Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

DeRuyter

Tester
  • Content Count

    1,465
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,127 Excellent

1 Follower

About DeRuyter

  • Rank
    Commander
  • Birthday 08/08/1963

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Delaware USA
  • Interests
    Military history in general but in particular the Napoleonic era and age of sail. Wargaming and painting military miniatures. Sailor and bicycle racer. F1 fan. Fan of "proper" football: Gunners and Philadelphia Union!

Recent Profile Visitors

1,903 profile views
  1. Of course I can attest to "The Admiral" as well. 😎 When I began sailing on a square rigger the captain recommended Harland, almost as required reading! Excellent resource (Seamanship in the Age of Sail).
  2. Ah yes correct. Any opinion on the model?
  3. I recall from a video interview with the designer Gabrio that they were going for something generic with several different versions of bow and stern to fit on for variation. What I suspect happened is that the sculptor was not inherently knowledgeable and did not research what a common configuration would look like.
  4. I have been waiting for play through videos on YT at a minimum before commenting on the game. Suffice it to say that some of what I have seen is troubling for those looking for granularity in combat. For those gamers who don't know the difference between a motor torpedo boat and a frigate the basic rules are certainly sufficient for a fun club game. This is certainly the intent as noted by the designer who is an age of sail aficionado, which makes me hopeful for the advanced rules. To a certain extent you won't completely turn a beer and pretzels game into a sim with just 4 pages of advanced rule though. Several examples that trouble me. One playthrough (On Table Top) video showed that brigs have 2 heavy cannon dice which do 2 points of dmg per hit. But there is nothing that distinguished those guns from the heavy cannon on the Santisima Trinidad. The Santisima carried a battery of 36 lb guns and a battery of 24 lb guns, plus a battery of 12 lb guns on the upper deck. Most small unrated brigs carried 6 lb guns unless rearmed with carronades. Put it another way it made a difference that USS Constitution was armed with 24 lb long guns opposing frigates with the standard 18 lb batteries. Another is in the basic rules running with the wind is the fastest point of sail, which is incorrect. Apparently the sailing and wind rules are a bit different with the addition of the advanced rules. Also the attacker in boarding combat gets a +1 to the dice? Like to know the rational for that one. And grappling can occur when the ships are 3 inches apart!?! Anyway I do like the fact that everything, except paint, you need is in the box including rigging. Since the models are larger I was hoping to use them for lake battles however I am not sure the rules have sufficient granularity on the low end of the stats for that, despite that they do have gunboat models.
  5. Yes but are not some of the units companies - artillery for example? I know you posted earlier that some were erroneously marked as companies - like a grenadier company but was too large. My main point above stands though - I'll revise the scale comment to say that it is more of a battalion/regimental scale as opposed to UG:CW which is more or less brigade scale. You could take it down to company level as well, which would fit with the landing force element of the game.
  6. Well I wouldn't look at it as a regression, rather a different scale. It is a different period in history with smaller battles and as you note landing marines. Look at Bunker Hill - about 3000 troops per side so you represent smaller formations as units. Using the scale in UG:CW you would only have a couple of units for each side. They do have the opportunity to represent individual companies on the battlefield in this game which IMO is a good thing if done right.
  7. Not likely. Look at the Bunker Hill scenario - units are company or equivalent with 100-300 men. AWI battles were generally smaller as well. Units in UG:CW are essentially brigades of up to 2500 men.
  8. @Wagram I agree the figurehead certainly discounts the model as the Bucentaure. Also Bucentaure had a large doghouse on the quarterdeck.
  9. Do you mean Naval Action or Ultimate Admiral? This is the UA forum.
  10. The website timeline shows EA release in 2019. The caveat is that development timelines often get stretched. So hopefully 2019!
  11. Except that this thread is posted in the Ultimate Admiral forum. @sonnypemberton did you mean to post here or are you referring to Naval Action?
  12. Sometimes it is just bad timing. One day sail out and there are lots of AI around, but the next day sail out to finish mission and nothing. It is a big map you might sail to freeport and see nothing, then pop out and there's three enemy players. Although I have never sailed for 2 hours and not seen at least some ai around.
  13. No need to go outside the time line to find ships built by Eckford. His shipyard was in Sackett's Harbor during the war of 1812. He built Oneida before the war as well. A brig with a pivot gun and broadside guns. The General Pike would be a good addition and similar but smaller than the ship above. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_General_Pike_(1813)
  14. Also when the source mentions speed and maneuverability of a 74 or even frigate wind speed and weather conditions have to be put in context. Maybe the source references wind speed @Serk like the British sea trials log. Constitution's log shows over 14 knots for a short time in ideal conditions, etc. I would suggest that the constant wind speed we have in NA is not the conditions that would allow a 1st rate or a 74 for that matter, to overhaul a frigate.
×
×
  • Create New...