"Ironclads & Naval Gaming 1890-1929 Boundary Change?" Topic

We currently have the Ironclads board and the Naval Gaming 1890-1929 board.

The Ironclads board currently covers 1862 to 1889.

Coelacanth writes:

I suggest an earlier start date to encompass the pre- Dreadnought era; admittedly, the division is still somewhat arbitrary.

What year should be the division between the two boards?

I'd say 1880, but that's purely arbitrary, and there's quite a bit of overlap in any case.

The problem with wargamers is that they/we insist on classifying everything and putting it in the right package. We must label everything, and are never happy with the classifications. Give it a rest.

Golly, Winston – I didn't realise the question was so controversial. I feel a bit guilty putting my two pen'th in now.

Bill, FWIW I agree with Winston – the 1880s has more in common with the 1870s ironclad era than it does with the 1890s which I think of as pre-Dreadnought.

When one considers HMS Alexandra, a central battery ship, verses HMS Camperdown, a recognisable pre-Dreadnought battleship, the hand over as flagship of the Mediterranean Fleet was in 1889.

That seems to mark a transition between the periods so I'd leave it as it is.

Jonesey

Most of the suggestions put forth in my original thread have been acted upon. This one isn't really a big thing; I mentioned it as a point of conversation and also out of a desire to be thorough. Upon reflection (always a good thing) I don't consider a change to the dates to be essential to my happiness, or significant in understanding the period. Although, if the two boards were to overlap by a few years… Thanks to all for taking the TMP Naval Reforms of 2015 so much to heart.

Ron

I think there are three periods. Ironclads followed by a Transitional period in the 1870's when naval gun power exceeded the protection used so armour was placed only in vital areas giving us box battery ships, Turret ships and Barbette ships. Pre-dreadnoughts came in around 1890 when battleships all started to have turrets. I dont have my referance books at hand so I cannot put a specific date on the Ironclads to Transitional Warship period but it would be sometime in the 1870's

What year should be the division between the two boards?

None. A date range is totally unnecessary.

The "ironclad era" is an amorphous concept, and even professional historians can't agree on start and end dates. Technically the first "iron clad" armored warships were launched in 1854, and wooden ships with iron armor were still in service in the 1900s, but as far as gamers are concerned, "ironclad" wargaming is usually ACW naval, with occasional forays into South American naval wars or attempts at gaming Lissa. The title should remain generic to catch all of those, and weird games like late 19th C. colonial naval battles, naval gamer "what if" experiments in the era of odd transitional designs, battles against Martian tripods, etc.

If anything, the date range should be removed from the name of the Naval Gaming 1898-1929 board, because it excludes about a decade of technologically similar warfare on either end. However, there is no posting traffic to justify changing it, so it would be better to leave it alone. There is no catchy name to summarize "the battleship era after the development of trans-oceanic turret battleships but before airplanes ruined everything" anyway.

- Ix

I'd have an 'Ironclad and Pre-Dreadnought' board covering 1860-1905, then a Dreadnought board covering 1906-1939.

That makes sense organizationally, though I still prefer to leave out the mention of dates.

It might also be a good idea to add the word "Era" to the board name (e.g., "Ironclad and Pre-Dreadnought Era Naval Discussion" and "Dreadnought Era Naval Discussion").

- Ix

I think lx has a point: when we look for a description like 'ironclad', or 'pre-dreadnought', we have an idea in our mind based on technology, tactics, aesthetics, not dates.

If we do have dates, then as I said before stick to what we have; the 1880s still feels like old tech, whereas the 1890s feels more '20th century', even though I know that's a contradiction.

But I have to say, I'm really not that fussed, as long as I can find it!

Nick

Leave out dates altogether.
If you want to post to it you know where to go.
Nobody is going to post queries about facing colors of Highland regiments in the Seven Years Ear to this Board.

Lack of a "proper" Board has not deterred people in the past. They post it where they think it belongs.

Guthroth and Yellow Admiral have worked it out: "Ironclad and Pre-Dreadnought Era"; and "Dreadnought Era", with no specific dates. I like this suggestion a lot.

Ron

"Ironclad and Pre-Dreadnought Era"; and "Dreadnought Era"

Ideal.