Warships Campaign - Questions, Comments and Concerns

[panther3485]

Warships Campaign
QCC (Questions, Comments and Concerns) thread.

This thread is for members to air any questions, comments or concerns they may have about the campaign.
I shall do my best to answer them.

Just one point up front:

If you spot a clear error on my part
I have tried my best - within the time and resources available to me - to be accurate in the presentation of my information.
However, I am aware of the chance that I might have made the odd factual or pictorial error here or there.
If you spot something you know isn't correct, please advise me so I can fix it as soon as possible.

[Merkava188]

Will modern warships be listed in this campaign?

[panther3485]

Will modern warships be listed in this campaign?

Thanks for the question, it's a good one.

The answer is yes, if you consider mid-20th Century as modern. At this stage, I'm quite reluctant to do anything after WW2.
This is because, IMO, it gets very complicated after that; with the disappearance of gunned warships as a primary type; and aircraft carriers & nuclear submarines effectively being dominant.

The Campaign is being divided up into at least 4 planned tournaments.
What you see now is just Tournament #1.

I haven't worked out yet, exactly where the boundaries will be drawn, because I am still researching warships of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries.
However, it could be something like this:

• Tournament 1 - Ancient era -to- 16th Century & the dominance of galleons.
• Tournament 2 - 17th Century (approx.) -to- mid 19th Century
• Tournament 3 - Mid 19th Century & the advent of "ironclads" -to- the Pre-Dreadnoughts.
• Tournament 4 - The Dreadnoughts -to- end of WW2

Naturally, a certain amount of warship types other than the "primary" or most powerful ones, will also be included in each era.
Example: For Tournament 2, Sloops of War - very much at the smaller end of the scale - are definitely under strong consideration.

Hope that answers your question?

[Merkava188]

But still I hope we'll see some modern ships because without cruisers, destroyers and frigates carriers and battles would be sitting ducks to air, surface and submarine attacks. Will submarines be listed in this campaign or will there be a separate campaign for those?

[MarkV]

A general point almost all the illustrations of ancient vessels are splendid looking but inaccurate as the oar holes are far too small to allow a proper sweep of the oar. makes one wonder how much else is down to the Osprey illustrators''(Osprey is where most of them have been lifted from) imagination.

[panther3485]

But still I hope we'll see some modern ships because without cruisers, destroyers and frigates carriers and battles would be sitting ducks to air, surface and submarine attacks. Will submarines be listed in this campaign or will there be a separate campaign for those?

Neither submarines nor aircraft carriers will be included in the tournaments of this particular campaign, which is intended to end with coverage of WWII warships.

Post-WWII naval assets may be considered for a possible future campaign.
However, if this happens at all it could be quite some time away; at least from me.
Naval stuff in general is a long way out of my comfort zone.

A general point almost all the illustrations of ancient vessels are splendid looking but inaccurate as the oar holes are far too small to allow a proper sweep of the oar. makes one wonder how much else is down to the Osprey illustrators''(Osprey is where most of them have been lifted from) imagination.

Yes.
If my experience with books is any indication, I think the term "artist's impression" is a fair guide and covers a multitude of potential sins; by no means confined to the various artists employed by Osprey.
I expect the quality and accuracy of the work to vary considerably and those expectations are usually met.
Such drawings and artwork are, IMO, best viewed as a general guide only.
Indeed, in many cases - especially with illustrations from earlier periods - quite a lot of guesswork and conjecture is involved, I think.

[T. A. Gardner]

I voted in the first round you put up, but haven't had the time to sit and make a comment on each selection. There are just too many to do that on.

[panther3485]

I voted in the first round you put up, but haven't had the time to sit and make a comment on each selection. There are just too many to do that on.

Thanks TAG, that's perfectly OK.
Whatever comments you can make will be appreciated, as usual.

[panther3485]

27 August - Progress Report

Hi everyone,

Round 1 of our 1st Warships Tournament has been running for almost two weeks now and I think we have made a reasonable start.
So far, 37 members have participated; casting 452 votes across the 16 polls.

We have 7 days remaining before this Round closes. By then, it will have been running for 3 weeks; give or take a few hours.
Subsequent rounds (Round 2 through to the Final) are planned to run for only 2 weeks each.

I think we should go with the following guidelines regarding eligibility for awards:

To qualify for the Campaign award

Members will need to participate to the required minimum level in all of the Tournaments, or all of the Tournaments except one.
In other words, you can't miss more than one Tournament.
It is planned that there will be at least 4 Tournaments in this Warships Campaign.
See below for required participation levels in each Tournament:


To qualify for a Tournament award

(1) Participate to the required minimum level, in all of the rounds or all rounds except 1 (that is, you are only allowed to miss 1 round max).
(2) The required minimum level of participation is to vote in no less than half minus 1 of the polls in the tournament.
For example, the current tournament - with 32 candidates - will have 31 polls (16+8+4+2+1). This means you must vote in at least 15 polls, across at least 4 of the 5 Rounds to qualify.
Hint: You can get off to an excellent start here, by making sure of robust participation in the current Round 1, because it contains 16 of the 31 polls.
However, if you happen to miss Round 1 altogether, it is still possible to catch up by voting in all 15 of the remaining polls.

Please note: It is yet to be decided whether the Tournament awards should simply be bars or other additions to the Campaign ribbon; or perhaps each Tournament should have a separate ribbon in its own right?
(I intend to discuss this with the other Staff members before making that decision.
Obviously, I'm also open to input from participating members on this question.
Stay tuned. )

Best to all,
panther3485

[MarkV]

May I suggest a separate gong for each tournament? Otherwise some who plays an active part in one or more tournaments but not in the rest of the campaign gets nothing for their effort

[Mountain Man]

Hi everyone,

Round 1 of our 1st Warships Tournament has been running for almost two weeks now and I think we have made a reasonable start.
So far, 37 members have participated; casting 452 votes across the 16 polls.

We have 6 days remaining before this Round closes. By then, it will have been running for nearly 3 weeks.
Subsequent rounds (Round 2 through to the Final) are planned to run for only 2 weeks each.

I think we should go with the following guidelines regarding eligibility for awards:

To qualify for the Campaign award

Members will need to participate to the required minimum level in all of the Tournaments, or all of the Tournaments except one.
In other words, you can't miss more than one Tournament.
It is planned that there will be at least 4 Tournaments in this Warships Campaign.
See below for required participation levels in each Tournament:


To qualify for a Tournament award

(1) Participate to the required minimum level, in all of the rounds or all rounds except 1 (that is, you are only allowed to miss 1 round max).
(2) The required minimum level of participation is to vote in no less than half minus 1 of the polls in the tournament.
For example, the current tournament - with 32 candidates - will have 31 polls (16+8+4+2+1). This means you must vote in at least 15 polls, across at least 4 of the 5 Rounds to qualify.
Hint: You can get off to an excellent start here, by making sure of robust participation in the current Round 1, because it contains 16 of the 31 polls.
However, if you happen to miss Round 1 altogether, it is still possible to catch up by voting in all 15 of the remaining polls.

Please note: It is yet to be decided whether the Tournament awards should simply be bars or other additions to the Campaign ribbon; or perhaps each Tournament should have a separate ribbon in its own right?
(I intend to discuss this with the other Staff members before making that decision.
Obviously, I'm also open to input from participating members on this question.
Stay tuned. )

Best to all,
panther3485

To date, each full campaign has been awarded its own specific ribbon. My vote would be to continue that practice.


Beyond that, congratulations once again on an excellent campaign.

[R. Evans]

Great job as usual, Paul. I'm looking forward to the next stages.

[panther3485]

Round 1 - one day added

Hi guys,

Several days ago, I reminded myself about time zones around the World.
I originally had Round 1 set to close at a date & time that corresponds with late Saturday evening in my location.
On reflection, I believe it's probably better to make it a day later.
A large percentage of our members are on the North American continent, which is something like 12-18 hours behind my time.

I decided to add another day, so members in that part of the World now have until Saturday afternoon/evening before Round 1 closes.
This is meant to flow through the whole Tournament with "change-overs" from round-to-round being at about the same timing.

[panther3485]

Two polls on a knife edge!

Here we are, folks, with just a whisker over two days to go before Round 1 closes!

So far, 43 members have cast a total of 583 votes.
The majority of them have voted either in all 16 polls or at least, all bar a few.

(If anyone who wanted to vote in all 16 isn't 100 percent sure, one quick way to check is to contact me.
I keep records on an Excel spreadsheet, so I can quickly see exactly how many votes were cast by each member.)

Anyway, ... some of you may have noticed that two of the polls are currently tied:

Pairing #1, Minoan Galley vs Egyptian Galley; 18 votes each!
Pairing #3, Phoenician Galley vs Greek Galley; 18 votes each!

We have a couple of days still remaining; so there is time for these deadlocks to be broken.
However, if the scores remain tied, the candidates I voted for will be declared the winners!
If there's anyone out there who hasn't participated in these particular polls yet and doesn't like that idea, cast a vote!

[panther3485]

Round 1 finished .....

... Round 2 begins.

By the time Round 1 closed, 45 members had cast 615 votes across 16 polls.
I think that's fairly good; especially if my impression - that many members of ACG have a knowledge of this subject as minimal as my own - is correct.

I suppose I could have simply embarked on a study of warships & naval warfare and left it at that.
No doubt after a good number of years, with sufficient persistence and dedication, I could have attained a fairly decent level of subject-matter knowledge.
However, while that would certainly have been both educational and enjoyable in its own right, starting out by running these polls and learning as I go seemed like more of a fun challenge.
I hope you guys, too, are getting something of value out of this.

For anyone who wants to participate in this first Tournament but missed Round 1, please don't be shy about jumping in at this point.
You can still qualify if you participate fully in Rounds 2 through 5.
There's also the fun angle starting from any point, in this Warships Tournament or any of the others that are to follow.

Best to all,
panther3485