LeBoiteux

La Fidèle (1757) is indeed a 400-ton 20-gun frigate launched at Nantes and owned by the Company from apparently her sailing from Nantes to Lorient. But she shows up in the Archives of the Company unlike Le Maure (1765). Could those Archives be incomplete ?

C'est bien "Capitaine"et non "Capitain". "Capitain" n'existe pas et "Capitaine" n'est pas le féminin de "Capitain". De toute façon, on ne va pas t'attaquer pour une faute d'orthographe. Le capitaine t'a attaqué parce qu'il... avait envie d'attaquer un Espagnol.

@ Malachi, about Le Maure : Are you sure that that Maure built in 1765 belonged to the French East India Company ? The only Maure in the Archive of the Company is a 300-ton vessel (1712-1730). Moreover, I think (but I'm not sure) that all the ships built by the Company was made at Lorient, not at Toulon. Source : Estienne 71, 263 ; Dermeliac XV n° 1962

Af Chapman drew a French fluyt called Le Chameau in his Architectura Navalis : Source : http://www.sjohistoriska.se/ImageVaultFiles/id_3083/cf_1801/53.JPG Has this to do with the French East India Company's ones ?

@ Malachi : Great contribution. I guess this is : Le Chameau (1758-1766) Fluyt, 750 ton, 12-26 guns Crew : 65-123 Built in Lorient Destinations : Mascarene Islands, India, China, La Coruña. Sources : Estienne 1986, 2114, 2126, 2134 ; Demerliac XV n° 1903 Archives of the French East India Company or is it : Le Chameau (1716-1725) Fluyt,, 400 ton Built in Holland in 1716 Shipwrecked in 1725. 10-20 guns Crew : 59-65 Destinations : Guinea, Louisiana, Senegal, Santo Domingo Sources : Estienne 113, 176 ; Dermerliac XV n° 1981 Archives of the French East India Company

Le Duc de Duras (future Bonhomme Richard) 900-ton French fluyt, 1765 26 to 52 guns Source : http://www.amarsenal.be/Images_05%20MM%2023_AW_DdD/DdD_AW010.jpg Two trading voyages to China before Company dissolution in 1770. Repurchased by Louis XVI, transferred to the early Navy of the USA and renamed Bonhomme Richard. She then won fame during the American Revolutionary War. Characteristics : 145 x 36 x 15 ft Crew : 160 Armament : as Le Duc de Duras : in peace time : 20 x 8-pdr in war time : 26 x 12-pdr + 26 x 8-pdr as Le Bonhomme Richard : 44 guns Sources, plans and shipmodels : http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/54-monographie-du-bonhomme-richard-1779.html?search_query=bonhomme&results=3 http://www.amarsenal.be/05_MM_23_AW_DdD01.htm Four plans of 54-58 gun Fluyts of the French East India Company One signed by Coulomb, the others by Groignard in Lorient in 1755. (all available in the Archives of the French Navy) 1) D1 66, n° 3, cl. 33784 2) D1 66, n° 4, cl. 92130 3) D1 66, n° 5, cl. 33783 4) D1 66, n° 6, cl. 92389

Le Massiac 900 to 950-ton French fluyt, 1759 24 guns (8 and 12-pdr) : 6 on the lower deck, 18 on the upper deck Built by Antoine Groignard on behalf of the French East India Company. Named after Claude de Massiac, Secretary of State to the Royal Navy. General characteristics : Length : 140 ft Beam : 35 ft Draught : 18 - 19 ft Crew : 159 - 199 Plans available : in the Archives of the French Navy : D1 65, n° 9, cl. 92383. in Boudriot, Le Bonhomme Richard, p. 18-19 Comparison with Le Duc de Duras Both have the same burden (900 ton), are designed by A. Groignard and are, to within 4 inches (11 cm), of the same length. Sources : http://www.histoire-genealogie.com/spip.php?article387

Le Saint Géran 600-ton French fluyt, 1736 28 guns Source : http://www.first-fleet-reproductions.com/client/cache/produit/600_600______intro_zoom_37.jpg 29 m x 9,60 m x 21m Another fluyt built in Lorient by the French East India Company. The shipwreck of Le Saint Guéran off the coast of Mauritius inspired J.-H. Bernardin de Saint-Pierre to write the famous novel Paul and Virginia (1788) in which the heroine’s fate ends in drowning during the sinking of the ship off the coast of Mauritius while returning home to the island : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_et_Virginie Shipmodels (no plan) certainly based on the plan of Le Boullongne (see above): http://www.first-fleet-reproductions.com/6-historic-saint-geran.html http://www.bobatoshipmodels.com/en/stgeran.php http://www.la-timonerie-antiquites.com/fr/antique/801/superbe-maquette-artisanale-du-voilier-saint-geran-cie-des-indes Source : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint-Géran Thx to Sella22 for this find !!

The French East India Company (1664-1794) Between 1720 and 1770, the Company gained a great prosperity and built more than 300 ships, a third of them being two-deck ships from 600 to 1500 ton. Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_East_India_Company La Paix, 1764 : http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/66472.html Le Boullongne 600-ton French fluyt, 1759 20 guns (6-pdrs) Source : http://gerard.delacroix.pagesperso-orange.fr/boullon/bou_2.htm Built in Lorient by G. Cambry on behalf of the French East India Company. Design (especially the interior) is a bit different from ships built by and for the French Royal Navy, such as Le Gros Ventre, to serve as a freight transport ship. Named after Jean de Boullongne, French magistrate and politician. Captured by the British in 1762. Length (gundeck) : 126' Breadth : 30' Depth in hold : 11'8" Monograph and plans : http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/63-monographie-du-boullongne-v-cie-des-indes-1759.html?search_query=boullongne&results=2 Shipmodels : http://gerard.delacroix.pagesperso-orange.fr/boullon/bou_index.htm http://www.amarsenal.be/05_MM_19_SDB01.htm http://enguerrand.gourong.free.fr/oceanindien/p19oceanindien.htm Source : http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=16503

Several nations have used the lion as figurehead (Sweden, France, Venice, Britain...). During the XVIIth century, French lions are said to be grunting, showing a bit of their teeth and sculpted with a classic style. The body posture of the lion figurehead from XVIII-th century L'Hermione looks quite similar to that of Le Muiron (even if I can't see that last one very well on available pics. see low-res pic below) : Source : http://www.hermione.com/actualites/2015/2011/794-un-lion-embleme-pour-l-hermione.html Low-res Lion figurehead of Le Muiron : It'd be interesting to know who carved the figurehead of Le Muiron (a French artist ? a Venetian one ?) and when (before/after capture by Napoleon).

Previous attempt at collecting all the plans of the ships that fought in a battle (that of Navarino, 1827) : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7641-battle-of-navarino/ That's another way of organizing NA shipyard (by historic events : battle, exploration mission...).

Impressionant ! Sacré experience. Et felicitations ;-)

Thx for that disdainful comment as it points out that players on PvE server and PvErs on the PvP/E servers may have the same needs.

For the moment : - Both pvp/e servers (such as PvP1) and the pve server have the same mechanics (except on pve server, there are no player vs player battle and no PB), - Devs haven't expressed yet the intention of specifically working on the pve server and giving it specific mechanics, as the pve server is only meant to be a pvp/e server without pvp. The pve server might need specific mechanics but it seems far from being a priority (if ever considered).

One very positive effect on gameplay is providing OW PvP by populating the OW. Ship deliveries don't have to be costly. They must be risky. So no teleport. Ship deliveries only by OW. Players must move their ships to outpost manually or (possible new feature) may rent the services of a player/AI captain (by issuing ship delivery missions). Remove the "send to post" trick. Let's make the captured ship the ship that is automatically sent to outpost.

Knowing (even approximatively) my amount of available labour hours at sea (not only in ports). Sinking in OW when having left a battle as a winner but half sunk and without repair kit available in OW. Maybe being able to change of upgrades in OW according to my needs.

Isn't what you oppose meritocracy vs. little deals among friends ?

Please, Gentlemen, provide specific evidences on Le Muiron (even if I guess that's Impossible Mission). Naval archaeology is all about evidence. G. Delacroix is a respected Naval Archaeologist. His statement must come from contemporary attested reports at the very least. Don't get me wrong. I have no a priori about Le Muiron. But what (may) matters is her actual performance. That ship may have been fast but fragile, light thus fast. If the Ottomans and the French thought the same thing about the weakness of Venetian ships, it may not indeed be a coincidence nor a conspiracy, but... a fact. More facts would be useful.

She seems to have been regarded by her contemporaries as weak in terms of structure and design as French Naval Archaeologist Gerard Delacroix wrote : « She was regarded as weak in terms of construction : her frames were spaced out too far apart, her planking too thin, lengthwise members (« liaisons ») were too few and the mizzen mast too far forward (only 12 feet from the stem). » « Elle était jugée faible de construction, ses membrures trop espacés, bordé trop mince, liaisons insuffisantes et son mât de misaine trop en avant (seulement 12 pieds de l'étrave). » http://5500.forumactif.org/t498-le-muiron However, she totally deserves to be in-game considering her history. PS : her unknown fate (sold or burnt) took place in 1850 during the Second Republic whose President was Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, future Napoleon III and nephew of Napoleon I.

+1. Very nice find. A ship with a unique history as she's closely tied to the Emperor Napoleon 1st. And her original plans were nowhere to be found in France.

That's it : I'd like to have shallows relevant on the OW. Current time compression and sailing model in OW are indeed valid objections.

Can't OW shallows and instance shallows be disconnected ; their shapes and spread, way to be detected and effects on ships being reworked only for OW while instance shallows would remain the same as currently for battle gameplay's sake ? OW shallows for interceptions, defensive positions or evading a threat ; entering a port ; exploration and trade gameplay... vs Instance shallows : simplified, automatically detected, with very limited effect on gameplay.

Improvement of shallow detection and dangerousness of shallows may indeed be features more adapted to OW than instances. OW needs a non-combat gameplay and dangerousness IMHO.

Damage (small or critical) could be good in OW for traders' and explorers' gameplay, and more generally for those who sail in the OW as non-combat damage similar to combat damage in instances for fighters. And also interesting in combat instances. Shipwrecks is just a non-combat way to lose a dura. Pushing back your ship to release it could be handled by pressing a button (and losing money ?) and having your ship "teleported" a few feet offshore.

I would add a 6th priority : "Sailing gameplay in OW and instances" including improvement/implementation of weather conditions (storms in battle, more fog...), shallows (new way of detection ? mapping ?...), wind strength...