l'oceans and 36pdrs

[Guest]

in the french navy the largest guns for a ship of war were the 36pd long cannons apart from the carronades, if you could give the l'ocean maximum gun size with 36 pd cannons it would 1. balance it more towards the victory in the terms of firepower. 2 Santisima would have a bigger part in the port battles bringing more variety to the types of ship there is in the battle and 3 the guns are actually being used as they are intended to do because no one would choose the 2 sec reload decrease over more damage and penetration.

[Liq]

Though the French pound is not equal to the british pound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/36-pounder_long_gun

Quote

"The nominal weight of shot was 36 French livres, 17.6 kg (38.8 lb)."

Edited September 18, 2017 by Liq

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Wyy said:

in the french navy the largest guns for a ship of war were the 36pd long cannons apart from the carronades, if you could give the l'ocean maximum gun size with 36 pd cannons it would 1. balance it more towards the victory in the terms of firepower. 2 Santisima would have a bigger part in the port battles bringing more variety to the types of ship there is in the battle and 3 the guns are actually being used as they are intended to do because no one would choose the 2 sec reload decrease over more damage and penetration.

first off Wyy.. I like the thought about mixing the ships up. But the problem with the broadside weights - as Liq already hinted at with his link, is that the different nations used different weights. I'm all for realism but seeing as the imperial lb were only used in brittain and the french, spanish, danish, swedish, dutch (etc) used different and sometimes very localized scales (ind Denmark we had more than 30 different pounds if I recall correct in the entire danish-norwegian kingdoms).. To ask the devs to check the weights, revert them to imperials is labor intensive and perhaps more than could be genuinely asked of anyone..

[Batman]

I already said in the past I would rather have the 42's removed - as all navies got rid of them over time. Heavy on gunpowder, heavy on weight, heavy on crew. On HMS Victory Website you can actually read that she was first equipped with 42pd guns but they were removed for given reasons. Give 36pd guns to 1st and 2nd rates, hell maybe even only 32's as well so 3rd rate ships can be a logical choice in port battle and don't get reload shocked every broadside they receive from a bigger ship.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Batman

[John Cavanaugh]

9 minutes ago, Batman said:

I already said in the past I would rather have the 42's removed - as all navies got rid of them over time. Heavy on gunpowder, heavy on weight, heavy on crew. On HMS Victory Website you can actually read that she was first equipped with 42pd guns but they were removed for given reasons. Give 36pd guns to 1st and 2nd rates, hell maybe even only 32's as well so 3rd rate ships can be a logical choice in port battle and don't get reload shocked every broadside they receive from a bigger ship.

3rd rates will never be a logical choice in a port battle so long as we have no incentive to mix fleet construction. You can argue maneuverability, but we can all see from streamed port battles that people who want the turning and speed will still just build 1sts, but with lighter woods. In order to see fleets with diverse and realistic compositions a BR cap/limit to number of each rate of ship for PB, and ideally OW battles as well, as suggested frequently in the past, is the only way to do that. Even with immediate post wipe QM limitations the rush was immediately on for the old mono fleet- nothing competes in this model

[Malachy]

On 9/18/2017 at 6:29 PM, John Cavanaugh said:

3rd rates will never be a logical choice in a port battle so long as we have no incentive to mix fleet construction. You can argue maneuverability, but we can all see from streamed port battles that people who want the turning and speed will still just build 1sts, but with lighter woods. In order to see fleets with diverse and realistic compositions a BR cap/limit to number of each rate of ship for PB, and ideally OW battles as well, as suggested frequently in the past, is the only way to do that. Even with immediate post wipe QM limitations the rush was immediately on for the old mono fleet- nothing competes in this model

Myself and a couple of my clan mates went to a port battle awhile back. We were the only bellonas there. Not only did we get the only kills In that battle, one of our guys killed 3 santismas, I killed one victory, and our third guy had 4 assists. The lame old excuse of no reason to use thirds is merely that, an excuse. 85 percent of those who have lineships don't know how to properly employ them. Those that do are too afraid to lose them because they know most of their force are know nothings.

 

pre wipe I stopped going to port battles because they were filled with arrogant noobs who couldn't sail their way out of a wet paper bag and it disgusted me.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Malachy

[Batman]

On 19.9.2017 at 1:29 AM, John Cavanaugh said:

3rd rates will never be a logical choice in a port battle so long as we have no incentive to mix fleet construction. You can argue maneuverability, but we can all see from streamed port battles that people who want the turning and speed will still just build 1sts, but with lighter woods. In order to see fleets with diverse and realistic compositions a BR cap/limit to number of each rate of ship for PB, and ideally OW battles as well, as suggested frequently in the past, is the only way to do that. Even with immediate post wipe QM limitations the rush was immediately on for the old mono fleet- nothing competes in this model

A Victory outturns Santi and L'Ocean, but it will never be able to outmaneuver a Bellona or a 3rd rate. I pushed the Bellona you build after the wipe to a turnrate of 2.8ish. Don't know the exact number right now because not ingame. Together with the better sailing profile a Bellona/3rd rate can easily sterncamp a 1st rate and angle itself to avoid most of its broadside. Yet there is no use for 3rd rate ships in Port Battles because 1st rates annihilate them in line sailing.

[John Cavanaugh]

Precisely - and with current fleet tactic of blobbing - sterns are protected and are (marginally) less vulnerable to mortars, sailing and maneuvering is largely limited to splinters that rush capture points. If we want variety in fleet composition you have to eliminate the ability to spam 24 1sts. Their role was as lynchpin of fleet- like Posts in rugby, not the entirety of the fleet. QM failed to limit their use, just neutered people who couldn't get them. It needs direct addressing e.g. Fleet br cap. If that were the case you could conceive of using other ships, but as it is - bring 10 1sts and 10 bellonas and unless the wind hands you victory on a plate you will lose. 

 

Cap BR to 10k in lineship battles and you'll see people bring a mix of rates as well as L'oceans load lighter guns to DPS down the smaller ships. 

[Ruby Rose]

there is no point in limiting a type of ship that everyone with the gold and materials and patience can get their hands on, also with regards to PB's, there should be overwhelming battles what would be the point in forcing battle groups to choose who can use a 1st rate and who can't, we already have low player count on the PVP global server no reason to diminish it further by making a change like this because someone thinks 1st rates aren't available to everyone or that there overpowered, this isn't call of duty this isn't another MMORPG this is NAVAL ACTION and as that name suggests its a war between nations set in the age of sails.  we aren't going off historical reenactments with port battles.  there is no reason to limit the cannons on first rates by size like the 36's instead of 42's.

the fact still remains that HMS victory a first rate had 42's on it at some point therefore making those cannons a valid type for first rates. just cause historically they removed them at a later date doesn't mean the devs should remove them from the game.

[CaptVonGunn]

On 9/22/2017 at 7:55 PM, Ruby Rose said:

there is no point in limiting a type of ship that everyone with the gold and materials and patience can get their hands on, also with regards to PB's, there should be overwhelming battles what would be the point in forcing battle groups to choose who can use a 1st rate and who can't, we already have low player count on the PVP global server no reason to diminish it further by making a change like this because someone thinks 1st rates aren't available to everyone or that there overpowered, this isn't call of duty this isn't another MMORPG this is NAVAL ACTION and as that name suggests its a war between nations set in the age of sails.  we aren't going off historical reenactments with port battles.  there is no reason to limit the cannons on first rates by size like the 36's instead of 42's.

the fact still remains that HMS victory a first rate had 42's on it at some point therefore making those cannons a valid type for first rates. just cause historically they removed them at a later date doesn't mean the devs should remove them from the game.

 And historically there were never more then a Dozen 1st rates in a single Battle  EVER that is both sides combined.. SO why is the gun from History  ok but not fleet tactics? Trafalgar had  3 Britsh 2st rate sa nd 4 2nd rates all others were 3rds.. Franco/Spanish had 4 st no 2nd rest 3rds(for line ships)