• New Horizons on Maelstrom
    Maelstrom New Horizons


    Visit our website www.piratehorizons.com to quickly find download links for the newest versions of our New Horizons mods Beyond New Horizons and Maelstrom New Horizons!

Navy Mod Poll

Would you join the Navy of a country if possible?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
<!--quoteo(post=151968:date=Jun 23 2006, 06:18 PM:name=Hook)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Jun 23 2006, 06:18 PM) [snapback]151968[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Sailing in the service of America should give you about a +3 Accuracy. Americans used barrels for target practice. Brit ships should probably get a boost to Cannons, as they were good when placed alongside an enemy ship.

You can see what happens when a British ship meets an American one. The Brit wants to sail alongside the enemy and exchange broadsides. The American wants to maneuver and snipe at the enemy.

While some American commanders would play the British game, they were not playing to their strengths. But then the Americans have always tended to improvise, and the Brits were bound by tradition and the "Fighting Instructions."

Hook
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Take the battle between the <i>USS Essex</i> and the <i>HMS</i> Shoot! I always forget her name, well <i>Essex</i> had all carronades, formidable guns, but lacking range, and six long guns. <i>HMS What'shername</i> ripped <i>Essex</i> to bits from long range. Also, the British could shoot up to three broadsides per two minutes! there should be something to represent that in this game.

2. During the battle of Cape St. Vincent, Nelson made the <i>Fighting Instructions</i> completely irrelevant by smashing the Spanish (bloody duffers! [no offence intended, I love the Spanish, but their navy was horrible] because the could fire about one broadside in about five minutes) from close range. This rvolutionized British naval warfare. Most RN captains could improvise with the best of 'em.
 
<!--quoteo(post=152407:date=Jun 26 2006, 12:49 PM:name=YourObed't Serv't LordNe)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(YourObed't Serv't LordNe @ Jun 26 2006, 12:49 PM) [snapback]152407[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
1. Take the battle between the <i>USS Essex</i> and the <i>HMS</i> Shoot! I always forget her name, well <i>Essex</i> had all carronades, formidable guns, but lacking range, and six long guns. <i>HMS What'shername</i> ripped <i>Essex</i> to bits from long range. Also, the British could shoot up to three broadsides per two minutes! there should be something to represent that in this game.

2. During the battle of Cape St. Vincent, Nelson made the <i>Fighting Instructions</i> completely irrelevant by smashing the Spanish (bloody duffers! [no offence intended, I love the Spanish, but their navy was horrible] because the could fire about one broadside in about five minutes) from close range. This rvolutionized British naval warfare. Most RN captains could improvise with the best of 'em.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. That's why I suggested a plus to cannons for the Brits. It's probably possible to have nationality crew adjustments to things like loading times as well.

2. "Byng was hanged 'as an example to the rest'" for failing to follow the Fighting Instructions. I don't have the references available, but you might be able to find some information on that.

The British ability to fire so rapidly is what cause the Fighting Instructions to be written. They basically state that the two fleets should line up side by side and exchange broadsides. If your fleet has more ships than the enemy, they won't be used. Nelson basically tossed the Fighting Instructions overboard for the battle of Trafalgar.

Hook
 
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Seriously, on game options, I think we're still too early for the U.S. Navy. To be even remotely historical, they probably don't belong in here at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
However, I'm talking from the P&E mod's point of view. We're talking in the year 1812.

I think that if we were to look at stats here, this is what they would be:

Britain: Grappling +3, Cannons +1, Meelee +2, Commerce +3 (Remember, England is a world power with many colonies, they tend to fight alongside and board to add the ship to their massive navy, their men were pretty pumped about battle because of their size, and they had A LOT of cannon!)

America: Leadership +3, Sailing +3, Accuracy +2, Luck +1 (The USN had some pretty daring officers, thay were excellent shipbuilders *cough* <i>Old Ironsides</i> *cough*, they were known to have some of the best gunners in the world, and they still won the Revolution and the War of 1812 with a puny navy!)

Did you know?
During the American Revolution, for every musket in the Continental Army there was one ship in the Royal Navy!
 
<!--quoteo(post=152444:date=Jun 26 2006, 04:11 PM:name=Commodore John Paul Jones)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Commodore John Paul Jones @ Jun 26 2006, 04:11 PM) [snapback]152444[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Britain: Grappling +3
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought the Brits preferred to pound a ship into surrender rather than board by force. While boarding by force is necessary for a pirate, it didn't appear to be done by navies often enough to matter.

Hook
 
I had to think of something. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
During the War of 1812, the British tactic was to capture the ship, explaining why they aimed to dismast American ships. The United States, on the other hand, aimed below the waterling to just plain get rid of the bugger. Thats sort of a factor in why the US was able to win the war.
 
<!--quoteo(post=152439:date=Jun 26 2006, 04:34 PM:name=Hook)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Jun 26 2006, 04:34 PM) [snapback]152439[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
"Byng was hanged 'as an example to the rest'" for failing to follow the Fighting Instructions. I don't have the references available, but you might be able to find some information on that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Byng lost, so it was considered not doing his utmost, plus the fact that he disregarded the <i>Fighting Instructions</i> "dogma".


<!--quoteo(post=152444:date=Jun 26 2006, 05:11 PM:name=Commodore John Paul Jones)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Commodore John Paul Jones @ Jun 26 2006, 05:11 PM) [snapback]152444[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->

However, I'm talking from the P&E mod's point of view. We're talking in the year 1812.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ha! Me too!

<!--quoteo(post=152444:date=Jun 26 2006, 05:11 PM:name=Commodore John Paul Jones)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Commodore John Paul Jones @ Jun 26 2006, 05:11 PM) [snapback]152444[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->

(The USN had some pretty daring officers, thay were excellent shipbuilders *cough* <i>Old Ironsides</i> *cough*, they were known to have some of the best gunners in the world, and they still won the Revolution and the War of 1812 with a puny navy!)

Did you know?
During the American Revolution, for every musket in the Continental Army there was one ship in the Royal Navy!
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sad to say, almost everyone built better ships than the "Bloodies" (as the Frogs called the Brits).



<!--quoteo(post=152446:date=Jun 26 2006, 05:27 PM:name=Hook)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Jun 26 2006, 05:27 PM) [snapback]152446[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--quoteo(post=152444:date=Jun 26 2006, 04:11 PM:name=Commodore John Paul Jones)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Commodore John Paul Jones @ Jun 26 2006, 04:11 PM) [snapback]152444[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Britain: Grappling +3
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought the Brits preferred to pound a ship into surrender rather than board by force. While boarding by force is necessary for a pirate, it didn't appear to be done by navies often enough to matter.

Hook
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Brits would board if the ship was superior in force to them, and they had killed a lot of the crew with their cannonade.

<!--quoteo(post=152476:date=Jun 26 2006, 10:28 PM:name=Commodore John Paul Jones)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Commodore John Paul Jones @ Jun 26 2006, 10:28 PM) [snapback]152476[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I had to think of something. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
During the War of 1812, the British tactic was to capture the ship, explaining why they aimed to dismast American ships. The United States, on the other hand, aimed below the waterling to just plain get rid of the bugger. Thats sort of a factor in why the US was able to win the war.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Funny, the Frog aimed for the rigging, and the Brit aimed to hull the ship in the Napoleonic wars> <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/bounce.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":b:" border="0" alt="bounce.gif" />
 
i was thinking the same thing about the frogs at the rigging, brits at the hull... . why on earth change tactics to ones which have obviously failed!?
and Commodore: Ol' Ironsides was originally planned to be a larger warship. if i remember correctly it was ment to be a 70- 74 gun two decker. the plan was abandoned for some reason [it was mentioned in the book i read this from but i have forgotten that as well] and changed to make a frigate with Ship of the Line standard hull thickness. that said, i wouldn't be surprised if some of the 3 deckers and 74 2 deckers had cannon balls bouncing off their sides when fired at by lower caliber cannons: not much chance to stop a 32 pound cannon ball penetrating the hull, but what about the much lighter 4, 8 and 12 pounders?
 
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> was thinking the same thing about the frogs at the rigging, brits at the hull... . why on earth change tactics to ones which have obviously failed!?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess they didn't want to damge the ships? I think that is wierd as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top