Cruel Seas Errata

[Bill McGill]

The second printing occurred because the first print run sold out. So any copies in stock should be second printing.

[Richard Coates]

Just to confirm what Bill has said, while we obviously can’t speak for other sales outlets, there are no more first printing rulebooks at Warlord Games. They sold out and therefore all the books we have available are the second printing that includes the errata.

[Laurence]

good to know now, thank you all

[Blipvert]

Updated my rules with the latest errata and a few more questions came up.

1. The US LCI(L) is now 65 points. How much is the vessel with an inexperienced crew? Is it 65? How much is the vessel with a veteran crew? Is it 140?
I ask because the initial points costs on the card are seriously out of line.

2. USN Sub Chaser is listed as 115 (170). The optional rockets add +60 points. Shouldn’t the cost be 115 (175)?

3. US LCM 3 landing craft is listed as Small. Shouldn’t it be Tiny? The fleet box they came in had tiny wake markers and none of the other vessels use them. They are also dramatically smaller than the Small PT boats.

4. All US PT boats (Higgins and Elco) have 4 MGs listed on their cards.

A. Shouldn’t the Higgins have 4 (the 2 listed in the stat line plus the 2 free ones)?

B. And shouldn’t the Elco have just 2 MGs? (Just the 2 free ones).

[Ross156]

Hi,

If I have the rulebook with the image of the RN Officer in the bottom right hand side of the cover, I understand that this includes the original errata.

Are there elements of the January errata not incorporated into this book?

Also, as I have a US Fleet box coming I would be grateful to know the answers to the questions posed by the previous correspondent.

Thanks,
Ross

[Raxonika]

The add on looks interesting, but are we going to get a new version of the rules with the original ambiguities and errors corrected ? This would be really good and would give additional life to the game.

[Ronald Cover]

The Armed Trawler game card is a Large vessel, yet the point values listed on the card use the smaller boat modifiers for adding regular or veteran crew.
I’m running this as an error, but wanted to verify.

[Mike Wolfe]

I picked up Cruel Seas just as Covid was heating when I saw in my Local Hobby Shop, in Marietta, Georgia, and thought it would be a good game for the students at the Middle School where I teach.  The kids loved it and I do enjoy seeing the 6th and 7th graders playing it.  That said, being a history teacher and model builder with AMS (Advanced Modeler Syndrome), I saw some issues with the aircraft stats in the game.

 

1.  In particular, the SBD Dauntless and TBM Avenger are underarmed.with no machine guns and only 1 bomb.  In comparison, the Blackburn Skua has machine guns and 1 bomb.  Don’t get me wrong, I love the Skua and the 1/72 MPM release has a honored place right next to it’s sister, the Blackburn Roc (also by MPM).  But, the Skua has four .303 Brownings in the wings and one Vickers K gun by the gunner.  All models of the SBD 2/3/4/5/6 that saw combat have two .50cal Brownings firing through the propeller arc and SBDs were used to strafe and engage enemy aircraft.  In fact, during the Battle of the Coral Sea, SBDs were used for anti-torpedo Combat Air Patrols.  SBD pilot, Swede Vejtasa shot down two A6M2 Zeros and cut the wing off a third with his wingtip on a head on pass.  Even the RAF recognized the advantage of two .50 cals over four .303s when they replaced the four .303s on the Spitfire Mk.IXc with two .50cals on the Spitfire Mk.IXe and Mk.XVI,

In addition, the SBD could carry up to 2,250lbs of bombs whereas the Swordfish was limited to 1,500lbs of bombs yet the Swordfish can carry two bombs and the Dauntless only one?  By you own figures, the SBD should have 2 bombs.  Also, the Skua carried but one 500lb SAP bomb, the Dauntless double that and was in front line use from December 7, 1941 to August 1945.

2.  The TBM Avenger also has no machine guns, yet the TBM-3 had two .50cals in the wingroots firing forward.  In addition, you have the aircraft only having one bomb, making it less capable than the Swordfish.  However, it can carry 2,000lbs of bombs, 500 more than the Swordfish.  Using your own figures, it should have 2 bombs.

Don’t forget that from 1942, the Swordfish and Albacores were replaced on the fleet carriers with Avengers and Fairy Barracudas.  The British Pacific Fleet ended the war with Avengers on the aircraft carriers.

3.  The F6F Hellcat may have had the capability to carry a torpedo, it never used it in combat.  The Carrier Air Wings had VT squadrons with TBM Avengers to make torpedo attacks.  So, the 1 torpedo factor should be in parenthesis.

4.  The B-25 has one torpedo and was tested with carrying it,  it never used it in actual combat operations so should have parentheses around it.  The only American medium bomber to actually drop torpedoes in combat were the B-26 Marauders that flew out of Midway Island during the battle.  In the South Pacific, B-25s used  ‘Skip Bombing’ to great effect against Japanese shipping.

As for machine guns,  the B-25s operated by the 5th Air Force in the South Pacific modified their B-25 C/Ds by adding four .50cals where the bombardier sat and four more in gun packs under the cockpit for a total of eight.  The B-25Js were armed with a eight gun nose for a total of 12 fifty cals.  In addition, the B-25 Gs and Hs had a single 75mm canon in the nose.  One could argue that 8-12 fifty cals could cause as much damage as 4 20mms on naval targets.

[Mike Wolfe]

I also noticed some problems with the ship stats in the rulebook:

1)  Fletcher class destroyers:  The game gives her five 4″ guns.  The last American destroyer class to have 4″ guns(http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_4-50_mk9.php)  were the Clemsons that were built from 1919 to 1921.  These were the ships transferred to the Royal Navy and known in Britain as the Town class.  Every American destroyer class starting from the Farraguts (Com> 1934-35) were armed with 5″ 38s in single open/turrets or twin turrets.  The Fletchers were launched with five 5″38 Mark 12s.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-38_mk12.php

2) Flower Class Corvette:  This is a ‘face palm’ mistake since the Flowers were Royal Navy form the start.  The game gives them one 3″ gun.  In fact, the Flowers had a 4″45 BL Mark IX or X forward of the bridge (http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk9.php)

3.  Bronekater:  All three versions are listed as having 1-2 6-pdrs.  Considering that the 6-pdr is a 57mm weapon as shown by the British anti-tank gun being designated as 57mm in US service, this is a problem.  In fact, these gunboats had T-34/76 tank turrets or a T-28 (or T-35) fitted.  The T-34/76 had a 76mmF-34 tank gun and the T-28/35 turrets had a 76mm KT-28 howitzer so the Bronekater should have 76mms instead of six pounders.  If you look at the models themselves, the turrets are definitely T-28 and T-34/76 turrets.

[Renko]

Hi Mike

Broadly agree – the aircraft in CS are a bit of a mess.

The rivet counter in me would point out Swede “claimed” three Zeroes, most recent assessments is he actually shot down none of them, and the ramming story is a pure fabrication (not his – just the “Yellow Press” as far as I can tell) .

The replacement of Swordfish \ Albacores on Fleet Carriers was just a case of them being recognised as obsolete in that role – same as replacing TBDs with TBFs in US service.

The replacement of the Barracuda on the BPF ships was nothing to do with the superiority of the Avenger as a bomb truck, more a desire for commonality of aircraft with the USN so that supplies would be simplified, and the Barracuda’s poor altitude in tropical conditions – it would struggle to say the least in PTO.

The rest I find hard to disagree with – as I said, aircraft in CS are very strange.

On the other stuff – yup. The Bronekater issue in particular just seems lazy – I did a blog post about it when they first came out here https://twtrb.blogspot.com/2019/01/down-rabbit-hole-fixing-bronekaters-in.html 

Cruel Seas is one of my guilty pleasures. I know there is so much that needs fixing, makes no sense or is just plain “wrong”, (I’m looking at you searchlights) but to balance that I have never had a bad game, all have been fun and interesting. Sometimes that is enough, and to be honest my expectations of Warlord really fixing anything is very low

[Mike Wolfe]

I agree with the US Navy replacing the TBD with the TBF as the Devastator being obsolete.  That said, how much of the TBD’s problem at Midway was due to the fact that they went in without fighter escort.  I seem to recall the Kates also took heavy losses from American fighters when attacking without fighter cover as well.  By the time of Midway, the TBF-1 was entering service and was in the process of replacing the TBD in front line squadrons.  In fact, Torpedo 8 was the first squadron to get the Avenger and at the time of Midway a detachment was flown from Midway Island during the battle.  Of course only one of the six made it back to the island with a dead gunner.

[Renko]

Yup – I think the issue is as much circumstances as a weakness in the Devastator – they did ok prior to Midway, and ANYTHING thrown in without escort would suffer, but the Devastator seems to have ben scapegoated a bit.

 

[Mike Wolfe]

So was the Brewster Buffalo at Midway.  Everybody says how bad the aircraft was and yet they fail to mention that VMF-221 was composed of mostly green pilots, fresh out of training with little operational experience.  Throw in the little fact that they were outnumbered and facing veteran Japanese fighter pilots with extensive combat experience in China, is it any wonder the Marines did not do so well?  Also, I seem to recall that the Finns claimed 477 kills against Soviet pilots in return for 19 Buffalos being shot down.

[Renko]

Sorry, I wont have a good word said about the Buffalo 🙂

https://twtrb.blogspot.com/2019/04/brewster-buffalo-in-blood-red-skies.html

Though this is probably a more reasonable and balanced view https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOLIVGvv6yY&t=526s

 

[Author]

Posts