Long Lance Torpedoes

[Walgers]

Those Long Lance Torpedoes are, I believe, the strongest weapons in the game. For the second time in a row they easilly sunk my USS Tennessee.

In both occasions it had one damage. Then the first battle the Jintsu launched two succesfull torpedoes, sinking my pride. Today, the Yukikaze did this the same way.

[DeathsHead420]

i completly agree with you long lance torpedoes are the shet!

[Lagduf]

Sounds like some lucky torpedo rolls - I wasn't so fortunate in the first two games I played.

I agree though, torpedos are extremely deadly. Thankfully submarines are slow, so in a worst case scenario most ships could generally out run them.

Don't forget to fight fire with fire...things like "Submerged Shot" are a great way to deal with the opponents subs.

[TheFoeHammer]

I was so scared of them today I killed two Yukikazes before I started shooting the enemy battleships.

[Aaronious]

Sounds like some lucky torpedo rolls - I wasn't so fortunate in the first two games I played.

I agree though, torpedos are extremely deadly. Thankfully submarines are slow, so in a worst case scenario most ships could generally out run them.

Don't forget to fight fire with fire...things like "Submerged Shot" are a great way to deal with the opponents subs.

Only problem is torpedos aren't just for subs, Jintsu and Yukikaze are both ships :>)

[Sean-Khan]

Yup, they are fearsome, but Japanese pay for them, and aerial & gunnery attacks & casualties are resolved before torpedoes, otherwise they would be the ultimate weapon or cost astronomical amount of points.

[Joisey]

A Extended Range 5 BB can probably sink two light ships charging for a torpedo run before they get into range. That said, the Japanese cruisers are probably the best in the game because they do get that extra torpedo attack at range 3.

[Big Kahuna]

I don't have that many ships but I should say few, very few IJN subs had long lance torpedos and these were all deck mounted and of limited value. They had the second best torpedo a 21 inch shape charged design, but it was not a Mk93 long lance which is 24 inches. Also not all IJN surface ships had long lance.

One other thing on my mind, I think there was only one sub sinking a sub with a torpedo in all of WWII.

[jeffgoboom]

The Jintsu and Yukikaze have awesome firepower with their torpedoes. I'm not sure why you would pay the extra for a Jintsu though. They are both surface ships and should be priority targets of opposing shipping and planes. That's why I'm beginning to think the I-19 might be better - even for the extra points. ASW attacks have to be in the same hex unless its a submerged shot from an opposing sub. So the only real threats are opposing subs at distance and planes. Zekes are cheap enough to take out planes. Low cost units swarming the sub would be another problem but I'm thinking a supporting force of ships to help clear threats from a distance would work.

Maybe this:
35 Kongo x1
23 Shokaku x1
18 A6M2 Zeke x3
26 I-19 x2

99 Total

What do you think? Taking Objectives with a force like this is secondary - the primary purpose is neutralizing threats.

[Walgers]

ASW attacks have to be in the same hex unless its a submerged shot from an opposing sub.

Even opposing subs have to be in the same sector.

[XAos]

Long lance is very random. if you roll above average 6's you can win. But the ships cost way too much for their defense values. A few aircraft can chop them up before they get close.
I checked Jane's None of the Japanse subs had the 24" tubes needed for Long Lance.

[Joisey]

Even opposing subs have to be in the same sector.

Where does it say that in the rules?

[Autarch]

It says it in the SA, local enemy subs.

[TheFoeHammer]

It says it in the SA, local enemy subs.

And local is in the glossary as same sector.

[Krusty Burger]

Imagine Long-Lance Torps with a unit that also has Wolfpack. :eek:

[jeffgoboom]

Even opposing subs have to be in the same sector.

Good deal. I'm sure I would have caught that the next time I played. :rolleyes: I think that just helps make I-19s better than the destroyers and cruisers with long lance even if the sub doesn't have them. The subs attacks are large enough and keeping a Kongo and carrier 3 to 4 hexes back of the subs should provide plenty of protection against swarms of smaller crafts.

[Barry Kendall]

Are you assuming in that Japanese OB that your I-19s would do double duty as ASW protection for the surface ships if your opponent has subs? Seems chancy not to include a destroyer or two.

[Kaufschtick]

One other thing on my mind, I think there was only one sub sinking a sub with a torpedo in all of WWII.

And that was at the end of "Run Silent, Run Deep".:)

Seriously though, I was thinking just the same thing. In game terms, at present, I think it may be a necessary evil to help keep subs in check.

[IXJac]

I'm thinking more of an SA that would be given to all destroyers and destroyer escorts that would make them much harder to kill with subs. Destroyers are already very vulnerable to aircraft and heavies. They should enjoy some immunity against subs, given that historically destroyers were the hunters, not the hunted in that relationship.

[Kaufschtick]

I'm thinking more of an SA that would be given to all destroyers and destroyer escorts that would make them much harder to kill with subs. Destroyers are already very vulnerable to aircraft and heavies. They should enjoy some immunity against subs, given that historically destroyers were the hunters, not the hunted in that relationship.

You should watch an old sub flick called "The Ememy Below". Good flick, takes a look at this relationship in a one on one fight between a sub and a DE.

At one point, there is a line that goes something like this...

"O.K. then, tell me why destroyers up in the North Atlantic hunt subs in groups of three?!"

[IXJac]

You should watch an old sub flick called "The Ememy Below". Good flick, takes a look at this relationship in a one on one fight between a sub and a DE.

At one point, there is a line that goes something like this...

"O.K. then, tell me why destroyers up in the North Atlantic hunt subs in groups of three?!"

Because the subs hunted in packs of a dozen or more? 1-on-1 a destroyer was more than a match for a submarine as its speed and shallow draft made it difficult to torpedo. Destroyers often operated together to bracket escaping U-boats with depth charge and hedgehog patterns but that was to improve the chances of a kill. A single destroyer might be hard for a sub to kill, but with limited weapons like depth charges and ASW mortars a single destroyer could also be evaded by a good sub captain.

Most sub skippers when faced with a destroyer would only run. It's significant that those few who fought back (and won) gained heroic reputations as "destroyer killers."

The statistics (pulled from Clay Blair's definitive works Hitler's U-Boat War - the Hunters and - The Hunted) show who was on top in that relationship pretty well. During the battle of the Atlantic Allied destroyers and destroyer escorts sank between 250-300 U-boats. U-boats in turn accounted for only about 20 destroyers and 20 escorts.

[IXJac]

Anyway, I think the house rule I'm going to suggest to our group is this - all ships with an ASW value gain a 4+ save against submarine torpedo attacks in the same square.

That still allows the subs to get kills against "unaware" destroyers at range, but once the destroyer is in "hunter" mode and doing its depth charge patterns over the sub, the sub had better start praying.

[Thunderjp]

Funny how this turned from a conversation about 'Long Lance' torpedos to subs, even though the I-19 doesn't have Long-Lance Torpedos.

[Kaufschtick]

Because the subs hunted in packs of a dozen or more?

No no, you don't understand. I wasn't asking that as a question, I was just quoting a movie. :D It's just a good flick IMO, is all. Not trying to start a debate over how many subs it takes to do in a destroyer or visa-versa.

Anyway, IMHO I don't see a torpedo save roll being needed for destroyers... yet.

As far as being slightly off topic, I would say that the Sub/ASW issue kinda-sorta goes right along with the topic of the Long Lances being very powerful in this game. 3 hull points of damage from one torpedo hit is pretty brutal, indeed. A couple Long Lance hits will put a hurting on even the mighty USS Iowa.

Which brings up something else off topic (sorta) that I was kinda wondering about. Why didn't they call the "Torpedo Defense 1" SA "Belt Armor 1" SA instead? It doesn't really matter obviously, but I would've thought "Belt Armor" a little more in the spirit of things.:)-Edit, I stand corrected on this. Belt armor turns out to be something different from what I mistakenly thought it was.

[swarbs]

I thought that Belt Armor was designed more for stopping incoming shells, while the later ships were also fitted with anti-torpedo bulges, essentially an extra-wide hull to allow torpedo explosions to dissipate some energy before getting to anything essential. So belt armor would be part of the equation for armor/vital armor, while modern torpedo defences, like bulges, would be accounted for with the torpedo defense SA.

[Kaufschtick]

I did a little quickie "belt armor" search and it seems it was for shells as well as torpedos. I'm no ship expert obviously, but I always thought belt armor was extra armor for torpedo defense. It seems there is a lot more to it than just that, very interesting.:)

I'm really looking forward to learning quite a bit about naval warfare and the ships that fought WWII in the course of this game. My main interests have always been with aircraft, a game they have yet to hint at doing...:(

[Big Kahuna]

The American Bulge design with two layers of STS steel and an angled belt was great against a possible heavy caliber shell, but the void spaces were filled with fluid that transmitted the shock wave and were not effective or would not be effective against torpedo. The problem was found long after ships were being built in underwater caisson testing. So in reality a hit from a long lance or a 21” inch IJN sub torpedo has a very good chance of sinking any BB a float. There was only one 21” strike that I know of against the North Carolina and the flash from the hit had reach the B turret shell handling room. The North Carolina was not handling shells at that time. A long lance has a significantly larger blast cone (shape charge weapon) and IMO it could destroy an Iowa in one hit along large portions of the Iowa’s belt.

The Yamato and the Bismarck are two of only a few ships IMO that could take a long lance hit and mainly because they were very wide at the beam and in the case of the Bismarck there was a thick outside belt. Most long lanced cursers survived ONLY because the damage section just broke off saving the rest of the ship. The BB in general has too much armor for a section just to break off.

[IXJac]

No no, you don't understand. I wasn't asking that as a question, I was just quoting a movie. :D


Ah, sorry. ;)


Which brings up something else off topic (sorta) that I was kinda wondering about. Why didn't they call the "Torpedo Defense 1" SA "Belt Armor 1" SA instead? It doesn't really matter obviously, but I would've thought "Belt Armor" a little more in the spirit of things.:)

Well, belt armour was for shells. It didn't necessarily provide any additional protection against torps. What many battleships had for torpedo protection was "bulge armour", an extra layer of raised armour at the waterline that detonated the torps before they reached the hull proper.

[Kaufschtick]

A long lance has a significantly larger blast cone (shape charge weapon) and IMO it could destroy an Iowa in one hit along large portions of the Iowa’s belt.

The Yamato and the Bismarck are two of only a few ships IMO that could take a long lance hit and mainly because they were very wide at the beam and in the case of the Bismarck there was a thick outside belt. Most long lanced cursers survived ONLY because the damage section just broke off saving the rest of the ship. The BB in general has too much armor for a section just to break off.

Wow, very good stuff. One Long Lance hit on an Iowa. That must have really been one hell of a torpedo, the Long Lance.:)

[Uncle_Joe]

The North Carolina was not an Iowa-class BB. She was her own class (slightly older and a bit smaller).

[swarbs]

The North Carolina was not an Iowa-class BB. She was her own class (slightly older and a bit smaller).

All true except the North Carolina shared a class with the Washington that we have in the first set.

[Uncle_Joe]

Yeah, its interesting that they gave the sister ship instead of the class lead.

[Big Kahuna]

NC is not the Iowa and a 21" sub torpedo is not a long lance. A long lance would hit = bad day on any ship, even a BB of the Iowa design. The best that could be hoped for is a hit along a very thick belt and a very wide ship with lots of compartments to absorb damage, the Bismarck would be a good example.


We see here the STS for the SD and up ships were for decapping shells. To a lesser extent the bulge was suppose to absorb torpedo damage, but in actuality the liquid budge greatly magnified the impact of a torpedo which would cause bulkhead failures all along the ship. A problem only found during late war / after war caisson testing. A shock wave in liquid stress all areas of a container. Older BB had far better coal in her void spaces.
http://www.microworks.net/pacific/ships/battleships/south_dakota.htm

“The deficency of this design was the protection against high explosive underwater hits -- i.e. torpedoes and mines -- which prior designs met by using deformating, elastic bulkheads to absorb much of the energy of the explosion. Now, with an unelastic armor belt in this system, it was of doubtful value.”


So once again, a long lance against the Iowa, or SD = bad juju, and would probably result in the ship to be at LEAST a mission kill (unable to fight or maneuver at battle speed), if not an out right magazine explosion due their very thin hull abreast A/B magazines.

[Kaufschtick]

Well, I guess in this game, it's going to take three of 'em to do the trick.

But the real life historical information, I'm sorry guys call me a geek, but I just find totally fascinating and absorbing. I'll be getting some books soon on all this. There's a lot of amazing stuff to be learned here.

[IXJac]

Wow, very good stuff. One Long Lance hit on an Iowa. That must have really been one hell of a torpedo, the Long Lance.:)

The Japanese invested heavily in torpedo development as a way for their navy to match the more powerful USN through mastery of a few key technologies.

The end result, the Long Lance, was quite simply the best torpedo in WWII, and by a very wide margin. It was faster, had greater range, and more striking power than any other torpedo. It also had a very reliable detonator unlike many other nation's torpedos which often failed to detonate. To top all that off it was wakeless, making it extremely hard to spot. No other torpedo of the war came close to its capability.

The Allies didn't fully grasp the capability of the Long Lance until 1943 when they finally captured one intact and realized just how badly outclassed their own weapons were. In the early days of the Pacific War, the Long Lance, coupled with superior Japanese destroyer and cruiser tactics, allowed the Japanese light forces to win a string of devastating victories over their Allied counterparts.

The Long Lance did have a downside though - because it was propelled by compressed oxygen it was unstable and highly explosive. If a ship carrying Long Lance torpedoes was hit in the wrong place it could sometimes go up like a bomb as its own torpedos detonated.

[DeathsHead420]

I was up against an Iowa the other day with my Tone. Of course the Iowa blew it out of the water with ease but something happenede that I nor my Opp. had expected. During the Torp phase My tone although she was slipping beneath the waves in the saME ZONE AS THE Iowa, I reluctantly rolled it's 3 LLT's and the war gods must of been smiling on me because I rolled 3 six's, even with torp. Def. thats 6 points of hull damage, 9 without it, on the Iowa. Needless to say the Iowa was gone just like that. I wonder which ship hit the sea floor first.:D

[Kaufschtick]

The Japanese invested heavily in torpedo development as a way for their navy to match the more powerful USN through mastery of a few key technologies.

The end result, the Long Lance, was quite simply the best torpedo in WWII, and by a very wide margin. It was faster, had greater range, and more striking power than any other torpedo. It also had a very reliable detonator unlike many other nation's torpedos which often failed to detonate. To top all that off it was wakeless, making it extremely hard to spot. No other torpedo of the war came close to its capability.

The Allies didn't fully grasp the capability of the Long Lance until 1943 when they finally captured one intact and realized just how badly outclassed their own weapons were. In the early days of the Pacific War, the Long Lance, coupled with superior Japanese destroyer and cruiser tactics, allowed the Japanese light forces to win a string of devastating victories over their Allied counterparts.

The Long Lance did have a downside though - because it was propelled by compressed oxygen it was unstable and highly explosive. If a ship carrying Long Lance torpedoes was hit in the wrong place it could sometimes go up like a bomb as its own torpedos detonated.

Man that's good stuff. Time to start keeping an eye out for some good WWII naval history books as I'm just about finished with a biography on U.S. Grant.:cool:

I could sit and shoot the breeze all night long talking about stuff like that, hopefully while enjoying some suds to boot!:D Just ask C2K!

[IXJac]

I was up against an Iowa the other day with my Tone. Of course the Iowa blew it out of the water with ease but something happenede that I nor my Opp. had expected. During the Torp phase My tone although she was slipping beneath the waves in the saME ZONE AS THE Iowa, I reluctantly rolled it's 3 LLT's and the war gods must of been smiling on me because I rolled 3 six's, even with torp. Def. thats 6 points of hull damage, 9 without it, on the Iowa. Needless to say the Iowa was gone just like that. I wonder which ship hit the sea floor first.:D

Not sure I'm reading that right, but the Torpedo Attack phase comes after the Gunnery Phase. All casualties are applied at the end of the phase, thus if the Iowa sank your Tone with his main guns she'd be dead and removed from the board at the end of the Gunnery phase and never would have a chance to fire her torpedos.

[Kaufschtick]

Not sure I'm reading that right, but the Torpedo Attack phase comes after the Gunnery Phase. All casualties are applied at the end of the phase, thus if the Iowa sank your Tone with his main guns she'd be dead and removed from the board at the end of the Gunnery phase and never would have a chance to fire her torpedos.

Yes, by all accounts then, the Tone should have hit the sea bottom first!

But if it were me, I wouldn't say anything for a few days! Enjoy it for a little while first!:D

[DeathsHead420]

But doesn't every thing throughout the turn get to act until the end of a full turn cycle in other words aren't casualties taken at the end of the turn, or is it by the Phase, Slightly confused. Everything happens at the same time

[Arontje]

But doesn't every thing throughout the turn get to act until the end of a full turn cycle in other words aren't casualties taken at the end of the turn, or is it by the Phase, Slightly confused. Everything happens at the same time

Open up counters at the end of every phase!!

[IXJac]

End of phase.

So any ship sunk by an aircraft in the Air Phase dies before the Gunnery Phase, and any ship sunk in the Gunnery Phase dies before the Torpedo Phase.

[Big Kahuna]

Just got my first Yamato... so I'm happy. I just saw my first Iowa, I was sick at looking at the anti-torpedo. Hasbro has no military guys. I could have look at the entire set and told them what was right on vs OFF. The Iowa would be blow to bits by a torpedo.... and um the French BB can't shoot over 3 spaces... as they did not have a sequential fire trigger and their shell fall was all over the place, meaning the can't hit anything at range. The was not fixed to AFTER the war. The German BB were lethal close in and should have far more hit dice at ranges 1 and 2 due to the fact their main guns fire 50% faster. At range the rapid fire does not work as they have to wait for shell fall and the BB have light shells so they fall to about where the Hood would be.... close in only the Yamato would have the same punch.

[DeathsHead420]

Thanks makes sense.