WAS Scenarios

[Der Leiter]

What engagements would you be interested in?

[Belisarius]

Yes. :)

Seriously, There are a lot that leap to mind (many will have to wait for expansions, of course):

Pacific Theater
Sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse (Perhaps with some "what if?" variations, such as British air support from land-based Buffaloes or the aircraft carrier that was supposed to be with them).
Java Sea (Perhaps as a campaign with Balikpapan, sunda Straight, etc.)
Savo Island (Perhaps as a campaign along with Cape Esperance, Guadalcanal, Tassafaronga and the other engagements that I've undoubtedly forgotten)
Coral Sea, Midway, Philippine Sea, and other actions where the surface fleets didn't actually see each other (Let's see how the game mechanics actually reflect airpower v. surface ships)
Leyte Gulf (All the various parts)
Komandorskie Islands
Wake Island (Probably need some house rules for shore guns)

Mediterranean Theater
Taranto (Again, air power alone v. surface ships)
Matapan
Mers-el-Kebir
Malta Convoys (Lots of small-scale battles; put those merchant ships to use)
Various Italian v. British actions (Calabria, Cape Spartivento, Cape Bon, First and Second Battles of Sirte, etc.)

Atlantic/North Sea/English Channel
Hunting the Bismarck
River Plate
Scharnhorst and Gniesenau's Channel Dash
Scharnhorst v. Duke of York
Intercepting Murmansk convoys (Using both U-Boats and surface ships)

There are probably more, but I can't think of them right off hand, and this should keep us all busy for a while, at least.... ;)

[unc_samurai]

How about Taffy 3 vs. Kurita's Central Force? A good scenario for letting a novice take on a much more skilled player. The core remnant of the Japanese surface force versus a handful of tin cans and escort carriers.

[Sean-Khan]

Convoy -hunting :) U-boats & Condors vs. freighters & destroyers etc.

[Muenchausen]

I'm hoping after the first two sets we have enough of a representation because I would like to try a lot of these battles. http://www.combinedfleet.com/map.htm

[MarcusAurelius]

Since the first set focuses on the early war (presumably 1939-42), the first scenarios I'd like to see would be based on this period.

We won't have miniatures for enough of the key units involved to accurately recreate many of the major battles yet. But I think a number of smaller actions would make great scenarios — even if you have to proxy a few units for now.

1940
First Battle of Narvik
Second Battle of Narvik
Battle of Cape Spada
Convoy HX-79

1941
Battle of the Tarigo Convoy
Convoy OB-318
Battle of the Duisburg Convoy
Battle of Cape Bon

1942
Battle of Makassar Strait
Battle of Badung Strait
Attack on Sydney Harbor
Convoy PQ-17
Battle of Cape Esperance
Battle of Tassafaronga
Battle of the Barents Sea

[TheJudge]

There are a million possible scenarios, hoever, without the right ships released, it will be difficult to pull these off historically.

One thing I have talked about which could get really involved and interesting is doing a scenario that involves both land and sea forces using both mini games. A perfect example would be the battles for Guadalcanal, the Americans landing on the Island, trying to hold Henderson Field and the Japanese trying to reinforce it and supply their troops via the Tokyo Express so on a much larger scale battlefield, you'd have the main island surrounded by water and some smaller islands and could play out both the naval and ground forces scenarios at the same time.

This definitely intrigues me.

As for basic scenarios, Ive already voiced my displeasure of set 1 not having all the ships released to be able to do a Bismarck scenario as well as River Plate but WOTC insists on releasing units by year so we have ships that weren't even built when those very important and historic battles occurred and also trying to fit 10 pounds of crap into a 5 pund bag by releasing ships from almost every warring nation! Suffice it to say, sets 1 and 2 will be dreadfully incomplete for the more historic gamers.

This is where I differ from the A&AM grognards who insist on everything being historically accurate because I am less knowledgeable about the army end of the spectrum and don't care as much but the naval part, I do care. I don't want to do Chase the Bismarck without the Sheffield or River Plate without the Cumberland but I'll survive....for now. :)

[Joisey]

I'm hoping after the first two sets we have enough of a representation because I would like to try a lot of these battles. http://www.combinedfleet.com/map.htm

That's a GREAT site. One stop shopping to write any WAS scenario you may want.

Unfortunately, I think nearly every historical scenario is going to have to wait until Set II is published, at the least.

[DooMNaToR]

That's a GREAT site. One stop shopping to write any WAS scenario you may want.

Unfortunately, I think nearly every historical scenario is going to have to wait until Set II is published, at the least.

I agree, as there are only 64 units in the first set. But it will be great if some of these battles can be played after two sets.

[Der Leiter]

That's a GREAT site. One stop shopping to write any WAS scenario you may want.

I've enjoyed reading that site, a lot of interesting stuff in there.

Unfortunately, I think nearly every historical scenario is going to have to wait until Set II is published, at the least.

I have to say I'm really dissapointed with many people seem to have adopted this attitude (and sorry Joisey, I don't mean to pick on you in particular). AAM Base Set had even less units than this, yet still more than enough to do scenarios. If worse comes to worse you proxy something in that's close enough. The Americans still don't have their own MG in AAM but noone I know of balks at using the US in historical games.

Yes there's plenty of more ships to come out, and yes not everyone got everything they wanted. The game is still a lot of fun if you let it be.



Anyways, back to the topic of the thread... I think perhaps I should have clarified to 'pick 3 battles.' It is a bit of a problem narrowing it down to that few though. Perhaps one for the Atlantic, one for the Pacific (currently doing Coral Sea), and one... other?

[XAos]

If worse comes to worse you proxy something in that's close enough. The Americans still don't have their own MG in AAM but noone I know of balks at using the US in historical games.

The difference between a US .50 cal and a UK vickers is a lot less than the difference between 2 classes of heavy cruiser.
Substituting a different class of heavy cruiser (e.g. Exeter for Baltimore) would be like swapping a 1939 Matilda for an 1944 Sherman. It might be even more extreem than that. The spread of weapons technologies in ships varied from ships built during WW-I to late war ships with radar controlled guns & automatic loaders. It would be like substituting a WW-I tank with a T-10.

[Joisey]

Well, we do have enough to do subs attacking shipping. Even convoys with escorts.

And I guess we could do Lepanto with some substitutions.

Ditto Battle of the Coral Sea. And Pearl if you want to abstract Battleship row as simple a fixed target to score hits on.

Still, it won't be until Set II that things can really get rockin.

[Cruizin2000]

There are a million possible scenarios, hoever, without the right ships released, it will be difficult to pull these off historically.

One thing I have talked about which could get really involved and interesting is doing a scenario that involves both land and sea forces using both mini games. A perfect example would be the battles for Guadalcanal, the Americans landing on the Island, trying to hold Henderson Field and the Japanese trying to reinforce it and supply their troops via the Tokyo Express so on a much larger scale battlefield, you'd have the main island surrounded by water and some smaller islands and could play out both the naval and ground forces scenarios at the same time.

This definitely intrigues me.

As for basic scenarios, Ive already voiced my displeasure of set 1 not having all the ships released to be able to do a Bismarck scenario as well as River Plate but WOTC insists on releasing units by year so we have ships that weren't even built when those very important and historic battles occurred and also trying to fit 10 pounds of crap into a 5 pund bag by releasing ships from almost every warring nation! Suffice it to say, sets 1 and 2 will be dreadfully incomplete for the more historic gamers.

This is where I differ from the A&AM grognards who insist on everything being historically accurate because I am less knowledgeable about the army end of the spectrum and don't care as much but the naval part, I do care. I don't want to do Chase the Bismarck without the Sheffield or River Plate without the Cumberland but I'll survive....for now. :)


I thought that the Battle of the River Plate had the Ajax, Achilles, and Exeter going after the Graf Spee. Cumberland? Wasn't that a "what if" because one of the ships was going to be repair or something? I could be wrong...

C2000

[Der Leiter]

Well, we do have enough to do subs attacking shipping. Even convoys with escorts.

And I guess we could do Lepanto with some substitutions.

Ditto Battle of the Coral Sea. And Pearl if you want to abstract Battleship row as simple a fixed target to score hits on.

Still, it won't be until Set II that things can really get rockin.

I know we don't have everything we need, and when making scenarios I'm constantly having to ask myself "What's close enough?" However I still think that they've done a nice job of at least provided enough units to cover the different theatres and make some nice scenarios; once the next set is released we can begin filling in the proxies with the proper ships.

[Belisarius]

And I guess we could do Lepanto with some substitutions.

I didn't see any galleys or galleases on the relase list. Or am I missing something? :confused:

[Muenchausen]

First opportunity I got to post and I appreciate everyones input. I know set one is going to be severly hampered in playing any of those historical scenerios I referenced in my earlier post. I also believe that while set II will add some much needed units there will still be a lot of missing ships after its release. I think someone posted in another thread that there were some 900 + A/C's, BB's & CU's in WWII. Set I and set II will give us 96 of these ships. That still leaves 800 + ships yet to be released.

I like to play historic builds in AAM and that's where my interest lies in AANM. But I will not let that ruin the game for me. I'm willing to substitute units to make the best possible navey to reflect a historic battle. For example I'll use Midway. Primarily Midway was a conflict fought between seven carrriers. Four Japanese and three American carriers. The US had a few Cruisers and destroyers and the Japanese had a massive fleet of Battlehips, Cruisers and destroyers. Most of these ships didn't play a roll other than anti air support. So if I get three USS Enterprises and Four Akaigi's I should be able to re-enact the Midway battle. Will it be historical? Not in its entirety but as more ships become available I will make changes to make it more historical. If the game lasts long enough and I hope it does. I would like to see at least one ship of every class represented.

[Count_Ciano]

Here's another excellent site that covers not only the Pacific theater, but the Atlantic/Arctic and Mediterranean as well:

http://www.navweaps.com/index_oob/index_oob.htm

Enjoy! :D

[Joisey]

I didn't see any galleys or galleases on the relase list. Or am I missing something? :confused:

Meant Taranto---oopsy.

For the allies, all you need is lots of swordfish planes, which are in Set I. Their carriers are off map during the raid. And there are plenty of BB's and cruisers that can stand in for the Italian fleet.

[TheJudge]

I thought that the Battle of the River Plate had the Ajax, Achilles, and Exeter going after the Graf Spee. Cumberland? Wasn't that a "what if" because one of the ships was going to be repair or something? I could be wrong...

C2000

No, I don't think you are wrong, I think I was, I was just posting from memory so the Cumberland might have been one of the ships that was on station when Graf Spee got scuttled. Other ships were on the way but were many hours or even days away but the British got the word out that other ships were waiting for Graf Spee so the Captain knowing he couldn't win, scuttled the ship to save his crew.

[TheJudge]

I also agree that scenarios can certainly be played without each individually named ship since that would likely be impossible anyway, we simply won't see every single ship ever made that fought in WW II unless this game gets 3-4 sets per year for the next 20 years. ;)

However, I also will not let that ruin my fun since other ships can be had and used to simulate the actual battles.

I still think it is rather goofy that the Bismarck scenario will be missing the Prince of Wales and Prinz Eugen, ships that actually fired during the battle! I imagine we will get those in the next set, I would hope.

[Muenchausen]

If in fact there were only about 900 Cruiser's, A/C's and Battlerships, at two sets per year, it would only take five years to get the "Capitol" ships. After 10sets we'll have so many Destroyers, Torpedo boats, Planes, Ect...... , we will not know what to do with all of them. Now if they plan on releaseing named versions of Liberty ships, then yes, were at 20 years or more to get them all. I hope the SS Jeremiah O'Brien is a one time deal.

[TheJudge]

I agree and am fairly annoyed that merchant ships are worthy of an uncommon slot. They better be really good!

For example, to do a PQ17 scenario, you need roughly 42 merchant ships! That will take a godzillion dollars to get that many since you get like 1 uncommon per pack and there are a bunch of other uncommons! Merchant ships will be tough to get actually.

This game, to do properly, is going to cost a LOT of dough.

[MarcusAurelius]

I agree and am fairly annoyed that merchant ships are worthy of an uncommon slot. They better be really good!

For example, to do a PQ17 scenario, you need roughly 42 merchant ships! That will take a godzillion dollars to get that many since you get like 1 uncommon per pack and there are a bunch of other uncommons! Merchant ships will be tough to get actually.

This game, to do properly, is going to cost a LOT of dough.

For now, the German Nordmark supply ship and Japanese Kinai Maru can probably serve as proxies for Allied merchant ships in convoy scenarios. Also, I'm not sure you'll need miniatures for all 42 ships to accurately represent the convoy. That alone would take up 21 map zones — without considering the escorting destroyers and corvettes.

I wouldn't mind seeing 1 or 2 slots in future sets allocated to other auxiliary ships. Possibilities for the Allies include a Type C2 or Type C3 all-purpose cargo ship, a T2 tanker, a Hog Islander cargo ship, or a Victory ship. This would help fill out the convoy ranks.

[TheJudge]

I don't have plans to use the supplied starter maps. ;)

My map will encompass a 6' x 3.5' table so I will be able to hopefully, accurately play this game. Having seen a picture of the map with ships on it, it does not look like it will play real well on a small table top. Single ship skirmishes do not interest me a whole lot, I'd much rather have full fleet actions involving 20+ ships but thats just me.

I also have in mind to do scenarios that use the whole table for sea actions, as well as land operations using the other game. Guadalcanal and Leyte immediately come to mind and the merchant ships and supply operations will be critical parts of those games. Japan had a lot of troops on Guadalcanal and not being able to properly re-supply them was one of the main reasons they lost that battle, and many others in the Pacific. Another interesting possibility is doing North Africa, again trying to reinforce and re-supply your ground units is HUGE in the order of battle and Britain and the US gained the upper hand by sinking convoy after convoy of German and Italian shipping.

I think that will be awesome to try and play out, although it will make for some very long games.

[MarcusAurelius]

I don't have plans to use the supplied starter maps. ;)

My map will encompass a 6' x 3.5' table so I will be able to hopefully, accurately play this game. Having seen a picture of the map with ships on it, it does not look like it will play real well on a small table top. Single ship skirmishes do not interest me a whole lot, I'd much rather have full fleet actions involving 20+ ships but thats just me.

Sounds like some great ideas. If you're looking for really big convoy scenarios, 1943 saw some truly epic battles. One I'd eventually like to try is ONS-5 — where an Allied convoy fended off attacks by 4 different wolfpacks comprised of 55 German U-boats.

While the Germans sank 12 ships, they lost 6 U-boats in the process. Another 7 had to abort due to severe battle damage. Many consider this the turning point in the Battle of the Atlantic.

[Joisey]

I don't have plans to use the supplied starter maps. ;)

My map will encompass a 6' x 3.5' table so I will be able to hopefully, accurately play this game. Having seen a picture of the map with ships on it, it does not look like it will play real well on a small table top. Single ship skirmishes do not interest me a whole lot, I'd much rather have full fleet actions involving 20+ ships but thats just me.

I also have in mind to do scenarios that use the whole table for sea actions, as well as land operations using the other game. Guadalcanal and Leyte immediately come to mind and the merchant ships and supply operations will be critical parts of those games. Japan had a lot of troops on Guadalcanal and not being able to properly re-supply them was one of the main reasons they lost that battle, and many others in the Pacific. Another interesting possibility is doing North Africa, again trying to reinforce and re-supply your ground units is HUGE in the order of battle and Britain and the US gained the upper hand by sinking convoy after convoy of German and Italian shipping.

I think that will be awesome to try and play out, although it will make for some very long games.

Me too. I've got two sheets of 4 x 8 MDF that can be set up on sawhorses for an 8 x 8 foot table. I'm going to overlay a hex grid and use an SFB 32 impulse chart to do tactical movement. I can use the supplied maps to track strategic movement on a divided map, so there will be hidden movement. I'll just get two starter sets to have two sets of the game maps. That would be easy to set up on two different tables to facilitate hidden strategic movement. Let the carrier duels begin!