seanjo
-
Posts
449 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by seanjo
-
-
6 hours ago, Bearwall said:
18pds frigates doesn't become the norm untill the 1770's and only the first rates had 42pds on the bottom deck. The problem with downward elevation would only be exacerbated on ship of the lines due to the shape of their hulls. And while it is true that carronades became widespread practice on fifth rates in the 1790's they were often of inferior quality to the long guns due to manufacturing of them. Carronades were (in the beginning) a cheap, discount alternative to the more expensive long cannons. In terms of the quality of materials used that is. The british first saw a genuine interest in outfitting their frigates proper with carronades and throughout the period produced some of the most devastating carronade frigates.
This must be the most unenlightened comment so far. Discussion is closed for my part..
LOL, you experiment to perfect a method as well.
I prove you wrong and you get all pissy...carry on muppet.
-
I've skipped stones in choppy waters, I'm pretty sure an experienced cannon Captain could pick his moment.
Anyway, the point being, bouncing cannonballs off the surface of the water was a well-known practice and it would be nice to see it in the game.
-
51 minutes ago, Bearwall said:
Alright I'll yield - if we get ships from the 1850's.. The problems I see is:
The smoothbore cannons compared to the rifled ones. The use of rifled cannons (as far as I know) didn't become widespread practice in naval warfare untill the late 1850's and I simply do not see its practical use.
In the same treatise (if I recall it correctly) it mentions that it only works with large calibers on level ground and smooth water surfaces..
And one premise that is outlined in the treatise is that the shots are so-called hollowshots - worthless against any warships.
I concur that it could have its uses against longboats and similar targets - in very smooth waters, but I don't see it in almost all sailing condition nor against any of the current ships in game.
The experiments he mentions were done in 1838.
-
It quite clearly says shots deflected off the surface penetrated very well at 1200 yards.
-
1 hour ago, Hodo said:
Perhaps against thin hulled ships yes. But at the range people are talking it would lose so much energy it would be hard pressed to punch through few inches of wood.
2From my earlier link....
162. From the tables of ricochet practice made on
board the " Excellent" in 1838, against the " Prince
George" hulk, at the distance of 1200 yards, the following
particulars are extracted:—A shot fired from a 32-pound at an elevation of half a degree, with a
charge of 10 lbs. 11 oz., penetrated, after one graze
from the water, the after port-timber of one of the
ports, to the depth of 28 inches in very good wood,
shattered the head of the rider, started the plank between
the ports, and passed over to the opposite side,
where it penetrated to the depth of 10 inches. Tin's
shot also broke the beam-clamp, a piece of good wood
6 inches thick.
A 68-pounder hollow shot, with a charge of 12 lbs.
and an elevation of half a degree, after five grazes
struck a chock of solid wood 4 feet 8 inches thick luider
the fender, and shattered it in pieces. It stmck also a
large iron bolt, which it flattened. Another, with a
chu*ge of 10 lbs. and an elevation of 1 degree, after
two grazes penetrated the ship's side diagonally (34
inches), in tolerably good wood, below the chocks, and
lodged behind a cluster of iron knees on the orlo])-
deck, which were shaken considerably. The planking
on the outside of the ship was also started. A third,
after two ^azes, struck a chock used for the sheers,
tearing off a piece 6 feet long, 1 foot deep, and 24 feet
broad. It then penetrated 11 inches deep in the ship's
side, in bad wood.
A 68-ponnder shot, with a charge of 8 lbs. and an
elevation of 1 decree, after two bounds, penetrated to
the depth of 24 inches, close to the side of a port just
above the lower port-sill, in bad wood, started the inside
planking, and tore off a piece which splintered. One
of the splinters, a very large one, was thrown beyond
the main-hatchway to the opposite side of the deck.
The shot having crossed the deck, struck a corner of the
main-hatchway conihinofs, and tore out a large piece on
eacli side, destroying the use of the combings. It struck
a winch-handle which was lying on the deck, and drove
one end of it through a port-scuttle. After striking the
combings, the shot grazed a beam and fell on the deck.
Another shot, with a charge of 7 lbs. and an elevation
of 1 degree, after three bounds, penetrated through the ship's side diagonally (29 inches), shattered the oeiUng,
and made several splinters.
A hollow shot from a 68-pounder carronade, with a
charge of 5 lbs. 8 oz. and an elevation of 4 degrees,
after one bound, struck the upper surface of a bulwark,
and went overboard.
Kicocliet practice is now much better understood
than formerly, and is daily becoming more important
in the service. When made with large ordnance it is
susceptible of great accuracy on level ground, or on the
surface of smooth water.The copypasta is a bit messed up cause it's from a PDF, for the original text go to the link and flick through to page 126.
-
1 hour ago, Hodo said:
I dont think ricochet shots are exactly what some people think they are. In no logical sense would a shot hitting the ground or water extended its range by bouncing. The kinetic energy loss due to the impact with the ground or water would be pretty substantial.
While the idea of bouncing a hollow shot off of the water to cause it to break up and scatter shrapnel over a larger area is a valid concept. Which maybe what the tactic was. Fire a hollow shot that would hit the water or a wave before the target, shatter, and scatter shrapnel across the deck of the ship, thus increasing the anti-personal and anti-rigging range.
Seeing as we do not have a hollow shot in game I wouldnt put to much effort into worrying about it.
I think it was a way to do water level damage.
-
8 hours ago, Bearwall said:
Could we perhaps have more reputable sources than hearsay and an article in a popular historical fansite that takes its information from the daily mail?
Page 126-130 discusses ricochet shots in depth.
Gen. Sir Howard Douglas, A Treatise on Naval Gunnery 1855
https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_PK50sbOOfjUC#page/n141/mode/2up
-
1 hour ago, George Washington said:
Bounce off what? Water? Their shape and weight have no connection to your topic. They sink, they don’t bounce.
It was used to good effect many times, it uses the same principles as skimming stones. Barnes Wallis is said to have got the idea for the bouncing bomb from Nelson bouncing cannonballs.
-
Generally, when hundreds of people can get on a game no problem...it's a problem at your end.
-
The safe zones are fine as they are, they let new players play without taking a devastating loss because some "PvPer" wants to sink an easy target. The population seems to be holding steady since the safe zones were introduced. I had the luxury of a relatively safe zone around West End, it encouraged me and got me addicted, if I had been ganked to buggery, I would not be here now.
There are plenty of opportunities for PvP around free ports and other places. Or are you too scared to face other real PvPers?
-
1
-
-
Yes, but on the PvE server map only.
-
1
-
-
I wouldn't sell mine anyway.
-
2 hours ago, Comeonche said:
For me choose a nation to play must be a hard and difficult choice, it's not like choose his shirt in the morning.
Players should be allowed to have only ONE Forged Paper. Not 2, 3 or 4!!! It's useless and dangerous.
2Same here, I have four left and will not abandon my nation no matter how crappy it gets.
-
1
-
-
1. They used to have co-ords in map so you could plot your position but got rid of them.
2. There are different ships as you gain rank and do higher PvE missions.
-
Stop whining about the safe zones...they are keeping the player base. Any skilled player can PvP in the safe zones if they know how.
-
I'm guessing it would be too much for the game engine/server to support.
-
You know you can change the way you see the forum with the buttons arrowed?
-
10 hours ago, Lord Gud said:
Yes and everyone isn't a skilled PvPer such as myself...
So you want an unskilled PvP free for all where you can choose the easy kills instead of trying for the challenge...I understand now, you want your own version of carebear zones.
-
23 hours ago, Lord Gud said:
Attacked a player the other day only 2 of us 10x 1st rates left battle to find 8-10 players waiting to attack us which shows they can defend their waters.
Skilled PvPers don't get put off by safe zones, they use the gameplay to their advantage, the skilled players are getting kills in the safe zones every day.
-
If you want PvP freeports like Great Corn or Tumbado are hotbeds of PvP activity unless of course what you want is easy victims to boost your stats.
The safe zones are encouraging and keeping the player base.
-
3
-
-
The safe zones encourage new players, which this game badly needs. Reward PvP, even if you lose, some gained XP and gold would offset the loss of what might be a person's only valuable asset.
-
6
-
-
4 hours ago, Celtiberofrog said:
Hello there,
Was wondering if barter trade could allow a wider economy activity.
Gold is restricting the exchanges, could the current coding allow 1 or 2 alternatives from seller or buyer proposal ?
example:
Celtiberofrog sells :
Live oak log unit for ==> 75 gold, ==> or 2 Teak logs, ==> or 0,5 copper ingot
You can do that through the trade facility, already.
-
You can only fit them to class 5 and below I believe....could be very wrong on that...
-
Having taken part in a few Port Battles, I found them very boring....just a means to an end.
Finding each other in OW
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
How do taxes help?