$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 97.83

6,240 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
39.3% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
3 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Gaming Related » Recommendations

Subject: AH Victory in the Pacific variants rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Nicholas Johnson III
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
I have a variant for VITP Called Crazy 88s.A "what if" variant that is based on what would the navies of the US and IJN would look like if the Washington naval treaty of 1922 had not taken place.All the fleet carriers both navies had not been built and the battleships had remained the top capital ships in the Pacific.Both navies do not start taking naval aviation seriously until after the British used Swordfish torpedo planes to inflict heavy damage on the Italian fleet in Toronto in 1940. I have the battleship replacement counters and the OBs but no rules changes. The first turn is is especially important to know how the Pacific war would start. I have my own ideas but I looking to see if rules have been made for the variant and/or I can get anyone elses ideas. Thanks for any help I can get.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Eldard
United States
Burke
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Usnicho3 wrote:
I have a variant for VITP Called Crazy 88s.A "what if" variant that is based on what would the navies of the US and IJN would look like if the Washington naval treaty of 1922 had not taken place.


Does that mean that developments before 1922 continue to evolve?

Usnicho3 wrote:
All the fleet carriers both navies had not been built and the battleships had remained the top capital ships in the Pacific.


Aircraft carriers were already conceptualized and being built (or more commonly, converted from other ships) before the Washington Treaty.

That treaty limited the tonnage of various capital ships, but excluded carriers because they weren't considered capital ships yet (and wouldn't be for some time.)

But smaller carriers were in use, and the signatories of the treaty were experimenting with shipborne aircraft, including seaplanes catapulted from and recovered by cruisers. The primary purpose of the early naval aviation planes was air recon and spotting for large guns.

Usnicho3 wrote:
Both navies do not start taking naval aviation seriously until after the British used Swordfish torpedo planes to inflict heavy damage on the Italian fleet in Toronto in 1940.


Check on the history of Royal Navy carrier aviation, which begins in earnest during the First World War. I'd say that Britain, the US, and Japan all took naval aviation seriously in the interwar period. The airplane proved its value in war during the First World War, and would continue to develop a naval role regardless. Naval aviators always envisioned a strike role even while the battleship admirals saw aircraft as nothing more than observation platforms.

Usnicho3 wrote:
I have the battleship replacement counters and the OBs but no rules changes. The first turn is is especially important to know how the Pacific war would start. I have my own ideas but I looking to see if rules have been made for the variant and/or I can get anyone elses ideas. Thanks for any help I can get.


It could be a fun variant. I recommend a few resources that may help.

Books:

War Plan Orange: The US Strategy to Defeat Japan 1897-1945, by Edward S. Miller. I think this is your best source, because Miller's matticulous research and analysis lays out the thought processes of American strategists before and after the Washington Treaty, which ought to give you insight into how a carrier-less Pacific war was envisioned. Essentially, the US Navy was still very much influenced by Mahan and the decisive major fleet battle concept. But Miller also digs into the basing and logistical considerations, and how they changed over time with the introduction of innovative technologies, such as the conversion from coal to oil, etc. The book is loaded with tables of data that you man find useful.

What's particularly valuable for your variant from Miller's book is how the importance of geographic objectives rose and waned over the years due to politics and new innovations. The construction of repair bases were an essential consideration, somewhat alleviated by the production of large floating drydocks for the USN.

The Great Pacific War
, by Hector Charles Bywater. The author was a naval enthusiast writing in 1925 about a hypothetical Pacific War in 1930. He got some things right, and he got a lot wrong, but you can see how he describes major surface engagements between battleship fleets. IF nothing else, he might provide you with a storyboard for your variant.

Games:

Plan Orange: Pacific War 1930 - 1935 designed by Mark Herman. Mark is rightly regarded as one of the hobby's top designers, and he's put a lot of insightful details into this game, which is a stand alone based on his Empire of the Sun system.

Great War at Sea: U.S. Navy Plan Orange. This one speculates that even without the Washington Treaty, some carriers would be built (I think that's a realistic assumption). But others, like Kaga, would've been finished as battleships/battlecruisers. It includes for USN battle cruisers and dirigibles like Los Angeles and Macon. The planes on the few fleet carriers don't have nearly the capabilities that WW2 aircraft would feature.

NOTE: You'll probably get more discussion if you move this to the Games Forum under Victory in the Pacific.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Here is that Variant about this: Story of the Eighty-Eight fleet-1996 cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.