Fluffy Fishy

I thought I might look at the ideas and potential additions from the venetian list of Venetian ships and While this isn't going to be a list of suggestions, this is a little warning to the devs a little like one of my previous posts on this thread just as a caution when looking at potential Venetian ships and the possibilities to model them accurately enough to put them in the game. There is quite a bit of dificult with the records of venetian ships and this mostly comes from the prominence of the Venetians using models as ther main reference in construction much later than the likes of the Atlantic nations, this is almost always the case until various reforms undertaken in the mid to late 18th century by Venetians who studied shipbuilding in England and the Netherlands and until the 1770s it was really quite uncommon for ships to be planned out in the same fashion of western and northern Europe. Generally speaking Venetian ships were built using two references, The shipwright would build a model, and draw a picture, similar to concept drawings we see with modern architecture depending on where the shipwright studied would generally determine how extensive the concept drawing was and how complex/if they would include contours to show the shape of the hull so as to complement the models being used, you can see this in a respect by the post made by Leboiteux on the San Michael Arcangelo, however plans were usually more extensive when included with the Venetian 1st rates. This source issue adds to the other issue I mentioned earlier in the thread, the problem of the single hull construction. As a list of visual sources as far as I am aware of broken down by main ratings of the Venetian navy: 1st Rate: Giove Fulminante (62 guns, 1667); Both the model and plans are lost, although some paintings exist. San Lorenzo Zustinian (70 guns, 1691); Some surviving drawings, a modern reconstruction, model some paintings from the Morean wars exist. Corona (74 guns, 1711); No plans, no model, no paintings. Leon Trionfante (70 guns 1716); Many plans drawings and paintings, no model. San Carlo Borromeo (66 guns, 1750), numerous plans exist alongside a model (I beleive the model is housed in the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum) "1780"/La Harpe (70/74, 1797 Completed by France, Double hulled); extensive plans, no model, a picture of her as a prison ship. 2nd Rate: Drago Volante (48 guns, 1674); No plans, No pictures, possible model housed in Boston Art Museum San Marco Grande (56 guns, 1684); no model, no plans, no painting Sant Andrea (60 guns, 1685); no plans, no model, no paintings. Fede Guerriera (60 guns, 1693); no model, no plans, no paintings. San Spiridion (58 guns,1717); No plans, some drawings, no paintings. Sant Andrea II (40/56 guns, 1724 Fregata Grossa); possible drawings, possible paintings, no plans no model. San Michiel Arcangelo (40/56 guns, 1749 Fregata Grossa); Nice drawings, basic plans, no model, no paintings. Speranza (40/58 guns, 1757 Fregata Grossa); Basic drawings, no model, some paintings, no plans. Vigilanza (40/56 guns, 1766 Fregata Grossa); Possible plans (unconfirmed), no model, no plans, possible paintings. Fama (66 guns, 1784 Fregata Grossa, Double hulled); extensive plans, extensive drawings, a model situated in the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum, some great paintings too. 3rd Rate: Madonna Della Salute (44 guns, 1675); no plans, no model, no paintings. Sant Andtonio da Padova (44 guns, 1684); no plans, no model, no paintings. Monton d'Oro (24 guns, 1688); Basic Drawings, no plans, no model, no paintings. Scudo Delle Fede; (52 guns, 1715) no plans, no model, no paintings. Costanza II (28 guns, 1757): Basic drawings, no plans, no model. Palma (38 guns, 1784, Double hulled) : No Drawings, no model but there are likely plans out there in France due to their capture, Medusa and Bellona saw service under the french, medusa being renamed Leoben and Bellona being captured again by the British in 1811 becoming HMS Dover. Pallade (24 guns, 1786, Double Hulled); Good plans, no model, no drawings, no paintings. Cerere (32 guns, 1794, Double Hulled); Likely has plans out there, she saw french service under the name Mantoue, no paintings, no model. "44 Cannoni"/Muiron (44 guns 1797 completed by France, Double Hulled). Good plans, Great model, some nice paintings too. While this is a fairly extensive list this is just from my long time trying to match up ships to drawings and doing a fair amount of research into the Venetian navy, there are also a lot of other unnamed craft out there, some named some not but its a lot like wading through treacle thanks to the difficulty posed by the destructive nature of Napoleon's looting combined with the methods used in Venetian naval design. Despite the lack of visual evidence there are good records on the dimensions of the ships, with a very rough silhouette drawing in a similar way to the ww2 identification charts but in colour, these are housed in the Venetian Archives.

I don't either which kind of frustrates me mainly because I think the large british 2nd rates need a bit of love, other than that the British Americans and French are pretty well covered, although the French desperately need a 74. Maybe once we have a bit more of a diverse line up we can come back to some of Slade's era defining designs.

@pietjenoob No it's not the first truly rifled cannon, crude rifling was introduced to Venice from southern Germany in the 1520s and a purpose built drilling room for rifling guns was included in the renovations of the late 1530s. From here on they experimented with various types of rifling over the next few decades with some fantasticly modern looking examples of both polygonal and groove rifling dating well back into the early 17th century and was one of the reasons Venetian cannons had significant range advantages even over 18th century British guns. The Tirar Bombe was a muzzle loaded design, however the invention of breech loading artillery was something else Venice takes claim over thanks to the design being formulated in brescia in the 1570s. @Intrepido Venetian ships certainly sailed to the Caribbean, they traded in luxury goods like glass and fine cloth, I'm not aware of any warships specifically travelling to the new world, however there are numerous times Venetian warships would accompany voyages from Venice to the red sea, even late Venice was the main trade power in the eastern Mediterranean and Red sea @LeBoiteux Damn you beat me to it, don't steal speranza from me as well . Really nice post though thanks for sharing I'd happily help should you want to make another one

2nd 3rd and 4th are by far the most lacking categories right now. We could really do with a couple of larger 2nd rates and if it was me deciding I would go for the famous large 2nds from Britain as they played such an important part of the British battle fleet, the two I would personally go for most would be the 98 gun Neptune class and the 90 gun Barfleur class ships, the dutch De Ruyter class would also sit nicely here. When we talking about 3rd rates we really should see an offering from the Téméraire class, and probably a Montañés too, This is also a good place to throw in an offering from Portugal, perhaps as Bungee suggested on the first post of this page the Rainho de portugal. Moving onto 4th rates, this is potentially the most versatile class, while 3rds are generally the backbone of fleets the 2nd rate Naval powers offered some fantastic 4th rates, this would be a lovely place to put in some love for the 2nd rate naval powers, The Dutch, Venetians, Portuguese, Danes Swedes and perhaps even the Ottomans. Although saying this the recent addition of Wasa for the Swedes, and the supposedly under development Christian VII for the Danes somewhat sorts them out a little. This leaves Venice, The Dutch and the Portuguese, again I'm unsure on what the best possible option is for the Portuguese, however I would most love to see Delft (1783) for the Dutch and Fama (1784) for the Venetians added here. What I really don't want to see for now is more smaller frigates, which is comparatively well stocked and balanced, 6th and 5th being the currently best offering the game has in a lot of ways considering the balance and options in those rosters, the other thing I really don't want to see is the addition of more US ships, because this game is slowly becoming too much of a homage to the US Navy, especially with the Prince de Neufchatel just in its final stages of development. Barfleur De ruyter Téméraire Delft Fama

Mahmudiye wasn't the most powerful but she certainly was something to be reckoned with. Launched in 1829 her armament was a staggering 128 guns, her size even more so impressive. Comparing her to Santissima shows just how much monster she really was. According to Threedecks Mahmudiye's stats are; Length of Gundeck: 67.9704m Breadth: 18.796m Depth in Hold: 9.144m Draught Forward: 7.929m Draught Aft: 8.2623m Santissima was; Length of Gundeck: 61.299m Length of Keel: 52.3768m Breadth: 16.1588m Depth in Hold: 8.0794m While the measurements don't quite give the same stats or readings its clear how much larger the Mahmudiye was over the Santissima. where its a little less easy to distinguish is the broadside weight, mainly because it looks like threedecks is unfamiliar with turkish gun weightings, the Okka system seems to escape them a little, the broadside value they have given taken from an source talking about her armament in 1832 gives her a broadside of 934.21kg, however the Okka weighting doesn't compare so easily to the weightings given to her so her broadside would be much closer to 1000kg, possibly a little over. Comparing her at even the conservative 934.21 to the Santissima gives a fairly dramatic difference, Santissima and her heaviest armament in 1805 was given at a total broadside weight of 675.648 kg, giving Mahmudiye a staggering advantage of around 300kg. This being said she is certainly not the most heavily weighted broadside going, as from around about 1815 onwards navies started to experiment with arming their first rates with 32lbs on all decks, for example the Caledonia class was given 120 x 32lb guns meaning a broadside of a staggering 1741.8kg, over 10 years before Mahmudiye was launched. Threedecks also misses out some of the important aspects of the Turkish fleet, which is their attraction to huge calibre stone guns similar to those I mentioned in my recent post about the tirar bombe, allegedly the Mahmudiye was armed with a few of these over her career, whether they are modernised versions the 44 okka from my previous post or different calibres I'm not quite sure but its obvious she did carry some staggeringly huge guns. The other thing that is worth mentioning about Mahmudiye is that she would have been incredibly sluggish in the water, the Ottoman navy had a poor history of naval design despite heavy investment in their navy. She would have sailed like a bathtub even compared to much older super heavy first rate ships of the line, a mix of conservative naval design mixed with a completely filled in waist leaving her rather vulnerable in combat despite her heavy armament. The other thing to consider is that she was fairly poorly constructed and maintained, its quite the miracle she survived as long as she did, her service was littered with frequent dry and wet rot, she was notorious for hogging and being a bit leaky, despite this she still maintained a huge level of prestige, mainly due to her dramatic size.

I'm just popping this here in case it gets lost off the original thread. Mainly because it took me forever to write, sorry for the copy and paste job. The Tirar Bombe was came about as part of the bitter arms race between Venice and the Ottomans during the First Morean war (1784-99). The war is the first time both the Venetians and Ottomans are fighting line battles, with both sides pushing for dominance at sea, as a result both sides pushed themselves as hard as they could, seeing the Ottomans launch some particularly large and heavily armed ships while Venice was fielding slightly smaller more manoeuvrable offerings. Part of this arms race also involved a dramatic scramble for large calibre artillery, with the Ottomans pushing for more use of their largest naval guns, the 16 and 12 okka, which compared to being slightly larger than the British 40 and 32 pounders. The Ottomans also started to equip their ships with a number of 44 okka guns which fired stone projectiles, equivalent to 124 British pounds. The war also saw the Ottomans bringing some of their now ancient bombards back into action, although these old monsters were potentially capable of huge damage although their outdated technology didn't add any real tactical value as they were unhandy and inaccurate. These large calibre weapons needed a response from the Venetian government or otherwise risked turning what was on the whole a successful conflict for Venice back in Ottoman favour. The response was assigned to the public gun founder (Fonditore Pubblico) at the time Sigismondo Alberghetti III. The Alberghetti family were a hugely prestigious family in the world of artillery and arguably the most important family in the history of the cannon, they had held the title of public gun founder more than any other bloodline in Venice thanks to their incredible talents for founding large ordinance. Sigismondo III was a genius even by Alberghetti standards, he mainly studied in Venice and England and was unparalleled during his time. The gun itself was developed out of Venetian technology mainly centred on their mortars and obusiero (similar to howizers) with large parts of the inspiration coming from various experiments conducted by the English in the 1680s, his thoughts were also influenced by accounts of the French bombardment of Genoa during 1684, the experimental shells doing a terrifying amount of damage to the city. Sigismondo set about applying these new technologies for naval combat, something the English and French avoided due to safety concerns. The initial design for the gun was a calibre of 120 libbre (equivalent to 212mm), it was to employ a spherical powder chamber similar to mortar technology of the time allowing for larger charges without increasing the thickness and weight of the gun. It was to fire a ball roughly the same weight as the Venetian 20 libbre, similar to an english 15lb. The style of the gun meant that it could be very lightly constructed and framed while still packing a huge punch. The projectiles themselves are somewhat distinctive too, the projectiles unlike standard round shot were to be made cylindrical, and would either be hollow iron shot filled with explosives, or solid stone shot, the cylindrical design was a hugely important part of the gun giving it more stability and accuracy in flight but also meant that there was no risk of the shot turning and causing itself to instantly detonate on firing. Interestingly the first two guns were built in England, both at 120 libbre and 6 calibres long, weighing 3500 libbre grosse (1670kg). They were cast under Sigismondo's supervision in Ashburnham in Sussex at the Thomas Western foundry. However once they arrived in Venice they were put aside and half forgotten, mainly thanks to the Venetian fleet having a string of success and enjoying naval superiority. However the Ottoman fleet started to recover after 1693, leading to a narrow defeat of the Venetian navy at the battle of Chios in 1695 thanks to the effective use of their 44 okka stone cannons. To respond to Turkish success the Venetian Senate reinvested in the Tirar Bombe project once more in 1696, leading Sigismondo to develop a second model of the gun, the 200 libbre, weighing 5000 libbre grosse (2385kg) and further adapting them for naval use on their ships of the line, mainly the San Lorenzo Zustinian class ships. Now however the guns were to be cast in the Venetian Arsenal itself out of Bronze, allowing to make use of the huge technological advantage Venice had in bronze casting, combined with the superior properties that bronze has as a material for casting guns. Testing then confirmed the incredible qualities of the gun to the point that it created a feud between the Sergente Generalre dell' Artiglieria Jacob Richards who endlessly doubted its capabilities. This feud would continue to strain on between Sigismondo and Richards resulting in a bitter rivalry between the two, even despite numerous tests and competitions confirming Sigismondo to be in the right Jacobs continued to claim the gun was dangerous, the ammunition was too expensive to produce and its construction too light. Despite these arguments the Venetian state immediately sent 33 guns to the Levant, however the continued objections from Richards meant that their ammunition was in short supply. The guns now got their first real taste of combat under Sigismondo's Brother Carlo Alberghetti, a prominent Venetian naval commander. Despite the limited ammunition the new guns proved incredibly successful in some light skirmishes, they even proved to exceed their high expectations given by their testing on Lido. The first true test however was at the battle of Mitilenos, where the heavier Ottoman fleet outnumbered the Venetians significantly, the battle resulted in a decisive victory for Venice. The Tirar bombe received significant praise from the three Venetian admirals present, Daniele Dolfin, Pietro Duado and Fabio Bonvincini. Daniele Dolfin even presented Sigismondo with a certification of merit thanks to the crucial part the new guns played, praising the high rate of fire and great accuracy, however they all downplayed the innovative nature of the new weapons, partly as they had been unable to fire many explosive rounds, but also partially due to using them misunderstanding how the cannons were designed to be used. The tirar bombe was intended as a long range weapon, however the lack of range tables and explosive ordinance meant that at Mitilenos they were used much more like a carronade, fighting in a much more traditional close quarters combat, despite their incorrect usage eyewitnesses to the battle tell of a great many Turkish ships having to withdraw having suffered enormous holes in their hulls, thanks to these new weapons. Peace resumed in 1699 and it was decided that these powerful weapons were of little use as part of the fleet, they were redeployed in the home batteries around the lagoon, providing security during the early parts of the war of Spanish succession. When it was clear Venice wouldn't be dragged into the Spanish conflict the guns were warehoused and then forgotten about, they were rediscovered on during the 2nd Morean war (1714-18), where the Venetian navy attempted to quickly redeploy them amongst the fleet. Ammunition was updated slightly and new trials were conducted, reconfirming the incredible properties the weapon had, these new trials were this time watched by multiple members of the Venetian Senate, these observers were highly impressed and attention was given to ensuring the guns were properly supplied with ammunition and range tables. Now properly supplied the gun played a crucial role in relieving the siege of Corfu, not only fending off the much larger Ottoman navy, but also creating mass casualties and panic amongst the encamped Turkish troops. The guns were even given dedicated thought in the design of the 60 gun second rate San Spiridion with the hope that the smaller cheaper ships could outmatch larger foes thanks to the incredible effectiveness of the tirar bombe, they again played a crucial role in the huge battle 3 day battle of Matapan helping the Allied fleet secure another decisive victory. Following the end of the 2nd Morean war the guns continued to be mounted on Venetian ships into the 1740s, when it was eventually retired. Following their retirement a number of the guns were then kept in the Arsenal alongside other examples of exemplary Venetian ordinance, documenting the best made guns over the centuries, they were documented as part of Domenico Gasperoni's study of Venetian guns in the short text Artiglieria Veneta (1779) but the last surviving guns were melted down during the Napoleonic occupation, who overlooked the huge potential of the weapons. Despite being hugely successful as weapons they never really got used as they were designed to be, Sigismondo III died in 1701 leaving a legacy of fantastic gun founding, however his greatest creation was never fully realised the gun sinking into obscurity rather than leaving the potentially huge legacy it could have. Looking at the gun itself, its statistics are wonderfully impressive. Both the 120 libbre and 200 libbre models of the gun had a range of about 5000m, with an extremely high degree of accuracy to around 3500m, firing in an easily predictable and stable path, partly thanks to the steady advances of Venetian rifling since the 1540s, and also the cylindrical shot. The calibre of the 120 libbre was 212mm, compared to the 200 libbre's 265mm. The windage of the two guns stands out at 2.9mm, compared to even the best English guns of the period at around 7.5mm, with even the mighty carronade only achieving at best 3.7mm. Perhaps most impressively though was the design of its frame, the design of which incorporated a constant aiming system, where by the gun was continually following its target, something that wouldn't be seen again until 1898 when it was re-discovered by the Englishman Percy Scott, this was especially devastating when combined with its high rate of fire. Its also important to remember this staggeringly forward thinking cannon was, all achieved almost 150 years before the Paixhan's Gun, and almost 200 years before the Dahlgren gun, both of which despite having all the advantages of all the technological advances made during the 18th and 19th Century were both inferior to the tirar bombe.

I feel like a bit of a dirty tease now. In short they are a little bit like the Paixhan gun but better in every way. The Tirar Bombe was came about as part of the bitter arms race between Venice and the Ottomans during the First Morean war (1784-99). The war is the first time both the Venetians and Ottomans are fighting line battles, with both sides pushing for dominance at sea, as a result both sides pushed themselves as hard as they could, seeing the Ottomans launch some particularly large and heavily armed ships while Venice was fielding slightly smaller more manoeuvrable offerings. Part of this arms race also involved a dramatic scramble for large calibre artillery, with the Ottomans pushing for more use of their largest naval guns, the 16 and 12 okka, which compared to being slightly larger than the British 40 and 32 pounders. The Ottomans also started to equip their ships with a number of 44 okka guns which fired stone projectiles, equivalent to 124 British pounds. The war also saw the Ottomans bringing some of their now ancient bombards back into action, although these old monsters were potentially capable of huge damage although their outdated technology didn't add any real tactical value as they were unhandy and inaccurate. These large calibre weapons needed a response from the Venetian government or otherwise risked turning what was on the whole a successful conflict for Venice back in Ottoman favour. The response was assigned to the public gun founder (Fonditore Pubblico) at the time Sigismondo Alberghetti III. The Alberghetti family were a hugely prestigious family in the world of artillery and arguably the most important family in the history of the cannon, they had held the title of public gun founder more than any other bloodline in Venice thanks to their incredible talents for founding large ordinance. Sigismondo III was a genius even by Alberghetti standards, he mainly studied in Venice and England and was unparalleled during his time. The gun itself was developed out of Venetian technology mainly centred on their mortars and obusiero (similar to howizers) with large parts of the inspiration coming from various experiments conducted by the English in the 1680s, his thoughts were also influenced by accounts of the French bombardment of Genoa during 1684, the experimental shells doing a terrifying amount of damage to the city. Sigismondo set about applying these new technologies for naval combat, something the English and French avoided due to safety concerns. The initial design for the gun was a calibre of 120 libbre (equivalent to 212mm), it was to employ a spherical powder chamber similar to mortar technology of the time allowing for larger charges without increasing the thickness and weight of the gun. It was to fire a ball roughly the same weight as the Venetian 20 libbre, similar to an english 15lb. The style of the gun meant that it could be very lightly constructed and framed while still packing a huge punch. The projectiles themselves are somewhat distinctive too, the projectiles unlike standard round shot were to be made cylindrical, and would either be hollow iron shot filled with explosives, or solid stone shot, the cylindrical design was a hugely important part of the gun giving it more stability and accuracy in flight but also meant that there was no risk of the shot turning and causing itself to instantly detonate on firing. Interestingly the first two guns were built in England, both at 120 libbre and 6 calibres long, weighing 3500 libbre grosse (1670kg). They were cast under Sigismondo's supervision in Ashburnham in Sussex at the Thomas Western foundry. However once they arrived in Venice they were put aside and half forgotten, mainly thanks to the Venetian fleet having a string of success and enjoying naval superiority. However the Ottoman fleet started to recover after 1693, leading to a narrow defeat of the Venetian navy at the battle of Chios in 1695 thanks to the effective use of their 44 okka stone cannons. To respond to Turkish success the Venetian Senate reinvested in the Tirar Bombe project once more in 1696, leading Sigismondo to develop a second model of the gun, the 200 libbre, weighing 5000 libbre grosse (2385kg) and further adapting them for naval use on their ships of the line, mainly the San Lorenzo Zustinian class ships. Now however the guns were to be cast in the Venetian Arsenal itself out of Bronze, allowing to make use of the huge technological advantage Venice had in bronze casting, combined with the superior properties that bronze has as a material for casting guns. Testing then confirmed the incredible qualities of the gun to the point that it created a feud between the Sergente Generalre dell' Artiglieria Jacob Richards who endlessly doubted its capabilities. This feud would continue to strain on between Sigismondo and Richards resulting in a bitter rivalry between the two, even despite numerous tests and competitions confirming Sigismondo to be in the right Jacobs continued to claim the gun was dangerous, the ammunition was too expensive to produce and its construction too light. Despite these arguments the Venetian state immediately sent 33 guns to the Levant, however the continued objections from Richards meant that their ammunition was in short supply. The guns now got their first real taste of combat under Sigismondo's Brother Carlo Alberghetti, a prominent Venetian naval commander. Despite the limited ammunition the new guns proved incredibly successful in some light skirmishes, they even proved to exceed their high expectations given by their testing on Lido. The first true test however was at the battle of Mitilenos, where the heavier Ottoman fleet outnumbered the Venetians significantly, the battle resulted in a decisive victory for Venice. The Tirar bombe received significant praise from the three Venetian admirals present, Daniele Dolfin, Pietro Duado and Fabio Bonvincini. Daniele Dolfin even presented Sigismondo with a certification of merit thanks to the crucial part the new guns played, praising the high rate of fire and great accuracy, however they all downplayed the innovative nature of the new weapons, partly as they had been unable to fire many explosive rounds, but also partially due to using them misunderstanding how the cannons were designed to be used. The tirar bombe was intended as a long range weapon, however the lack of range tables and explosive ordinance meant that at Mitilenos they were used much more like a carronade, fighting in a much more traditional close quarters combat, despite their incorrect usage eyewitnesses to the battle tell of a great many Turkish ships having to withdraw having suffered enormous holes in their hulls, thanks to these new weapons. Peace resumed in 1699 and it was decided that these powerful weapons were of little use as part of the fleet, they were redeployed in the home batteries around the lagoon, providing security during the early parts of the war of Spanish succession. When it was clear Venice wouldn't be dragged into the Spanish conflict the guns were warehoused and then forgotten about, they were rediscovered on during the 2nd Morean war (1714-18), where the Venetian navy attempted to quickly redeploy them amongst the fleet. Ammunition was updated slightly and new trials were conducted, reconfirming the incredible properties the weapon had, these new trials were this time watched by multiple members of the Venetian Senate, these observers were highly impressed and attention was given to ensuring the guns were properly supplied with ammunition and range tables. Now properly supplied the gun played a crucial role in relieving the siege of Corfu, not only fending off the much larger Ottoman navy, but also creating mass casualties and panic amongst the encamped Turkish troops. The guns were even given dedicated thought in the design of the 60 gun second rate San Spiridion with the hope that the smaller cheaper ships could outmatch larger foes thanks to the incredible effectiveness of the tirar bombe, they again played a crucial role in the huge battle 3 day battle of Matapan helping the Allied fleet secure another decisive victory. Following the end of the 2nd Morean war the guns continued to be mounted on Venetian ships into the 1740s, when it was eventually retired. Following their retirement a number of the guns were then kept in the Arsenal alongside other examples of exemplary Venetian ordinance, documenting the best made guns over the centuries, they were documented as part of Domenico Gasperoni's study of Venetian guns in the short text Artiglieria Veneta (1779) but the last surviving guns were melted down during the Napoleonic occupation, who overlooked the huge potential of the weapons. Despite being hugely successful as weapons they never really got used as they were designed to be, Sigismondo III died in 1701 leaving a legacy of fantastic gun founding, however his greatest creation was never fully realised the gun sinking into obscurity rather than leaving the potentially huge legacy it could have. Looking at the gun itself, its statistics are wonderfully impressive. Both the 120 libbre and 200 libbre models of the gun had a range of about 5000m, with an extremely high degree of accuracy to around 3500m, firing in an easily predictable and stable path, partly thanks to the steady advances of Venetian rifling since the 1540s, and also the cylindrical shot. The calibre of the 120 libbre was 212mm, compared to the 200 libbre's 265mm. The windage of the two guns stands out at 2.9mm, compared to even the best English guns of the period at around 7.5mm, with even the mighty carronade only achieving at best 3.7mm. Perhaps most impressively though was the design of its frame, the design of which incorporated a constant aiming system, where by the gun was continually following its target, something that wouldn't be seen again until 1898 when it was re-discovered by the Englishman Percy Scott, this was especially devastating when combined with its high rate of fire. Its also important to remember this staggeringly forward thinking cannon was, all achieved almost 150 years before the Paixhan's Gun, and almost 200 years before the Dahlgren gun, both of which despite having all the advantages of all the technological advances made during the 18th and 19th Century were both inferior to the tirar bombe. Apologies its a little off topic, but the question was asked. As always thank you for reading .

Well this is a thread that is supposed to be thinking about potential offers from Portugal The Netherlands and Venice and I think on balance I have the largest bank of information on Venice around here There aren't many ships in the Age of Sail that are particularly key to having had stopped the Ottomans, Venetian artillery was probably on balance more responsible for stopping Ottomans than Venetian ships were, although both played complementary roles, especially in the Cretan war. The main issue is that the Venetians (nor the Ottomans) didn't really start to centre their fleets around SoLs or Frigates until the closing years of the 1600s holding onto galleys much longer than the Atlantic nations. The later adaptation of this style of ship meant that in Venice at least, the technology evolved slightly differently, meaning Venice gained some advantages and disadvantages to developing galleys further than most European nations. The key warship class in the fight against the Ottomans remained the galley, with the galley and the galleass being the main contributor to the Cretan war, It wasnt until near the very end where Venice developed their first SoL, the Giove Fulminante Class (1667), more significantly only 4 of these ships were ever built. It was followed on by the San Lorenzo Zustinian class which emerged near the middle of the 1st Morean war in 1691 which they built a lot more standing at 29 ships, this class played a much more prominant role in the two Morean wars although arguably it wasn't the ship that made the difference, it was their armament, the vastly superior Venetian cannons and each being given 2 large and 6 small tirar bombes. Venice's lonely 74 Corona (1714) played a strong role in the 2nd Morean war, where it was important in the siege of Corfu as the main capital ship, it was here where the Leon Trionfante first saw action too, itself armed with the same number of tirar bombes as its predecessors. The main action of The Venetian line ships was at the 2nd battle of Cape Matapan, a surprisingly under represented battle in history, especially as it was larger than Trafalgar and just as decisive (The Wiki doesn't show the full listing of warships there), while the Allied navy fought bravely and the Leon Trionfante distinguishing itself well the real game changer wasnt the ships it was the armament, the standard Venetian guns were so ahead of their time by this point, with the incredible tirar bombes ripping huge holes through the Turkish ships and causing great damage, despite not being used as intended. Apart from the early examples the only real conflict that Venetian ships played a part in was the Venetian Barbary/Tunisian war where the Leon Trionfante class played the most significant role mainly due to their higher numbers and pure firepower, while Fama earned the highest prestige due to her unmatched speed and sailing qualities combined with the fact her firepower wasn't significantly less than the 70 gun Leon Trionfante class ships, she was also praised for her ability to run down the smaller speed built pirate ships along side the lighter fregata leggara ships such as Palma. Beyond this the Venetian ships are only found in fights between France Austria and Britain, like as De Ruyter said, Bellona at Lissa. If you want to read more about the history of each of the ships, I have done some considerable writing up for the ships I have posted for individually, most notably I have done a brief history of each and every one of the Fama Class which goes into Venetian, French and Austrian service, you can find them on their dedicated ship threads .

Here are some nice paintings I posted on the Venetian Ship Thread over time from the Venetian painter Sandro Feruglio, who paints marine images both current and historical. Some of you may have seen them before but I always love to look at them myself. Its such a shame they are one off paintings, I would personally love a print of each of these for myself, mainly because I can't really justify commissioning to do one for me as much as I would like to. This Picture shows some nice examples of ships you could have in the game. From left to right the ships are Eolo (Leon Trionfante class 1785), Distruzion (1771 Bombard Vessel roughly based on a design from 1750s Deptford), Vittoria 2 (Leon Trionfante class 1785), Esploratore (A Galliot) and Fama. This shows the bombardment of the Island of Sfax as part of the Venetian Barbary/Tunisian war. I really like the floating gun platforms, I made a post asking if anyone knew why a gun platform like this would be used in offensive action. I am a huge fan of the Venetian naval paint scheme and in addition to hopefully seeing a Venetian ship make it into the game I would love to see the possibility for the paint scheme to be included too, its personally my favourite of any examples of colour schemes used by navies, I'm also fond of the English yellow and black and Swedish blue and brown but the combination used in Venice just seems so special to me, then again its probably to be expected from a city famous for its aesthetics. A couple of others I also like are: San Carlo Borromeo: Cavalier Angelo (a 40 gun transport frigate): Fama:

Bellona was built in 1788, shes a Palma class frigate with 38 guns, she isnt a French design, shes double hulled too, I mentioned Palma in the previous post I made. Corona isn't really Venetian at all, she is a Hortense class frigate, just one of the many ships built in Venice by the French during the 2nd occupation. If you want a double hulled ship like all the others in the game you are basically just restricted to the option of having Fama, Palma, Pallade, Cerere, If you combine in the ships completed after the fall of Venice you only gain the "44 Cannoni" (Muiron) and "1780" (La Harpe). Otherwise you are basically selecting from a list of ships with single hulls or built after Venice fell. I'd like to see at least one of the Fregata grossa classes make it: Fama (1784), Vigilanza (1757), Speranza (1752), San Michiel Angelo (1743) or Sant Andrea 2 (1724) all at 40 guns except Fama. Realistically the best resources out there are all pointing into Fama, she has one of the most comprehensive ship posts on the whole forum here too and would make one of the most interesting choices too as she is quite different from anything else in the game at the moment. Other ships include SoLs: San Lorenzo Zustinian, which is kind of too old at being 1691, Corona (1714) a one off 74 which doesn't have plans that I know of, Leon Trionfante which has a very long history and would make a potentially interesting choice due to her forward thinking design. San Carlo Borromeo, which is a bit of a wet fish, the ships were 66s so fall into the unloved category for this selection but also weren't particularly great and weren't favoured over the older Leon Trionfante design. When it comes to smaller ships the only real other contenders the frigates of the Classes Constanza 2 (1757) and Scudo Delle Fede (1715) and while Venice did make a lot of Xebecs I don't really have any named plans for them, its an area of history that isn't particularly covered. Fama is the ultimate choice if you are going to represent Venice, she is really the ultimate Venetian ship and also the ultimate frigate too, I really do hope she gets picked, she has a pretty unique history and has the added benefit of being stunning to look at too.

Out of interest why are we not including ships from 60-74 guns, Agamemnon needs to have at least some alternative at the 64 range. The other thing I find frustrating is the fact that basically if you want a Venetian ship you almost have to go for Fama, the ships built before 1784 are all single hulled, ships like Speranza and San Carlo Borromeo and Leon Trionfante, so would have to be somewhat weaker than their contemporaries, at least in armour and thickness, although they would make up for this with a bit of speed. The other options are ships like Palma and Cerere which I can't easily get plans for or to include ships that sadly weren't completed until the French or Austrian occupations like Le Muiron. Fama is the heaviest frigate I have ever come across, she is also the most impressive in a lot of ways, and more importantly she is the best ship made in late Venice so would represent the city very well, the other bonuses to doing fama is she has greatly detailed A1 plans that come with the book Das Erbe der Serenissima and also a model that is the pride of place in the Austrian military museum. The other option is to balance this historically and let Venetian ships equip the glorious Tirar Bombe as bow chasers as was historical and they can rain down explosive shells to great accuracy beyond the range of any other in game cannons. What's not to love about a 120/200lb explosive weapon?

The main 4 postings for Venetian ships are I have some very large plans of a couple of the Venetian ships available but haven't had the time or ability to upload them yet, if anyone wants me to look into some of the smaller ships I will gladly do so, I have posted some of the brigs and cutters from late Venice and there is a model of a polacca circulating too. I have been waiting for this post since forever but why couldn't you have done it yesterday when I was able to properly react to it with some proper research Good to see more ships will be under development soon, I will do almost anything to squeeze fama in

The easy fix would be to make balls limited, ships wouldn't carry too many double headed shot at all, generally enough for around 3-4 broadsides, the same goes for grape which was usually around 4-6. I'd also limit round shot but keep it fairly unlimited, say 50-80 broadsides, this would mean people can't just endlessly waste iron all day long, it shouldn't be something you have to buy, just limited to battle instances. No one complains about having limited ammunition in shooting games, the idea of introducing it here would be a good start, you could always have a cheap perk for giving more specialist shot too, for example having a "American Quartermaster" perk would give you more double headed shot, as the US navy carried more than the navies of Europe.

Does Wasa come with its own set of Allen Keys (Hex Keys) for ease of construction, if not will it fit a standard selection?

@Prater I fixed it for you.

I can't let a thread like this go on without posting my usual contribution. It would be overwhelmingly great to see a tribute to Venice and the huge impact the city had on shipbuilding, without Venetian innovations you would miss out on a huge swathe of important changes to shipbuilding techniques and development. My Favourite possible contribution is Fama, here she is. She would also add a lot to the somewhat stagnant 4th rate bundle we currently have, where Agamemnon is the only real choice. She would also take her rightful place as queen of frigates, allowing for some pretty devastating firepower but still having the fun of being speedy and agile.

Here is a Video taken by the company BAE, who have been attempting to help preserve the ship and stop her collapsing in on herself. The video has been produced by laser measurements and shows a really nice take of the ship that gives a fantastic perspective you wouldn't normally get to see. The original article reads:

1880-1939 seems like a very interesting and somewhat unusual period to cover, I will be watching with a lot of interest to how things might develop here. My main concern that while its a relatively small date window the technology change during the period is so huge, these years covering the final ironclad wooden hulled warships to the really quite modern builds like HMS Belfast, giving a huge and difficult possible array of ships to properly balance. My other concern with this style of game is how satisfying the large turrets will really feel after we have been spoiled by Naval action and the 100+ gun first rates firing huge broadsides. It will surely be an interesting learning experience for everyone involved and hopefully feel a lot less arcade than other releases on the market right now. To my mind the first half of the period covers some impressive weaponry but somewhat poor resistance to the guns and torpedos available, as naval armour adapted along a much more slow line. This gap between weapons and armour is only further solidified by advances in range finding and the (re-)invention of the constant aim system, while second half covers the world wars, drednaughts and how navies dealt with the limitations of firepower after the treaty of Versailles. I look forwards to seeing some more information on the project and perhaps more of what is being aimed to do by the team. I do hope you include some good dazzle camouflage

This is very exciting news, especially because of what it might mean for the future of Game-labs projects, and how significant and spectacular the community of posters to the shipyard have been over the years. I'm hugely looking forwards to how things might develop from here.

I was recently looking through some paintings by the artist Sandro Feruglio, who has done some really nice paintings on the Venetian Barbary war and I came across two paintings in particular that interested me due to the depiction of floating artillery platforms. Apologies to those who have seen the paintings before as I have shared them to the Venetian ship thread but here they are. The first picture shows the bombardment of The island of Galite, including what looks like a Leon Trionfante ship of the line, a slightly poor representation of Fama and more interestingly two floating gun batteries, the one on the left being mounted with what looks like a medium sized bronze naval gun (most likely 30lb (20lb British weight)) and an Obusiero (The Venetian equivalent to a howitzer) also cast in Bronze. The use of Bronze guns itself isn't unusual as the main Venetian shipyard The Venetian Arsenal was only equipped to cast bronze cannon, so while expensive they played an important part in the arming of the Venetian fleet, Venice also had a significant technological lead in the casting of bronze guns too. The picture to the right shows a larger bronze cannon, likely a 40lb (26.5lb British weight) and a further, gun being loaded onto the platform, again likely a 40lb cannon. The second Picture shows a similar set up, although from a different ship and angle, much more clearly showing the ship Vittoria and Fama, with the same set up of a medium sized naval gun and an Obusiero. The second picture also seems to be showing a broadside from Fama. The third picture shows the run up to the bombardment of Sfax, where there are two prepared platforms and a further platform being loaded with a gun, these seem of a slightly lower calibre than the first picture, likely 14lb guns (equivalent to 9lb British), its also less clear whether the guns are iron or bronze, due to the different lighting, perhaps a mix of the two, the useful part of this painting is it more closely shows the rather crude construction of the platforms themselves, its also quite a nice pan shot of the composition of the fleet involved in the war. Looking at these different platforms they seem to be made without much uniformity, there is a clear difference in size and payload between each platform. I have come across floating gun platforms on multiple occasions and seen various designs for sailed, towed and oared platforms as a part of harbour defence but not really come across them in offensive action even though I have been vaguely aware of their offensive use in the Venetian Barbary war for a while, although not really thought about it in any detail. Bringing this all together, what kinds of advantages and disadvantages does using floating gun platforms bring in comparison to just using ships for shore bombardment? Are there other instances where this known to have happened? While I have some of my own thoughts on these matters I would really appreciate and enjoy hearing some ideas from others first, especially people who are much more experienced in the area than I am, so please do share any thoughts or knowledge you might have on the subject.

While its not an area I can particularly help with I wish your team the best for the project. part of message edited due to mention of F2P games which should be discussed in the tavern only.

I was browsing the internet as I do and I came across some more paintings by Sandro Feruglio San Carlo Borromeo Fama: Numerous/Other Ships:

I have been browsing the internet and I came across a 3d render of the Galeass model made by Guido Ercole earlier in the thread, the viewing is pretty spectacular although sadly it doesn't seem to host the proper 3d model in its entirety, just a few little shots on youtube of the stunning creation, its some really top work if you ask my slightly biased opinion. http://veniceatlas.epfl.ch/atlas/gis-and-databases/mediterranean/3d-model-venetians-ships/ Also in recent times I have come across this nice little show from Carlo Beltrame, showing some really nice models and drawings of Venetian cannons, sadly though the specimens are too early for the game as far as I know http://virgo.unive.it/beltrame/

There's something a bit fishy about the idea of someone called captain lust wanting to know more about penetration

The opening broadside to Bucentaure was loaded with a treble shot of round, and that the full broadside fired weighed 3444lb (1566kg/1.9 Imperial tons). The record doesn't state any grape/cannister being involved.