Fluffy Fishy

These example pictures are all 16th and 17th century and perhaps not very well placed in the game, however the types of gun used would be quite nicely placed, I'd personally quite like to see some representation of Falcon/Falconets Culverins/Demi and Sakers, all having seen some use in naval warfare of the period, although as I think someone pointed out the vast majority of naval guns were still cannons, as they offered the best characteristics needed for sea service. The Falconet seeing some considerable service during the American Revolutionary war. Culverins were also fairly popular but they tended to be restricted to being chase guns due to their high length to low poundage ratio. Sakers are probably the odd one out here, many of which were just older guns that hadn't been recast, or destroyed, they were clunky and heavy, however they were relatively cheap due to their obsolescence, many of which were made during the conflicts of the 17th century, English civil war, 30 years war ect. Generally when you speak of the characteristics of each type you get: Culverins Long Barrel High Accuracy Long Range Small poundage Medium Penetration (due to comparatively smaller charge) Falcons Small Gun Low Crew Cost Medium Accuracy Small Poundage Low Penetration Quick and easy to aim Sakers Heavy weighted weapon Cheap to buy Medium accuracy Medium Penetration Slow to aim Outdated When it comes to the Ottoman gun its probably not worth making a big thing over, Turkish artillery was surprisingly slow to advance beyond their huge advantage they had in the 15th and 16th centuries, The general stagnation of the Ottoman empire as a whole also reflects their slow nature to innovate new gun design and foundry methods as was happening in western Europe. The gun shown in the picture would have similar characteristics to the outdated Saker, their worth as a siege gun would also be limited as it would perform worse than a regular long gun or Culverin. The lack of innovation in firepower on the Ottoman's part was one of the significant reasons they were unable to create much success at sea beyond the days of their famed admiral Barbarossa. Did you mean this as you wrote it? Culverins were hugely popular during this time, especially in Galley conflict, there are numerous Culverin Finds from wrecks dating from this period. There are some really nice examples found from general wrecks and invarious battle sites ranging from the Turkish capture of Constantinople to the Spanish Armada. As another possible suggestion we could perhaps include some high quality guns from different origins, say English Iron guns as the top tier as they represented the zenith of iron gun founding during this period. This leaves something that is quite approachable and useful to players as a door to thinking about how well guns were materially composed or manufactured.

I would just be happy to see some distinction between build materials, giving players the option to create both bronze or iron guns taking into account the various advantages and drawbacks of each. I'd also I like to see a larger choice of simple armaments for example adding short and medium cut guns but also having short guns too, all having slightly different values as was historical. I'd also like to see dedicated chase guns like "long 9s" as a slightly different option to regular long guns I have been doing some work on guns (venetian) recently but haven't has the time to compile it or create a post yet, I will hopefully make some time to answer more fully at a later point.

I like this idea but would like to see the small adjustment to having flags appropriate to the age, I don't want to see some bizarrely modern flags appearing and ruining my immersion, for example Canada or Italy. Historically when it comes to sailor nationality its not unreasonable to see foreign sailors serving in national navies, plenty of men served at sea in wars that had nothing to do with their home country, generally these foreign sailors tended to come from nations with cordial relationships to the states at war without formal alliances, especially where there might be a high price or shortage of local manpower. Its a nice little personalisation option.

Muiron and Carrare aren't really that french though . The two ships were both built incredibly similarly to the Palma class first launched in 1784, Muiron and Carrere were both laid down in 1789 and completed under the French occupation in 1797, the plans are almost identical although Muiron and Carrere are a slightly upscaled version, being ever so slightly wider, having more length and an extra gun port, where the Palma class is labelled as a 13 portelli, compared to Muiron as a 14 portelli ship, mounting 38 guns vs 44s. When it comes to looking at the hull plans you'd need an incredibly well trained eye to spot any real difference without resorting to counting guns. I also somewhat deliberately chose the ships I did because of the way the fall of the Republic distributed Venetian ships throughout the Napoleonic wars, giving them quite interesting and varied history, Carrere and Murion Being involved with Egypt, Carrere later being captured by the British, while the Fama class served some interesting roles under Venice, France, The Kingdom of Italy and finally Austria. I'm still quietly trying to come to a solid understanding over that corvette though, I hope some day I can find a proper answer, hopefully I will stumble across some more answers around her at some point. I'm also very pleased how the response for this topic has gone so far, thank you for the support everyone

With the other proposed sets of kick starter packs being thrown about I thought I might make my turn to do a Venetian one, mainly with the aim of providing some things that are a little bit different to what we already have and what the other proposed packs are offering. I will also start by saying that these are my personal suggestions after a good think, if there is a ship that is missing from this group I would more than gladly discuss swapping a ship or adding any others. Polacca (c1750) Adding a Polacca to the game gives the devs two nice options, one they can have a new small fighting, and two they can also use the same model for a trade Polacca as has been done with the other trade ships, the trade brig for example. Polacca were used quite extensively by Venice as both a small escort ship and as a trade ship itself, they are nimble and sail fairly well up and down wind, their real advantage however is their ability to deter boarding, their high sides being a great advantage in this situation when being attacked by their main enemies, the North African Barbary Pirates. There is also a nice advantage in that there is a purchasable scale model produced by Amati. Sciabecco (18th Century) The devs have toyed with the idea of adding a Xebec for a while now, I just thought it might be fun to throw in a detailed plan of what formed the back bone for the Venetian fleets activities in home waters, this is a 34 gun variant built to mainly operate in the coastal waters of the Venetian Lagoon and the Dalmatia, this style of Xebec would add some flair and variety to fighting in shallow waters. Historically the day to day activities of these ships were to discourage illegal activity and protect higher value trading convoys. I also have a sail map for a similar vessel if anyone is interested. Muiron (1797) I had a long think over whether to include Muiron or rather go for her parent, the Palma class (1784) but I decided to go for Murion, mainly due to the importance Muiron played in breaking through the British blockade of Egypt, inevitably saving Napoleon from capture or death after the battle of the Nile. Napoleon also wished Muiron to be preserved eternally as thanks for his safety and so it would be a nice little tribute to him to do so electronically in the game. For further information please see the dedicated post to her by @Sella22, I will post a link below. Fama (1784) I have personally worked long and hard on trying to unravel the history of the Fama class and have given at least a brief history for each of the 6 ships built, it would be a dream come true to be able to sail her in game. I have explained before my reasons for adding her when it comes to adding Fama, as the swan song of the Venetian Republic's shipbuilding she was the last and most heavily armed of the Fregata Grossa class, the Venetian line of super frigates dating back to the 1720s. She would be a fantastic ship to see in game, not at least to offer some alternative to the Agamemnon dominance of 4th rate battles. She is beautiful, charismatic and historic, her various sisters serving in the Venetian, French and Austrian navy, and as my signature suggests, she is the one I would be most happy to see. Link below to dedicated thread. Bonus: I would love to see either of these ships added on to the pack but when it comes down to the cost of ship development I would much rather see the others added over the two below. Leon Trionfante (1716) The Leon Trionfante is a ship I have discussed before, the main reason I like her is she has such a long history as a ship, serving her users well for over 100 years and taking part in multiple conflicts, as the ship is more of a bonus choice I wont go into huge detail of why I would like to see her, if you wish to read more please visit her own thread. I also like her because she offers a smaller alternative to a 3rd rate, being armed with 70 guns. Or "1780"/La Harpe The 1780 is the other of my bonus choices, my less favourite over the Leon Trionfante, mostly due to her relatively short history. I just like her design really, she would, like Leon Trionfante be a nice offering to give as another compact 3rd rate, but unlike Leon Trionfante was capable of being armed with 74 guns, which again gives a nice little option to take over the current crop we have of the 3rd and the Bellona. Links to more information: Thank you for reading I hope you can find some time to support this proposed pack

I remember reading something not too long ago that the Hartleypool museum were considering setting up a system to commission sailing her for a negotiable price of around £20,000 a day. I don't think it went any further than that though, it was a proposed plan to help raise a bit more money towards her restoration, something she has nothing like the budget for when compared to Constitution.

For those who may have missed it, it was announced yesterday that the USS constitution is to become the oldest floating warship again, replacing the temporary title holder HMS Trincomalee (the same one in the game). This follows a large repair and restoration job replacing and resealing the planking. She is due to be relaunched back into Boston harbour towards the end of July. Full article and some pictures here: https://www.navytimes.com/articles/navy-showcasing-repairs-to-historic-warship-old-ironsides

I may have some nasty bias instilled on me from the English education system but as I remember It was more that the English wanted to make use of their better technological guns, and as I understand it, the English guns were better cast and bored but the real advantage was they were sitting on much better carriages that resemble early examples of the traditional carriage we most often associate with naval warfare rather than the more historic slower loading Spanish armaments. Had it come to an actual boarding action the English would surely have lost, the English would also have lost if as Juan Martínez had suggested the Spanish were to attack the English fleet in Plymouth Harbour. What really set the Spanish Armada to fail was the single mindedness of the administration of the conflict, not allowing deviation from the original plans where they Spanish sailed for Flanders without any allowance for adjusting to the situations presented to them. Getting back on topic, I'm not an expert in the area but I remember there being a significant Galleon presence in the Ottoman navy at least well into the 1730s. The Ottomans Galleons were in no way as beautiful as those built by the Atlantic nations, most of them had rather ugly lines that presented a show of conservatism dating back almost to what was drawn upon after the fall of Constantinople, Athens and Rhodes. The Ottoman naval doctrine, landscape of the Mediterranean seas and coastlines helped the presence of older naval ideas that had fallen away in Western Europe.

Air Draft or Height generally refers to the total top to bottom measurement of the ship Bilge tip Measures from the bottom of the ship to the upper most deck, its uncommon to see this being used. Draft refers to the distance between the keel and the waterline Longer ships don't go faster, ships that have a good ratio of length to width go faster, as long as they accept limitations to material strength and elasticity. This is why the Sepping's method and introduction of iron frames helped ships go quite a lot faster than their traditional framed vessels, especially when considering the reduction in hogging that slowed ships down quite drastically due to the amount of force being transferred into the the ships bending instead of going forwards. Its also important to not forget the power associated with the ships and how well the force of the sail area can be made the most of with regards to roll, yaw and heel, something that is exaggerated in the use of square sails when compared to triangular sails, the square generally having a higher force pivoting nearer the top. Draught is just an older word that predates setting words similar to "ye" and "the", it used to be that Draught was used in Britain and the Commonwealth and Draft comes from the USA but now Draft is now much more common the world over, although both are acceptable and mean the same thing.

Its interesting that the answer almost avoided the question, I suppose because draft has very little affect on speed and it is much more to do with design. The over enthusiasm to speed being determined by length is a little foggy though, especially as hogging of ships that are too long has a pretty drastic effect on speed as it distorts the hull lines and throws out dynamic efficiency. Really draft has little to no effect at all and the important thing here is the design, material and construction strength, paired with how well a ship is loaded and where its centre of mass is. A shallow draft will likely force a small ballast and a lower mast and rigging, where as deeper allows for not only a higher masts and deeper ballast. What it really comes down to is the general shape of the hull and the measurements a ship might have, which is somewhat more complicated than the OP asked for, but for example, generally a large 74, or an 80 Ship of the line sailed faster than a 64, or small 74 due to better comparative dimensions. Its also interesting that occasionally a razee was slower after losing their weight, leaving them higher in the water due to various changes in the dynamics of how they sit or sail.

For those who have missed it, It was announced today that the headline for Cowes week on the isle of Wight between 29th of July and the 5th of August will be none other than HMS Victory, what's more is the local radio station has some tickets you can win to join in the whole experience. This will be the first time since 1922 that Victory will be leaving her drydock in the historic dockyards and is the result of many years of hard work and restoration work bringing her back to life as she was at Trafalgar Full article here: http://iwradio.co.uk/2017/04/01/win-tickets-as-hms-victory-sails-into-isle-of-wights-cowes-week-2017/

I was doing some research today and I found a virtual tour of the Austrian Military museum, as part of the collection there is a small but well lit room full of ship models, including one of my favourite ship, the age of sail models are mostly situated in the Seemacht Osterreich (2) section. I really enjoyed this, the only downside is you can't walk about like google street view. I'd love if more museums gave the opportunity for virtual tours. http://www.hgm.at/en/museum/virtual-tour.html Enjoy

I am so glad that the PVE voice was listened to, and even more that it has helped inspire the team to buy into additional PVE content to the benefit of everyone all round, both PVE'rs and PVP'rs. Thank you to you and the team Admin. I'm looking forwards to seeing what the future for PVE content will now bring

Has the tallow thing changed recently? The last I heard of it the UK government and mints were pressing ahead with using it despite pressure from lifestyle and religious groups, that was late last year though but they were considering using an alternative product for the £10 note.

It was confirmed by the Bank of England a couple of days ago they will be pressing ahead with the design for the new £20 note featuring JMW Turner and his painting of the 98 gun HMS Temeraire being pulled into harbour by a steam tug boat in his famous 1838 painting. Having been proposed as a concept around a year ago, this design will now go into print at the royal mint, and then into circulation in October as part of a modernisation scheme set to move all english currency into a more durable plastic composite over the traditional cotton paper that has been used for decades. The original painting shown below, most of you will probably be somewhat familiar with. I look forwards to getting my hands on a crisp new note and keeping it nice and preserved, I can't wait to see the printed edition that will be announced later this year.

Firstly I would like to thank you all for your responses, they are great to read through and hopefully I can expand on my original ideas to better appeal to a wider range of people. I am really pleased that mostly so far people have properly explained their reasons against my suggestion rather than just dismissed it which was what I was expecting. I will respond to what has been said so far and start with answering Rickard: I don't believe that my suggestion would severely limit PVP as much as focus it, with the original post I suggested something like one region a day, but I would be open to having more than one, where as the current proposal by the devs looks like roughly half the map will be lost permanently. I think its also important to remember that as we currently have 8 factions, so thats 8 declarable regions of conflict, in a map that is currently composed of 73 regions, having thought a little more about this having 2 each would work quite nicely in my eyes, thats 16 possible target zones. My other idea to help with this would be that you can declare an area of conflict at a set period of time, a count down and logistics period would then start, followed by the raising of hostility, then port battle. Its also important to remember that nations can take full advantage of the alliance mechanic and be involved with more than the conflicts that directly affect them. As part of this I would also like to see the return of multiple port battles, like proceeded the regional mechanics. To answer Ruthless; The main reason PVE never really took off to the same extent that PVP did was the distinct lack of features, the grind also had quite a high attrition rate. I have been around a long time and have seen most of the friends I have made get very excited and enjoy the game, then level up to rank 10 and sometimes level 50 crafting too, then just run out of things to do and lose interest, thinking back to the early game the PVE community was a solid base of around 500 people, with around 300 online at most time periods, they nearly all left as they got bored with the amount of content, some moving over to PVP. Zooloo: This is by far the weakest end of my suggestion, there is no shame admitting that. I'm honestly not quite sure how to remedy this either, because you aren't alone, its what many players like. Although my intuition would be that now we are going to see 1 dura rolled out across the board we will see quite a few less people out on their own anyway, especially traders who now run a much higher risk to losing their cargo, and will therefore likely seek close protection from friends due to the much higher risks involved. Rikard Frederikson: I will try to keep to the same format that you have for ease of reading, to begin with the first; The whole idea of only large ships being useful is a criticism I have with the game in general where small ships just aren't very useful on a general level, the current l'Ocean or Agamemnon is something that hampers the game generally. It would good to see a system that properly benefits bringing a higher variety of ships, this could somewhat be addressed with the return of multiple port battles in areas, the upcoming changes to ROE mean that large ships will soon be quite easy to victimise and hamper by zergers in basic cutters. For your second point I feel like I have mostly covered in my response to Zooloo, I am very sorry if thats not a satisfying answer for though you two though. I too would like to somehow do something to give players the ability to continue with your play style. For the third, this seems fairly similar to your previous point, I'm sure everyone has their own views on this, I personally feel completely the opposite to you in this regard, where the presence of danger while just doing some light trading actually detracts me from the game, I'm not alone either, we have lost a huge amount of players to this reason you are supporting here. The risk to many people creates something that ends in frustration and therefore boredom, its the same issue that plagues the devs when it comes to facilitating PVP, the huge time periods of sailing in dangerous waters just aren't applicable to most people's lives, I like many others simply don't have time to spend sailing 2 hours for everything to be lost, in that regard AFK sailing is the lesser evil here, it creates too high of an attrition for players, who can't almost waste their time like this. To conclude, I want to enable a better more symbiotic relationship between those who want to take part in PVE and PVP, both are important to the game. I am just trying to create some ideas that appeal to more people to benefit both ends, perhaps we are all missing something that could benefit us all here, the main trouble is that for the most part I feel like the audience who would critique and add to these posts have already gone, and we will gradually lose the game we enjoy. Thanks again for the responses, I hope I have provided some alternate arguments.

With the merger of PVE to the PVP servers likely on its way soon I would suggest a different approach to the system proposed by the dev team. I feel like the current system that has been outlined for the future doesn't really benefit either PVE players or PVP players. While I imagine this post may receive quite a large amount of criticism I thought I would make some points to throw down an alternative to what has been suggested by the dev team. The main point of my idea would be to almost entirely turn the plans PVE and PVP inside out, instead of having a PVE zone, have PVP zones instead but to make them more dynamic by utilising similar mechanics already in place. Thanks to the region mechanic we can contain player vs player violence to certain points of the map, this both benefits the PVP players as they have a higher concentration of opponents but also PVE players as they can enjoy the sea and fighting their various NPC opponents or fulfilling missions or trading. This also goes with more traditional MMO models of implementing PVP, so is a good and effective system, but also something that works well and has been tested before in other games. As part of this I would like to see no area of the map safe from port battles, but make port battles something that becomes an organic area of conflict where each nation can target an area at a time, while hostility grows, players then have the choice to stay in the conflict area or move on to somewhere uncontested where they would be safer. The areas of conflict using the outlines for regions as the PVP combat zones, as soon as you cross over into say, Hispaniola from Puerto Rico, where Hispaniola has been marked as a conflict zone you become vulnerable to PVP attacks, no matter what nation you play. The main benefits to this system is it streamlines PVP, doesn't portion up large chunks of the map, doesn't allow for such intense abuse as the current proposals, allows to give a more dynamic player experience, and somewhat addresses the problem of wild gank squads. Where as the only major drawback I can think of is that to some extent it takes away some of the trader hunter aspect. To compliment this I would also like to see a karma or reputation type system, allowing for some leeway in attacking out of combat zones, but would like to see some penalties attached to this, for example a captain with poor reputation will struggle to generate hostility and face other fairly harsh drawbacks but be able to attack players more freely, where as on the flip side a notorious player would be fairly free game, even despite alliances or neutrality. Thank you for reading

Will this include blueprints? One of the more frustrating parts for me about the move is suddenly being unable to craft the various ships I enjoy to sail should I need to, this is especially important considering that we will be seeing a giant ship wipe too.

Zones make for a worse experience for everyone involved though, I quite liked doing fleet missions alone or with a small group. PVP hate PVE zones as has been expressed because it creates an unbalanced economy, PVE players don't like zones because they are forced to stick to a certain area or otherwise face unwanted attacks from players. The whole thing sounds like a huge mess that takes away more than it gives. I don't want to be forced into a small area when there is so much of the map to explore and enjoy. If anything surely it makes more sense to focus around PVP zones more than PVE ones.

It saddens me to hear the PVE server is going to be closed down, its what I like best about the game, a nice place to be friendly and enjoy ships in a non competitive environment, I'm not sure the same could be said of just having PVE zones, especially as missions often spawn so far away now.

Amerigo Vespucci is an Italian Training ship launched in 1931, I have spent a long time on these forums but it suddenly dawned to me there is next to no mention of her as a ship at all, despite her fairly well known presence in the modelling community with quite a few kits available for various levels of detail and skill. I have seen two models of her now, one in Greenwich, London the other in Monmouth, Wales, the model in Monmouth being the much more detailed of the two, she is a stunning ship, and has often been described as the worlds most beautiful vessel by various parties, most famously by the USS Independence. She was designed by Francesco Rotundi, a Lieutenant General in the Italian Naval Engineering Corps and was one of two ships ordered in 1925, both named after the Italian explorers, Amerigo Vespucci (1454-1512) and Cristoforo Colombo (1451-1506) in tribute to their well known discoveries and journeys to the new world. The ships, despite being steel hulled and framed were inspired by the historic ships of the line, and is loosely based on the Neapolitan steam sail battleship Monarca. She was laid down in laid down and built in the Regio Cantiere Navale of Castellammare di Stabia, near Naples and is now maintained by the naval base in La Spezia. Her older sister ship, Cristoforo Columbo, built in the same shipyard was laid down in 1926 and completed in 1928, however Cristoforo Columbo was taken by the Russians in the 1947 peace negotiations following WW2, renamed Dunay and destroyed by a fire in 1963. Amerigo Vespucci's Specifications are; Length (LOA): 100.5m or 329'9ft (Including bowsprit) Length (LPP): 82.4m or 270ft Beam: 15.56m or 51ft Draft: 7.3m or 24ft Height: 54m or 177'3ft Displacement: 1203t - 4146t (full load) Speed: Under Engine: 11kn Under Sails: 15kn Power: Sails: 26, covering 2635 m2 , or 28,360 square foot Engines: 2x Diesel 1,360kw or 1,824 bhp 2x Diesel 760kw or 1020 bhp 1x Electric Propulsion engine with 2x 750kw or 1010 bhp outputs. Compliment: Her typical compliment is around 400 men, comprised of roughly 15 officers, 64 NCOs, 185 sailors and 130 Naval Cadets. As a commissioned ship in the Italian navy she spends a large portion of her time cruising in and around Italian waters taking part in officer training, mainly taking men from the Francesco Morisini Academy in Venice, she also gets involved with various pageantry around the world, occasionally taking part in tall ship races or visiting large large international regattas. Her officer training is built around trying to emphasise an importance on building seamanship, discipline and teamwork, she also plays an important part in preserving heritage as a whole, hopefully giving naval cadets a chance to understand some naval history as part of their training. As of when writing this Amerigo Vespucci is currently undergoing maintenance work in La Spenzia, following a long tour visiting the most of the major ports of Europe as far as Denmark before returning home. Italy have also secured her future and hope to maintain her well into the future as a working sailing ship, this is something we should all be pleased about, as she is as far as I know unique in being the only ship of similar size and characteristics to historic fighting ships of the 18th and 19th Century, and the only experience similar to what it would be like to sail one of these ships not restricted to drydock. I hope to come across her properly myself some day. Thank you for reading

This feels like a sudden jump of activity after what feels like not much going on for too long, I'm glad to see this kind of post. I am curious to see how the new updates will work but I do have a couple of concerns. The idea of accumulating experience level sailing a particular vessel, will that mean the type of ship, say Trincomalee, or does that mean the specific ship you are sailing at the time? for example when that ship is sunk, so is the experience you have gained with said ship. My other concern is how the 1 dura will affect crafting, because currently it feels like ships of the line are far too cheap in comparison to tiny little triangular sailed ships like the privateer. I am excited to see how the new upgrades system will work, it sounds a bit different, my main worry there is that it sounds a little arcade but I do like the idea of some cosmetic personalisation happening. When it comes to the crafting system, the idea that you can buy regional refits is great, it sounds so much more streamlined than the current system, where it just creates contention over specific ports, and if a large navy can hold those ports then they basically win the game. I also like that there is going to be a lot less long distance sailing to craft things, that was so frustrating. Looking forwards to what is coming next, thanks for the informative post

I went to the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich the other weekend, while I didn't get to spend as much time as I would like there, or see everything in the museum I did take quite a lot of pictures both in the museum itself, and in the Cutty Sark. I have sorted them into 4 categories, mainly to help direct people to their right interests. If you want to know anything particularly about any of the paintings I did take photos of of their little text boxes next to them too, I didn't however upload them. The highlights of the trip for me was the Nelson's Exhibition (Their Age of Sail room) and Seeing all the different models, especially the large model of the HMS Cornwallis (bizarrely in the kids section). I will have to return at some point when the travel conditions are better, so as to get a proper look at the things I rushed through and the things I missed, likely when there is an exhibition that I really want to see, not the current one on Emma Hamilton. Anyway Here are the albums, click through here or visit the Imgur links if you want to see them easier Figureheads and Models: Paintings: Maritime Museum Miscellaneous: Cutty Sark: Enjoy

For those who are interested in this kind of thing here is the new trailer. Looks like a fun piece of cheesy hollywood to enjoy with some nice looking ships to oggle at too, I'm looking forwards to seeing this one too, more than I did with the last film. Its just a shame its no master and commander but Its likely the the best we are likely to get for a while when it comes to age of sail films Anyone else looking forwards to seeing it? I have actually quite enjoyed the trailers so far.

It is technically unverifiable but it still makes a lot of sense, when you look at what is going on in the city at the time and how the various actions of French rule are set out to attempt change the ways of the Venetian bourgeoisies. The key to spreading viable propaganda is to start spreading it in and convincing the knowledgable circles, if a collection of those who seem to understand their subject fairly well start to carry on well then the aim of what is set out to achieve requires less prodding in the right direction, it lays the foundation for more impressive bending of the truth. Interestingly very similar circumstances surround Britain and The Glorious Revolution, where misinformation was spread to the right people first, then branching out to everyone else. There also weren't really enough Venetian ships captured to give a broad enough experience to enough people to change this and loudly dismissing Venetian ideas while praising French methods is something indicative of the period, one that relied on unchallenged French Nationalism to keep the war economy going for the survival of the French Republic, which as you probably know spent most its years defending itself from worried monarchistic aggression, then while at peace with those major monarchies, spent the time expanding French borders in search of resources. All while this is going on there is the quiet note taking and reading of the various documents and dimensions acquired with the Arsenal records, noting down anything of value to them, I also believe that the French took the true measurements of Venetian ships quietly during this time too, and those documents along with the true measurements were being distributed internally on a need to know basis, used to enhance French understanding by maritime information from a nation not typically understood by studying captures as was common between Britain, France, Netherlands and Spain during this period. I don't feel biased against France, or Napoleon's motives, perhaps that is something that reads in the text but its not intended that way, I have a lot of respect for Napoleon, its just that Napoleon seemed to act the most destructive and greedily through his campaign in North Italy, with the most thorough looting happening the Venice, in part due to the fact that the city hadn't ever been looted so had almost its entire history of treasures kept there, something that the financially thirsty fledgling French republic needed to support herself. What is clear is that Napoleon was a total disaster for Venice, Austrian rule wasn't much kinder either. I was unaware that Napoleon legalised brothels in France in 1804 though, it seems very strange in comparison to the zeal he took in trying to create what he considered a moralised Venetian society, but then again 90s Napoleon seems quite different to how he behaved in the 1800s and then again in the 1810s.