Skip to main content

The Battle of Tonkin Bay 1904 (Naval AAR)

The IJN had been deployed to the Bay of Tonkin in support of Imperial China's war against France in 1903. Set backs on land required further troop reinforcements and an escort under way in early May. The IJN fleet consisted of;

 

  • Ø  Battleship Mikasa
  • Ø  Battleship Fuji
  • Ø  Battleship Shikishima
  • Ø  Cruiser Chitose
  • Ø  Cruiser Nisshan
  • Ø  Cruiser Idzumi
  • Ø  Cruiser Matsushima
  • Ø  Battleship Chen Yuan
  • Ø  Cruiser Idzumo
  • Ø  Cruiser Choyoda
  • Ø  Cruiser Naniwa
  • Ø  Cruiser Itsukushuma
  • Ø  Cruiser Katsuragi
  • Ø  3x destroyers

 


Divided into five squadrons with three transport ships in a sixth squadron.

 

The French Marine Nationale under Auguste Boué de Lapeyère found them at dawn. Their six squadrons consisted of;

  • Ø  Battleship Iena
  • Ø  Battleship Messena
  • Ø  Battleship Henri IV
  • Ø  Battleship Jaureguiberry
  • Ø  Battleship Carnot
  • Ø  2x cruiser Friant
  • Ø  Armoured Cruiser Gloire
  • Ø  4x torpedo boats
  • Ø  3x destroyers

 


The Japanese strategy was to advance all squadrons in either line abreast or a staggered line and engage the French fleet en mass. The French strategy was to form into two lines crossing over at the centre with the torpedo boats and destroyers running ahead down the middle to scatter the enemy formation. Whilst the French strategy did provide slightly more optimal gunnery lines it was over matched by the weight of fire from the Japanese.

 

 


Early exchange of longer range gunner went poorly for the French. The elite Japanese battleships possessed twice the large calibre guns of the French and were uncanny in their ability to score critical hits on French magazines. A trend which would repeat itself throughout the battle.

 

 

The French Battlehship Jaureguiberry was the first lost after its magazine detonated at first contact. Similar hits were scored against the Gloire and the Iena but effective damage control kept both ships in the action.

 

Whilst the French bigger guns floundered their torpedo boats and destroyers progressed into the centre of the Japanese formation. The destroyers made a pivotal error and were caught in the secondary batteries of the Japanese ships but the torpedo boats evaded such fate. They cut between the Japanese battleships and unloaded 5 torpedoes at close range. Unfortunately they failed score a single hit.

 


As the range reduced the Japanese guns continued to pound the French fleet with losses mounting. The French responded by crippling two Japanese armoured cruisers and sinking one. In exchange they would go on to lose all but one battleship and one of their own armoured cruisers.

 

 




The final blow was against the French flag ship, the Iena, who was sunk whilst the French fleet attempted to break off. A lucky shot hit her magazine and sent her sinking in a matter of seconds in the fourth such strike.  Her crew was lost to a man and so was her Admiral Auguste Boué de Lapeyère, who would surely have been court marshalled for losing most of the French fleet in exchange for some Japanese cruisers and one troop transport ship.

 

 


I knew going in the Japanese had the advantage but I was surprised it was such a one sided drubbing. Using the Tsushima rules by A&A game design weight of guns is really the most important factor in a fleet. Torpedoes are too random to be relied on and the smaller ships easily brushed off. I had a lot of fun but I may modify the rules for next time. In the games I have played it is rare that one line is formed by either fleet as the rules are two forgiving on command and control and target selection. Equally a 1 in 10 chance of causing a crippling explosion on a critical hit is very high and has led to consistently high casualty rates compared with historic engagements. I may not change the latter as it does speed games up but I want to try taking the card system from the Coaling Stations rule set, simplifying it a little and running it with these rules. A card based order system would force both players to plan their moves rather than just select targets of opportunity. Equally if orders are more effective over larger dedicated lines this would force more historical fleet formations. 


C

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Quick Looks: Cimean War Battles - Tchernaya River

 A quick one today I traded off Across the Narva by Revolution Games (should post something on this) for an oldish (2000) copy of an S&T magazine. The mag came with two battles reprinted from the 1978 Quad game on the Crimean War. The full Quad also contained Inkerman and Balaklava, this magazine version just has Tchernaya River and Alma. Initial setup Early SPI games (and actually GDW and AH come to think of it) of the 70s tend to have lots of rules you already know. I go, U go, movement, fire, melee, rally, and most of the rules are standard. Command and control rules and friction of war arrived a lot later. To couter this I have added a simple house rule. For each division (units are brigates and regiments, about 2-8 per division) roll. On a 1 in 6 movement is halved unless the unit can charge, in which case it must charge the nearest enemy.  A simple easy to apply rule for generating those light brigade charges. You could also easily convert this to a chit pull game by division
2 comments
Read more

Quick Looks; Red Star / White Eagle

I generally hate it when people describe designs or ideas in games as dated, because many of the most innovative games  are older than I am. Equally it implies there is something innately good about new designs, which I don't think there is. Dune is arguably the best multiplayer 'war' boardgame and the 70s basic DnD is in my view still the best RPG. I wasn't born until the late 80s and didn't discover these things to the mid 2000s so this isn't nostalgia doing my thinking, its just that some old ideas are better than new ones, despite our apparent 'progress'. Back when Roger B MacGowan did cool art house covers But having said all this Red Star / White Eagle is a dated game design. And this matters if you are looking at popping £70 on a new reprint of it from Compass Games. I am a wary cheapskate so I picked up a second hand copy with a trashed box of ebay for £20. It was worth it, but only just. Poles have just been creamed on the south we
2 comments
Read more

Jena Campaign - Debrief - Lessons learned.

On the last Saturday of this past June I enjoyed one of the best learning experiences I have had in wargaming to put a positive spin on it. The day did not start well in character as General von Ruchel I arrived to the field 3 hours late having boarded the wrong train. When I arrived I discovered that my colleagues had spread our forces in a long thin line between the Fulda gap and Gera with no reserve. Control's game map The Jena campaign megagame, designed by Rupert Clamp was devised as a double blind map game. Each side of 10-15 players wrote orders for each division ordering it about a large map of central Germany. When battle was joined a divisional commander collected his regimental level counters and played a simple face to face tactical game. A step up the chain of command it was the army commanders (generals) role to devise the overall strategy for then the divisional/corps commanders and their chiefs of staff teams to implement. Or if you were on the Pruss
7 comments
Read more