"Battle Report: Coronel/Falklands" Topic

Tried out a scenario I might run at GenCon next year for a WWI demo. Rules used were Naval Thunder: Clash of Dreadnoughts.

Essentially, its the battle of Coronel, followed by the battle of the Falklands. I threw in Canopus for the British just to give them a little bit more punch for Coronel.

Essentially the scenario goes like this:

German East Asia Squadron

Armored Cruisers
Scharnhorst (CA Scharnhorst)
Geneisenau (CA Scharnhorst)

Light Cruisers
Dresden (CL Dresden)
Nurnberg (CL Konigsberg)
Leipzig (CL Bremen)

British Forces Round 1

Armored Cruisers
Good Hope (CA Drake)
Monmouth (CA Monmouth)

Light Cruisers
Glasgow (CL Bristol)

Pre-Dreadnought Battleship
Canopus (B Canopus)

Both German armored cruisers start with elite crews. All British ships in round 1 start with green crews.

Canopus starts out trailing the British force by some distance, representing the British cruisers leaping ahead to catch the Germans. This invites defeat in detail unfortunately. . . but Canopus was able to get a few shots in at long range before the lead British ships were annihilated.

As expected the British got their clocks cleaned. Good Hope was aflame and going down by turn 4. Gneisenau sustained minor damage, although took a pesky rudder hit that was soon repaired. Scharnhorst did absorb some damage from letting the British cruisers and their 6" guns get in too close as well as a lucky salvo from Canopus, but not too bad overall.

The Germans were a little worried about Canopus, but pressed in and finished her off with heavy 8.2" gunfire at close before she could deal too much damage in return. Leipzig was sunk by 6" shellfire from Monmouth after Good Hope went down, and the British player (me) realized that taking out one of the German armored cruisers was a lost cause at that point. The other two German light cruisers came through round 1 completely unscathed as the British had concentrated on the armored cruisers.

The Germans were then allowed to make minor repairs to their ships before we started round 2:

British Forces Round 2
Invincible (BC Invincible)
Inflexible (BC Inflexible)

Just ran the two battlecruisers against the entire German force for round 2. We were playing with the cordite flash rules for the British, thinking that might give the Germans a chance at killing one of the battlecruisers. No such luck for them.

The British battlecruisers started with regular crews.

Realizing he was significantly outranged by the British battlecruisers, and slowed somewhat due to damage from the previous engagement, the German Admiral bravely charged into the teeth of the British battlecruiser gunfire. He realized that his only chance in victory lay in getting in close where the British range advantage was neutralized.

Scharnhorst was blown out of the water by Invincible before she was able to reply effectively. The British were cocky and unconcerned with keeping the range open so Gneisenau was able to close and deliver several 8.2" and 5.9" shell hits on the Invincible starting fires on deck. Unfortunately, damage was minimal and the fires were quickly extinguished by RN DC teams. Sustained 12" salvoes from Invincible and Inflexible soon sent Gneisenau to the bottom.

The German light cruisers charged into the teeth of heavy 4" shellfire from both battlecruisers, trying to get in close enough to us their torpedoes, however, they were sunk just shy of effective range. Their attempts to savage the upper works of the British battlecruisers with their 4.1" guns were. . . somewhat less than savage.

Invincible came through with minor damage. Inflexible was unscathed. The entire German squadron was sunk. Final losses:

Germany:
CA's – 2 sunk
CL's – 3 sunk

Britain:
BC's – 1 lightly damaged
B's – 1 sunk
CA's – 2 sunk
CL's – 1 sunk

All in all, we felt the Germans gave a good account of themselves. We determined that if the German's could sink 2 heavy ships (i.e. Canopus + 1 battlecruiser since there was no way they were getting both battlecruisers) that they would win the engagement, even if they were completely wiped out.

While they failed in that effort, and never seriously jeopardized either of the British battlecruisers – despite the cordite flash rules – they did at least as good as their historical counterparts.

We didn't add the three British CA's to the second round because we wanted the German player to be able to use his CLs to make torpedo runs on the British battlecruisers. But although 4" guns are not the heaviest of secondary armaments, a broadside of 16 of them between the two battlecruisers was enough to put paid to the two German light cruisers before they were able to close to effective torpedo range (as opposed to a hail mary shot).

From deployment to cleanup took about 2 hours, and an excellent time was had by all.

One of these days I'll do a fancy battle report with pics.

Do I understand that you fought both battles in that 2 hour period?

How many players and what size table?

-- Jeff

Also, it might be interesting, If Canopus is sunk at Coronel, to allow the Germans to "trap" the Brits in port as the second part of the scenario . . . since Canopus would not have then been grounded and couldn't provide that long-range fire that deterred the Germans.

-- Jeff

I think the idea of trapping the British in harbor is over-rated. The British were out of the harbor within an hour of the Germans spotting the tripods. While the British were in the inner harbor, the Germans would have had only the tripods visible above hills to shoot at, and would not have been able to spot their shot while firing into the harbor. Hitting anything would have been pure luck.

Once the Brits got up steam and moved into the visible part of the channel, assuming the Germans were even across the mouth of the channel at that time, the Germans still IMHO had little chance. The narrow part of the Stanley Harbor channel is barely 3 miles long – any of the British ships, even at about 10 knots would need only about 10 minutes to clear that part of the harbor – and would likely be up to at least 15 knots by the time they did. The British ships would be in view in the narrows for maybe 10 broadsides. The Germans would have to be at point blank to achieve anywhere near enough hits and damage to sink one of the large ships in that little time. Meanwhile, they'd be Swiss Cheese themselves – as the British showed their gunnery was pretty good at moderate and short ranges. As it was, Invincible in the real battle took at least 10 8.2" hits and suffered negligible damage – I doubt the Germans could have done much more in the little time they had. After that, it was all bets off as the Brits would be in open water.

Falklands is simply not the same situation as Santiago Bay, where slower, weaker, ships had to thread their way through a narrow, twisty chasm, into a vastly superior array of gunpower.

That may well all be true . . . but being "trapped in the harbor" allows for far more options.

Would the Brits send out their Armored Cruisers first? Or their Light Cruisers?

Might the German Cruisers get into a good torpedo position? Or might they split right away? And how would they use the Islands themselves?

Yes, I know that the Battlecruisers dominate this encounter . . . but will novice players use them that way?

-- Jeff

Yeah… I know… :)

I've been slowly building in 1/700 an "all possible options" fleet for the Germans and British – Defence for the British and K u K Maria Theresia, Emden and whatever else I can think of for the Germans – just for kicks.

Yes, we fought both battles within the single 2 hour period.

I like the idea of the harbor trap scenario. Have to give that some thought.

I am NOT an experienced naval gamer . . . but I have played a lot of miniature games. To my mind one of the biggest and best parts of such gaming is HAVING DECISIONS TO MAKE.

If all you're doing is rolling dice, it can certainly be fun . . . but having to make DECISIONS that will affect what happens is much more rewarding.

Which is why I suggested the harbor trap . . . the British player(s) will have to decide how to respond . . . by the way, how long will it take for each ship to build up enough steam to really do anything? How will the German choose to attack?

Making choices really puts players into the "Command" role.

-- Jeff

Jeff, I was not saying it is not a good gaming scenario. Rather, I merely take issue with most of the historical accounts of the battle that say "Von Spee missed a golden opportunity".

It took about 30 minutes for ships with water tube boilers to raise steam. Once moving, ships of the era accelerated at a steady rate for the first 15 knots or so, taking about 10 minutes to get there. Around 15 knots ships had to work harder and take longer to add speed – 20 minutes total to 20 knots, 30 minutes total to 22 knots, etc.

VSB

VSB,

I'll happily defer to your superior knowledge as to the "missed opportunity" . . . indeed, it is always easier for historians to use hindsight when analyzing events . . . but only the people on the spot really know what factors influenced their decisions.

Also a solid "thank you" for the "steam" information.

-- Jeff

Oh Jeff – Just noticed the other half of your question was how many players and what sized table.

There were just two of us playing as a few people had things come up. This was just a scenario I whipped up in a few minutes. If we had four players we could have finished in a little more than half the time since the system is designed to allow multiple people on the same side to take turns simultanously – no waiting around doing nothing.

The play surface at my house is a dedicated 4' x 8' ocean-top table, although a scenario this small used only a fraction of it. Probably could have fit it on a 3' x 5' table easily.