Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

LeBoiteux

Members2
  • Posts

    3,484
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by LeBoiteux

  1. I saw on a youtube vid that there was an interesting line of sight tool for land/landing battles.

    If there were to be a French campaign implemented in game some day, I guess it could be fun/unusual to have the  French Aerostatic Corps with balloons for reconnaissance. They took action from 1794 to 1802 (battle of Fleurus, campaign in Egypt…). One of these balloons, L'Intrépide, is exhibited at the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum in Vienna. 🙂

     

    Early_flight_02562u_(9).jpg?uselang=fr

     

  2. 1 hour ago, Wagram said:

    For the sake of completeness, I would like to draw everybody's attention to Clarkson Stanfield's painting of the battle of Trafalgar. The figurehead of the Redoutable is a full figure. Could be a cloaked Greek or Roman warrior with cuirass and crested helmet, but I'm not sure. Also, the painting is not contemporary (dated 1836) and I don't know whether Stanfield is reliable in this respect.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/The_Battle_of_Trafalgar_by_William_Clarkson_Stanfield.jpg

    A Greek/Roman warrior as an allegorical figure of what is "redoubtable" (ie the name of the ship) would be a logical choice for a figurehead made during the French Revolution at the time of the name change (1794). 

  3. ^ Indeed and that's why those sculptures of Tourville,  Duguay-Trouin, Jean Bart, Duquesne (...) from the Naval Museum are an invaluable source about the production of the French figureheads of the period, especially ' for the Téméraire or advanced classes ' (which was Admin's initial question). For now, with the info in this thread including the ship model, figureheads of, at least, Le Duquesne and Le Duguay-Trouin can be modeled with some details in the game... ie, what was or what could have been their figureheads, according to what we know. 🙂

  4. 13 minutes ago, Bert66 said:

    Nope, not getting why land battles are needed to flesh out an Age of Sail game sorry.

    land battles and naval ones are connected via trade, troop landing and transportation, invasions... Nice to have both in a same game. 

    I for one wouldn't understand if there was Chesapeake without Yorktown or Yorktown without Chesapeake, in a given campaign.

  5. 16 minutes ago, Citoyen J said:

    Duquesne (74 temeraire class) bow figure from the ship model at Toulon (Musée de la Marine)

    Do you now when this ship model was made ? 

    ____________________

    From the collection of the Naval Museum of Toulon, sculptures of Tourville,  Duguay-Trouin, Jean Bart and Duquesne :

    ob_aac698_img-9856.jpg

    Also, Bellone (c. 1815) :

    ob_f86c32_img-9865.jpg

    And more : here.

    • Like 1
  6. According to the French Navy :

    • Laid down in 1888
    • Launched in 1890
    • Layed up in 1910
    • Sold to the Peruvian Navy in 1911, renamed 'Commandant Elias Aguirre' but never delivered because of WWI
    • Guns disembarked in 1915
    • Sold to Belgium in 1918, renamed Péruvier and used as cargo ship
    • Condemned in 1920
    • Characteristics 6400 t ; 14000 cv ; 114 x 15,7 x 7,9 m ; Plans de Bussy ; En acier ; 20 chaudières du Temple ; 3 hélices ; 480 h ; II.194 + VI.164 + 12).
    • Like 1
  7. 7 minutes ago, Ortac said:

    Both of these suggestions already happen in battle.

    1) Enemy warships will chase you regardless of health until they are sunk.

    2) All trade ships try to run away.

    The only difference is the open world attack mechanism. In other words - aggressive ai, which I believe is slated for introduction to both servers.

    I for one (and Destraex also, I think) talk only about the OW, not battle instances. Needless to say...

    As for AI aggressiveness (the subject of my post), it still hasn't been implemented yet and can be discussed, knowing some don't like the idea.

    Cheers 🙂

  8. ... maybe meaning players of the PvE server don't go to NA forum ?

    About your suggestion, I find it a bit complicated. For example, with "Enemy AI chase mission - Any enemy Cerberus in the OW will give chase to your ship" : sometimes you don't come across a Cerberus for a long time...

    What about just two simple missions or switch-on/off button(s) you can even press in OW (I prefer that last one) ?

    1) Enemy AI chase mission - Any enemy nations ships will attack you and give chase, depending on rates (6th-rates attack 6th-rates, etc.).

    2) Enemy AI Run away Mission - Any enemy trader will run away from you. 

  9. Real-time tactical games such as the Total War series or the Ultimate Admiral/General ones add to the difficulty the micromanagement of the troops (making them more reflex/speed/action-based), unlike turn-based tactical games such as Field of Glory (that involve more deep thinking). Some players prefer the former type, some the latter...

  10. 23 minutes ago, Wagram said:

    So, the original French figurehead was a full figure representing a c.1700 French "warrior" - commanding officer. Rough translation into English:

    "... The figure will represent a warrior dressed in the French fashion of  the time of Duguay-Trouin. He will wear a belt tied on the left side from which will hang a sword on the hilt of which he will rest his left hand. The right hand extended forward will indicate by its position the action of issuing an order." 

    simply put : a (not realistic) representation of Duguay-Trouin, the French Corsair (with the left hand on the pommel of his sword and the right hand extended forward)  :

    320px-Duguay-Trouin_Saint-Malo.jpg?usela

    Guay-Trouin.jpg?uselang=fr

    Duguay-trouin-2.jpg

    (some representations of Duguay-Trouin)

    • Like 1
  11. 6 hours ago, admin said:

    We only have the bow figure for the implacable - but it could be a british one. Maybe someone has info on Redoutable bow figure or any other figurines for the temeraire or advanced classes ?

    I don't have drawings or pictures. Have you look at Boudriot's 74-gun ship ?

    1) If I ain't mistaken, most/lots of ships of the Téméraire class were built between 1782-1789, ie during the Monarchy and Louis XVI' neoclassic style. The lion bow figure sculpture (one sees on earlier L'Hermione and such) was replaced with decorative friezes and then symbols of the royal arms. 

    2) During the French Revolution, one used allegorical figures related to the names of the ships, names that were related to the Revolution, such as The Revolutionary, The Human Rights, The Unity...

    Example : La Poursuivante (1796)

    5MczH2n.jpg

    3) Then, during the First Empire (1804-1815), symbols of the Ancient Rome related to the power of Napoleon were used : eagle, crown of laurels...

    Example : Le Triomphant (1809)

    ASK5pVm.jpg

  12. 54 minutes ago, slashdash2 said:

    3.  Aircraft Carriers: I would love to see (and this is a bit of a stretch) early aircraft carriers. i know this might get some flak but before you chuck it out here me out. Early aircraft carries were slow and pretty weakly armed and armoured. They didn't hold a lot of aircraft and the early aircraft (biplanes such as the swordfish) used in the time period weren't all that flash either. These should not be overpowered in anyway. Mainly scouting and some light bombing etc. This could lead to some awesome scenes on maps where a fleet is defending a aircraft carrier from an enemy ambush or attack with the aircraft defending the hive like bees as a distraction to get the main fleet away. Flak barrages and early machine gun fire around ships would look awesome especially if the game lets us go into WW2. As a balancing portion in the campaign make them relatively expensive or to maintain compared to other ships and the planes not super strong so as to not make them super common on the field and overpowered. Even if the ships were a mid/late technology to research would add balance to the game too. Some early examples of basic aircraft carriers were the HMS Engadine, HMS Ark Royal/Pegasus and the IJN Hosho just to name a few.

    Great idea ! 🙂

    There were also seaplane tenders and... early seaplanes, such as La Foudre (1895) carrying Canard Fabre, Canard Voisin and Nieuport  seaplanes from 1910 on.

    • Like 1
  13. Not sure there is a strict correlation between having one's own nation in game and buying a game.

    I for one liked playing a Soviet soldier in the Eastern Front of a WWII game, a US secret agent in Splinter Cell, a French captain in NA, a Japanese samurai in the Mark of the Ninja or an Ancient Greek in TW Rome and so on because it was realistic/believable and helped the immersion (the make-believe).

    'Not sure' I would play a game as a Belgian samurai or a US lancer in TW Rome.

    However I am no MMO specialist...

    And it might be cultural.

    • Like 5
  14. Speaking of land battles, I really like the idea of connecting them to naval battles and fleets :

    On 9/22/2019 at 10:35 AM, sterner said:

    The mission “Snakes and Powder” is a typical land mission in the campaign. Your troops are tasked to collect resources that are required to supply your fleet. You have not received any news for the past three days. There is a reported activity of the Spanish army in the area. Your goal is to investigate what happened with your people and reacquire supplies.

    Speaking of connections (and thus nations), I wonder why the focus of such a game as UA:AoS are national campaigns and careers of given Admirals and not a given war and coalitions. Wars were (already) coalition ones. And such battles as the naval battle of Chesapeake (France vs GB) and the (land) siege of Yorktown (with US, French, British, etc. troops) were connected.

    The first game of the series could have been about the American Revolutionary War with two factions/campaigns : one for the USA ans their allies and one for the British and their allies. The second game about say a Napoleonic war with two playable coalitions, etc.  

    IMHO making it nation-focused give a partial view of History.

  15. 11 hours ago, Sento de Benimaclet said:

    But Jorge Juan wasn‘t wrong. 

    Your reasoning : a French (Francisco Gautier) replaces a Spanish (Jorge Juan) at the head of the Spanish shipbuilding from 1765 to 1782 using his (French) system, that's what explains the defeat of the Spanish-French fleet at Trafalgar in 1805 where the British ships were 'surely inspired" by Spanish Juan, thus the Spanish system is better than French one.

    Ok... 🙂

     

×
×
  • Create New...