Spanish Command Comments

Bob will lead the battle for the Amricans and I will be a little late, as I am coming from work. Hope to be there by 730, maybe more close to 830 though. My prediction is 1 battleship and 2 cruisers escape and the rest of the Spanish navy sunk. American losses will be light.

hmm thanks for the info i am looking forward to hear the results of the next battle. i might have acctually planed to attend this battle but work is horrible and busy.

The americans did not have the option to regroup; they selected their plan of attack and split into columns before entering the map. They expected the Spanish to be at their anchorage, where they were historically engaged.

The minefields could only affect at best 1 ship in each column; the die roll needed to hit a ship was 6, and I had two dice at each target. Average results would have been a hit in 2 or 3 columns. Damage was then diced for, with 1-3 hull hits resulting; this would either be a little inconvenience, or very annoying, depending on the ship. As it was, I missed sinking a monitor by a hit and only scratched one of the other cruisers.

Superior range was less of a consideration in this battle, as visibility was only 30 inches because of night.

The Spanish ambush as to which column to hit was considered randomly, which was reasonable as the Spanish would have had little idea of the American dispositions. It was simply a misfortune to hit the column with the Olympia, although a larger misfortune would have been the middle monitor, as it would have been difficult to damage and the two faster american columns could have converged rapidly.

The Spanish historical response was to anchor in shallow water; in this campaign they opted for an ambush.

The american speed advantage was quite pronounced. I tried to bring the spanish within range for a torpedo attack, but a long column is not ideal for that. Better luck might have been detaching the two Spanish PCs at the beginning in their own column and having them engage at close quarters; their 14 knot speed might have allowed them to get a torpedo off....or not. 8 knots was, however, too slow to effectively maneuver a long, 7-ship column in fairly close proximity to the enemy.

Another advantage the americans had was firing first. Many of the Spanish ships had SUNK results for their 6-column; if Bill had rolled closer to average the battle would have been a turn or two shorter.

The next fight should be a bit closer, as the disparity in speed and guns is not quite as pronounced.

When the speed differance is great enough, the slower force is at a huge disadvantage...a 15knot BB may not be grossly outmanuevered by an 18 or 20knot cruiser...but those pathetic 8knot monitors and old junk might as well be stationary to a 15knot ship.

tim wrote tht the spainish ambushed the americans. when i asked if the americans could engage at range and with a combined force i was asking if the americans had the option of regrouping from the initail ambush and using their supieior fire power to destroy the spanish as they tried to engage. this theroy is not as sound with one monitor out of the battle. did the americans suffer navigation penalties for entering at night? there were 2 well manned mine feilds correct? i am curious was it possible for the spainish to anchor in such a way to have there guns effective even in a night scenerio? what was the deciding factor in attacking at night?

i find that speed dose not mean as much as it may seem in tims rules set. just because the americans could go faster than the spainish dose not really matter since moves are plotted and you have to remain in formation. what dose everyone else think?

how many turns did the fight take? 8

how much manuvering was done by the spanish? Alot, but the American ships moved 2-3 times faster

the description makes it seem as thought they were stationary? No they moved, a whole big 8 knots a turn

did the shore batteries engage? Night time, they couldn't see us. This is how Dewey did it.

why did the americans engage after they were attacked by the spanish?
Americans were on the offensive on this, what do you mean?

was it fessible to reform the flotillas and assult at range or was the battle to closly joined? how big was the bay? No and 3 table's size.

how many turns did the fight take? how much manuvering was done by the spanish? the description makes it seem as thought they were stationary? did the shore batteries engage? why did the americans engage after they were attacked by the spanish? was it fessible to reform the flotillas and assult at range or was the battle to closly joined? how big was the bay?

I'm not at all surprised by the Manilla bay outcome - that battle seemed completely unwinable from the Spanish side pretty much no matter what you did.

Even the campaign option to pull up anchor and run for it didn't seem like a good idea with all the whopping 8 knot ships in the force.

I like the idea of things being marked. Some players can be jerks about recognizing that you have them (not talking about our battle). Sorry you weren't able to make it tonight, we had much fun destroying Manilla Bay.

They score was this:
Americans ships lost: 0
American ships with minor hull damage: 2
American ships with some damage to guns: 2
Spanish ships lost: All of them.....6-7?
Effect of mines: Took a monitor out of action
Effect of Torpedos: 0
American VPs earned: 25 covers the Spanish upgrades and lost vessels

Anyway, maybe we should ask it's opinion on games more often. It is amusing eh? Maybe it will figure out that it's opinion isn't wanted.

Bill - you're right it didn't really matter that it was the lead ship which was slowed, all that mattered is that one of them was slowed to a speed at which it couldn't disengage from you...

As for the speed/interception rules, I realize the intention is to keep this a simple set of rules - so I guess we stick with the GM arbitration (and just periodically complain about it;-) rather than try and create some overly complicated "grand tactical" hex movement system or something.
Although - if you are going to presume things like break downs at high speed and reserve superior coal, maybe the tactical movement rules need to be modified to include them?

As another random thought (and not to create too much work for the GM) but what would you think of a small wood base for the ships, with the fire arcs and possibly even the "crossing the T" zone marked on them? They'd be a minor bit of work to make, but would eliminate most of the questions/debates in game.

PS Ahh the peanut gallery steps out of the shadows..how amusing

when would you consider someone uninvolved in the campagin? just want to note this forum is for tims games not personal insults or attacks. if you have such strong feelings about a post i think that you should possibly not participat or make a private reply. this forum can be used to express honest opinions or to "mudsling" the choice is up to everyone that posts on this page. I just felt someone had to state that before some people took the insults too far. i do have a question for the american commander? Why did you not bottle the spannish fleet up in NY harbor as you suggested was possible? Were you affraid of civillian casualties or were the odds bad for catching the spainish?

i am enjoying the post you both seem to leave for me. i am glad that after all your bickering you both can get together to defend each other. It is also nice to see that you both take the game so seriously as to make slanderous and unfounded remarks about an unidetified person. keep up the paronoid and good work

I changed the time stamp setting for the fourums. Just posting this to see if it works.
-DC

Eric, after looking at the AR Katahdin, you are not to blame for not recoginizing it. But I still feel it did the same amount of damage as the TBDs. All of your cruisers are the same so saying that the lead one was damaged is moot. Anyway, to note to the peanut gallery, I played this masked stranger once in a naval battle with him and he stunk it up and his ships were sunk in battle. He will twist your words so I won't comment again on anything he or anyone not involved in this game say again.

Amazing, a troll - who'd have believed it...
Shall we just drop all pretense of misreading posts, snide comments and veiled insult? It's so much more satisfying to leap right to the mudslinging part of it.

Nowhere did I take "full responsibility" for the command desicions - I didn't, neither did Dage - we sort of talked over what we were going to do and went with it, simple consensus. We blundered - it happens, get over it.

As for being surprised by the Vesuvius, we knew they had purchased an additional cruiser, a BB and 2 monitors I think is what we were told - we were in fact NOT told ship names or classes, nor which squadron they were assigned to. Also - amazingly enough the Spanish command did not have copies of the american ship stats or look at them after the campaign started...ya know, like the rules said? The model (miniature) for the Vesuvius was brand new, Tim had made it that weekend so there was no way to have recognized it - quite frankly it looked like an armored ram or monitor.

PS Might want to include a name or sig file if you aren't going to bother to register...annonymous posters get lumped into the peanut gallery.

I find it interesting that bill decided not to bottle the spainsh up in an unfriendly harbor. I really belive that with a mistake of that magnitude more mention should be made of it. Basically the suprme american commander has said that he had the abillity to completely destroy the spanish force which would have probably ended the war. It is not suprising to see that he anxiously awaits the manila battle hoping that his mistake will not matter. I also have to point out that i find it hard to belive that the spainish can claim to not know that the dynamite crusier was present. everyone had copies of each others ships before the battle began and it was stated that the americans purchased that ship before the battle started.

Well i assume that this peanut gallery that eric reffers to is very happy that he keeps them so well informed. I think perhaps he miss understands what my position in this battle is.
tim asked me to post comments about my own analysis of the events surrounding his campagin i am sorry if anyone feels ofended but i believe i ahve posted an unbiased oppinion of the tragic defeat of the spainish navy. i would like to point out that if dage accepted responsiblity for thoose horrible orders then why dose eric take full responsibillity in his first post?

As is no doubt obvious my version of the Spanish-American war is primarily a tactical game, with operational level considerations heavily abstracted and run by the gamemaster. If we wanted to play the situation on the operational level some time I have a copy of 1898 by Avalanch games. It has a good map of the carribean and rules for coaling, searching etc. Tactical battles could be run using my rules or using the rather abstract rules provided in 1898. (In a way 1898 is the opposite of my rules, detailed operational simulation with simple "battle board" combat resolution). Potentially the game could be run double blind. All it would take is someone with sufficient interest and enthusiasm to run it.

"The question of why it went to table top in the first place is a valid one to me - we had more than a 10knot advantage over the american conglomerate speed, yet the American big guns started pratically in range already?"

Eric's question is certainly valid and there are several considerations that may answer his question:

1. Historically cruising speeds are much less than top combat speed. As a result slower ships did sometimes intercept faster ships, also slower ships sometimes evaded faster ships. Of course once in sight the faster ship could generally disengage is so desired.(As an aside printed cruising speeds are misleading, ships would be slowed by lower quality coal, dirty hulls, engine machinery in need of maintanence, wave conditions, random equipment breakdown, ships might speed up due to superior coal {Spanish ships sometimes carried a reserve of English coal, the best, for emergency top speed}, and moving individually at "flank speed", risking damage to the engines.)
2. I assumed that Spanish cruising speed would be at a normal rate, to conserve coal, and that the American speed would be at a faster pace, they would be a maximum feasible cruising speed,in a desperate attempt at interception.
3. In SA war both sides generally knew more or less what was up with the other, I assumed that spies and/or neutral merchants generated intelligence which had been received by Admiral Sampson prior to the actual bombardment of New York harbor, and that he was already racing in that direction.
4. Under perfect visibility the Spanish would have seen the smoke from the US fleet long before seeing the US ships, I rolled a die and determined that visibility was degraded until the ships were closer.
5. I deployed the fleets in opposite corners of the table. This meant that the Spanish, had they chosen to do so, could have turned directly away from the Americans had they wished to do so. In this case if unlucky they might have taken one or two long range hits from the BBs, which could not have penetrated hull armor at long range. Any slight damage would have been instantly repaired on return to Spain. In other words the effect of Spanish disengagement would have identical to the effect of turning away and running from smoke clouds on the horizon.
6. I felt that in one sense deploying the fleets was to the advantage of the Spanish, they got a good look at the American fleet and still had the choice to run, fight or manuever. Of course choices aren't always good, it also gave the Spaniards a chance to screw up.

More later

Bill Stein said...

The only reason the Texas wasn't with the rest of the BBs is that it can't cross the Atlantic, but it is a full battleship any other way. It was assigned to Schley's Flying Squadron but perhaps in defense it might be with the rest of the BBs.

Either way, we were stationed to block the Spainish in. If its easier to think of it, we could have blocked you in port at New York and hung back and watch our Forts decimate you or have you sail out 1 at a time at the US Navy.

Also, I recommend more fire being directed at the "little surprises" the US Navy brings to battle. The Dynamite Cruiser should never been allowed to live for 2 rounds, but I guess bad rolls can force unpredictable scenes to unfold before our eyes.

Is wasn't superior armor on the BB side, it was the lack of fire being returned by the Spainish that determined much of the battle. By the time the Monitors got to the battle the Spainish were in a very unorganized flight from battle. I remember one turn that the two Spainish columns were facing each other and within about and 1 inch and a 1/2 of each other (maybe I should of been a dick and measured).

Dage's column daringly turned toward the Monitors in a look of suicide while Eric's units were about to break for it. That turn Dage's lead ship had all of its guns shot off as 12 hits were scored from the BBs which got within 20" of the ACs. Was the plan really to get in a few shots and ride off or was it more like this: We spanked NY, lets blow there Navy away with our fattened fleet of ACs? Towards the end of the battle I found my BBs between a fleet of gunless ACs.

Anyway, I am excited to see the Manilla Bay battle play out and see what you spent for VPs there. Will the Oregon be there? Does it matter?

Eric said....

It's not a matter of grasping Tims rules - nor has anyone complained of them. I'm curious exactly what you are insinuating about a battle that you weren't at, especially since Dage was commanding 7 of 11 spanish ships in that fight.

The plan - such as it was - was to evade past the American BBs at medium range, coincidentally crossing them in the process, then disenage and leave - with the monitors/support out of the fight completely. A plan that Dage had no problem with I might add just for the peanut gallery.

This plan went to hell once an unidentified american ship turned out to be the "Dynamite" cruiser and turned out to be significantly faster than allowed for - it got in range of the ACs, survived a substantial amount of fire because it is hard to score on (3 or 4 "miss" columns) - and scored a lucky hit slowing the lead AC to 15knots - the same speed as the American BBs which it was already in range of.

After that we got sucked into trying to slow down the BBs with damage so we could get all the ACs away...rather than just scattering as we should have. (Also note at this point that it was 8 ACs vs 3 BBs - no other ships were engaged for several turns in here) That was a freely admitted mistake on the part of spanish command. (Once again - both of us, for the peanut gallery)

The simple truth is that the 3 American BBs outfought all 8 Spanish ACs, partly because its harder to maneuver 8 ships to have proper bearing/range against a single group of 3, partly because we were *slightly* and I stress slightly unlucky in our die rolling and mostly just because the BBs are that much tougher than the ACs - we lost guns fairly rapidly while the BBs didn't.

The question of why it went to table top in the first place is a valid one to me - we had more than a 10knot advantage over the american conglomerate speed, yet the American big guns started pratically in range already? The reluctance to turn and sail directly away once minis are on the table is also an issue - who really wants to spend a couple hours moving ships and "adjusting" their position every other turn because you are sailing off the edge?

I'm not trying to "blame" the loss on anything but spanish command mistakes - but that doesn't mean there aren't other issues from the battle which can be discussed. I really couldn't care less that we (and yes that includes me for the peanut gallery) made a huge tactical mistake in engaging - show me the person among us who claims they haven't made that kind of goof more than once in some game and I'll show you a liar.

Murph said.....

Well from what i have seen of the game Bob, Dage, and carl have managed to grasp the tactics requiered to play tims rules set quickly and well. I find it ammussing that the americans deployed and fought the battle in almost the same manner that they fought the test battle. If the spainish had not stupidly tryed to engage the supieor force they could have destroyed the american battleships without any interferance from thee monitors. i wonder whos decision was it to engage the americans? how did ships with a 5 knot advantage gat cought by speed 15 ships? I think the spainnish plan was excelent, they would have won the game if it was followed. The americans won the battle because of spanish mistakes not american success.

Eric replied.....

The hit the Vesuvius scored was just as the ACs were passing the battleline - making what we then intended to be the only pass. Once the lead ship of my division was slowed to 15 knots we were stuck in range of the battleline unless we slowed it or abandoned the ship. That is what led to the melee - the torpedo hit on the Texas occurred too late to matter and frankly slowed a ship that wasn't a major concern of ours at the time.

I fully agree that we should have just turned and sailed off the board at the start, doing anything else was in fact a stupid mistake - freely admitted as such. In hindsight, having screwed up and engaged - we should have issued the scatter order as soon as my lead ship was slowed...but /shrug we got caught up in fighting the battle.

I do think there is a natural (or unnatural) tendency once the miniatures are out on the table to "do something" even if running off would be better.

Bill Stein said....

Hmm...either way, if I had speedy ships and had just bombarded Spain, I would have beat feet and sailed away. We both have more ships on defense than on attack so I would have forced the issue. Do you think America would have let Sampson sit at home after that attack. If you had out run us the US govt would have forced us to attack Spain, where you have some BBs and torpedo boats waiting I presume. That, and if the battle was at Spain, how many monitor's do you think are sea worthy for that?

Another point to add, the TBDs are worth the same amount as the DC Vesuvius, and did the same thing. The CB Texas was slowed down by 6 knots, Eric's lead AC, by 5. Bob merely pulled the Texas out of formation right away and kept going. Had the Spainish done this to the similarily damaged AC, would there have been much fighting? As it was, my BBs were consistently firing more at the ACs than is the case for the opposite. Seems to me that the Vesuvius did the same as the TBD, just the American's adapted to damage to ships, where Spainish columns kept the slow ships in front till it was too late.