval History of World War I" by Paul G. Halpern
Yeah, that is a must-have book for anybody reading this forum. Besides what you mentioned, don't forget the Black Sea :).
Do you also have The Rules of the Game by Andrew Gordon?
Yeah, that is a must-have book for anybody reading this forum. Besides what you mentioned, don't forget the Black Sea :).
I'm not yet there in my reading, I just started the chapter about Baltic operations :)
Do you also have The Rules of the Game by Andrew Gordon?
No, but I do plan to buy the "Castle of Steels" books after finishing this one.
timetraveller
26 Feb 06, 08:43
Why the interest in WW1 - I've always enjoyed WW2 myself - there must be many engagements where carriers are not involved :laugh: The battles in Ironbottom Sound could be interesting:cheeky:
I confess some of my WW1 interest is in the old ships and how they look, with their torpedo nets and straight up and down bows. Yes, Jutland would be great.
However I am also a WW2 naval nut. My Dad was on the USS Vincennes (CA-44) when she went down in Ironbottom Sound off of Savo Island in August, 1942. He also survived a second sinking, the sinking of the USS St. Lo (CVE-63) at Leyte Gulf, which had the dubious honor of being the first American ship to be sunk by Kamakazi.
There's a Savo Island mission in Destroyer Command I have been replaying a lot lately. Still a great game. To be out there at 2AM in the morning and hear all those 5 and 8 inchers going off, seeing starshells being fired, raises the hair on the back of my neck, knowing my Dad was there.
timetraveller
Von Tegetthof
26 Feb 06, 08:49
Lissa, 1866. Austro-Hungary vs Italy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lissa_(1866)
Gordon's book gave me much more insight into why things happened than any chronologically based book. Great work on the integration of technology into doctrine, personalities and command & control.
Bullethead
26 Feb 06, 15:52
However I am also a WW2 naval nut. My Dad was on the USS Vincennes (CA-44) when she went down in Ironbottom Sound off of Savo Island in August, 1942. He also survived a second sinking, the sinking of the USS St. Lo (CVE-63) at Leyte Gulf, which had the dubious honor of being the first American ship to be sunk by Kamakazi.
<S> to your Dad!
One of my godfathers was in USS Dehaven, which had the dubious distinction of being the last ship sunk in Ironbottom Sound. He got a decoration for having the presence of mind to defuze the depth charges as the ship was sinking following the magazine explosion, although he swore until the end of his life he was on autopilot because he didn't remember anything about the sinking. He also took a bullet through the upper lip at Pearl Harbor, in the course of having his 1st ship (one of the DDs sunk there, I forget which) blown out from under him. My own Dad lucked out, in that his DD was the only one of his DesRon not to take a kamikaze off Okinawa, despite having several come close enough to leave pieces aboard.
There's a Savo Island mission in Destroyer Command I have been replaying a lot lately. Still a great game.
Did you ever play Task Force 1942? It had a whole dynamic campaign about the Guadalcanal campaign. Most excellent :).
Bullethead
26 Feb 06, 16:01
Gordon's book gave me much more insight into why things happened than any chronologically based book. Great work on the integration of technology into doctrine, personalities and command & control.
Anybody wishing to know about Jutland needs 2 books. Gordon is the 1st, to learn where the ships really went and why they went there. Reading it makes me wish I could have gone out drinking with Adm. Arbuthnot. Oh well, guess I'll have to wait until I meet him in Hell :D.
The other book is John Campbell's Jutland: An Analysis of the Fighting. This follows the pre-Gordon (as in Beatty's camp's dogma) interpretation of where the ships went. But that's no biggie, because telling the story of the battle isn't the main point of this book. It's purpose is to show exactly what happened to the targets when the shells and torpedos hit, and it uses the battle narrative just to give you the context in which these hits were received.
timetraveller
27 Feb 06, 12:07
<S> to your Dad!
One of my godfathers was in USS Dehaven, which had the dubious distinction of being the last ship sunk in Ironbottom Sound. He got a decoration for having the presence of mind to defuze the depth charges as the ship was sinking following the magazine explosion, although he swore until the end of his life he was on autopilot because he didn't remember anything about the sinking. He also took a bullet through the upper lip at Pearl Harbor, in the course of having his 1st ship (one of the DDs sunk there, I forget which) blown out from under him. My own Dad lucked out, in that his DD was the only one of his DesRon not to take a kamikaze off Okinawa, despite having several come close enough to leave pieces aboard.
Did you ever play Task Force 1942? It had a whole dynamic campaign about the Guadalcanal campaign. Most excellent :).
Interesting story about your Godfather, Bullethead. Alas, my Dad has been gone for some 23 years now.
Never have played Task Force 1942. Sounds interesting and I'll check into it. Thanks for the info.
timetraveller
The naval part of TF 1942 is grand. The ground part is weak.
Bullethead
27 Feb 06, 13:26
The naval part of TF 1942 is grand. The ground part is weak.
Can you find a downloadable version of TF1942 out there that runs under XP? All I've got is the original DOS game that came on 5.25" floppies, and haven't had a machine with those drives, let alone the ability to run that game, in many years :(. Too bad, because it was IMHO the best game of its type every made, with one of the best AIs ever seen in a sim.
For them as don't know, Task Force 1942 was an old DOS Micropose game that came out in the late 80s or early 90s. It was set in the Solomons and the campaign started the day of the invasion of Guadalcanal, and went until 1 side or the other's ground troops eliminated the other's ground troops on that island. It was an old-school naval sim of the GNB type, where you could wear several hats at once. If you were playing the campaign, you were the CinC and formed task groups from your available forces to go accomplish the missions of sinking the enemy, bombarding enemy troops, supplying your troops, and interdicting enemy attempts to bombard yours and supply his. You could also order your airplanes to search in specific areas or attack certain targets. When surface battle was joined (you had no control over CV ops), you could jump into the task force involved and be its commander, ordering all its ships. You could also jump into any single ship and be its captain, or even main its guns and torpedos in 1st-person.
The cool thing about ordering your ships around was that the AI skippers didn't always follow orders, but they blew you off in very realistic ways instead of doing totally stupid things. For instance, a CL might position itself at a distance on your disengaged side to make sure no surprises came from that way, and even if you ordered into the main fight, it might keep sneaking off over there if you really didn't need its help. Also, sometimes DDs would circle crippled ships laying smokescreens even if you ordered them to bug out. It was all very nicely done, I thought, and it's still near the top of my list of best games ever, of any type.
As to the land side being "weak", it was just totally abstracted. You basically had no direct control at all over land ops. You could do troop transport and supply runs to build up your forces, and bombardment missions to hurt the enemy. But that was all you could do. Eventually, when 1 side's ground troops decided on their own that they had a big enough advantage in supply and troop numbers, they would launch an attack by themselves, which would succeed or fail on its own, without any direct input from you. A successful attack drove the enemy back to the edge of the island, and a subsequent successful attack would eliminate them and win the campaign.
I don't think an XP-compatable version was made. The game was at the end of Nicroprose's run abd subsequent buyers gutted staff.
timetraveller
27 Feb 06, 14:39
Just did a little looking around for this one and it doesn't seem to be available. One of the sites (Home of the Underdogs) referred to unreleased copyrights as being the problem. They used to have it but pulled it.
Lately I've been playing a Fighting Steel demo I found. It was excellent for its day (1998) and has been carried onward by the mod groups. I've since ordered the CD off Amazon third party but it hasn't arrived yet. There is a Windows XP Service Pack 2 glitch though, but the Fighting Steel Project over at http://forums.navalwarfare.org/forumdisplay.php?f=9 says they have corrected that so it's fully playable.
Destroyer Command is still tops too.
TT
Hellfish6
27 Feb 06, 16:08
I think a "Warplan Orange" scenario would be a lot of fun. I've got the game of that name put out by Matrix, IIRC, and was a little less than thrilled with it. I love the subject matter, but wasn't a big fan of the game engine and it's learning curve.
That said, my vote is also for WWI. I don't know a damn thing about the war at sea - Jutland is only a place on a map for me - but I do have a particular fondness for the KMS Konigsberg and it's little adventure in the Indian Ocean. I'd love to be able to play that out (and I'd love it even more if I could command the East African Schutztruppe too!) :)
Otherwise Ironbottom Sound would be fun for a WWII scenario, or a game set in a 1950-1960 Cold War gone hot kind of thing. USS Des Moines vs. a Sverdlov-class cruiser would be a blast. :cheeky:
I don't know a whole lot about the RJW, except for the decimation of the Baltic Fleet. I'm still looking forward to the game and will buy it because part of why I like wargames is to learn about history.
Bullethead
27 Feb 06, 16:40
Lately I've been playing a Fighting Steel demo I found. It was excellent for its day (1998) and has been carried onward by the mod groups.
I never did get that one. I was a tester for it, but we never tested it. They got all us together, gave us a forum, and told us to start discussing things and getting to know each other because they wouldn't have the 1st version they wanted tested for a week or 2. Then after that time, they just released the game instead of testing it. That scared me off of it, and IIRC, the initial release was what you'd expect from that sort of development cycle. Could be wrong, but that's what I remember. Anyway, I didn't want to pay for testing it, so I never got it.
timetraveller
28 Feb 06, 19:23
I never did get that one. I was a tester for it, but we never tested it. They got all us together, gave us a forum, and told us to start discussing things and getting to know each other because they wouldn't have the 1st version they wanted tested for a week or 2. Then after that time, they just released the game instead of testing it. That scared me off of it, and IIRC, the initial release was what you'd expect from that sort of development cycle. Could be wrong, but that's what I remember. Anyway, I didn't want to pay for testing it, so I never got it.
Ah, interesting. Yep, I read where the game as delivered out the door was very buggy. They said the final patch fixed most of it.
Wellllllllll, Fighting Steel CD arrived in the mail today. Updated to patch 1.1 and loaded the Fighting Steel Project mod Thunder At Sea 10.2 ---- Windows XP Service Pack 2 glitch seems to be fixed. Good. Now to play it some. Looks fun. Tons of ships. Great sound and lots of action. Not a bad deal for $11. Gotta have something to do before DG arrives!
If you try the demo, it basically runs except for the ship navigation glitch caused by XP Service Pack 2. It will give you a look at the basic game though. Amazon has several third party vendors that have it, some used, some new. Mine was new in a nice box.
TT
How about the Battle of Lissa 1866?
Ameican civil war
South American what ifs just before WWI
Greek and Turkish before WWI
Lempereur1
28 Feb 06, 23:01
The only worry that I have about the Iron Clads period is making it fun.
WHat seems like a load of fun in board game format or miniatures battles does not uniformly translate into a fun PC game. In the 1990s, one of the big publishers spent a million dollares on a Monitor vs Merrimac game.
AFter they got 80% into the game, the parent company scraped the game because it wasnt any fun. All they did was circle around and lob cannon balls at each other.
On a ship-to-ship basis perhaps, but what about fleets, river war, shore batteries, blockade buster/runners? If you can make Chelmupo fun, you can make Ironclads fun.
Lempereur1
28 Feb 06, 23:21
You do have a point!
The campaign game would have to be similar to what were are doing with the RJW.@Sea.
Blockade running, port blockades, etc...
The individual battles might be crafted with this in mind..
I always wondered what happed to that game.:)
So the engine would support both steam and sail powered vessels?
Would it be possible to model some of the civil war commerce raiders’ voyages, like the CSS Alabama or CSS Florida?
Or extended blockade campaign say at Charleston, with ironclads, early submarines, armored steamers, forts and mines.
timetraveller
01 Mar 06, 05:00
If WW1 was done, what about subs and aircraft? I understand they aren't modeled in DG. Maybe not too difficult to add?
TT
Both navies had a few subs in their inventories in 1905 but they were coastal. One Russian officer in Port Arthur wrote a doctrine on sinking subs: catching the periscope in a net and then use a hammer to break the glass and flood them. Both sides ascribed some mine sinkings to non-existant subs.
As the Wright Brother's flight was less than two years old, aircraft would be fanciful, even if the Second Squadron thought it saw Japanese balloons off Sweden. (Go figure!)
Ivan Bajlo
01 Mar 06, 07:46
How about the Battle of Lissa 1866?
It would be even better if I could mod this one and have it downloaded from my site. :laugh:
Ameican civil war
South American what ifs just before WWI
Greek and Turkish before WWI
Plenty of Ironclad actions to make game just about them ;) :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironclad
And "what if" scenarios like La Gloire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FS_Gloire_%281858-1883%29) vs. British fleet etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship
And "what if" scenarios like La Gloire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FS_Gloire_%281858-1883%29) vs. British fleet etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship
I'd rather see a fictional, yet probable naval war between Britain and France after the Fashoda crisis.
Lempereur1
01 Mar 06, 15:28
We have designed the Distant Guns engine with a layered approach in mind.
That way we can introduce new elements into the environment and build effective A/I at the same time.
Many factors have to be weighed at each introduction.
The best part is that it feels like Christmas morning when you get the prototype up for the first time.:cheeky:
Anybody wishing to know about Jutland needs 2 books. Gordon is the 1st, to learn where the ships really went and why they went there. Reading it makes me wish I could have gone out drinking with Adm. Arbuthnot. Oh well, guess I'll have to wait until I meet him in Hell :D.
The other book is John Campbell's Jutland: An Analysis of the Fighting. This follows the pre-Gordon (as in Beatty's camp's dogma) interpretation of where the ships went. But that's no biggie, because telling the story of the battle isn't the main point of this book. It's purpose is to show exactly what happened to the targets when the shells and torpedos hit, and it uses the battle narrative just to give you the context in which these hits were received.
I would only add that Gordon's book is a truly amazing work. But it's true, going shell-by-shell through Cambell is equally essential, though not as much fun as reading Gordon.
Jutland would be great, but I am hoping it might include all of the various Battlecruiser raids and "almost" Jutlands. The British broke the German codes so generally new when the High Seas Fleet was sailing, but there was plenty of Fog (pun intended). Jim Dunnigan's Jutland had a campaign portion, but I would like to see something covering the first few years of the war. Hey, how about a Battlecruiser Goeben game? Man I can't wait for this thing!
IT might be hard balancing things with the Brits reading the codes, but the very early war might work fine.
I like WWII more than WWI (Jutland - the most over-rated naval battle in history :rolleyes:) that said, once aircraft are added your have becareful you still have a naval sim. Aircraft vs ships, more times than not, aircraft win! :eek:
Bullethead
27 Mar 06, 21:21
I like WWII more than WWI (Jutland - the most over-rated naval battle in history :rolleyes:) that said, once aircraft are added your have becareful you still have a naval sim. Aircraft vs ships, more times than not, aircraft win! :eek:
This is why I favor WW1 as the next step for the engine. Let's see if it can handle director control, faster and tougher ships, and much longer battle ranges (with associated visibility problems) before we get into full-blown air vs. ships.
Jutland was a significant battle, perhaps not in terms of results on the field, but definitely in terms of forces engaged, casualties inflicted, and tactical and design theories deflated or confirmed. And it's a battle reeking with "what if" possibilities, both in terms of decision-making and luck (both good and bad), which is why it remains a favorite of naval gamers. Over the last 30 years or so, I've refought Jutland countless times, starting with the pseudo-mini AH game "Jutland", through various mini rules, and finally on computer under several different engines. It continues to fascinate, and I've never seen it come out the same way twice.
HOWEVER, Jutland is far from being the only interesting naval action of WW1, and the North Sea was by no means the only theater of action. It was, after all, a literal world war, with sea battles (or at least their potential) of varying sizes taking place over most of the whole globe. There were a great many very significant naval campaigns, both of the purely naval and of the combined-arms type, in widely different settings pitting a great variety of forces against each other. The Med, the Black Sea, the Baltic, the Pacific, the Indian Ocean, the Atlantic, and even major river systems all had opposing warships taking serious action against each other. In short, WW1 offers great scope for naval wargaming, especially in terms of campaign engines creating tactical battles.
WW1 is much under-appreciated naval wargame fodder, thanks to the fixation of most historical works on the North Sea. I highly recommend A Naval History of World War I, by Paul G. Halpern, to anyone wishing to see that there was much more to it. This book is admirable for a general history in providing an excellent balance of big picture stuff and tactical details, with such an economy of words that it's neither too thick nor slow to read.
JD, is the Halpern book better than Massie's Castles of Steel?
I wonder if the DS engine could handle modern naval combat (now that Harpoon IV is long dead)? A Falklands war campaign could be fun.
I consider Great Naval battles and Harpoon to be the best computer naval games made so far, and also enjoy campaigns of Matrix Games UV and WITP.
I hope Distant Guns does to naval combat what Combat Mission did for tactical WWII combat.
It would be nice to have Battle of Yalu(or Battle of Yellow Sea) as battle and War of 1894 as a campaign. It should be easy to do, the map is the same, just add a few more ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Sino-Japanese_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Yalu_River_%281894%29
Also may be add in Battle of Lissa and Spanish-American war as well. But they may require more work. Since Lissa has sailing ships and both require new map.
First time power supply simply went dead, second time Matrox HD started giving click of death and Windows started crashing and giving me blue screen (bad sectors in boot!).
I think I see the problem with your system right here. :) Video card companies probably don't make very good hard drives. :laugh:
I am guessing you meant Maxtor. ;)
agentorange
05 May 06, 15:08
JD, is the Halpern book better than Massie's Castles of Steel?
Jim, I hope you don't mind me jumping in to answer this one. The focus of the two books is quite different. Castles of Steel concentrates on the Anglo German naval race and the various battles between them, so there's a lot of stuff on the north sea etc.
Halperns book is much wider ranging in that it covers all theatres of the war eg: the Med, the Black sea, the Baltic, actions on the Danube river and a variety of other stuff. It really is very good, treat yourself to a copy, you won't regret it.
EDIT: It's not that one is better than the other, because they are both very good, it's just that they set out to do different things.
Crocky007
30 May 06, 01:26
Thanks for the comments on the books just ordered them should reach New Zealand in a couple of weeks
Originally Posted by Bullethead
Anybody wishing to know about Jutland needs 2 books. Gordon is the 1st, to learn where the ships really went and why they went there. Reading it makes me wish I could have gone out drinking with Adm. Arbuthnot. Oh well, guess I'll have to wait until I meet him in Hell .
NormKoger
31 May 06, 00:50
I highly recommend A Naval History of World War I, by Paul G. Halpern, to anyone wishing to see that there was much more to it.
I am finishing up with Halpern's book right now. It is a good history, and at times - particularly in the final chapters - the author's personality actually cracks through the formal prose. It's easy to tell that he had a good, hearty laugh over "The Terror of the Danube". But overall, the book is not really an easy read. I find Halpern's style a bit dry. There is some excellent detail. I felt like taking notes half the time I was reading. It's nice to have most of the numbers I need (tonnages, etc.) for the WWI incarnation of Distant Guns in a single volume.
WW1 of course and assuming river combat and naval combat against land targets could be correctly modeled a ACW game would be loads of fun.
The Age of Wooden Ships, and Iron Men, from ~1550 to 1850.
I have to agree with you there....I'd love to see a quality simulation of this period of naval history. Age of Sail 2(the game) is well past its sell by date.
Vigilante
30 Jun 06, 07:24
I'm for the Spanish-American War. Fascinating conflict, never simmed. Jutland would be fun, but I feel that I have a good grasp of the battle tactics of WWI. A Spanish-American War sim would be instructive as well as entertaining- my favorite combination. :)
I think WWI is already in development by Norm now anyway judging by some of his earlier posts. But for me it would have to be the American Civil War because you are right there at the dawn of the ironclad age with lots of new technology and invention to play with. Plenty of strategy and logistics scope with the coastal sea battles, blockades, sieges and supply.
Vigilante
03 Jul 06, 01:26
ACW would be fantastic. A lot of additional work would be required because sailing would need to be included to do it right.
saddletank
03 Jul 06, 09:31
A short list:
1) WWI in the Black Sea, Baltic and Adriatic. I prefer these more obscure theatres because the ships in them were rather variable and the political and military objectives generated some interesting encounters and might-have-beens. For example I've played a couple of great miniatures games based on the (fictional) sortie of a Turkish Squadron against a French squadron on distant blockade of the Dardanelles.
2) A fictional WWI mini-campaign featuring the S American navies. Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Peru all had a stupid mini-arms race from 1900 to 1914 with some interesting little fleets each of a couple of dreadnoughts, some pre-dreadnoughts plus various cruisers and coast defence ships.
3) Sino-Japanese War 1894-1895.
4) American-Spanish War 1898.
5) Greek-Turkish War of 1912.
6) Well, my ultimate fantasy would be a humongous ship database covering everything in Conways from 1880 to 1918, plus a global map, plus the ability to create fictional scenarios or campaigns anywhere at any time between those two dates and the ship database would generate possible ship lists for the nations selected. So if you really wanted to find out what an encounter between the Chilean Navy and a French squadron off the Galapagos Isles might have been like, you could play it :)
Cheers, Martin
Bullethead
03 Jul 06, 21:40
A short list:
1) WWI in the Black Sea, Baltic and Adriatic.
That's my favorite for the next project, too. If all of WW1 is too big, and the North Sea already done several times, THESE areas are excellent battle fodder :).
2) A fictional WWI mini-campaign featuring the S American navies.
Excellent idea! Especially if the Brits didn't take over some of the ships they were building :). I'd also like to see the War of the Triple Alliance vs. Paraguay and the Peru-Chile wars involving the Huascar and against the Spanish as well.
6) Well, my ultimate fantasy would be a humongous ship database covering everything in Conways from 1880 to 1918, plus a global map
Why stop there? Why not pretend the Washington Treaty never happened and aircraft carriers weren't invented. Then we could have all those ships that got scrapped or converted duking it out in the late 20s or early 30s :).
saddletank
05 Jul 06, 08:59
I once participated in a fantastic fictional 1920s naval campaign set in the far east. It was based on the premise that WWI never happened so the technical advances in submarine and aviation warfare between 1914 and 1919 were considered not to have taken place. Hence the only aviation was tethered observation balloons at ports, a couple of unreliable seaplanes at bases and a couple of seaplane launching converted cruisers (e.g. Engadine style).
All the yummy big planned ships that got cancelled in the early 1920s were built. :devious:
In the far east Germany had a base at Tsingtao, the British were at Hong Kong and Singapore, there were Dutch and French present plus the USA and Japan. Russia was absent, I cannot now recall why but presumably in our alternative universe 1904-05 had happend but also presumably the 1917 revolution hadn't. I think we just assumed that post 1905 the Russian influence in the far east had dwindled to a point where it wasn't worth representing in the game. As the US and Japan were by far the most powerful fleets it was assumed there was a diplomatic rift over island ownership and war between the US and Japan was a definite. There was a diplomatic phase involving the smaller colonial powers (Ger-Brit-Dutch-Fr only had BC and CL squadrons present) as to who sided with who or stayed neutral. There was a merchantship trading system that generated economic points so it was possible to be successful by being neutral and protecting your merchants.
One thing we found was that combats between the super-super-super dreadnoughts was quite boring as it took so long for them to become crippled and everyone hoarded them carefully - no risk taking at all. And no one in an old BC squadron would stay around to see how much of a mess one of them would make of an older BC :)
I'd like to see the Spanish-American war as well - I could almost see it as an expansion pack to Distant Guns, since the era, ship types, etc. aren't too far off from the Russo-Japanese War.
Matt
If I have not replied already....the Golden Age of Sail!
By all accounts this engine could finally do this glorious period of naval history true justice. So Storm Eagle Studios get coding!!!
Now that the game is actually out, and I have had a chance to see it in action I am really looking forward to World War I, and possibly World War II.
The Chile/Peruvian naval conflicts would go down fine with me, as well as the Spanish/American War and American Civil War, but it would be great to refight the Austro/Italian battle of Lisa as well. Although my true heart lies with the Napoleonic Naval era, I'm trying to keep things a bit modern! :D
Cheers
Ken
If ever there was an age of naval warfare with frighteningly huge great guns and battles it was the Age Of Sail, particularly the Nelsonic era. Give me a game with real naval tactics and gunnery. I reckon this engine could do it too. None of that double explosivo or grenade shot. Proper shot proper cannons and carronades and 50 or more to a ship that gives the master sailor the real edge on knowing how to bring the guns to bear and when the upper hand. Reap player knowledge with real player rewards. None of that arcade crap with turn and click rubbish. Real guns real naval warfare.
SZO give me an Age of Sail game to beat all others. None of that Caribbean and pirate rubbish. Gimme the mediterranean Nelson and the ultimate navies battling for everything or nothing. With broadsides that make a proud man under fire believe in god.
Commodore Rob
29 Jul 06, 10:03
Well logically the next step Must be covering the period from 1905- 1920 adding other navies probably the Turks first as they fought the russian in the Black sea then the British, German, french, US and so on:) Maybe you could do it like TT wargaming and sell fleet packs:) at about $10 each
Well if chronology and logic figured you would go right back to 1150 or something and then work up through galleons and then frigates and then SOL's then ironclads then coal powered battleships then diesel then Nuclear.....etc
But I personally think that one focal point of the modern battleship genre covers enough of that style of play. I guess ading period mods to the original vanilla version would be easy enough and sensible in keeping interest in that style.
But to capture a whole new feel with a whole new crowd I think a step into a distinct era would be far more sensible. Take the Age of sail the other naval combat era. Create an AOS product with the same engine and you now have the ability to create mods for the two seperate eras and to cater to both markets. While being able to continuously perfect and develop a simultaeous engine etc. Especially if MP options are to be developed.
Just a single deviation into a distinct era would create a lateral expansion that would benefit both nieches. As well as provide very distinct relief when you needed a break from either.
Commodore Rob
29 Jul 06, 10:29
You miss the point of my post I was not talking chronologically for the sake of periods I said those dates becasue its probably the easiest to period to move on from, based on thge current game set up.
As to similarity when the dreadnought is built Naval warfare changes yet again therefore there is a distinct difference from the pre-dread era we have here and the post dreadnought era I mentioned.
YThe issues with going to the age of sail era is the game machanics will need to be completely changed as you have to factor in sails and wind and also the change of shot and if youy are playing it in real time look at how long it takes for ships in this period to turn and move and then look at the age of sail period where it takes forever. Besides its already been done in AoS
Hinchinbrooke
29 Jul 06, 10:41
Other naval campaigns? First off, North Sea, WWI. After that, just yummy gravy as far as I'm concerned.
Just my tuppence.
Dance with the one that brought ya!
Stick to the pre-dreadnought era for now on the near term expansions for DG. Anything from 1850 to 1905 is fine by me.:D
For the DG engine itself I would say a Rome Total War arrangement set in the Victorian era and ending in WW1. Grand strategy like in Paradox's Victoria (or the old Imperialism game) with DG's tactical engine would be a sweet thing to see.
You could call it "Distant Wars and Distant Guns":thumup:
My two cents.
Back to DG for me!
Just about any Naval battle or time would be great.
I think WWI and WWII would be great.
You could have the little wars that where fought up to the main wars of the time.
The great White Fleet that the U.S moved around the world in the 30's. I would like to see what would or could have happend if it was put to use.
I will wait for any one that is put out , because as I said in my post this game is a real winner, in 30 years of gaming,this is the best Naval game I have ever played. And I only have the demo!
I can hardly wait till I can get the full game.
Changed spelling in the edit. Sorry but I have a issue with spelling.
I'm sure the WITP boys would like to see a 'War Plan Orange' campaign. :)
Hello all
I would like to see american spanish war( ship battles) WWI( like jutland doger bank, cornel falklands ect) Civil war( mobile bay hampton roads etc) Criemea.
These would be cool
Thanks
Aklua24h
Spanish American War would be my first choice.
Daniel Sturgis
31 Jul 06, 12:38
Spanish American War would be my first choice.
With hypothetical intervention by other powers.
I'd like to see the Battleship Oregon in any case.
WallysWorld
31 Jul 06, 13:23
Spanish American War would be my first choice.
I second that!
I really enjoy the history around the pre-dreadnought period.
I'm sure the WITP boys would like to see a 'War Plan Orange' campaign. :)
After WW1 this is my #1 choice for a campaign. It would be amazing using the DG engine.
It would also allow for a very nice mixture of ships.
Pre-Dreanoughts
Dreadnoughts
First generation battlecruisers
Late and experimental battlecruisers
Oil buring super-dreadnoughts
Experimental super craft like the 18 inch armed South Dakota and the Ki
Would make for an amazing game.
Map could extend from southern Japan and cover most of south china all the way to Singapore in the west to Guam in the east and down to northern New Guina in the south.
Main theatre of action would be the PI and Southern China if Norm wanted to added in the RN.
Would make for some good gaming :)
There were a number of small to medium sized engagements using pre-dreadnoughts in South America prior to WWI. They would be perfect for this engine. Chile, Argentina, Peru and others had a number of conflicts using ships purchased from the major powers as old ships were replaced by newer models. There is an excellent two-volume history from the US Naval Institute called "Battleships" that details the pre-dreadnought era.
I think the focus should be on what would make a good campaign, I have little interest in a ship vs ship simulator. I would like to see WWII war in med where the germans transfered most of the ship assets there.
Admiral Nelson
01 Aug 06, 00:35
This should be a no-brainer for this engine:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/Ships/capitolpaintingmanilabay_e.jpg
Vigilante
01 Aug 06, 01:37
This should be a no-brainer for this engine:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/Ships/capitolpaintingmanilabay_e.jpg
I'm with you 100% on that. BTW fantastic pic - who is the artist and where can I get a print? :)
Lempereur1
01 Aug 06, 01:50
There is a fine line that we have to walk between a command simulation and a ship simulator. Once you crossover into the relm of individual fire controls and such, the game would then become a ship simulator.
As we grow the engine, we will have to be careful about the line blurring.
Actually I would love to have a sort of campaign game where you have a number of years to build up a navy, under a budget of course, and then fight something like the campaign in DG with the ships you have built / purchased. You wouldn't be able to conserve budget from year to year, so you would have to buy ships each year, even if you know that they'll be obsolete later. There could be a chance of war breaking out each year, so you would have to be ready at all times instead of min-maxing builds to have an optimal force at a certain date.
I would like to see the Jutland battle, and other battles of WW1.
My opinion, is that the WW1 times are the true times of Battleships, because in WW2 the role of main naval power were given to CVs.
I would like to see two pre-dreadnaught battles that could have been: Dewey's confrontation with the Germans at Manila and his later (1903?) shadowing of the Germans in the Gulf of Mexico (See Edmund Moris' Theodore Rex)
Actually I would love to have a sort of campaign game where you have a number of years to build up a navy, under a budget of course, and then fight something like the campaign in DG with the ships you have built / purchased. You wouldn't be able to conserve budget from year to year, so you would have to buy ships each year, even if you know that they'll be obsolete later. There could be a chance of war breaking out each year, so you would have to be ready at all times instead of min-maxing builds to have an optimal force at a certain date.
Count me in too please! I would even pay extra for it!:D
A ship design system based on then prevailing theories of ship design (i.e. central barbettes - like Chen Yen, or more conventional centerline turrets, and even traditional broadside layouts - much cheaper to build but no turrets and smaller guns only). Secondary and tertiary weapons (like Nordenfelts) Ram or no-ram hulls. Torpedo bulges on hulls. Net seaworthiness. Top heavyness. Etc.
DG already has a extensive library of ship parts in-game. So why not make them generic and interchangable in a ship design system? I'd probably spend hours just designing and tweaking my battleship blueprints - lol.
DG combined with a operational/strategic overlay with all of the aforementioned features would be a no-brainer must-buy in my book.
If the data formats were a bit more open or documented, one could make such a game as an external application, automatically generating the needed ship and scenario files and launching into DG when needed.
If the data formats were a bit more open or documented, one could make such a game as an external application, automatically generating the needed ship and scenario files and launching into DG when needed.
I believe the Fighting Steel fans have done something along those lines already.
Bloodstar
01 Aug 06, 10:09
I would like to see the Jutland battle, and other battles of WW1.
My opinion, is that the WW1 times are the true times of Battleships, because in WW2 the role of main naval power were given to CVs.
Of course I agree, and I said this before...
What benefit did bring impressive Yamato and Musashi... They had best armour and guns and American have poured doezens of torpedoes and bombs with planes and made a wrecks out of them...
Radar and airplanes killed all romantic and chivarlious ship to ship battles...
Of course even WW1 showed what modern BC can do to ships that didn't have sufficient range and speed but WW1 is really suied for this kind of engine... There is a lot what if's and also lot of good historic battles as well. Maybe with rearranging divisions you you could add those of suspense here.
So you could choose not to bring slow Bluecher to a Dogger Bank :D
Anyway you could choose what ships will sail and when... maybe some kind of limited intelligence could be employed, spy's etc...
mario
While I'm really not interested in re-creating the Yamato/Iowa dream slugfest that so many people like to talk about, there are plenty of surface actions in WW2 that can be explored. In particular, I'd like to see the entire Guadalcanal campaign revisited, and I don't believe the Med has ever really been covered in a computer strategy game. Since I'm not a programmer, I can only imagine how heavily the game engine would need to be modified in order to include things like aircraft, radar and centralized fire control.
Of course I agree, and I said this before...
What benefit did bring impressive Yamato and Musashi... They had best armour and guns and American have poured doezens of torpedoes and bombs with planes and made a wrecks out of them...
Radar and airplanes killed all romantic and chivarlious ship to ship battles...
I still would have taken my chances in an Iowa.
Most powerful gun based warship to ever float.
All else being equal and in a one vs one battle I would put my money on the Iowa.
Vastly superior fire control, damage control and radar assisted gunnery would cary the day.
Hell, her secondary 5 inch batteries were radar fire controlled.
Daniel Sturgis
01 Aug 06, 12:03
While I'm really not interested in re-creating the Yamato/Iowa dream slugfest that so many people like to talk about, there are plenty of surface actions in WW2 that can be explored. In particular, I'd like to see the entire Guadalcanal campaign revisited, and I don't believe the Med has ever really been covered in a computer strategy game. Since I'm not a programmer, I can only imagine how heavily the game engine would need to be modified in order to include things like aircraft, radar and centralized fire control.
Seems like jumping right to WWII would not work as well as doing some peripheral WWI things and pre-WWI things (cruiser actions, hypotherical wars before the Dreadnoughts became common, the Balkan Wars, Italian Expansion (1911-1913), the Baltic, the Med) and then WWI North Sea (which would have many potentially interesting phases before Jutland), War Plans Orange and Black and only after some extensive development moving on to the late 1930s, Western Approaches, Norway Campaign, the Early WWII Med, Rainbow 5 and so on.
Bloodstar
01 Aug 06, 12:09
I still would have taken my chances in an Iowa.
Most powerful gun based warship to ever float.
All else being equal and in a one vs one battle I would put my money on the Iowa.
Vastly superior fire control, damage control and radar assisted gunnery would cary the day.
Hell, her secondary 5 inch batteries were radar fire controlled.
Ah, yes, I forgot Iowa. Missouri was also cool. Was it a ship where was signed end of WW2?
Mario
Neutrino 123
01 Aug 06, 12:15
Well, it has been mentioned that the Distant Guns engine can handle air and land things as well as ships, so if we get WWII games after awhile, we might see many of those non-naval aspects modeled and under player control...:)
BloodStar the BB Missouri was where the War ended with the signing of the treaty. The BB Missouri was a Iowa class BB.
I think that any of the above type game add-ons would be great with this game.
I was thinking of the book I read about a German raider that was chased around the world, as it sunk cargo ships. I can't remember the name of the German ship though. I think it was caught off the coast of South America and sank. But in thinking of this it would be great to have to manage your ships and fleets to both take on the main fleets and to also be able to catch Raiders that where sinking you supply line ships around the world.
The game we have now is just about endless in what can be done, at least that is what I see.
Lempereur1
01 Aug 06, 16:22
You never know where we might go next!
Now where was that -(CENSORED)- scenario......:halo:
I still would have taken my chances in an Iowa.
Most powerful gun based warship to ever float.
All else being equal and in a one vs one battle I would put my money on the Iowa.
Vastly superior fire control, damage control and radar assisted gunnery would cary the day.
Hell, her secondary 5 inch batteries were radar fire controlled.
I doubt Iowa could win the 1vs1 match with Yamato.
She got good chances MAYBE in bad weather and night conditions, where the superiority of USN radar and FCS could really tell the last word.
But in shiny wheather the extremely good optical based FCS of Yamato was equal to USN FCS. And due to bigger immunity zone and larger caliber main guns, the Yamato would definately win.
Hi all, glad to be here, yesterday finally purchased DG after three days evaluating the demo; I've been waiting for it for almost a year and I like it very much so far.
My favourite period for a new campaign would be the one that took place in the Adriatic Sea during the 1866 Italian - Austrian conflict and ended in the climatic battle of Lissa when Italian Navy suffered a bitter defeat while supporting an anphibious operation against the fortified island of Lissa. This period is quite interesting because it represents the first confrontation between two comparable fleets of ironclads, when ramming manoeuvres were still regarded as decisive actions and the battleships sported both steam engines and sails.
My idea is that the campaign would be very interesting because many times the Austrian fleet tried, without success, to lure the Italians to battle performing many raids near Ancona harbour, the most important Italian base in the Adriatic Sea.
It would be enough to plot an interesting (hypotetical) campaign if we assume the Italians more ready to accept or search for battle.
The main forces in both navies were composed of ironclads, yet many ships were still wooden vessels with sails, so if wind is not modeled in DG, this would be a problem.
Regards
J
I doubt Iowa could win the 1vs1 match with Yamato.
She got good chances MAYBE in bad weather and night conditions, where the superiority of USN radar and FCS could really tell the last word.
But in shiny wheather the extremely good optical based FCS of Yamato was equal to USN FCS. And due to bigger immunity zone and larger caliber main guns, the Yamato would definately win.
Care to reference where you got that the optics of the Yamoto were better?
Every competent source of the subject I have read states that by 1944 USN fire control systems were vastly superior to the Japanese.
And the USN 16 inch shell actualy had better anti armour capabilities than the IJN 18.1 inch shell.
Admiral Nelson
01 Aug 06, 18:40
Not to mention twice the rate of fire... :)
There were a number of small to medium sized engagements using pre-dreadnoughts in South America prior to WWI. They would be perfect for this engine. Chile, Argentina, Peru and others had a number of conflicts using ships purchased from the major powers as old ships were replaced by newer models. There is an excellent two-volume history from the US Naval Institute called "Battleships" that details the pre-dreadnought era.
Correction: That was "Battleships in Action" by H. W. Wilson. It is a two-volume set. Volume I deals with armored ship actions in the American War Between the States, the Danish War of 1864 (including an account of the Battle of Lissa), the Franco-German War of 1870, the war between Chile and Peru, the Brazilian Civil War, the Japan-China War in of 1894 (incl the Battle of the Yalu, fought under 3000 yards), the Spanish American War, the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 (6 chapters) and the Balkan Wars of 1911 and 1912. Lastly there is a chapter on battleship disasters. All in all there are 308 pages of great armored ship and pre-dreadnought BB actions that took place before WWI. Volume II is devoted almost entirely to WWI. Remember, these books are just about the NAVAL battles.
There is LOTS of material here for the Distant Guns engine.
Bloodstar
02 Aug 06, 02:56
Hi all, glad to be here, yesterday finally purchased DG after three days evaluating the demo; I've been waiting for it for almost a year and I like it very much so far.
My favourite period for a new campaign would be the one that took place in the Adriatic Sea during the 1866 Italian - Austrian conflict and ended in the climatic battle of Lissa when Italian Navy suffered a bitter defeat while supporting an anphibious operation against the fortified island of Lissa. This period is quite interesting because it represents the first confrontation between two comparable fleets of ironclads, when ramming manoeuvres were still regarded as decisive actions and the battleships sported both steam engines and sails.
My idea is that the campaign would be very interesting because many times the Austrian fleet tried, without success, to lure the Italians to battle performing many raids near Ancona harbour, the most important Italian base in the Adriatic Sea.
It would be enough to plot an interesting (hypotetical) campaign if we assume the Italians more ready to accept or search for battle.
The main forces in both navies were composed of ironclads, yet many ships were still wooden vessels with sails, so if wind is not modeled in DG, this would be a problem.
Regards
J
Heard about that battle, Issa is now called Vis... Yugoslav army also had base there... Lastovo island had German submarine base in WW2...
Mario
Not to mention twice the rate of fire... :)
Iowa
USN 406mm MK-7 guns.
rate of fire - 1 salvo each 30 seconds.
1225 kg MK-8 AP shell.
maximum range - 38720 meters.
main belt - 307mm (equivalent to 343mm),
deck armor - 147mm to 179mm.
speed - 33knots.
Yamato
IJN 460mm Type 94 guns.
rate of fire - 1 slavo each 45 seconds.
1330 kg AP shell.
maximum range - 42050 meters.
main belt - 410 mm.
deck armor - 380mm to 200mm.
speed - 28knots.
So, as u can see, the pure numbers show us that Iowa had no chances in the conditions of pure artillery duel with Yamato.
Im looking forward to see some WW1 campaigns. As many have already said WWI was the golden time of battleships and so would make good campaing in this engine.
Hi Mario, thanks for your attention.
Lissa has been a major ironclads battle indeed, and one of the fiercest ever. Austrian Admiral Tegetthoff (still regarded as one of the greatest admirals in history) divided his ironclads divisions in three wedge formations seeking the chance to ram the enemy ships (he was a strong supporter of ramming manoeuvres), so the two fleets engaged in a furios short range gun and ram combat while Italian divisions, led by Admiral Persano were still forming their battle lines coming from coastal support to the landings (moreover Italian doctrine was centered on long range artillery engagement so they have been caught in a very difficult moment and without the chance to show their true firepower...).
The most important Italian ironclad, "Re d'Italia" after a wrong manoeuvre, remained motionless in the middle of the fray and was rammed from the Tegetthoff's flagship, "Erzherzog Ferdinand Max", sinking in few minutes; another Italian "armored" gunship simply blew up. The Italian admiral wasn't onboard the "Re d'Italia" though, cause he transferred himself on the newly arrived rammer "Affondatore" just before the battle, (thus destroying the Italian chain of command, because not all the skippers had been informed in time...)
This is one of the few episodes in history in which a major battleship rammed another peer one in a big battle.
The Italian wooden ship divisions led by Admiral Vacca were never committed to engage (on the contrary, Austrians ones played an important role in the battle); eventually Vacca stated he didn't receive the order to attack (so would be interesting to simulate a "what if" scenario with all ironclads and wooden vessels joining the battle).
This battle has been studied for ages in all the naval colleges at least until RJW and WW1.
In the end, in my opinion this remains one of the most interesting periods in the ironclads era (they weren't still true pre-dreadnoughts models, yet they were very fascinating vessels).
Regards
Carlo
Hi KGB, thanks for this interesting data (406 and 460 mm guns firing more than one shot in a minute is really impressive...), but are you sure that Japanes optical fire control systems were better than US ones (edited my post)? ...And any data about the accuracy of the guns themselves at long range (many times the bigger ones aren't very accurate...)? Think that Iowa class BB were far better in this field.
Really don't think that sheer gun caliber and armor belts would really matter so much in a real encounter...
Just my idea of course; it's a big pleasure to exchange some ideas!
Regards
J
Hi KGB, thanks for this interesting data (406 and 460 mm guns firing more than one shot in a minute is really impressive...), but are you sure that Japanes optical fire control systems were better than US ones (edited my post)? ...And any data about the accuracy of the guns themselves at long range (many times the bigger ones aren't very accurate...)? Think that Iowa class BB were far better in this field.
Really don't think that sheer gun caliber and armor belts would really matter so much in a real encounter...
Just my idea of course; it's a big pleasure to exchange some ideas!
Regards
J
You are right, the salvo from all main caliber guns of Yamato covered the circle of 560 meters in diameter if firing at maximum angle and with full charge.
Unfortunatelly, I have no data about the shells dispersion of MK-7 Iowa guns, but I think the numbers are almost identical. Maybe little less, due to long barrel of USN guns.
But, the amount of armor Yamato got covering conning tower, FCS and range-finder posts, the front, upper and back sides of main caliber turrets, the armoring of deck above and the belt near engine rooms, powder magazines and other important zones was more (and in many ways - significally more) than Iowa had.
The range-finders of Yamato were 15 meters long, and each main caliber turret got its own periscope. The electronic systems, which were added to Yamato and Mushashi in May 1944 were worse than USN systems, but due to best optics the Yamato firecontrol systems were almost identical to those functions that Iowa got.
Admiral Nelson
02 Aug 06, 08:48
Gentlemen, I think we are off topic in this thread discussing Iowa and Yamato. :) Do allow me to suggest reading the excellent Nihon Kaigun (http://www.combinedfleet.com/kaigun.htm) web page. It is full of information about the Japanese Navy in WWII. Take a look at the "World's best Battleship" special feature in which you will find Iowa, Yamato and several other BBs compared.
Thanks KGB, ok, if I understand correctly, you are only taking into consideration optical range finders, so I shouldn't consider radar controlled gunnery when reading your conclusions.
I joined the post thinking that radars were considered, so I stated I was sure US BB had big accuracy advantages in a long range artillery duel (leaving apart the inherent gun accuracy).
Now I have a question: were opticals better than radars in a daylight battle?
I ask because I think that the only way to be sure on who has a real advantage is to compare the two BB as complete weapon systems.
Beg your pardon if my statements may be very naive, I like naval history but I'm not an expert.
Regards
J
Hi Nelson, ...ok, if anyone can be so kind to give me a brief answer to my last question I'll stop posting on the Iowa-Yamato topic.
Cheers
J
Thanks KGB, ok, if I understand correctly, you are only taking into consideration optical range finders, so I shouldn't consider radar controlled gunnery when reading your conclusions.
I joined the post thinking that radars were considered, so I stated I was sure US BB had big accuracy advantages in a long range artillery duel (leaving apart the inherent gun accuracy).
Now I have a question: were opticals better than radars in a daylight battle?
I ask because I think that the only way to be sure on who has a real advantage is to compare the two BB as complete weapon systems.
Beg your pardon if my statements may be very naive, I like naval history but I'm not an expert.
Regards
J
Briefly speaking, the fire control systems of Iowa and Yamato in daylight and good wheather were even. In bad wheater, at night, and so on - the Iowa FCS was superior, due to relying on radar instead of optics, though USN optics was also good.
PS: Sorry for off-topic guys.
Thanks KGB, very interesting, so it seems that Yamato was deadly as she looked...
Regards... and yes, sorry for off-topic gents ;)
J
I doubt Iowa could win the 1vs1 match with Yamato.
She got good chances MAYBE in bad weather and night conditions, where the superiority of USN radar and FCS could really tell the last word.
But in shiny weather the extremely good optical based FCS of Yamato was equal to USN FCS. And due to bigger immunity zone and larger caliber main guns, the Yamato would definitely win.
I have to disagree with you on this, not only was the Radar and FCS better the speed and construction of the ship better.
One of the things they found after the war was the quality of the steel in the Yamato.
The ship was sunk because of this. Even with the water tight compartments the ships sides and fore and after decks where penetrated by bombs and torpedo's easily.
I am not saying this just because I want the Iowa to be better because we built it here.
I am big into the study of the types of War Ships and how they would fight and who would win. Other than lucky hits , and that did happen. Like the Hood.
BB Ships from Italy where of very good quality, but most of them where caught in port and pounded by large bombers and sank.
Either way it would have been a great fight between them and the larger guns on the Yamato would have taken out a lesser ship with ease.
Bloodstar
02 Aug 06, 14:18
Hi Mario, thanks for your attention.
Lissa has been a major ironclads battle indeed, and one of the fiercest ever. Austrian Admiral Tegetthoff (still regarded as one of the greatest admirals in history) divided his ironclads divisions in three wedge formations seeking the chance to ram the enemy ships (he was a strong supporter of ramming manoeuvres), so the two fleets engaged in a furios short range gun and ram combat while Italian divisions, led by Admiral Persano were still forming their battle lines coming from coastal support to the landings (moreover Italian doctrine was centered on long range artillery engagement so they have been caught in a very difficult moment and without the chance to show their true firepower...).
The most important Italian ironclad, "Re d'Italia" after a wrong manoeuvre, remained motionless in the middle of the fray and was rammed from the Tegetthoff's flagship, "Erzherzog Ferdinand Max", sinking in few minutes; another Italian "armored" gunship simply blew up. The Italian admiral wasn't onboard the "Re d'Italia" though, cause he transferred himself on the newly arrived rammer "Affondatore" just before the battle, (thus destroying the Italian chain of command, because not all the skippers had been informed in time...)
This is one of the few episodes in history in which a major battleship rammed another peer one in a big battle.
The Italian wooden ship divisions led by Admiral Vacca were never committed to engage (on the contrary, Austrians ones played an important role in the battle); eventually Vacca stated he didn't receive the order to attack (so would be interesting to simulate a "what if" scenario with all ironclads and wooden vessels joining the battle).
This battle has been studied for ages in all the naval colleges at least until RJW and WW1.
In the end, in my opinion this remains one of the most interesting periods in the ironclads era (they weren't still true pre-dreadnoughts models, yet they were very fascinating vessels).
Regards
Carlo
Thanks Carlo, nice description! :)
Mario
BlackVoid
02 Aug 06, 15:00
Getting back to the topic: I would like to see the current campaign fixed first and the interface improved.
Then enable multiplayer for the campaign.
Then I would love to see a WW1 campaign with the Med included.
After that hopefully there will be a Pacific campaign with carrier battles.
My personal prefrence would be a quailty "age of sail" game. All the games developed for this period had been dissapointing. WWI and WWII are all well and good, but firing at each other from 10-15 miles away isn't my idea of fun. Rolling your sleeves up and getting in close is more the ticket. What about ancient naval? Nobody seems to have touched this one yet.
Thanks Mario, it was only a brief and way incomplete description (don't want to be a competitor for Wickipedia...) just to explain why I find the second half of 19th Century so interesting for naval warfare: it was an age of transition, the old and the new lived side by side and few were sure to know what was going to happen in the future.
Cheers
Carlo
Commodore Rob
02 Aug 06, 17:21
BB Ships from Italy where of very good quality, but most of them where caught in port and pounded by large bombers and sank.
Erm the Swordfish at Taranto were not big bombers
Some Italian cruisers have been hit while in the port by American strategic bombers, don't remember BBs though.
...and "maiali" are even smaller than "stringbags" if i remember correctly :smoke:
Regards
J
Erm the Swordfish at Taranto were not big bombers
Yep you are right. I was thinking of the Fleet that was tied up in the docks and the attacks that came I think a year or so later. And did they not raise the Battle ships that where sunk? Not sure , I will have to go back and read up on this as it has been a little time sense I have read about this. Hmm
I'd like to see the the next installment be WWI in the Med and Black Sea.
And FYI for those who were posting above about the naval battles between Austrians and Italians in 1866, Against the Odds magazine has the following entry in its "In the Pipeline" section:
THERE MUST BE A VICTORY
Paul Rohrbaugh takes gamers to the Adriatic to cover the naval campaign fought between the Austrian and Italian fleets during the 1866 Risorgimento. Both nations put to sea with large numbers of ironclad warships, and how these were fought influenced the war's outcome and naval design for the next half-century. Large 5/8" counters (representing individual ships), an area map for the campaign game with six geomorphic hex maps to fight-out the ship vs. ship battles.
No date yet for when this will come out. The next game to be published in the magazinbe is on Leyte Gulf. Check out http://www.atomagazine.com for more details.
Thanks for the hint Zouave, interesting!
A little correction to my report on Lissa battle, the Italian wooden ships were led by Admiral Albini, as Admiral Vacca led the first ironclad division in the Italian battle line.
Cheers
J
Hinchinbrooke
02 Aug 06, 20:46
Jethro,
If you're contemplating Stringbags, here's something for them to target.;)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v292/Hinchinbrooke/Cavour.jpg
I wouldn't mind seeing some hypothetical naval encounters. An English/French fight in the Med in the pre-dreadnought era, or something along those lines. WWI battles would be interesting too, but I'm starting to really like some of these pre-dreadnought designs. :)
Hi Hinchinbrooke, great job! A "Conte di Cavour" class BB IIRC... I know very well your skills, from SFP1 forum; is DG moddable? It would be great to see some of your models here!
Regards
J
Hello,
I am new to this forum, and I just discovered this game some days ago while "navigating" in the 'net.
I downloaded the demo and it's wonderful. I have waited for a long time for a complete naval simulation to hit the market and the historical period is very fascinating and interesting.
I really think I am going to buy the game in the next week.
Well, regarding the topic of this thread, I would really "love" to see a WW1 Adriatic campaign, as this has been a "forgotten front" and there are many possibilities to create "what if" scenarios.
In a second place , a WW2 Mediterranean game would still be interesting: at the initial stages of the war, few British units had the radar and there were still battles fought using "old school" optical gadgets as in the "Battle of Punta Stilo" or "Battle of Capo Spada".
There is a good site about the Regia Marina at http://www.regiamarina.net
Rick
p.s. "Hinchinbrooke", the Conte di Cavour looks brilliant!
Vigilante
03 Aug 06, 05:28
@ Hitchenbrooke - is that a screenshot of a game? Looks fantastic. The RA made them pretty. :)
Sorry Vigilante, what is RA? Thank you.
Regards
J
Hinchinbrooke
03 Aug 06, 12:03
Yes, that's the rebuilt Italian battleship Conte di Cavour in Strike Fighters Project 1 (which is easily moddable............ although naval action leaves a lot to be desired).
Daniel Sturgis
03 Aug 06, 13:42
I wouldn't mind seeing some hypothetical naval encounters. An English/French fight in the Med in the pre-dreadnought era, or something along those lines. WWI battles would be interesting too, but I'm starting to really like some of these pre-dreadnought designs. :)
The French super-pre-dreadnoughts and others are pretty nutty designs. It would be interesting to pit them against the Italians and Austrians -- which would have happened if the Italians had not switched sides at the beginning of WWI.
Strategically it would be pretty wild too....
Daniel Sturgis
03 Aug 06, 13:44
Some Italian cruisers have been hit while in the port by American strategic bombers, don't remember BBs though.
...and "maiali" are even smaller than "stringbags" if i remember correctly :smoke:
Regards
J
The Roma was sunk by a TV-Guided German bomb when it was on its way to surrender to the Allies in 1943. Does that count?
Adriatic/Baltic to me from reasons already posted
points in campaign for naval bombardment support mission / destroying coastal shipping / blockade running
Adriatic/Baltic to me from reasons already posted
points in campaign for naval bombardment support mission / destroying coastal shipping / blockade running
Well, there's another Pole on the forum. Witam!
PS. Wow, it's my post no 100 as well :-)
witam
I will try to put my 2 cents about this game and commit myself in community but DG is currently my third so important game and I need to divide time between them :-)
Hi Daniel, ...yes and no...;)
Yes, BB Roma (third of the "Littorio" class) was sunk while sailing to reach Allied ports by German radio-guided bombs (not tv-guided) FX-1400 "FritzX", dropped by Do-217 tactical bombers.
So it is a tactical aeronaval action in open sea...
Cheers
J
Lempereur1
07 Aug 06, 17:43
Lots of places to visit!
Admiral Nelson
07 Aug 06, 17:47
Yeah, but just look at the mess some of these 'visitors' make!!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/Ships/Dewey.jpg
Yeah, but just look at the mess some of these 'visitors' make!!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/Ships/Dewey.jpg
You may fire when ready, Gridley!
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.