Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Haratik

  1. Haratik

    Ship paintings (Art collection)

    Bretagne (1855) Decommissioned 1865.
  2. If you cannot grasp the answer then I'm not going to indulge you. Figure it out.
  3. Right, you had no control over what happened. Of Course.
  4. I read the thread, apparently you didn't comprehend the fact that you allowed him to do what he wanted.
  5. Player did nothing wrong. Morally wrong according to your moral compass perhaps, but nothing wrong according to current game mechanics. If he joined the enemy side, then you are obligated to sink him, and if you do not, and by ignoring him thus allow him to do what he wants, then that is your fault as an opposing player to prevent him from doing what you are accusing him of doing now. Do not waste tribunal's time with matters such as this. If you have a suggestion to change current loot mechanics, post it in the correct thread.
  6. Haratik

    Ship paintings (Art collection)

    Not paintings, but a couple of rare pictures.
  7. Haratik

    The 3rd Rate Merchant Ship

    modern representation of a lost ship, you need plans to propose such a vessel, and I doubt one exists of this particular ship. They might be able to map it out based on knowledge of the wreck, but I highly doubt such a rebuild is feasible.
  8. No certainly not. You're not on my list I merely saw the title and location of the thread and was left scratching my head as to why lineship images were being posted.
  9. I take it the post was about stern galleries instead of ship types?
  10. You sure you didn't post this in the wrong thread @LeBoiteux?
  11. Haratik

    Wonderful ship maker

    Some people have trouble comprehending.
  12. Haratik

    Player selected ship 2017 - Suggestions

    This thread is defunct since the poll is over and ships already selected, so why post here?
  13. Haratik

    Happy almost 4th! (With Pictures)

    How many traitor's day's does the UK have?
  14. Haratik

    Happy almost 4th! (With Pictures)

  15. From what I can find about him, my guess would be no, it is not a ship of his design, rather it is a plan drawn up of an existing Portuguese ship of the line at his insistence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_of_the_Portuguese_Navy#1807_Fleet indicates (with a noted source): These ships, in general, were said to be in good repair; and as to construction, equal, if not superior to the British. So a further guess would be that he had orders to draw up plans of existing Portuguese warships to take back to the Admiralty to be studied. With the level of good relations between the Portuguese monarchy and that of the British, I would assume he had little difficulty in executing this.
  16. I'm still trying to find out more detail about the plan. The date 1811 is clearly marked, as is a name toward the bottom of the upper right corner paragraph: Lord Berkeley. There's not much I can dig up on any Lord Berkeley that existed during the supposed date on the plan. Of those with the title that existed, only one I can discover that served in the Royal Navy before and after the date, and he became a Sea Lord years later. I'm afraid it's not much to go on right now, but there's clues to be explored. Edit: I am mistaken, further research has revealed the service of a Sir George Cranfield Berkeley in the Royal Navy during this period, who happened to be stationed in Portugal during the years preceding the date marked on the plan up until the following year. Wikipedia notes this: Berkeley continued building his political status during the Peace of Amiens and by Berkeley had been appointed inspector of sea fencibles, a job he undertook with vigour, conducting a fourteen-month survey of Britain's coastal defences, which greatly improved the island's defences. In 1806, after a shift in political power, Berkeley fell out of favour somewhat and was dispatched to the North American Station. From there, Berkeley ordered the attack by HMS Leopard on the American frigate USS Chesapeake in retaliation for American recruitment of British deserters. This action, known as the Chesapeake-Leopard Affair, helped precipitate the War of 1812.[2] Having embarrassed the British government with this action, Berkeley was recalled home. However, public opinion supported his orders, so Berkeley was moved to command in Lisbon in the hope he could organise the chaotic supply system for Wellington's army in the Peninsula War.[2] Berkeley recognised that only a dedicated and organised convoy system could keep the supply of men, food and material regular and consequently set one up. Simultaneously, he reequipped and galvanised the remnants of the Spanish Navy, rescuing several ships from capture by the French as well as used frigates to supply partisan units all along the coast of Portugal and Northern Spain.[2] By 1810, Wellington could truthfully say of Berkeley that "His activity is unbounded, the whole range of the business of the Country in which he is stationed, civil, military, political, commercial, even ecclesiastical I believe as well as naval are objects of his attention". He was promoted to full admiral and made Lord High Admiral of the Portuguese Navy by the Portuguese Regent in Brazil.[2] By 1810 he had used sailors to man coastal defences all over Spain, freeing soldiers for Wellington and also formed a squadron of river gunboats to harry French units from major rivers like the Tagus. I cannot say for certain whether it is this man who is mentioned on the plan, but his presence in Portugal and his work on the Iberian Peninsula could only promote my opinion that this is the "Berkeley" mentioned on the plan for this unknown Portuguese warship. Further evidence (and close to home for me, I may have a look sometime if I can): https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/taro/ricewrc/00005/rice-00005.html
  17. There are several things I must apologize for in advance: 1. The title is slightly misleading. The scans I will be posting are taken from the book "History of the American Sailing Navy" by Howard Chapelle. The scans are of vessels proposed and/or built for both the Continental Navy and the American Navy up to the year 1820. There are further sketches, sail plans, draughts, etc beyond that cut-off, should any request them, however, for the sake of avoiding arguments, I have not included them. 2. I was heartily disappointed to discover that the larger plans are on facing pages within the book, thus forcing me to remove the cover of the book and do the best I can to provide the most accurate scans possible; being an amateur with book binding, no easy feat. All of the plans on facing pages are tucked into the book spine itself and as such, the plans are slightly off in the middle and may require some guesswork. 3. Lastly, I realize some of the plans posted are more than likely already on the forums. I skipped some plans because I knew for a fact they were already on the forums, but I may have missed a few during the scan & upload process. Don't flame this poor lubber too hard. The plans I will be uploading range from small vessels such as schooners, galleys, brigs and sloops, up to frigates ranging from 28 to 44 guns, and finally plans for the American ships of the line up to, but not including the USS Pennsylvania, as the date on the plans for that particular ship are after 1820. Again, any particular requests for plans can be mailed to me via the forum messaging system. Fishnuts
  18. Principe Real is listed at roughly 200' in length Principe do Brazil is listed at roughly 187' in length (per this site: http://3decks.pbworks.com/w/page/915356/HMFMS Principe do Brasil, though here she is listed as a 74 and not an 80+ gunner, perhaps she was rebuilt?). She is also listed at roughly 191' in length (per this site: http://marinhadeguerraportuguesa.blogspot.com/2013/04/navios-da-real-marinha-de-guerra.html, which also mentions her as being an 80 gunner from the year 1802 til 1822). Vasco da Gama is listed at 179' in length (per this site: http://3decks.pbworks.com/w/page/915367/HMFMS Vasco da Gama (1793)) She's not the Medusa, as the Medusa is mentioned as a 74 with the potential to carry 80, but her length is a good 10' less than the lower number of 182'. However Queen of Portugal is a 74 with the potential to carry 80, and her length is roughly 187' (http://marinhadeguerraportuguesa.blogspot.com/2013/04/navios-da-real-marinha-de-guerra.html). Any other info would be welcome.
  19. Where'd you find her @Wind http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/81037.html lists her as a Portuguese third rate, date unknown but plan seems to have been made roughly 1811. She appears to have been pierced for 76 guns, if I counted the gunports correctly. Checking elsewhere now. Edit: I miscounted, not counting the uppermost slots for carronades, she favors the Vasco da Gama, but aside from her, the only other heavy rates the Portuguese had at this time are the Principe Real and the Principe do Brazil, both listed in excess of 84 guns.
  20. Haratik

    Ocean is still to Tanky

    I said about as much in another thread, but some people here refuse to do the research themselves and stubbornly declare a pox on the truth no matter how it's presented.
  21. I would certainly say I've done more research on the Spanish in the years leading up to Trafalgar than you or most others here, just like Fluffy Fishy has done with the Venetians. Amateur enthusiast for sure, but I won't claim more than that. Now if you're done being a child and wish to actually debate, I'm more than willing to, but if you have no wish to do more than trade insults, I'll be done with this thread and you.
  22. My posts? Fine, I can see why you think they're arrogant, probably because I did the research and came to the conclusions I have. Please, do tell, how much research have you done? I'm not going to measure myself against you, there's no point, it's no contest. I applaud your nationalistic fervor, but you could use a dose of humility and a spoonful of reason.
  23. Independent ship crews depended on their captains for training, see the Redoubtable at Trafalgar while the rest of the French fleet was for the most part incapable of heavy action in ship to ship action. This had little effect on the Navy's outlook as a whole. Please don't use "no u" as a rejoinder, it just makes you look as insignificant as your posts.
  24. I never said Spanish ships were of poor design, but the crews, while good at seamanship, were poor at gunnery (essential in naval warfare), and typically lacked the stomach to fight, usually because their naval commanders knew the aforementioned fact. I've covered the topic before, you should go look for the posts.