HMS Ark Royal was the first ship in history designed and built as a seaplane carrier.
HMS Anne was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy used during World War I.
HMS Argus was a British aircraft carrier that served in the Royal Navy from 1918 to 1944 Only had her start in Sept 1918, war was over in two months so no.
HMS Ben-my-Chree (Manx: “Girl of My Heart”) was a packet steamer and a Royal Navy seaplane carrier of the First World War.
HMS Campania was a seaplane tender
HMS Empress was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy
HMS Engadine was a seaplane tender
Furious was recommissioned on 15 March 1918, and her embarked aircraft were used on anti-Zeppelin patrols in the North Sea after May. In July 1918, she flew off seven Sopwith Camels which participated in the Tondern raid, attacking the Zeppelin sheds there with moderate success.
HMS Hermes was a seaplane tender
TSS Manxman was a seaplane tender
HMS Nairana was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy
HMS Pegasus was an aircraft carrier/seaplane carrier bought by the Royal Navy in 1917 ( no missions against other ships was ever flown)
HMS Raven II was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy
HMS Riviera was requisitioned by the Admiralty on 11 August 1914 and converted by Chatham Dockyard to carry and operate four seaplanes.
HMS Slinger was an experimental catapult ship ( another seaplane tender)
HMS Vindex was a Royal Navy seaplane carrier
So no “Aircraft Carriers in world war one”
I am very disturbed by the fact that tanks will be available from turn 1. The whole no tech thing requires it be that way but this is a massive miscarriage of history to a rather revolting degree. Depending on how the initial set-up is and what the starting economies are, we are facing a scenario where some of the better off nations, like Germany and Britain maybe, will not need to buy anything else but tanks from the word go. If there starting forces are large enough they might only need to buy tanks to augment their existing forces. Given that Germany only produced around 20 tanks during the war, having any by the end of turn one would be ridiculous.
Dose this not bother anyone else?
Thats why the other world war one game will be better. No candyland.
Of course in that game, tanks will be a technology upgrade and the first house rules will include technology.
@Imperious:
Thats why the other world war one game will be better. No candyland.
What other game?
Can’t say too much, but you will be shocked how great it will be. And it will be.
I’m disappointed that the official A&A version will be so lightweight. I’m unconvinced that the target audience want it that way. Nevertheless the game will be ripe for pimping, with techs the obvious place to start.
I suspect that it won’t be quite as bad as you suggest; perhaps the introduction of tanks will be only after a number of turns; then again the USA coming in as early as turn 4 means that the game clearly pays little regard to the historical time line.
And no bombers? Rail transport? Cavalry? = Risk 1914.
I am very disturbed by the fact that tanks will be available from turn 1. The whole no tech thing requires it be that way but this is a massive miscarriage of history to a rather revolting degree. Depending on how the initial set-up is and what the starting economies are, we are facing a scenario where some of the better off nations, like Germany and Britain maybe, will not need to buy anything else but tanks from the word go. If there starting forces are large enough they might only need to buy tanks to augment their existing forces. Given that Germany only produced around 20 tanks during the war, having any by the end of turn one would be ridiculous.
Dose this not bother anyone else?
@Imperious:
Can’t say too much, but you will be shocked how great it will be. And it will be.
Are you referring to another game using the A&A map or something you are publishing? Your entire posting is highly ominous.
On the side, WWI is very interesting because all sides are equally evil. I always feel a little horrible celebrating a WWII axis win. Maybe that’s just me…
I’m still perfectly optomistic about the game, we hardly know enough to really make judgments yet. Plus I’m just excited to have a ww1 game (sorry, whatever you guys are talking about just sounds far to complicated for me to pay attention to)
No aircraft carriers. They weren’t used except as seaplane tenders for observation. Biplanes didn’t launch to attack and sink enemy warships from carriers.
If you add them, also add missile guided cruisers.
No Battleships either. Dreadnoughts. A few ships classified as Battleships existed, but these are pre 1900.
IL, is the website for that other game working again yet? or are we back in the dark about it?
IL, is the website for that other game working again yet? or are we back in the dark about it?
What other game? what website?
I believe Yavid is referring to “The Conflict” from Legion Games.
“The Conflict” from Legion Games.
This game said release in 2012. Was it ever released, their forum is down.
That would be yet another WW1 game.
Holy Cowpat, Batman! No America!
Has battleships, so IL can’t be involved.
Units would be:
Artillery 2/2/1 4 IPCs
Special Rules
- Fire Support: Supports Infantry at a 1:1 basis, boosting their attack to ‘2’
Cavalry 2/1/2 6 IPCs
Special Rules
- Withdrawal: Cavalry units may remove themselves from combat after all dice have been rolled and retreat to a friendly territory
Aircraft 2/3/3 10 IPCs
Special Rules
- Dog Fight: If enemy air units are present, roll all air units as a separate combat
- Air Reconnaissance: For each air unit you have in combat, raise the attack power of an adjacent strategic artillery unit to ‘3’
I’m gonna comment on a couple of these, so bear with me:
• Cavalry: these units are not represented in Imp Games’ The Great War, with the explanation that they so quickly became outdated by the early days of the war that they never saw much action
• Artillery: I can’t see these functioning the same way as in WWII because, well… they didn’t
• Aircraft: TGW tried this and it didn’t work; it was too easy for “the side that goes first†to mass their aircraft and destroy the enemy’s air force early in the game, and have air supremacy throughout. The rules were later changed to be almost identical to typical A&A
• Navy: It’s disappointing that 1914 is going to be using d6; a d12 would provide the granularity to allow for more types of ships, and do justice to a war that was really the twilight of the “Big Ship†fleet engagement.
• Machine Guns: generally regarded as the most deadly new invention of the war (although artillery caused the most casualties, but was really just an upgrade on older field cannons) I would like to see machine guns/bunkers/pillboxes represented in a way similar to AA guns or D-Day fighters.
• Tunnel mines/Flame cannons: I’ve seen documentaries on these, and in almost every case, they completely reversed the status quo of trench warfare and broke enemy lines wide open, almost akin to a Heavy Bombers tech. I would like to see some mention/representation of these in the game.
I would say that machine-guns were a part of every infantry unit; we can assume that the defensive ability of infantry includes their MGs.
Regarding aircraft, in 1914 there were no fighter aircraft, just observation planes. These should have a low combat ability of 1-1 (movement 4) against any target. Their main use is for giving artillery more accurate targeting.
Later, techs will make fighter aircraft available, my suggestion is for two developments: forward firing MGS (2-2-2) and twin synchronized MGs (3-3-2). Bombers also need to be a tech at 4-1-6.
Do you have a link to TGW rules anywhere?
Regarding the look of the map:
I’m not a fan of the muddy style of recent A&A boards. I’d rather have clear light green for lowlands, darker green for difficult terrain, grey for mountain ranges.
Would really like railway lines printed on the map, these would nicely emphasize the importance of certain tts as transport hubs.
