Transferring thread - please don't post here (Constellation)

Originally posted by Solomiranthius

Must have been kind of hard to cost. I like it.

Yes I did see that Conways noted the use of British-style inclined belt armour. I'm wary of going into too much detail in attempting to justify armour 7 though it may warrant further discussion. Possibly comparison of total armour weights with the lower-end Armour 7s might clarify matters?

Originally posted by Toronado3800

In the other thread did we already discuss adding an S/A to make it effectively Armor 6.5?

If that is what we think the design deserves.

Don't we have a "if this unit suffers a hit equal to its armor rating roll a dice. On a 4 or higher this unit suffers no damage" type S/A?

Originally posted by Solomiranthius

I say keep it as is. Brigs is right about the SA, plus I would rather not drive the cost up further on this. Even with big guns, glass cannons are hard to bring for the cost.

Originally posted by SWO_Daddy

Gents, I strongly recommend US Battleships by Norman Friedman. books.google.com/books/about/U_S_Battleships.html?id=Y41Ha_3HsrYC

One of the best texts available on the detailed design of US BBs, including very good information on this class of BCs.

The Lexington class was the first American foray into the realm of the 'Battlecruiser' and, not surprisingly, it had its faults. It retained the superb firepower of the Colorado-class, but sacrificed much for speed (not a common USN attribute before WWII) and range (a common USN standard due to the distances involved). They would have been beautiful ships, with all the practical flaws of other battlecruisers.

Believe me, when I went to work on my own card for this class, I hoped I was going to find an American Amagi. Unfortunately, the armor stats are wanting. It was certainly going to be a big ship, but much of the displacement was devoted to achieving great length (necessary for high speed) and a powerful propulsion plant, not protection. It was a common failing of all BCs...they looked very big, and had the displacement of BBs, so everyone naturally wanted to treat them like they we some kind of invincible thing, when they simply didn't have the armor to backup those ideas.

As for game play, its all about how much risk you want to take. To me, the Armor 6 value isn't that daunting. This ship was barely armored against 8" gunfire, so its not surprise its armor value is low. What makes it a risky gameplay option is the Vital Armor 13 (which is the same as Hood and Repulse). As long as the adversary doesn't roll an above average Main Gunnery shot, this ship will hit like something in the high 40s-mid 50s. But if it gets within range of ship firing 15+ MG dice, the odds of a vital are roughly 20% or more. If you can avoid those odds, the ship fights above its weight and is worth the buy. If you make this ship go toe-to-toe against a 9/15/5 BB, your probably going to lose every time. I'd absolutely use this ship in the right kind of game. It might be worth a gamble in a 100 pointer and in larger games, I might consider it as a second BB working behind something "beefier". It will never be a 'ringer' ship like Alabama or Massachusetts, but it has its uses.

Originally posted by SWO_Daddy

I really think the USN remained enamored with the pre-WWI concept of a "Scouting" BC force. The Navy didn't see the BCs as obsoleting the "Standard Type" BB, and seemed to be almost going out of its way to not create a true fast BB just to keep the existing battleline from being viewed as obsolete. There is no doubt the USN and US shipbuilding were capable of a more balanced design, but there seems to have been some pretty 'hard-wired' notions that influenced the way these ships were designed, despite lessons that should have been learned from battles like Jutland. A bit more armor would have slowed the ships further, but that would have been small sacrifice on a design potentially capable of 33+ knots! Particularly when most USN BBs would be struggling to top 21 knots!

In some ways, perhaps US Naval enthusiasts should be happy the Lexingtons weren't finished as BCs and were converted to excellent CVs instead. Thank you history...you may have done us a favor!