Imperial Japanese Navy

This is a general forum for all types of posts related to Military models.

Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1

Post Reply
thetourist
E5
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:08 am
Location: Jacksonville

Imperial Japanese Navy

Post by thetourist »

I am new to the Micronaughts line and I have a few questions for the experts.

1. Are there any major holes in the WWII Japanese line?


2. I see that there were three Amagi Class CV's completed near the end of the war but I've also read that they are very similar in appearance to the Hiryu/Soryu ships. How true is that?

3. Are GHQ's micronaughts rules primarily good for tacticaal battles or is there a astrong strategic element as well. I am trying to organize a game in the Central - Eastern Pacific where nothing is predetermined and both sides have to seek each other out. Do GHQ's rules allow for this or is it scenario based?

Thanks!

battlewagon
E5
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 10:57 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by battlewagon »

Here is some information to get you started

1. The IJN line is pretty complete for major surface combatants. There are some omissions with light (escort) carriers, late war carriers and destroyers.

2. The Amagi class carriers are the same basic dimensions as the Soryu, but the elevator layout is different, Amagi is more heavily armed with AA mounts and appears to have a somewhat larger island structure with what looks like a bulge in the hull under the island.
(My reference is Japanese Warships of World War II by A. J. Watts...it says the design of the class closely followed Hiryu but with the bridge on the starboard side) I think the Soryu would make for an easier conversion.

3. The Micronauts: The Game rules are scenario based and have a section on scenario generation. For a campaign game you may have use components from another game and a referee to conduct your search phase and go to the Micronauts rules once elements of both forces come within detection range of one another.

I hope this helps.
Always respect the law of gross tonnage (aka "bigger boat wins")

IRISH

Major Holes

Post by IRISH »

The Tourist,

As Battlewagon mentioned the carriers are the biggest hole.
The following carriers are not done by GHQ:

CVE Hosho
CVEs Taiyo, Chuyo, Unyo
CVE Kaiyo
CVE Ryuho
CVE Shinyo
CVLs Chitose, Chiyoda CVL versions
CV Shinano
CVs Unryu, Amagi, Ikoma, Aso, Katsuragi, Kasugi ( the last 2 had different funnels )

CL Kuma
CL Oyodo

DD Shimikaze

There are some sub-classes of DDs that have not been done, as well as the Torpedo boats and escorts. They have the I-19 class which can cover some of the SS classes that were similair, but there are several like the I-400s not done.

IRISH

kiasutha
E5
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 9:10 pm

Post by kiasutha »

www.combinedfleet.com/

might be of help with statistics and some pics and photos...

thetourist
E5
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:08 am
Location: Jacksonville

Post by thetourist »

Thanks for all your responses! I will now be able to focus my efforts on countering the much larger US Navy and not worry about which of my ships are in dry dock waiting to be built by GHQ.

Extra Crispy
E5
Posts: 992
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:56 pm
Location: Edgewater, NJ
Contact:

Post by Extra Crispy »

You might look at the "World War 2 At Sea" game by Avalanche Press. They have a game with the strategic aspects - you can just use your favorite tactical rules for the fighting itself.

http://www.avalanchepress.com/line_WWIISea.php
Mark Severin
Owner, Scale Creep Miniatures
Author DeepFriedHappyMice.com

Post Reply