Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Sir Lancelot Holland

Members
  • Content count

    263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sir Lancelot Holland

  1. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Paints mechanic

    Indeed, during the inter war years the Far East Squadrons wore a white hull with buff funnels scheme which looked very pretty, I think it is HMS President, moored on the Thames close to HMS Belfast still wears that scheme, also research has shown that the Black/yellow paint scheme worn by HMS Victory was not the colour scheme worn at Trafalgar, at Trafalgar she wore a light pink checkerboard scheme, the latest photographs of Victory show her in this scheme instead of the traditional Black /Yellow checkerboard so familiar to the world at large.
  2. Sir Lancelot Holland

    PVP rewards for ship return to port

    It took years, tens of thousands of £'s, $'s, Reals, to build ships, It was considered by all nations that it was cheaper, more cost and time efficient to capture and reuse ships against their former owners, the cost and time to build ships in game is markedly reduced, there is little or no incentive to capture and reuse ships in the game as long as the emphasis is on VM's and a position on a leader board. Were it not for the Prize system and the hope of accumulating enough prize money for the 'little pub when I leave the sea' or whatever dream (and the threat of execution should they become logged as 'R' in the ships log) they had, kept the poorly paid officers and men of every navy at sea. While promotion depended largely on patronage, performance in battle and the ships captured were the criteria by which Captains and Admirals were judged by their peers, the men under command and the Nation as a whole, and, influenced very heavily their status in society, there was no other way that a son of a Norfolk Preacher could become a Lord, a Peer of the realm and an Admiral, a hero to his nation for 200 years. Even his much maligned opponent Admiral Villeneuve, who not only worked extremely hard to earn his rank and survived the terror of his nation post revolution as well, went through the same process to achieve his station in life only to be humiliated, driven to end his own life by his Emperor, a singular disrespect for a Flag Officer who fought with courage and honour (things that mattered far more in the period the game is set in than they do today) for his nation, whose only failure was to sail on the orders of his Emperor against every shred of experience, and, in full knowledge of the outcome of those orders under the prevailing conditions of that time, also with the full knowledge that his Emperor intended to relieve him of his command, that his replacement was en-route to relieve him. Naval Action is essentially a war game, fought with beautifully rendered and for the most part accurate sailing ships, whose function was solely to destroy the enemy, to protect their nations trade and waters, most of all to survive to fight another day should things not go to plan on that day, the Articles of war, the ROE's were written with that aim in mind, despite the draconian punishments, in part the game reflects that, the capping of enemy ships, the prize system which made the the names and reputations of so many great Captains and Admirals of all nations drove men on to fight in truly horrific conditions, the pride of fighting with, and, for men like Nelson, Villeneuve, John Paul Jones stayed with the rank and file for life, to say I was there, with those great men meant far more than VM's, a place on a leader board, or even that 'little pub', few of those men got their 'little pub' where they would recount their achievements with their Captain, their Admiral, and their ship, even if they did not get their pub their pride was no less, you see that very same pride in the posts in the great battles thread, they tell us they were there when we capped or sunk Christendom (no offense intended), it matters not if it was Trafalgar or Bensalem in game, the incentives should be the same, for the pride is the same, to say I was at Bensalem is no different to saying I was at Trafalgar, excepting that one is historical fact, the other is a battle in a game, To say I was there and receiving a little prize money means a lot more to many people than VM's and a number on a leader board, irrespective of whether they win, lose or draw a battle, for even the losing side sometimes took captured ships home for prize money, they too were there, they too were proud to say I was there.
  3. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Paints mechanic

    I think most people understand that Royal Navy has long used colour schemes and flags to denote fleets or squadrons within those fleets, in order of seniority the RN used RED White and Blue ensigns to denote which fleet a ship belonged to, Admiral's were often said to be an Admiral of the Red for example, even after the advent of steel RN Fleets were distinguished by the shade of grey they wore, Dark Admiralty Grey for the home fleet, Medium Admiralty Grey for the Med, and Light Admiralty Grey for the Far East Fleets. With the anticipated new flags certainly ships of a nation could fly any of the variations of national colours A Fine usage of the old Royalist France and the Revolutionary Tricoleur or one of the many incarnations of the US flag (including the many colourful flags seen during, and after the American Revolution/War of Independence) to denote the region a ship operates from, or her clan. Clans could be distinguished by their painted strakes or checkerboard colours and even clan flags flown in conjunction with National Colours like company flags were. Ship recognition was always a little hit and miss, it could take months before the news that a ship had been captured filtered through the respective fleets ( poor ship recognition was a trait carried over as late as WWII, Admiral Holland spent part of the last six minutes of his life fighting a Cruiser having assumed the lead ship was Bismark when in fact it was the Heavy Cruiser Prinz Eugen, until Capt Leach aboard Prince of Wales very tactfully informed him by signal flag of his error!) In the smoke and confusion of an 19th Century sea battle colours and paint schemes were a quick way of identifying an enemy at close quarters especially after the signal General Chase was hoisted. Often ships of the same class could only be told apart by colour scheme, or by the cut of their rigging, or her figurehead or transom carvings. There will always be mis-identification of ships, especially where colour schemes are similar, it's the nature of warfare that such mistakes occur, even at close quarters, in land battles such errors also happened. Perhaps a selection of paints and flags for each ship and nation should be sold as DLC certainly it would achieve the aim of raising revenue and definitely less controversial than DLC ships, Clans and nations could then make their ships more distinctive even in the smoke of battle.
  4. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Work in progress: Dreadnoughts

    While Jutland was the only fully fledged fleet action of WWI and the controversy over who actually won/lost will never be satisfactorily be decided by Great Britain or Germany, it should be remembered that there were many smaller battles that took place, The Falklands, Dogger Bank, The Bight, all had an impact on strategy one way or another, and all will very probably be the most likely form of battle as opposed to the major fleet battle at Jutland. It is ironic that less than half a century on the same protagonists fought almost a mirror war at sea in the Atlantic and North Sea with the same result. Perhaps it is not surprising since the issues facing both navy's had not changed, neither had the respective positions (in the world order of the time) of both navy's changed at least until 1941. At first glance this game has potential, especially in that ship design may be either historical or a what if scenario, for example if the Battlecruiser design been even slightly modified, and the practice of stockpiling cordite away from the protected areas within the RN for faster reload times been discontinued, would it have changed the battlecruiser loss rate at Jutland? Or even prevented the loss of HMS Hood in a later war? Certainly for whatever reason Great Britain suffered the loss of Battlecruisers far out of proportion to any other navy in world war I and to be honest Beatty may have been wrong, it may never have been the case that there was something wrong with his bloody ships that day, but more likely, the way they were fought.
  5. Sir Lancelot Holland

    [Caribbean] Great battle results.

    There have always been 'go to' ships for specific roles, ships like Le Requin and the Hercules to me are ideal for commerce raiding, certainly in a more balanced game I'd argue that Frigates should be the 'go to ships' for circle capping, a well handled frigate may not be physically able to kill off a SOL but she can hold them off and buy time to gain points until relieved by a ship of the line, or more realistically PB's could evolve into Frigate actions supported by 3rd and or 2nd' rates while the the big line battles with mixed SOL's and Frigates occur as screening actions, a reversal of current trends and may result in mini Aboukir Bay style battles, centered around PB's, and mini Trafalgar's in the vicinity of PB's, a more traditional Napoleonic sea battle that I think many expect, yet, seldom see. It may also provide usage of many ships that are currently underused and undervalued. It may prove to be that better quality RVR may result, or it may not, we simply will not know until someone tries it out over many battles to see how it all works out, tactics have to evolve or the game becomes stale, certainly if new ships arrive (and setting aside the DLC argument for a moment) they help by by providing new tactical challenges until their role becomes established in game and would help to keep the game fresh and more challenging. I would further submit that a small number of high value ports would provide a more strategic impetus at both a national and clan level, promoting tactical ability, OW PVP, skill over mega-modded almost unsinkable or un-catchable warships and providing more valuable trade resources for the trading and crafting players whose protection (alongside the protection of national waters and is where junior and less experienced Captains should be learning the skills required in fleet actions) is, in reality, the reason for the existence of all navy's everywhere, the very reason for Naval Action.
  6. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Sterncamping realism - possible solution

    This was pretty much how the system worked in real life, every ship carried marines as one of their primary functions was to protect the Captain and officers from mutiny, They also fulfilled a landing party role and were invariably found in the fighting tops (the platforms between mast sections) from which the unknown French Marine ended Nelson's career at Trafalgar. To be honest, unless the ships were locked together, accuracy was poor, smooth bore weapons, that were notoriously inaccurate, muzzle loaded with a long reload time on a platform 30 ft+ from a moving deck made for some interesting weapons skills. I suspect many Captains were more likely to place their faith in the 2lb swivel guns loaded with grape for deck clearance while sniping officers from the fighting tops. In the 18th/19th centuries no small ship Captain would attempt to lay alongside a ship of the line, Sol's were seldom caught out of support distance from other SOL's or Frigates unless they were badly damaged, and any Captain would be aware that if he attempted such a maneuver, he could be risking Courts Martial and a death sentence if it went wrong, and, should he survive. Of course it makes better game play for small ships to try their luck against larger ships and there is not the 'gentleman's agreement' that essentially prohibited a Post Captain from engaging smaller ships unless fired upon by the ship in question in game as existed during the Napoleonic wars.
  7. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Quaker Guns

    "As for OP the only way this would matter is if the OW tag tells you something like, '5th rate 20 guns' a LGV normally but some one with false guns might have '5th Rate 38 guns' Belle Poule. You will give it gun count of ships very simular to the trader ship. NOt sure what ship the Indiaman would match with in game. This would actually work great if we had paints and you could paint that trader ships to look very much like a war ship counter part or even have some paints that made warhsips look like trade ships since that is our only indicater in game is what the ship looks like in the OW. This would be an interesting addition in the game along with false flags (maybe for pirates/privateers) that allow you to look as if you are a national ship of the false flag until you tag the other players ships. Than upon battle start your true flag shows and battle begins. But I can see that so being abused even if it's just a pirate only skill." The British East India company routinely painted their ships hull's to look like warships, they also carried Company Soldiers (or mercenaries if you like) as well as ex navy gunners, those guys were real serious about keeping their cargo's! The use of national flags as a ruse de Guerre has always been legitimate as long as those colours were struck and the fight carried out under the ships real national colours, it was certainly true of 'Q' ships like Pinguin, but not of AMC's like Rawalpindi, even Graf Spee was known to have impersonated a U.S, cruiser and nominally flew the Stars and Stripes as a ruse de guerre, as well as using her sister ships names to confuse the enemy. Such measures date back to this period, and, that being said, Captain Haddock commanding RMS Lusitania (which was according to Janes Fighting Ships was an Armed Merchant Cruiser despite never having carried a gun) during WWI was censured for using Ammercan colours to avoid U-boat attack! Even during WWII for the St. Nazaire raid several lend lease U.S. Destroyers were disguised as German DD's and flew German Naval ensigns until engaged when the White ensigns were broke out and German colours struck. So yes such measures would be legitimate and would definitely add another level of immersion at a tactical level.
  8. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Tasteless

    With respect Sir where is the Provocation there? While I agree that the context of the word Bastard held a different meaning in the 19th century and was provocation enough to warrant a duel, and could bar people from the upper echelons of society, today it is pretty much a common phrase due to it's overuse, and, misuse out of context to it's original meaning. It is a sad reflection on today's society that phrases like 'i hope you die of cancer' are considered commonplace, even normal, where one group/person wishes to denigrate another group/person whom they disagree with or dislike, especially when it used by the anti Smoking Industry against those who choose a smoking lifestyle, such comments reflect a mentality that should have died after WWII and the Nuremberg trials, sadly it has not. There is no place either in game, nor in real life, for such cruel and unnecessary comments, a sentiment that I am certain that you, and anyone else with common decency, and tolerence endorse without reservation.
  9. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Collision damage

    There is of course the issue of suction, a larger hull will attract a smaller hull in close proximity, so says the successful defence in the Admiralty courts, White Star v Admiralty 1912 where the Cruiser HMS Hawke collided with the RMS Olympic causing significant damage and loss of revenue. The collision took place in the Solent where it is necessary to travel slow for the S turn to access the English Channel, at speeds similar to what sailing ships were expected to make or minimal steerage way. While I doubt suction is modeled in game there can be little doubt that suction played a significant part in boarding actions or collisions at sea despite the fact that such phenomena was unknown or rather unnamed until 1912.
  10. Sir Lancelot Holland

    DLC ships = Multi Dura ships

    The Constitution class, Monitor and Merrimack, the ironclads, CSS Hunley, Dreadnought, all natural evolution's in naval warfare, countries could either afford to employ them or they could not, the Dreadnoughts were were the ultimate P2W warship, they made every other ship obsolete overnight! Even they were outclassed by the 'super-Dreadnoughts in time. The others were harder to sink certainly, and they all had an impact out of proportion to what they actually were. In time solutions to these ships were found either through natural causes or the ingenuity of the enemy. The Xebec's widely used in the Mediterranean Sea were something of a culture shock even for the old world navy's, they solved it by building their own xebecs and hybrids, paradoxically the infant USN managed to beat them with square rigged ships and schooners, so, one has to ask what did they do that the old world navy's did not? The Hercules, another 'local' ship was fast, maneuverable, and heavily armed for her size, The Argentine Navy was not among the elite navy's of the world, they had few ships of the line compared to the old world navy's so they compromised, Hercules did exceptionally well for her size, to a degree it is reflected well in the game. Are they OP? Yes they are, but like all warships they have strengths and weaknesses, they are not invulnerable, eventually they were outclassed tactically, or became obsolete, and one day, someone like Hachiroku and his Trincomalee, or Greg Rainsborough and his Snow will find a solution to them, they will do it by exploiting the weaknesses of the Xbec's and the Hercules's, or the weaknesses of their Captains, or both. The big questions perhaps, are not so much are they OP, not so much that as DLC ships are they P2W, but, who will be the first to comprehensively and consistently beat these ships, naval warfare over the centuries has demonstrated that you can have the best equipment that mankind can devise, yet still lose because your opponent exploited your weaknesses, the weaknesses of your ship, or both, and very occasionally, blind, dumb, luck.
  11. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Changing port abilities

    An interesting idea, it would take planning and co-operation between a group of clans to get the most out of a set up like this. An RVR campaign to set up shipbuilding facilities with the necessary trade ports close by to support and finance it, the location of which would need to well thought out and a defensive plan worked out well in advance. Any group of clans/nation that can quickly establish such a chain of ports would be in a good position to secure quality wood ports, or special interest ports creating PvP/RvR 'hotspots' trying to defend, or capture their chosen areas, make channels / straights important for trade interdiction and defensive purposes which are certainly better reasons for PvP and RvR than the current 'points' system we have now. To take, hold, and build up an area holds a greater incentive to seek out PvP than just gaining points, to increase your area of influence is also a greater incentive, and if ever Pirates get autonomy they could become the brethren of the sea, the real scourge of the Caribbean that they actually were, making them what they were in reality, outside of the law and a drain on resources for national clans.
  12. Sir Lancelot Holland

    i miss the Konstabel on my trader

    It would appear to me that the Konstabel is the equivalent to the R.N.'s Gunnery Petty Officer, a fearsome individual equal in almost every respect to the Army's Regimental Sgt. Major and Colour Sgt's. With their Ratan and rope starter they controlled sections of a gun deck under supervision of an Midshipman and LT, it was, in large part due to their efforts the R.N, was as efficient as it became. They were key and vital positions to the running of any warships lower deck, equal to the Bosun who's responsibility was for the deck and sail hands. My introduction to Navy life at HMS Ganges was a Gunnery Petty Officer Turner, a product of Whale Island, who, was very soft spoken, yet could, reduce the biggest recruit to a wreck, then rebuild him into a sailor in the Royal Navy! His kind, as generations of seamen knew them, are now pretty much extinct.
  13. Sir Lancelot Holland

    DLC ships in PBs needs to be fixed ASAP

    I think that is a partial solution to the issue of DLC ships in PB's, however what may happen is that a PB Fleet will find itself intercepted by hordes of Xbecs, and or Hercules or whatever the next over powered DLC ship is, it could well be that PB's will be decided by the number of these ships screening and not by the quality of crafted ships or player ability. It is one thing to actively engage with quality ships and good players knowing the odds are slim at best for average players with average ships, after all a significant number of the good players do try to help less skilled players with advice, even if the advice is sometimes not as well formatted as it could be. It is quite another to turn up in ships that it takes the average player a long time to craft, find mods for, learn to master, only to be slaughtered by ships of lesser rate that take a few minutes to craft and are immensely powerful even as vanilla ships just because they are paid for. Surely there must be more satisfaction in using well crafted ships and learning how to sail and fight them even against the more skilled players, whom I suspect sometimes think to themselves that this fellow is improving and needs watching (even if they do not say so) or the lesser skilled player who lasts another few minutes longer each time they meet skilled players and see their skill improving because of that, as opposed to losing to ships that are so over powered that they are almost invulnerable. The former improves morale and makes the game worth playing, the latter demoralises and forces less skilled players to quit the game.
  14. Sir Lancelot Holland

    DLC ships

    Surely the real question is: Why should anyone spend time, resources, and gold crafting a good quality ship when their opponent can pay for a mini super Dreadnought, build from the finest woods, throw on some enhancements that make her almost invulnerable in a few minutes, and then, sink you on your maiden voyage? It is not fun spending time gold and resources crafting ships that never get to do what you designed them to do because someone bought the 18th century equivalent of the Graf Spee pocket battleships, Scharnhorst battlecruiser or Bismark class battleships, it is worse than P2W, it's almost no win! Unless of course, you follow the R.N.'s solution, gank them to death! In my opinion it is far more satisfying to construct a ship that someone has to learn how to counter, even for the opposing player who comes up with the winning tactics, than to pay for an almost invulnerable ship that kills almost anything it meets, a concept that is self destructive, as eventually, few, if any players will be willing to come out and fight it. Now, where is my battle bowler and anti flash gear?
  15. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Routing

    in game I think that the limitation of speed should be to what that type, or class within type were physically capable of, raising or lowering speed constraints 'across the board' achieves nothing of significant value. Minor variations of speed within class were the norm, indeed even the different classes within a ships rate had minor speed variations. The illustration you provide looks reasonable, and if battle damage is taken into account, in theory a fir/fir Bellona may not be capable of reaching her maximum speed, or maintain that speed, and may even be slower than her Oak/Oak counterpart given damage and even reps carried at the time, and, of course assuming the more sturdy ship will have suffered less damage, at least hull wise, although that may not always be the case. The point you make regarding Fir/Fir Bellona's is no different to to the debates between Admirals Beatty and Fisher regarding the Battlecruiser concept, which was basically a speed v armour debate, it was also felt in some quarters that the Battlecruiser would render the Cruiser obsolete just as HMS Dreadnought rendered the Battleships of her generation obsolete. So in truth your point about rendering Frigates obsolete actually mirrors real life thinking in a later century. Further, the Torpedo Boat Destroyers of the same era reinforces that point, and of course the they became the Destroyer of escort and anti submarine warfare fame, and, at no time did they threaten the Frigates and Corvettes of convoy escort fame, but, they did compliment them. It was their speed that made Destroyers the natural escort for battle groups where Frigates and Corvettes escorted convoys for the most part. In reality the Battlecruiser never replaced Cruisers either, the concept failed due to misuse and bad cordite handling procedures. I do not think we need speed mods, the sail-force mods alone provide significant difference in performance in the same way that a Captain would fine tune the the rig of his new command to his preference. Such a system may even make the Captain's skill sets more important than the artificial 'turbo charging' of speed mods, it is of course theory, but, it is in battle where theory becomes fact or fiction.
  16. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Routing

    The issue of speed is I think quite complex, different classes of ship type often had significant differences in speed, hull-form, sail plan and rig all made a difference. Even within a class of ships there would be a fast one, a slow one and the rest would fall somewhere between those, the difference may only be measured in 10th's of a knot, if that, but that difference can still be life or death. Many Captains would adjust a ships rig on taking command, his experience would be different from the previous commander and he may know his preferred rig produces a fraction of a knot more than his predecessor. Even today no two warships in a class share identical properties, there will be a fast one a slow one, one that turns slightly faster or slower, they all have individual characters if you like. It is, I think, vital that the ship you use for a given role be actually capable of fulfilling that role, Line ships do not need speed, they do need armour and brute force, small ships demand speed sacrificing armour and brute force for maneuverability, it is true that commerce raiders relied on speed to catch traders and evade frigates, it is also true that hybrids like the later Battlecruiser concept which sacrificed armour, yet, retained the firepower of line ships were of mixed value, they were meant to out run anything that could sink them and sink anything that could out run a line ship, it was, in part, the misuse of their role that caused the loss of so many of them at Jutland and of HMS Hood in the Denmark Strait. The same holds true in game if your ship cannot fulfill the role it is designed for it will very likely fail, if you fight a battle it is not designed to fight it will very likely fail. Yes speed is vital in ships that need speed, Armour and brute force is vital in ships that are expected to fight toe to toe, did some ships have both? Yes, but they had to live with the facts, if they met a slower equally powerful ship it was very likely run or die, if they met ships of equal speed they would very likely win, unless they are unfortunate enough to run into greater numbers. Of course the day may come when you meet a lesser ship commanded by a more experienced Captain, (or a Captain who will stand and fight even knowing the outcome), and i am sure everyone has been there, where his skill, experience and knowledge made the difference between success and failure, or, more rarely, a less experienced Captain who stands and fights to stalemate, or is lucky enough to actually win, such can be the fortunes of war.
  17. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Hugging exploit

    It was considered that a Captain of a ship of the line who engaged 4th's and below without provocation was guilty of Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman, punishment would have been removal from command and beaching on half pay or even without pay. Any Captain of a 4th rate ship who attacked a ship of the line would have been considered to have unduly hazarded his command with the same penalties, unless he was supporting a ship of the line, or, the SOL had been severely damaged and the loss of crew so severe as to of permitted boarding by a lower rated ship, or was otherwise incapable of defending herself adequately. Captains who successfully boarded SOL's from Frigates were rare, and would have ended up as public heroes, those who failed lost their commands, living as paupers their position in society lost even if they were reinstated. Every Frigate Captain knew if he tangled with a SOL he was in for a world of hurt, (just as every Post Captain knew he would be held in contempt for engaging a 4th Rate without provocation) his command would be in a poor condition to fight if it took a few broadsides, and even if he made into musket range typically about 100 meters the numbers of Marines and marksmen in the fighting tops and upper deck would turn his upper deck into an death trap, the impact of 32lb or larger ball would wreck his ship close to or at the waterline would hazard his command, a prospect that he would not be inclined to risk, especially in light of the Articles of War and the wide range of punishment available to the Admiralty. It should also be kept in mind that when Nelson received his mortal wound HMS Victory was within pistol shot range of Le Redoubtable or less than 50 meters and that the casualty rates aboard both ships were horrifically high precisely due to musket, pistol, and fire from the lowest and heaviest gun decks. Were the effects of close in fighting accurate in game no sane small ship commander would get anywhere near a ship of the line unless directly ordered or without support from a ship of the line, more out of fear of what the Admiralty would do to them, rather than what the enemy could do! I do not think the issue is so much one of game mechanics, neither is it an exploit, but the transposition of 21st Century values over the true values of the 18th/19th Centuries.
  18. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Demasting / dismasting

    English, like most languages is an ever evolving language, historians would say a ship was demasted/dismasted a seaman of the period would most likely not say that, he'd more likely say that her masts had 'gone by the board', meaning overboard. Sailors have always had a sub-language of their own, just as Lawyers and Doctors do, and to the layman the language was, and even now still is, almost a foreign language even though most laymen know what a deck is, they may not all be familiar with deck-head, or even bulkhead, they may not know what the heads are, or what the tiller flat is, or the difference between a mess, gun-room and wardroom, but the words are none the less are familiar to some, but not necessarily their meaning, anyone who sails anything would know what cheesing, flaking and coiling lines are, what reefing, setting and furling sails means. They would know a knot is a measure of speed, and not what you use to secure a line to something else, which in naval parlance are bends and hitches, or that splicing is the term for joining two lines or hawsers or cables, or lashing a broken spar as a temporary repair, add to that the realisation that lashing and splicing also has different connotations in other contexts ie 'lashing hammocks' meaning to stow away hammocks and the daily grog issue or 'splicing the mainbrace'. Even something as simple as Port and Starboard can be counter instinctive especially, when as in the 18th century, the the order to hard over to Port would actually turn you Starboard, in fact the same held true as late as 1912 and possibly beyond that date, the orders issued aboard Titanic were intended to 'port about' (to place the berg on the ships right hand side) the berg, the initial turn would have been to starboard (Turning the wheel right to go left) to clear the ships head of the berg followed by a hard port turn (turning the wheel left to go right) to to clear the stern, at least if the quartermasters testimony at the inquiries was correct, since the Officer of the Watch (who did not survive the wreck along with the Captain) reported to to the Captain that he had tried to 'port about it but was too late and had closed the watertight doors' and that would have been the only way to 'port about' the iceberg. Some nations did, and still do use Backboard for Port, more usually in the 18th century helm orders would be to windward or leeward, to tack, jibe, or wear ship, indeed today's navy's signal turns as Red or Blue for port and Starboard since every sailor knows red is port and Blue is Starboard ,despite starboard navigation lights being green, such were some of the nuances of the nautical language . It is no real surprise that writers and historians try to make such terms more understandable to the layman, as the layman finds it easier to understand things in their own context rather than the nautical context, in truth whether you use 'demasting', 'dismasting' or 'going by the board; no one is wrong, it'is merely a crossover from a nautical context to a context the reader is more familiar with, it is no different to a British sailor or heraldry student referring to the Union Flag and who understands that a Union Jack is only flown from a jack-staff, and it is the Union Flag flown from anywhere else, and the layman, many of whom do not see the difference between the two terms, call it the 'Union Jack'.
  19. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Holy Grail of Shipwrecks

    Pick an Empire, any Empire, you will see exactly the same allegations laid against them all. Violations against human rights, what human rights? The Empires did not have any form of human rights legislation as we know them. Some Empires did make efforts in that direction, within the context of the times they were enabled they were progressive and the basis of todays human rights legislation. Even the US Constitution, which is still an enlightened document in many respects (as is Magna Carta upon which the Constitution is based), said categorically slaves were chattel's, property to be disposed of as their owners decreed with none of the equality it clearly espoused . it was a product of it's times, moulded by the culture of it's time, and not as todays politically correct would have us believe, a means to keep slaves in their place. The tribes of Africa did more to perpetrate slavery than any Empire, they abducted neighboring tribes to sell into slavery yet the Empires are the villains. The Royal Navy was chasing down slavers for years before the importation of slaves to the Caribbean and continental U.S. was banned, and Wilberforce's slavery bill is generally ignored by the PC brigades. Then of course we have Genocide, Many indigenous populations were all but wiped out by diseases like smallpox, in the time when the European's were carving out their Empires there was little knowledge of how smallpox was transmitted, no Vaccines either, so is it not more likely that this particular tragedy played out through Ignorance rather than a deliberate policy like Manifest Destiny? Even today Genocide is rife, African tribes still try to wipe each other out, yet, the big bad Empires are held responsible, despite tribal feuds that have dated back for millennia. Exploration was an expensive venture, substantial capital was invested and a return on that investment was expected, many South American cultures had no use for gold, silver and some other minerals, it held no meaning to them, so how can you exploit a people out of minerals they hold no interest in? The same holds true today, drug companies invest trillions in new drugs, often they are as dangerous as the diseases they combat and are sold at immense profit, often denying the product to those who need it the most. I wonder which philosophy is worse? Mankind has not changed, merely shifted focus from making a profit from territory they have conquered to controlling lifestyle choices, one day, those who are trying to force lifestyle changes will stand as condemned as the old Empires are, it is easier to lay blame, to keep old grievances burning, than to make a real effort to solve problems, Carrie Nation practiced Eugenics, as did Germany post Weimar Republic, Eugenics does not work, the Prohibition of alcohol alongside tobacco in the 1930's and World War II proved it beyond doubt, yet, here we are in the 21st century making the very same mistakes, such is human nature. France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Portugal, Italy, and Great Britain all held Colonies or Empires, all had differing methods of control, all have blood on their hands, all have done right and wrong, but it was done within the culture and context of their specific times, not the culture or times we have now, for today we no longer bully or persecute countries we conquered as Rome did, but our own people, is the 21st century culture any better, or different, than the old Empires? Perhaps in a hundred years we too will stand damned, as the men and nations who created the great Empires are damned today.
  20. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Battle Flag DLC

    Admiral by Martin Grieve A straight-forward English flag in the ratio of 2:3 Martin Grieve, 12 December 2003 Vice-Admiral by Martin Grieve As per Admiral's flag, but one ball added in upper canton. Martin Grieve, 12 December 2003 Rear-Admiral by Martin Grieve As per Vice-Admiral, but an additional ball inserted in 3rd quarter and centrally placed on white panel.. Martin Grieve, 12 December 2003 Commodore by Martin Grieve The rank of Commodore, the status of which had remained murky throughout the 18th Century, was legally established by Regulations of 1806, and formally divided into those of the 1st class (with a Captain under them) and 2nd class (when commanding the ship themselves) in 1826. The previously used Red and Blue Broad Pendants disappeared with the abolition of squadronal colours in 1864 leaving only the White, with a "ball of difference" being introduced for the boat pendants of Second Class Commodores at the same time. From the same cause that affected Admiral's flags, this form with the ball became the only one for use for the second class. In 1958 however, the rank of of First Class Commodore was placed "in abeyance" and the broad Pendant without a ball accordingly dropped. The construction details given here are taken from figures issued by the Ministry of Defence and published in the current edition of BR20. Martin Grieve and Christopher Southworth, 26 December 2003 Admiral of the Fleet 1:2 image by Clay Moss, 16 December 2006 The British Admiral of the Fleet uses the Union Flag flown at the masthead, but the proportions of the flag have been disputed. In BR20, the Ministry of Defence flag book, they are given as 2:3, but the Royal Navy web-site and other sources showed it to be 1:2. It has now been agreed that the flag of an Admiral of the Fleet has always been, and still is, a Union Flag in proportions 1:2. The Ministry of Defence will remove the 2:3 Union Flag from BR20 at the next change. "Admiral's flags" are 2:3, but the flag of an Admiral of the Fleet is not an "admiral's flag", it is the Union Flag. David Prothero, 3 December 2002 A Union Flag at the main masthead is no longer flown only by an Admiral of the Fleet. From Chapter 91 of ‘The Queen’s Regulations for the Royal Navy’:
  21. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Happy treason day to my fellow ungrateful colonials

    The Red coat was considered to be eminently practical, it was thought that the Red coat would hide most of the blood thus keeping up morale, also it acted in a similar way to a guidon it was easy to see in the smoke and poor visibility of battle. Blue was not exactly inconspicuous either, it was a lot easier to see than the Butternut and Grey used by the Confederate States Army during the American Civil War in the smoke of battle. It was not until the Boer war(s) (in the not so distant future from when this game is set) that Khaki, which made the Boers harder to see, replaced the Red coat. Equally, we should not forget, that were it not for the French advisors, and the Comte de Grasse who successfully stopped the reinforcement of General Cornwallis at Chesapeake Bay, bringing about the siege of Yorktown, the Continental Army may well have lost their war.
  22. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Flags Flags Flags

    Will the Commodore's Broad pennant and Admiral's flag be included? Some indication of from which mast head such pennants flags and Battle Ensigns should be flown from would also be a nice touch too.
  23. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Newbie clans

    Yes, but every nation in the world teaches their military, then, some of them leave, so does that argument hold true or is the game imitating life?
  24. Sir Lancelot Holland

    The Admiral

    An awesome film on so many levels! As a young man I would see Dutch warships bearing the names De Ruyter, De Witt and Tromp, and have even marshalled the Wasp helicopter from the Van Spjiek class Frigate HMNS De Ruyter when visiting HMS Osprey in the 1970's, watching the film for me puts these men on a level with Hood, Anson, Rodney and Nelson, all ships that bear the names of great Admirals, who served their nations with honour and pride, often at odds with their political masters but beloved by the navy's and people of their nations. We may not get to sail the ships upon which they made their names as many of them were before the game's timeline, but to sail the ships that bore their names during our timeline would be a just and fitting legacy both for the men themselves, and the Nation they so courageously fought and died for.
  25. Sir Lancelot Holland

    Boarding + 'Determined Defender' suggestion

    To a degree I would agree DD gave me an advantage, equally I agree you worked hard to get into a position where you could board, I do think that a single still picture does not reflect how the battle actually progressed. My first thought was 'expletive' It's Nick the Cursed! Many have heard of you, few have heard of Sir Lancelot Holland so from a morale perspective you were already ahead, it was also clear you had already been in a fight. Despite low crew numbers and the loss of 25% of my sails I was still able to manoeuvre fairly well and where I could managed to get a few good broadsides into your Snow. Indeed it is a testament to the Snow and your ability having lost 35% of your own sails that you got close enough to attempt to board. To be honest it was going to be anybody's fight, either of us could have won even at the point where the decision was made to disengage and yes it was a good fight, it's rare that i get into a 1v1 fight, usually I get on the wrong side of a high numbers fight, all that really taught me was that to win you need numbers, which is sad for so many reasons. The battle ended as so many battles in this age ended, with both of us believing we could have won, that the mutual decision to disengage, repair, and go our separate ways was the right one, made with honour by both sides. Should DD be removed, no I don't think it should, I do think though it should be more balanced maybe linked to morale and the condition of the opposing ships which may be a more reasonable solution.
×