Cruel Seas - Faffing about with submarines and other new fangled technology

Last night we were testing out some options for having submarines in Cruel Seas. I also wanted to give a try out for an App I picked up called "My Mini Report". The main selling point for the App was it makes producing battle reports easier because it allows you to add a voice commentary that gets converted to text as comments. I've tried it before but to be honest it was "a bit of a faff" to use, and previously I said "bugger it", but I decided to give it another go - and it was easier this time. It still needed some editing after the game but it didn't take too long. I think I may be getting the hang of it, but I'm still on the fence.

Here's the "test" result

The game itself went "OK". Like much of Cruel Seas there was some "err" moments when stuff happened - the ram was far less damaging than I thought it should be, and the perennial problem of torpedoes not doing enough damage reared it's head, but nothing that was deal breaking, and it was fun, for a given value of "fun".

Cruel Seas - Soviet Minesweeper "Mina"

I've just about finished painting my Soviet fleet box for Cruel Seas. If you have not seen the fleet boxes and are looking at playing CS they're certainly a good place to start. The Soviet one contains four each of the G5 and D3 MTBs, a pair of Bronnekaters (Project 1124s NOT 1125s as Warlord keep insisting) and the Fugas class Minesweeper. The other nations follow a similar pattern - one "big" ship and a selection of little ones.

I left assembling and painting the Fugas til last. Partly this was a matter of being a bit intimidated by the size of the thing, and partly because it was clear the model was of a very early ship, possibly even pre war. This was quite interesting because the ship data card included in the set didn't match the stats in the rule book, but did match the model. I wanted more guns, particularly AA guns as a mid to late war ship - and it was clear this was not only desirable from a gaming point of view, it was also quite historically correct. (edit - they errata'd the stats in the book). The pic below shows how the ships gained additional firepower as the war progressed. The Warlord model is very close to the original Project 53 design , what I was wanting to try for was something closer to the T407 Mina, which as an up-gunned Project 53

The model itself was quite nice, consisting of a very crisply cast rein hull, and some metal details. The only assembly issue being the lifeboat davits which needed a bit of work to get even close to the right position, but they fitted in the end.

My limited research suggested the best way to up gun the ship was to re-site the aft 45mm (which for whatever reason Warlord insist is a 40mm*) further aft and replace it with a 37mm AA gun, and add a pair of the same behind the bridge. Ideally I should have cut the rear of the bridge with the two DshK HMG mounts away, but it was a hefty piece of metal and I bottled that. The Mina with this configuration can be seen in the pic below nearest to the camera.

Getting the 37mm AA was a royal PITA. Warlord don't include this gun in their accessories set, but initially I thought his would be easy - just pick some up from a 1:300 manufacturer such as Heroics and Ros. This idea came a cropper fast as unlike every other nation Heroics and Ros don't make a 37/40mm AA gun for the Soviets. Scotia do, but it is a strange 2 part model with the gun platform integral to a square of metal to represent the ground and it would be a pain to separate. GHQ DO make a beautiful gun in towed and firing set up, but they're also rather expensive and ordering the three I wanted would have increased the cost of the project by 50%. Similarly the other Warlord guns of about the same style such as the Bofors in the US accessories set wouldn't really be suitable as this has a gunshield. 3d prints to the rescue. Paul Davison printed me out some 37mm he found on Thingyverse (or similar) and they cleaned up well. The first prints were way too fine, so I asked him to artificially scale them up to match the oversized guns Warlord were providing, and after a bit of trial and error Paul delivered as requested (Cheers m8). As the gun mounts included the round platforms they also were easy to fit to the ship abaft the bridge with minimum messing about - I had to file the paravane a bit to get them to sit right but all in all they look quite reasonable. I do fear for their long term survival given the extreme thinness but I can always ask Paul to print some more**.

* Warlord are pretty crap at identifying guns OR maybe they think the punters are so dense they cant handle the info, but they seem to have decided to re-designate quite a few of the Soviet guns - so for instance they refer to the very common 45mm as a "40mm", and the 76.2mm F34 on the Bronekaters as "6 Pdrs" . To a rivet counter like me this is really annoying. I suspect this is because they are shoehorning them into fixed categories, but surely the correct way to do this is to say "treat as" rather than just arbitrarily change the name? 

So there she is. It has to be said the additional AA will make her a tougher opponent for any S Boats she runs into, but she remains a bit lightweight when compared to some of the other larger ships in Cruel Seas. Being classed as a large ship she is very vulnerable to torpedo attacks, and her relatively slow top speed wont help either. All in all a really nice model and well worth picking up if you are planning on playing Soviets in Cruel Seas

Cruel Seas - Comrade Tender

Warlord keep steadily adding to their Cruel Seas range, and just about all the nations have something in the range to act as a small troop transport - except the Soviets. This is a bit of a gap as a couple of scenarios require you to land troops. The Germans have Seibel Ferries and F Lighters, the Brits and Yanks have a variety of landing craft, and the Japanese have several choices, but the Soviets are a bit lacking at at the moment. I'm "tooling up" for  a campaign and will need something to act as a troop transport, or just a target in some missions, so I have been looking around for something suitable. Step forward the Lagoda Tender.

I first heard about these interesting little vessels about twenty years ago when I found a collection of Soviet era commemorative postcards on a local flea market. I took them home and framed them it, to hang on the stairs to the games room (err loft). Several of them showed these funny little barge things doing undoubtedly heroic acts. Sadly the staircase was in the sunlight, so they've now faded, as did my memory of them, till now.

The Lagoda tenders were a series of boats initially built in Leningrad during the siege and used to get supplies in and civilians out of the besieged city. They were a VERY simple design, probably the epitome of function over form, basically a welded flat bottomed barge made from crude metal plates and powered by an engine taken from a truck. When I said crude I did mean it - the bow is basically two metal sheets welded into a straight V shape, in fact there are no curves anywhere on the boat, and they're steered by a tiller rather than a rudder and wheel. They were at least two versions, the larger being 43 feet long, weighed 25 tons and chugged along at about 6 knots flat out. While undoubtedly basic they were equally robust and they could carry about 50 passengers or cargo, and could be armed with a DshK HMG for anti aircraft defence. That simplicity did however mean they were incredibly robust, and the shallow draught and flat bottom meant they could land just about on any beach or shore. During the siege they built 118 of these and between them they made over 10,000 trips to and from the city, carrying 150,000 tons of cargo in and taking thousands of civilians out, constantly under threat of air attack. Many were damaged, but none were reported lost, quite an achievement. It didn't end there. As the tide of he war turned the design was so successful they became an integral part of Soviet amphibious operations, taking part in landings both the Black Sea and Baltic. The Lagoda Tenders are held in high regard in Russian history, similar to the Little Ships of Dunkirk here in the UK, and gained the nickname "Comrade Tender".

So back to the games element. I discovered Scotia \ Grendel did a 1:300 model in their Ship to Shore range. I bookmarked them, but had "a Cunning Plan". My regular oppo Paul had just acquired a 3d printer. So far he's been printing out models that are designed by others and made available for personal use on Thingyverse and the like. I've been tentatively thinking about dipping my toe in to doing 3d design myself, but so far lack the time or talent to really get it to work. Surely the Lagoda Tender, a boat that consists of straight lines, would be a good project to start with? I mentioned this to Paul too, but he seemed sceptical. I think with hindsight he knows me better than I would like to think:-) - after a couple of tries at various programs I did the equivalent of screwing the drawing up into a ball and throwing it in the bin! I went on to the Scotia site and ordered three from them. However unbeknown to me my comments had lodged in Paul's mind, and a couple of days later he sent me a pic - I'll follow that up in another post.

Meanwhile Scotia delivered, and the model is rather nice. Resin cast and with crisp detail they painted up quickly.  Proportionally they look about right, with a bit of exaggeration to the height to allow them to have a bit of depth in the hold, which is no bad thing in my view. Price wise they are £3.50 each which initially I pulled a bit of a face at but with hindsight is about the same as the equivalent Warlord LCMs (with the added bonus that being resin they will hopefully take less damage to the paintwork when handling) so not so bad.

a pair of Scotia Lagoda Tenders

Size comparison with a Warlord Vosper

the real thing preserved

In Cruel Seas
One of the oft repeated issues with Cruel Seas is there is no explanation of how they arrive at the stats or points, and the points system provided manages to miss out on a couple of really crucial factors. All that being said, after having a look at some of the boats already in the rules it should not be too difficult to come up with some stats. There are three small landing craft available in the Cruel Seas rule book. the Japanese Daihastu, and the UK and US LCM. These all have 20 Hull Points. The Lagoda is slightly bigger and made of steel rather than wood, so 25 Hull Points seems fair. This will also mean it is almost always going to survive the 5 D6 damage you would expect from an air attack in Cruel Seas, which seems to fit too. It is Small sized, and immune to torpedo attack due to the shallow draught. Comparing it with the others it would either be free (ie zero points) if unarmed (like a UK LCM) or 5 points each if up-gunned with a fearsome DshK HMG. Turns will be the normal 45 degrees per move phase, and speed breaks down into 2\4\6 cm which is painfully slow but correct, and helps balance out the points compared to the LCMs which are faster.

So there you go - if you're looking for something to add to your Soviet Cruel Seas collection these are worth a try.

Links
Scotia Lagoda Tender
Some useful history and pics from the Engines of the Red Army website - worth a look

Something a bit bigger next time

Soviet D3 MTBs for Cruel Seas

Back to Cruel Seas and following on from the G5 let's look at the  "other" Soviet WW2 MTB available in Cruel Seas, the TKA D3.

Unlike the G5, which frankly should be put in the box marked "Good in theory but maybe a bit ahead of it's time....", the D3 is much more recognisably a Motor Torpedo Boat, in fact it sits pretty neatly alongside the Italian MAS boat in size and capability. Similar to the MAS boat the gun armament was not particularly heavy - a couple of DshK heavy machine guns. Judging from the stat card the model in Cruel Seas is the Series 1, of which 26 were made. These had Soviet engines and managed 32 knots. The later Series 2 versions benefited from Lend \ Lease Packard engines and that boosted their top speed up to 45 knots. 47 of the latter were built, and some carried slightly heavier gun armament including a 20 or 25mm autocannon, an improvement but still not capable of standing up to an S Boat.

As far as I am aware there are two D3 models available, one from Warlord, the other from Heroics and Ros. Both are in metal. I can't confirm this, but I suspect the H&R may be based on a Type 2, however the gun mount, like many H&R models is quite small. The arrangement of the guns and the bridge also seems unlike anything I can find in pics of the real boats. Actually it looks a bit like the OD200 Anti Sub cutter??

I know Warlord exaggerate the size of their guns to make them more identifiable, and I think H&R would have been wise to have followed this example. I'm going to bang a new gun mount on the H&R model and claim it as a variant.

The H&R model comes in 2 parts, hull and a gun mount, the Warlord version has 5 parts, hull, 2 torpedoes, 2 guns \ gunners and a mast. The detail on the Warlord version is very much better than the H&R, with scribed deck planking and just more detail in general. Assembly of the Warlord model is pretty easy, the only problem being the torpedoes which will need to be held in place til your glue sets as they tend to fall off. In fact I think I would leave them off until the model is painted as they tend to get in the way a bit.

Here are a pair of Warlord D3s with a H&R one at the front - with a Warlord gun on the central position.

On the whole I think the Warlord version is a much nicer model. The H&R version is available for £4 each, Warlord are selling their D3 in packs of four for £15. Given that, it really is a "no brainer" for me and I would go for the Warlord model on just about all counts.

There is also the option of messing about with the Warlord model to make some different versions. You could add a single 20mm amidships as a late model, or if you feel like a challenge there were a couple of D3s that were converted into SKA patrol gunboats with the torps replaced by a 37mm at the rear and the DshKs raised on pedestal mounts - all of which should be doable using the Warlord weapons sets for the DshKs and some plasticard and bits for the 37mm.

WorLard - Durham part one - Coastal Patrol

Yesterday I attended "Wor Lard", an annual gaming event arranged by the chaps at Durham Wargaming club where the day is dedicated to the games of the Two Fat Lardies, and indeed attended by Rich Clarke, the face of TFL, and others.

It happens in the Vane Tempest Community Hall in Durham, itself an interesting building as it once was the headquarters of the Durham Militia, but has since been converted into a community centre, which, as they say, is nice.

The Dread Portal!

The format of the day is simple. Everyone is asked in advance what they want to play from a broad menu of current and past TFL hits, you turn up, have a chat, and then get your gaming head on. One game in the morning, break for lunch and snacks, another in the afternoon, wrapping up at around 5:30 in time for a pint at the local hostelry followed by a curry. In many ways an unreconstructed perfect day for me.

My first game was Coastal Patrol - MBTs and Eboats in the Channel and all that, very much a "happening" period due to the popularity of Warlord's Cruel Seas. The scenario was pretty standard fare, E Boats returning from a patrol run into a pair of Fairmiles who are covering an Air Sea Rescue Launch inserting an SOE agent, all complicated by a patrolling R boat with a previous history of trigger happiness so everyone is under strict instructions to identify targets before shooting.

CP uses an action system - each turn a ship dices for how many actions it has, usually between none (Captain asleep at the wheel or otherwise distracted) to three. These are the usual things like change speed, order a turn, attempt to spot, shoot, etc etc.

The game was a blast, and ended with a fairly comprehensive win for the Kriegsmarine when they managed by sheer fluke to blow up the ASR launch within an inch of making it's escape. German gunnery dice were damned impressive throughout, and two critical hits on the bridges of the Dogboats caused them both to be ineffective at the crucial moment as the crew struggled to replace the COs, cut down in a hail of 20mm cannon fire.

Blinds in play

E Boat evading

Contact ! 

An E boat "blind" skilfully weaves between the Fairmiles

So the inevitable comparison with Cruel Seas (CS)? - disclaimer - after just one game of Coastal Patrol! (CP)

Lardies are usually held up as a paragon of "play the period, not the rules" and tend to produce much more "realistic" (tm) rules to Warlord, and Warlord\ Cruel Seas has taken some criticism for this, particularly over their torpedo rules, so I was interested to see how they dealt with the challenges inherent in fast attack games.

Firstly, night. CP immediately assumes the game is set at night, which is the norm for the actual engagements. CS is pretty silent on this, but there is some hand waving going on about the short in game ranges representing the problems of poor visibility and mostly being at night. CP uses a system of blinds to represent this and adds an interesting layer of confusion - "is that a target?" "is it a friend from another flotilla?" etc. This is fun, BUT there is an unavoidable layer of complication in any double blind system tracking who can see what and has identified what. That does make for in interesting game, but also imposes a practical size limit on the number of boats a side as more than 4 or 5 would probably swamp the system. One interesting CP rule is that firing your automatic weapons loses your target in the glare of the muzzle flash, so you have to reacquire taking actions - a nice touch that adds quite a bit of tension. Searchlights - searchlights in CS work in ways that defy logic and physics, it really is just a head shaking moment. CP uses a template that works, if you are stupid enough to use it because although you can see your target, everyone can see you. Nuff said.

The actual firing systems are poles apart. CS uses a number of dice based on each of the weapons firing, CP aggregates firing points devolved by the guns that can bear, meaning an average E Boat was throwing 4 or 5 dice. CS uses a simple hit points system, with possible critical hits, CP a progressive damage system where you basically shoot things off the target until it burns down, blows up or sinks due to flooding. Both systems work, but CS does make your boats extremely short lived where in CP in theory you can take a lot of hits on non essential bits. Dealers choice.

Turning. Another area CS takes some flak for is the way boats turn. There is no real excuse for this - a tanker at 15 knots should not be able to turn twice as far as a E boat at the same speed. CP uses a simple turning circle which takes a lot of hassle out of the game. I hate turning circles personally, but they do work.

Torpedoes. CS takes a LOT of criticism over it's torpedo system, which many feel is too complicated and not realistic, requiring the torpedo to move through the water, dice to hit, dice to explode. CP uses almost the EXACT same system, with one major exception being torpedo hits are pretty much universally fatal, something CS gets very wrong. The similarities between the two systems are striking, which does make me wonder how much the criticism of CS is due to an anti Warlord bias from the naval wargames intelligentsia in their stuffed armchairs (me included)?

Aircraft. CP doesnt have them. This is perfectly sensible. Why would you have aircraft intervening in a night engagement between coastal forces? CS goes all "Hollywood" here, which is fine if you like that sort of thing, or would be if the air attack rules had been better written, which sadly they are not.

On the subject of size, CP and CS both focus on small boats - up to Corvettes and Minelayers, but unlike CS it looks as though the player base has enough understanding not to want to include the Bismark.

Both games have a fair amount of clutter - both use ship cards to track damage for instance, but CP is noticeably "chart heavy", much more so than CS, which is certainly a factor in CS's favour.

So overall? The thing about Cruel Seas is, it is undeniably fun. No matter how much I dislike elements of it, and there is a lot to make you scratch your head in puzzlement, I've not had a game which was not fun. There's a lot to be said for that, even if you have to switch your brain off in places. Coastal Patrol is also fun, but takes a slightly more refined and thoughtful approach.

So either or? - Why not both? I have every intent of giving Coastal Patrol a try using my Cruel Seas models. I assume CP was written with the traditional 1:600 models in mind (which we used today) but there is no reason why it wont work with Cruel Seas 1:300 models, and vice versa.

Coastal Patrol was published in 2011 as part of the TFL 2011 Summer Special, available on line as a pdf for the princely sum of £6.49 from the two Fat Lardies web store. Well worth a look as it contains a veritable boat load of other good stuff https://toofatlardies.co.uk/product/2011-summer-special/.

So that got me through the morning. Next post will hopefully cover the afternoon where I struggle to save Roman Civilisation from the waves of unwashed barbarians.......

Cruel Seas - Third Party Models (2) G5 MTBs

Following hot on the heels of the Bronekaters here are some thoughts on the G5s

The G5 is the standard Soviet MTB of WW2, if such a thing existed. It was unlike most other craft in it's design in a number of ways. Firstly it was made of Duralumin, at the time an advanced type of aluminium more usually encountered in aircraft design - maybe not so surprising as it's designer was Andrei Tupolev, the famous aircraft designer. This allowed a fast, strong and lightweight hull. This has some "issues" as without treatment it reacts to salt water...............something of a drawback for a boat designed to operate at sea. Secondly the G5 had a very "futuristic" appearance, with a streamlined turtle backed hull and enclosed wheelhouse that looks very much like a submarine. The design also lacks what we think of as traditional torpedo tubes, instead carrying the two torpedoes in troughs on the rear hull and launching them by dropping them backwards, followed by an obligatory tight turn! This is a method copied from earlier British Coastal Motor Boats (CMBs) that the Soviets encountered during and after the Revolution. Like most navies the Soviets struggled to find a reliable source for good fast boat engines, so a number of different engines were used and top speed varied, but some G5s were VERY fast - in CS up to 57 knots. Unlike some other boats the G5s didn't carry much in the way of other weapons - at best a couple of DshK HMGs, which combined with their low (20) hit points make them just a light snack for an S Boat in a gunfight in Cruel Seas. Then again, they're cheap, and did I mention how fast they are? If you are looking for a "pure" torpedo boat, look no further.

Warlord have just released their G5, and Heroics and Ros also have one in their vast WW2 1:300 range so I thought it would be interesting to look at both models side by side. Materials wise they are both identical - metal castings with some metal fittings - mainly guns. So here they are - Warlord nearest the camera in this pic.

Ros nearest in this

Overall I think the Warlord model is nicer. It has more detail, and is much crisper and a bit bulkier. In addition it has crew on it's guns, which immediately give it more character. The torpedoes are fully visible on the Warlord model but partly covered on the H&R - this is fine as it seems to have been a variation. Also the Warlord model has a mast, but being thin metal I'm not sure how long that will last in play.

Given there were a number of variations on the G5 design you could probably use them side by side if you wanted.

Cost wise the H&R model wins hands down, available for £2.00 each (two quid!) from H&R. The Warlord model is now available on their website in a four pack for £15, so £3.75 each. There is no mention of data cards or wake markers but they will be easy to come by if you play CS. That's quite a difference and makes the H&R version worth considering on cost alone, however if that is less important then I think the Warlord version just looks better.

Links
Heroics & Ros 1/300 Naval Range
Warlord Games G5 MTBs

Next I'll look at the Soviet D3 MTB

Cheers

Cruel Seas - Looking at third party models (1) Bronekaters

I've been banging on about Bronekaters now for a couple of posts. Now the Warlord model is out it is possible to make a comparison with the others out there, in case people are interested in some variations.

I have touched on the Scotia,  Ros and GHQ models before here Bronekaters Shoot Out so I will try to avoid repeating myself too much and concentrate on comparisons with the new Warlord model.

So having said I was going to try to avoid repeating myself, the first thing to say is Warlord got the name of their model wrong, which I seem to keep saying. The model is a twin turreted Project 1124 NOT a Project 1125 as Warlord continue to insist. They also mix the stats of the two up in the game. I'm not sure why they keep repeating this mistake other than somewhere there is a guy sat in the corner of their Nottingham HQ with his fingers in his ears shouting "La la la la la I can't hear you!"

Back to the model. As far as I'm aware there are only two options for Project 1124s - Scotia Grendel and Warlord. The Scotia model has a resin hull and metal details, the Warlord one is all metal. Here they are after I painted them up - first pic has the Scotia Grendel model closest to the camera, second has Warlord.

Detail stuff first. I think on balance the Warlord model is slightly more accurate when compared to historical photos I can find as it has the prominent exhaust pipe running down the port side of the deck, and the slightly raised deck house behind the wheel house. Both of these are absent on the Scotia model, which has a blank area behind the wheelhouse and a pair of vertical exhausts \ vents at the rear. There is also more detail on the HMG turret with some ribbing on the guns. The Warlord model comes with a "spare" T28 (T35??) style turret. I cant find any pics of 1124s with mixed T34 & T28 turrets, so you really need to have 2, but as they models are sold in pairs this should allow you to make one with T28 turrets if you feel the need. There is also a bit more detail on the deck, and it is slightly less "fiddly" to put together. However the Warlord model has less sharp detail on the hull and wheelhouse in particular, and both mine had some major clean up issues with the metal hull warping and the bows in particular showed some damage where they had been snapped from the mould. The Scotia model hull is very crisp, where there is detail, it is sharper, a result no doubt of using resin. It has a more angular AA HMG turret which I think marks it as a later model.  I'm unsure if this may also account for the different exhaust details??

The Soviets produced at least 99 Project 1124s and throughout that production run details changed quite a bit, so I am happy with both models and would not be worried running them side by side. The Scotia model is £9, the Warlord one has just gone on sale in their store at £15 for a pair. There is no mention of data cards and wake markers, but these are easy to come by.

I have three Project 1124s now. I think I prefer the Scotia model aesthetically just because the resin hull has crisper detail, and cleaning up the metal bows on the Warlord one was a bit of a chore, but it is a VERY close call. If I were to want a fourth, I suspect it would be Scotia - particularly as I have seen pics of a 1124 with a midships 37mm AA behind the wheelhouse, so it would be easier to mount on the blank area with the Scotia model rather than trying to clear the area on the warlord one with a file. On the other hand if you were starting from scratch the Warlord one may make more sense.

Lastly a pic of the four different Bronekaters I've been looking at . Farthest away to nearest Heroics and Ros Project 1125, GHQ Project 1125, Warlord Project 1124 and Scotia Grendel Project 1124

Links
Warlord Games erroneously listed as Project 1125
Scotia Grendel
WarGamingmats  for the mat in the pics

Hope you found that interesting - if so why not click the follow button on the top right?

Next - G5 MTBs in comparison.

Cruel Seas - The Power of Comrade Stalin

I think I mentioned I play World of Tanks on PC? There is an ongoing joke there about Soviet bias, and it particularly applies to the KV2 heavy tank and it's ludicrously inaccurate 152mm howitzer, which seems to defy all odds by hitting almost every time with devastating results. The joke is that if called upon, the cold dead hand of Stalin's Ghost guides the shells with unerring accuracy.

Its not just World of Tanks...............

I got my "official" Soviet fleet box over the weekend and rushed to get some of it ready for a game last night. Me and Paul D (my regular oppo) were going to try out the Convoy scenario, and my newly varnished Soviets were the escort. I took three Bronekaters (I'm going to call them Bronekaters for now as Warlord sell them as Project 1125s but they're actually 1124s) and a BMO armoured sub chaser. Paul was running with four S Boats, 2 early, 2 late. The Convoy was a Tanker and Merchant, both with a 3" gun mounted on the stern (but not modelled - yet).

My Bronekaters were using the "vanilla" stats for the Project 1125 in the rule book, even though I think they are "wrong" on a number of levels - see my earlier post here Bronekaters in Cruel Seas.

So over to the action. Turn one saw the Soviet Convoy sight some fast moving Fascists coming in, three from the port beam, one from just off the port bow.

Long range fire was ineffective against the main group, and all three put their torpedoes into the water at the first opportunity. The escorts tried to impose themselves between the vulnerable transports and the Fascist Sea Wolves and the transports turned to open the range to give them room to try and avoid the incoming torpedoes.

The Soviets did however manage to hit the S Boat approaching from the bow. Then the inexperienced gun crew on one of the merchants cried out "For Stalin!" and although they needed "silly" dice results their 3" shell smashed into the already damaged boat as though it had been a guided missile, causing three critical hits including blowing one torpedo tube overboard. The S Boat decided to turn away in the face of this heavy firepower. This was just a foretaste of what was to come.

Turn 2 and the Soviets had the initiative, moving one tanker to hopefully avoid the spread of incoming torpedoes. "Comrade Stalin, Inspire Us!" called the gun crew, and again, he did, this time an S Boat lost a gun and started to burn. The convoy started to think they have a chance.  The escorting Bronekaters now realised that the way to ensure damage was to call on the Leader, and in rapid succession their heavy guns started to get unlikely hits - fast moving S boat at long range? No Problem!

Meanwhile the Bronekaters thanked their leader for the wisdom of making them shallow draught as the torpedoes aimed at the transports passed harmlessly under their flat bottoms. Some fresh underwear will be required.

Turn 3 and the range was now officially "rather close".

German gunfire remained patchy at best, Soviet gunfire was almost supernaturally accurate hitting boat after boat, and that included the inexperienced gunners on the Merchant ships. One torpedo struck and badly damaged a transport, but by the end of the turn two S boats were already sank and a third was burning from stem to stern.

The last boat saw the writing on the wall and ran for home covered by smoke.

It was a fun and interesting game. Getting away from the issues of using Bronekaters as escorts for a moment (and indeed the strange stat line they have) they pack a surprising amount of "shooty" on a small hull for a reasonable points cost.

We still feel uneasy with the torpedo and "plume" rule - something that multiple Bronekaters can take advantage of btw - but we both can see plenty of gaming time and fun to be had with Cruel Seas in the future.   

Models - Tanker, S Boats and 2 Bronekates from Warlord, third Bronekater from Scotia - Grendel, BMO from Heroics and Ros. Merchant 3d print

If you like this sort of thing why not hit the follow button up on the right and get notifications?

Cheers

Gaming Mats gaming mat for Cruel Seas - a review

Cruel Seas comes with a paper printed gaming mat. That's all well and good for starting out but it has the long term durability and survivability of a British Battlecruiser at Jutland (ie not a lot), and if you plan on playing regularly you will be looking for a replacement.

Something of a first but unsolicited I was sent a gaming mat to review. Not sure if this is "a thing" but why not. I'm also available to review vintage Port and , well, anything :-)

Seriously though, it does mean I feel responsible to do a fair job balanced job, but in the end its just my opinion so here goes.

The mat was from GamingMats - who make, well, you get it. This one was a clear ocean area with some waves scaled to Cruel Seas size, ie 1:300, but I think it would work equally well down to 1:1200. After that the waves may be a bit big.

Size is standard 6x4 feet but they make other sizes. Material is PVC 500gsm (grams per square meter) with a printed front and a non slip textured back. The printing on the front has good detail and although we've only used it once it looks hard wearing. I know some people prefer neoprene for gaming mats, but pvc does have it's advantages - easy to clean and generally spill proof and is also usually more affordable.

We got the blue version, but there is also a green tinted one available. Colour wise I think both seem quite good for the Med or Pacific but I would probably want a greyer option if I were planning on playing in the North Sea.

One issue is the mat has been created with a repeated pattern to cover the whole area. This looked a bit strange at first, but in use it rapidly became barely noticed. Anyway we gave it a run out at Asgard Wargames in Middlesbrough, one of our local friendly local games stores (see footnote).  Also note that bright red wall - it will get a mention later.

I was pleasantly surprised at how well it laid flat - previous experience with pvc mats has been a bit hit and miss in this, but this one lost its curl in a very short time - quite a positive. The non slip backing worked well in use. The pic above is straight out the box and you can see there is a small amount of curling at the far left but this had straightened by the time we started to play. The pic above also shows the repeated pattern, but as I said in actual use I don't think this will be an issue, particularly if you have islands or similar to break it up.

And here it is in use - sorry the reddish tinge is my poor camera and skills picking up reflected from the red wall, but the mat itself has a matt finish that meant there was less reflected glare from overhead lighting - another plus in play.

So overall not bad at all. Prices in the uk are £39.50 for the 6x4 including delivery, the 4x4 is £29.50, which is also I think quite reasonable.

Useful for Cruel Seas or indeed for other naval games

These are available from GamingMats ebay store 

I'm donating the review sample to our local club Hartlepool Wargames Society, where I am sure it will be put to excellent use. Clearly any bottles of Port sent to review will be disposed of in an appropriate manner too :-)

Cheers!

Footnote
I have in the past referred to the excellent facilities at Asgard Wargaming, including their well used but friendly tea making facilities. I was frankly horrified when visiting last night to discover this had been usurped by a "coffee machine" with those fiddly little pod things. Happily the kettle was still available for those of us who like tea, but I'm not at all convinced this is a good omen.

Cheers

 



 

Down the Rabbit Hole - "Fixing" Bronekaters in Cruel Seas

OK this is a bit of a stretch. A little while ago I did a comparison between the models available for Soviet Bronekaters (BKs) in Warlord Games new rules "Cruel Seas", which deal with coastal warfare in WW2. Which is sort of the first problem right there, as the inclusion of a river gunboat in the game certainly could raise a few eyebrows. On balance I think it is reasonable in the overall big picture as they could and were used on lakes such as Lake Lagoda and close inshore. What is less understandable is the stat line they get in Cruel Seas, and indeed the prominence in the Soviet listings - there are four Bronekater types listed, and only 2 MTBs or other genuine coastal warfare types, which is a bit strange. Even more so is the stats they are given, which seem to be a bit off when you compare both to the real world examples and some of the other ships in the game.

So I'm going to add to this extraneous layer of questionable inclusion by adding another layer of my own, based on my admittedly limited knowledge and research - ignorance of subject matter never was a bar in this sort of thing! Also it is worth noting that as the game uses a points system and lists the way to "build" boats using this, the results will be "legal" as far as that goes in the game. 

As I mentioned earlier Warlord give stats for four versions of the Bronekater, listing Early, Middle and Late Bronekaters, plus Project 1125. The details for all four are very similar, in fact suspiciously cut and paste as you can see below, and I think a bit more depth and detail can be offered.

I should add that in the errata published by Warlord recently they changed the weapons on the Project 1125 to 2x 6-Pdr for 55 points. This is (almost) certainly wrong!

Firstly, what are they actually talking about when they say Early, Middle etc? The Soviets deployed 2 main types of BK, the Project 1124 and Project 1125. Given the Project 1125 gets a specific mention that leaves the Project 1124 as the likely candidate for the Early\Middle\Late version. I'm going to proceed on that assumption.

There are some nicely illustrated pages on Engines of the Red Army here and WW2 Armoured Boats of WW2 here which give some details of the two main types, and I will be using them mostly in what follows, but any errors and assumptions are my own. 

The Project 1124 was around 25 meters in length and displaced around 50 tons, the Project 1125 was a couple of meters shorter and displaced about 36 tons. Both had armoured weapon positions, machinery and bridges. The main feature of both versions was they used complete tank turrets for their main armament, either taken from T28 or T34 medium tanks. This is a little unusual. No other nation as far as I can see thought of this, but hey, those whacky Soviets! It does make quite a bit of sense when you think that the main use for these boats was in confined rivers engaging targets on or near the bank at quite close range. This means they are armed with 76mm (3") guns, which of course is our first problem with the Cruel Seas stat lines, as they are all listed as 6-Pdr (57mm) guns. To add a bit more confusion there was a version of the T34 turret that mounted a 57mm, but there is no evidence this ever ended up on the BKs -  in fact it would be counter productive to do so as that gun was mounted to give additional anti tank capability against the new generation of German tanks the T34 started to encounter, but it is safe to say Tiger tanks don't float. I've tried asking them if this is a mistake or deliberate, and if so, why?  But no response as of yet. You could argue (I suppose) that a tank turret is a lot more confined than an open deck mount and therefore less efficient at engaging moving targets like other vessels. Then again, other tanks move...... So for my first "buff" I will be "upgrading" both types to 3" guns vice 6-Pdr. It is safe to say the down side of this is you can't expect a tank turret to engage aircraft. As far as I can tell these tank turrets retained their co-axial machine guns but I'm conveniently ignoring these - as Warlord seem to do.

The second issue is the number of guns. The Project 1124s mounted one turret forward and one aft, ie two main gun turrets, the Project 1125s mounted a single turret forward. All the Cruel Seas versions have only one turret, except the errata version of the 1125 which has two..... which is problematic. So the 1124 is getting a second turret, and the 1125 is losing one. On the subject of turrets on of the advantages of using a tank turret is you get a lot (in relative terms) of armour plate thrown in too. The rules cover this by making BK turrets immune to critical hits from guns of 40mm and below. Given the amount of armour involved in both the T34 and T28 turrets this seems reasonable. They don't seem to get any additional protection for the armour on their wheelhouse and other gun positions. This can be "fixed" by giving them the "Armoured Wheelhouse" trait used on later S Boats in CS, which seems reasonable. 

Secondary weapons also needs looking at, and here it gets a bit complicated. Both versions had their secondary machine guns mounted in turrets, initially lifted directly from the design of the T28 tank. As the war progressed it became obvious that the original 7.62mm DT machine guns were not cutting the mustard, and that the threat from air attack meant something more was needed. This saw the early MG turrets replaced with either single or twin 12.7mm DshK heavy machine guns in mounts that could elevate to engage aircraft. The actual number, type and position varied wildly, other than to say the mount on top of the wheelhouse tended to be twin DshKs in all but the early T28 turreted boats of both types.

Lastly there were a few more "options". Either due to a lack of spare turrets, or a desire to give them a gun that could engage aircraft, some 1124s mounted a pair of Lender 3" AA guns in open mounts in place of the tank turrets. These were the standard naval 3" AA guns mounted on some older surface warships and dated back a few years, but seemed to do the job. Finally there were versions of both the 1124 and 1125 that mounted a set of rocket rails at the rear. On the 1124s these replaced the rear tank turret, on the 1125s these replaced the rear MG \ HMG.

So lastly a quick look at the other stats - Speed and Hull Points. In Cruel Seas both types are given a speed of 21 knots. The on line sources vary quite a bit but 21kts seems about correct for the 1124s I think,  the slightly smaller 1125s seem to have been a little slower, with speeds of around 19 knots. Rating speed in CS is usually in 3 knot brackets for game use, so dropping the 1125s to 18 knots seems reasonable. 

Hull points are a bit err problematic. The problem is there seems no particular method in allocating Hull Points. I did a quick chart of the stats already given and it mostly equates to about 1 hull point per ton of displacement rounded up to the nearest five, but there are some that are wildly out, particularly the S Boats and larger. I've asked on the Warlord forum about this, but again with no response as of yet. The 30 Hull Points Warlord gives all BKs seems very ungenerous considering both their size and the fact they are armoured  - at least bullet proof, which is more than can be said of some of the other boats in Cruel Seas, particularly when compared to some other boats of similar displacement such as the Vospers and PT Boats which are rated as 40+. With this in mind I decided to give them slightly more Hull Points, closer to their actual tonnage. As this factors in to the points totals it should not give them an unreasonable advantage in the game. 

So with all that in mind here is my all singing all dancing re-stat of the Soviet BKs in Cruel Seas. By Early I am assuming either T26 or early T34 turret types, the rest being up-gunned as circumstances allowed and dictated.

Ship	Turn	Size	Slow	Combat	Fast	Hull	Equipment	Points
Project 1124 Early	R	S	7	14	21	50	2x 3” gun turrets*, 1 MG*, Armoured Wheelhouse, Armoured Turrets	85
Project 1124	R	S	7	14	21	50	2x 3” gun turrets*, 1x twin HMG, Armoured Wheelhouse, Armoured Turrets	85
Project 1124 PVO (AA)	R	S	7	14	21	50	2x 3” guns, twin HMG, Armoured Wheelhouse	85
Project 1124 Rockets	R	S	7	14	21	50	1x 3” gun turret*, 1x Rocket Rack, 1 x twin HMG, Armoured Wheelhouse, Armoured Turret.	100
Project 1125 Early	R	S	6	12	18	40	1 x 3” gun turret*, 3 x MG* Armoured Wheelhouse, Armoured Turrets	70
Project 1125	R	S	6	12	18	40	1 x 3” gun turret*, 1 x twin HMG, 1 x MG*	65
Project 1125 Late	R	S	6	12	18	40	1 x 3” gun turret*, 1 x twin HMG, 1 x HMG	65
Project 1125 Rockets	R	S	6	12	18	40	1 x 3” gun turret*, 1 x twin HMG, 1 x Rocket Rack, Armoured Wheelhouse, Armoured Turret	90

As with all boats above "Tiny" size rating, they all should have 2 "free" MGs as well, which I think is supposed to represent crew using small arms. Smoke pots or generators seem to have been a common addition too - again no surprise given their intended usage, so you can throw them in too for an extra 5 points. It's not exhaustive, but as it's already twice the length of the Warlord entry it's probably enough. A couple of points. Weapons listed as turrets have the Armoured Turret rule from page 91 of the main rule book. I would also suggest optionally these weapons should suffer an additional -1 to hit due to their cramped mountings. Any weapon listed with an asterisk (*) is in an enclosed mount and cannot fire against aircraft. There are no points mentioned anywhere for these additional factors, but I think that on the whole they probably balance out so I will not invent anything more to further complicate things.

I hope this helps give a bit more flavour to the Soviet Bronekaters in Cruel Seas. Comments welcome, and if you like this sort of stuff why not click the "follow" button over there on the right?

Cheers