FT to WW2 conversion

Remember this was done about 8 years ago with the original FT rules. 
The thought being a player could run a Task force of up to 20 ships
while allowing up to 8 players in game. The general idea that players
could concentrate on being Admirals moving fleets, not Captains
maneuvering ships. 

The quick one page summary of the conversion is -

Roughly the break down for gunnery was this:

3 - 18" guns = 4 class 3 beams
3 - 16" guns = 3 class 3 beams
3 - 14" guns = 2 class 3 beams

2 - 12" guns = 3 class 2 beams
2 - 10" guns = 2 class 2 beams
2 - 8" guns = 1 class 2 beam

1 - 6" gun = 1 class 1 beam, not dual purpose (can't fire at fighters)
2 - 5" guns = 1 class 1 beam, possibly dual purpose

12.7 mm-20mm AA guns, roughly 20 per PDS
20mm+ AA guns roughly 10 per ADS

There is some fudging for strange arrangements like the quad turrets on
certain ships or triple mountings of 8" or 10" guns.

Torpedo mountings were 1 TT per TT, so a DD with twin triple mountings
had 6 single shot torpedoes. Some ships had the capability to reload
(most submarines) and had a record line for ready torpedo expenditure
(in most cases only one additional salvo, as the other torpedoes are not
easily accessed.)  Depth charges were treated like torpedoes against
submerged submarines at short range, you rolled to hit, then a roll for
damage.

Tonnage was based on actual reported weight, not the propaganda Treaty
displacement, although some of the British ships were problematical
depending on whether their bulges were flooded or not. 

Speeds were roughly based on 1 MU (inch) per 5 knots with board scale
for ships being about 1 MU per 1000 yards.  We used 1:2400 scale models
for ships.  Engines were one box per MU, so most ships had 4-6 engine
boxes.

Turn rate was fixed - 3 points for small (destroyers), 2 points for
medium (cruisers) and 1 point for large/capital (battleship/carriers) 
Maneuver systems were represented by 2 "rudder" boxes, a left and a
right.	You needed both or none to maneuver straight, if one box was
destroyed, you could only turn in the direction of the remaining box. 
DC parties could "repair" the box once.

The largest game we ever did was a total (both sides) of 6 carriers, 14
battleships, 22 cruisers, 38 destroyers and 4 submarines, plus an
additional 10 stands of land based planes. The game took about 4 1/2
hours to complete with 6 players. The key parts to running the game
relatively quickly was grouping the DD's into squadrons, and ships into
fleets and moving them as a group.  Also having huge numbers of dice
handy made things quicker (we used 42 oz. Big Gulp cups to contain the
dice, and rolled into a medium sized box (the dice were color coded into
groups of 10 to make them easy to count - for instance if you needed 36
dice, you grabbed the red, blue, white dice and 6 yellows).

--Binhan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jared Hilal [mailto:jlhilal@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 6:48 PM
> To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject: RE: dreadnought thrust was Re: Fighters and Hangers
> 
> 
> --- B Lin <lin@rxkinetix.com> wrote:
> > I encountered similar problems when doing the conversion of FT I to
> > WW2 Naval - for instance an Iowa class battleship had 9 
> Class A (Beam
> > 3) guns mounted in three turrets, twenty Class C (Beam 1) mounted on
> > the sides, 10 PDS and 4 ADS.
> 
> I assume that you made no distinction between 14", 15", 16" and 18"
> guns?
> 
> How about 6" and 8" cruiser guns?  Were they both B batts?  How about
> the 12" on the Alaska?
> 
> Aside: I think that classed batteries is one of the best improvements
> to FT to come from the EFSB/FBs, as it allows a greater range of
> choices.
> 
> 
> > Belt armor was represented by shields, but ignored if fire 
> came from 
> > the front/rear arc
> 
> Sounds like sidewalls and impeller wedges :)
> 
> You do know that all ships with belt armor, including pre-dreadnought
> battleships and armored cruisers either had armored transverse
> bulkheads joinng the ends ofthe belts, anged the belts inward to join
> to the fore and aft barbettes, or extended the belts all the way to
> join at the bow and stern, right?
> 
> Just before WW1, the USN found from testing that light armor was worse
> than no armor since it did not stop shells penetrating but 
> did detonate
> them inside the ship.  The new pattern, called "all or nothing
> armoring" was to strengthen the armor over vital areas to the point
> where it offered tremendous protection, and reduce all other areas to
> completely unarmored status to allow shells to pass through without
> detonating.  This was picked up by other navies and became the norm
> after WW1.
> 
> At the battle of Leyte Gulf in the Phillipines during WW2, Japanese
> battleships fired AP shells at US CVEs at point black range.	The
> shells passed completely through the ships without detonating.
> 
> > or from long range (plunging fire).
> 
> And all ships built after the battle of Tsushima in 1905 have armored
> decks precisely to defend against plunging fire.
> 
> In fact, the USN built battleships based on an "immunity zone" idea. 
> This zone was defined as "from X thousand yards to Y thousand yards
> against Z" shellfire".  Where X was the closest range at which Z"
> shells could not penetrate the belt and Y was the farthest 
> range before
> plunging shells would penetrate the armored deck.  The zone 
> was usually
> calculated based on the ship's own main battery size, since the ship
> was assumed to be facing similarly armed contemporaries in other
> navies.
> 
> 
> > Hull boxes was based on displacement, roughly 1 box
> > per 1,000 tons with some fudge factor based on anecdotal evidence of
> > strength of design.
> 
> Which figures did you use?  Standard load (Washington Treaty), full
> load, or maximum deep load?  These could be very different, 
> for example
> some ships built to Washington Treaty limits of 35,000 dwt standard
> could have full or maximum loads of 40,000 to 45,000 dwt.  
> Could make a
> big difference in a game.
> 
> 
> <snip> 
> > 
> > There was a problem with Battleships and heavy cruisers annilhating
> > destroyers at long ranges, which historically didn't happen much. 
> > Another issue is that in real life, salvoes are very much hit or
> > miss, with rarely anything like a "grazing" shot.  Getting slammed
> > with 1,600 lbs of armor-piercing steel is going to hurt, but a near
> > miss is only going to get you wet, so in reality there should be a
> > "to hit" roll then a damage roll.
> 
> That is why I used K-guns.  However, if you want to use the beam
> battery mechanic, try this:
> Each beam only rolls a single die, however it has a range equal to the
> full range for the weapon, e.g. an A batt/class 3 rolls 1 die 
> out to 36
> MU.  Score the roll as for normal beam dice.	Each hit does a 
> number of
> points of damage equal to the class of the battery, so an A batt/class
> 3 does 0, 3, or 6 damage.
> 
> J
>