How would the French version of the Carronade "Obusier de vaisseau" naval howitzer fit in game?

[Destraex]

Were 

The French had no carronades at trafalgar. They did though have the obusier de vaisseau (naval howitzer) which was their answer to the carronade.

It seems to me that these may be interesting if they had explosive ammo that had a chance of killing your own crew. What a trade off! You can always fire ball if you do not want to take the risk.

Is it worth including in game for the novelty or even the historical accuracy?

It does not seem like entire broadsides would have been made up of these weapons? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obusier_de_vaisseau

 

[SunKiller]

Sounds interresting. But shells for naval use weren´t perfected until the 1840's or so if my memory doesen´t trick me.

[maturin]

The Obusier was far inferior to the carronade, even without the defective explosive shot.

[Aetrion]

When you actually delve into the history of cannons there are some calibers in the game that practically didn't exist or would have been extremely difficult to come by. For example 42 pound cannons were basically not installed on any ship, since the 32 pound demicannon was considered to be the superior weapon and lighter on top of that. A full cannon would have been exceedingly difficult to come by during the time, even though they technically did exist.

 

The quality of cannons was also all over the place. It wasn't until 1805 or so that the french started machining the bore on their cannons instead of casting it, so pretty much any gun made before then was a lot heavier and a lot less accurate. Iron cannons were also lighter and cheaper than bronze cannons, but less accurate because iron isn't as easy to cast or machine to exact tolerances.

[Aetrion]

The accuracy of a cannon comes down to it's barrel to ball tolerance. The tighter the fit the less the ball moves side to side on its way down the barrel, and the less it moves side to side the less likely it has to fly out at an angle rather than straight where the gun is pointed.

 

Machining the bore is superior because it produces tighter tolerances, and it also allows for some weight to be saved on the barrels, since the thickness didn't have to be as uniform to avoid head fractures during casting.

 

That's the reason why pretty much all cast machine parts today are cast first and then milled down to their final shape. More refined tolerances and it makes the part a lot stronger if the casting can cool at a uniform thickness to avoid heat fractures and is then brought down to it's final shape where not all parts are the same thickness.

[Destraex]

The Obusier was far inferior to the carronade, even without the defective explosive shot.

This may be so but it could fit into the game somewhere, no? The advantage could be cost and the fact that at least there would be novelty attempting to use the explosive ammo.

[Francis Tabernac]

If nothing else, imagine the surprise of seeing a Renommee, for example, suddenly spring up right on your port side and suddenly unleash an broadside of explosive ammo. Even if half of them hit him instead of you, the shock might make the attack worthwhile all by itself as you're left thinking "what in God's name was that?!"

 

I'm sure the novelty would wear off soon, but still. Why limit our options just because some may not be universally applicable? It can't hurt, just don't use them if you'd rather not.

[akd]

This may be so but it could fit into the game somewhere, no? The advantage could be cost and the fact that at least there would be novelty attempting to use the explosive ammo.

 

Not in the game's current configuration.  These fall more into the realm of swivel guns (supplementary arms), rather than broadside / deck armament.  Anyways, technology that failed historically seldom translates well into games, as the factors that caused failure are often excluded or oversimplified (because they tend to be very complex), which in turn leads to failed technology becoming dominant.  See double-shot in carronades in previous iterations.

 

First and foremost, that explosive ammunition was a threat to crew would be a non-factor in game compared to the increase in firepower, so its use in game would be heavily distorted, and probably become dominant.