monitors

[michaelbaldur]

really don´t like the way WIF have crippled the monitors, by giving then to low a movement allowance.

the can never their full shore bombardment

[paulderynck]

I was informed this was taken into account when the counters were made. In other words, full value is the counter's shore bombardment number minus -1, in fine weather.

[michaelbaldur]

but why would they build ships that could not use it´s full capacities.

that really don't make any sense ....

have wif given them a higher value to compensate for the way the sea sections are handled

[paulderynck]

have wif given them a higher value to compensate for the way the sea sections are handled ? --- yes, this was a response from Harry to that same original question.

[Jimm]

Funny I was pondering exactly the same subject this morning.
Bear in mind the RN monitors only had 1 turret with a pair of 15 inch guns. So in terms of effectiveness they would only be a quarter of your average battleship.
And they only did about 12 knots and were pretty unseaworthy so you couldn't realistically give them better movement.

I think they are more there for flavour than anything.

[paulderynck]

Without CLiF & COiF nor an oil shortage... they are OK for ASW work.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

The monitors are one thing, and I agree with the chorus that they're only intended to be able to provide 1 shore bombardment; but WiF handles SB a bit funny anyway. From what I've read, it was the cruisers, not the battleships that provided the bulk of the shore bombardment, due to their ability to get closer to shore and be a bit more accurate. When firing at a land target, the difference between 6-8" guns and 14-16" guns really isn't all that relevant.


The counter I personally never understood was the poor old Japanese cruiser Idzumo. 3 move, 1 sb. So can never actually use it. Never quite understood what was going on there.

[paulderynck]

The 1 sb was there so you'd know what you were giving up when using it to transport a Div.

...I guess this needs one of these... [;)]

In truth, I think originally there was a table of actual armament versus factors that was used to put the various numbers on the counters. With the Idzumo, you have to conclude that the "time on target" is so abbreviated by its cruising range, that it nets out to ineffective.

[AxelNL]

It serves as cannon fodder?

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

The counter I personally never understood was the poor old Japanese cruiser Idzumo. 3 move, 1 sb. So can never actually use it. Never quite understood what was going on there.

Actually one of the early bugs had units like that ending up in the 3-box after RTB.

Alas for you, that bug got eradicated.