Help support TMP


"War Plan Orange - ?" Topic


11 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Naval Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

World War Two at Sea

Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

Microscale LCT(5) from Image Studios

Thinking to invade German-held Europe? Then you'll need some of these...


Featured Workbench Article

Basing Small-Scale Aircraft for Wargames

Mal Wright Fezian experiments to find a better way to mount aircraft for wargaming.


Featured Profile Article

Report from Spring Gathering VI

Paul Glasser reports on the debut of Axis and Allies: Guadalcanal and the North African expansion.


1,320 hits since 9 Jan 2018
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Joes Shop Supporting Member of TMP09 Jan 2018 5:22 p.m. PST

I'm reading this book which I find fascinating with its 'what if – ?' possibilities:

link

Has anyone ever gamed any aspect of this assuming conflict starts prior to 1941- ?

How did you do it -?

79thPA Supporting Member of TMP09 Jan 2018 5:52 p.m. PST

No, but if you are not aware, there are several board games on the topic. They start in the 20s and/or 30s. You can check them out on boardgame geek.

Ed von HesseFedora09 Jan 2018 7:09 p.m. PST

And look for the book "The Great Pacific War" by Hector Bywater.

tbeard199909 Jan 2018 7:14 p.m. PST

I have my own set of WW2 rules that is a descendant of AH's Jutland. I've played several Plan Orange fleet actions. The fleets are relatively comparable except for the Kongo class. They're battlecruisers and even after being upgraded, they're still weaker than their US counterparts. One interesting thing is that the American capital all move the same speed. For fun, I also threw in the battlecruisers and super-super dreadnoughts cancelled by the Washington Naval Treaty.

An interesting game we played was a two part fleet action. The first action was the US and Japanese 1941 battlelines. I gave the Japanese a bit of an letting them carry out a couple of torpedo attacks on the US

The result is that the Japanese have a modest advantage over the American fleet.

Then, after that battle is over, the survivors are repaired and have a rematch 3-4 years later. The Japanese get Yamato, Musashi and Shinano (as a battleship). The Americans get a gaggle of North Carolina, South Dakota and an Iowa class battleship.

We played several games. The Japanese won the first round. The Americans won both of the second round games.

Allen5709 Jan 2018 8:56 p.m. PST

I have gamed this using the Avalanche Press game and on the computer using Matrix Games War Plan Orange PC game. Fun games with fleets not too different from Jutland. If you game it later in the 30s there are some interesting aircraft for air combat games also. Bywater's book is a great read for the imagination but grinds a bit in its writing style.

Dave Jackson Supporting Member of TMP10 Jan 2018 8:58 a.m. PST

Should read this one too:

link

Shagnasty Supporting Member of TMP10 Jan 2018 2:07 p.m. PST

There is an interesting supplement for the General Quarters III naval rules called Sudden Storm which postulate war breaking out in 1937 after the "Panay" incident. Many of the ships of WW II but very different aircraft.

Panfilov11 Jan 2018 6:11 a.m. PST

Bankrupting the Enemy" is on deep discount from the Naval Institute Press right now; Through Jan 12th (Friday), you missed free shipping. Some interesting books in their Clear the Decks sale, plus the Holiday Catalog was (is) half price.

Russ Lockwood11 Jan 2018 9:11 p.m. PST

We gamed a 1930s naval game using a variant of Great War at Sea that my buddy found on the internet. I don't know what it's called, but it was simple enough and interesting enough to try it again a couple weeks later. Here's the write-up sans photos I did for the newsletter I send around:

Thrilla Off Manila


by Russ Lockwood

The USS Texas rode the waves somewhere in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, circa 1935, searching for the Japanese task force that had launched a sneak bombardment of Manila. US warplan Orange Marmalade was in effect, with my Salt Water Taffy One -- Texas, two cruisers and three Benson-class destroyers -- leading Sam's Salt Water Taffy Two -- two battleships, a cruiser, and three John Paul Jones-class destroyers.

Finally, contact! Two Rising Sun forces -- under Jay and not so silent Dave -- of about the same number and type of ships.

Great War at Sea

Dan umpired a naval game using a clever variant of the Great War at Sea boardgame rules he found somewhere on the internet. The main difference was a single gunnery table with gun factors across the top and 3d6 results down the side. The intersections contained the number of hits on the target, with each hit generating a 2d6 roll on a Hit table that told where the hit occurred (primary guns, secondary guns, tertiary guns, hull, or speed). A quintet of die modifiers added a little spice. The extremes of the die roll hit spectrum contained critical hits, which were resolved on a separate 2d6 table.

In the original GWAS game, my swiss cheese recollection was a bucket of d6 rolls, the number depending on the gunnery factor. This 3d6 variant proved faster, if less nuanced than rules such as Panzerschiff or General Quarters. No calculator required like Panzerschiff.

Gun ranges were in increments of 15 inches: primary guns out to 45 inches, secondaries out to 30 inches, and tertiary out to 15 inches. The boxes that made up the ship charts required a certain caliber of gun to penetrate certain ship areas. Primaries destroyed armored box types, secondaries only the partially armored or no armor boxes, and tertiaries only the no armor boxes. General Quarters has a similar armored mechanic.

Movement was anywhere between 5 or so inches for a battleship to 9 inches for a destroyer. We used turning templates from another game and each ship was allowed one turn per movement -- i.e., no S turns.

Torpedoes used 1d6s, one die per torpedo, with a 6 indicating a hit. If torpedoes missed one ship and ran into a farther ship, the torpedo owner rolled anew. If a ship lost a speed, the torpedo roll got a +1. No modifier for distance that I can recall.

Day of the Long Lance

Of note, unlike other naval games, you didn't lay down a torpedo angle, move ships, and then move the torpedoes. In these rules, torpedoes moved instantly, like a gun shell.

As we found out, this gave the Japanese a considerable advantage because US torpedoes moved 15 inches and Japanese Long Lance torpedoes moved 27 inches.

As Salt Water Taffy One found out, many torpedo rolls means many torpedo hits. I lost a cruiser to an end-of-range torpedo and my other one was crippled instead of sunk only thanks to a miserably low torpedo hit roll.

In the exchange of gunfire, two of my three destroyers sunk (they only have one hull box) in exchange for one of the Japanese. My third DD soon went to meet Davy Jones. I had only a crippled cruiser (which was also on fire -- -1 to hit) and a pinged battleship left after five turns. The cruiser laid smoke to try and get the Texas away.

Sam got it even worse. One battleship (courtesy of a critical hit on turn 5), his one cruiser, and all three destroyers were glug-glug-glugging it.

As for Jay and Dave, each lost a destroyer and suffered about half damage on a battleship and some scattered damage on other ships. The Emperor would be pleased…

Quick and Quicker

We called it after five turns. Gadzooks! Plan Orange Marmalade had turned into Plan Lady Marmalade and were sleeping with the fishes.

The game was over in about an hour and a half. Granted, we only had four players instead of the usual six to eight, but man was that fast! We liked the speed and didn't worry overmuch about the simplicity. The Japanese torpedoes cause some concern, as the first targets for all US ships in the next game would be the Japanese destroyers.

One rule we used was that torpedoes had to be fired from broadsides -- you could not rush bow first and fire torpedoes straight ahead. I'm thinking that might need a change so we can get the DD charge back. I'm on the fence about the torpedo angle mechanic. It's great not to deal with protractors, but torpedoes acting like gun shells don't strike me as an improvement -- maybe a little too simplified. Guess we can always try a game with the torpedo angle mechanic.

All in all, this was a nice little variant for a first try.

Cheriton14 Jan 2018 3:23 p.m. PST

Joe:

Has anyone ever gamed any aspect of this assuming conflict starts prior to 1941- ?

I haven't seen so much enthusiasm and good discussion on this topic since amongst regulars at Scruby Miniatures in the early 70s. Then it turned up in the university library I worked at in the 1980s.

Deja vu all over again, just ordered it. Thanks for raising the topic again. thumbs up

guinness

Joes Shop Supporting Member of TMP20 Jan 2018 10:38 a.m. PST

Michael: understood, I think it's an outstanding book and it's really motivated me to look deeper into gaming possibilities.

My friend and I are currently assembling forces for the (naval) Guadalcanal Campaign starting with Savo and I stumbled onto this book in one of the bibliographies I was reading.

_____

Thanks to everyone else who posted – excellent info!

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.