US Ship of the Line USS Ohio (1820)

[Slim McSauce]

5 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said:

Nope as players have access to all the ships in game, whatever their in-game nationality. No national tree. Misplaced pride.

IMHO, ships that 'should' be implemented are those :

• we have reliable plans of,
• that are built and armed during NA timeframe,
• that are interesting in terms of gameplay, line-up gaps, looks...
• that are the most representative of a nation,

whatever their nationality.

The ship was launch 1820 putting in into the timeline. As the only 1st rate for the US it is hugely representative

[LeBoiteux]

Just now, Slim Jimmerson said:

As the only 1st rate for the US it is hugely representative

?!

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, LeBoiteux said:

?!

The only US 1st rate within the timeline?

[BungeeLemming]

"representative".. ?

Sorry but the only representative ships of the american navy that we have and should have ingame are: rattle, essex and consti. US SoLs are NOT representive for the time our game is set. Rattle since these corvets harassed the brits immensly during the war. Essex cause that was more of a typical sized us vessel and consti cause.. murica^^ (first noticed big frigate with long 24s)

And looking at this ship its like a Consti with an additional deck and structural additions. Another step towards the economical design of ships in general. Id like to stop bevore the spar deck became adapted.

8 hours ago, Spartan0536 said:

While her commissioning was not until 1838, she was and completed was AFLOAT by May 30th 1820.

 

Ships launched are afloat but they lack planking everywhere but to the first wale. So the question for me is: Was she afloat like I described? Or was she finished and build up for service?

[Spartan0536]

10 minutes ago, BungeeLemming said:

"representative".. ?

Sorry but the only representative ships of the american navy that we have and should have ingame are: rattle, essex and consti. US SoLs are NOT representive for the time our game is set. Rattle since these corvets harassed the brits immensly during the war. Essex cause that was more of a typical sized us vessel and consti cause.. murica^^ (first noticed big frigate with long 24s)

And looking at this ship its like a Consti with an additional deck and structural additions. Another step towards the economical design of ships in general. Id like to stop bevore the spar deck became adapted.

Why have the Russian Brig Mercury in then? Mercury was launched May 19th 1820, the USS Ohio was launched same year and month as her, just 11 days later.

[Spartan0536]

12 minutes ago, BungeeLemming said:

"representative".. ?

Sorry but the only representative ships of the american navy that we have and should have ingame are: rattle, essex and consti. US SoLs are NOT representive for the time our game is set. Rattle since these corvets harassed the brits immensly during the war. Essex cause that was more of a typical sized us vessel and consti cause.. murica^^ (first noticed big frigate with long 24s)

And looking at this ship its like a Consti with an additional deck and structural additions. Another step towards the economical design of ships in general. Id like to stop bevore the spar deck became adapted.

 

Ships launched are afloat but they lack planking everywhere but to the first wale. So the question for me is: Was she afloat like I described? Or was she finished and build up for service?

Commissioning within the US Navy means they took possession of her in an official capacity, she was completed on May 30th 1820 and a celebratory launch commenced, she required a refit in 1838 to prepare to sail for the Mediterranean as she was neglected while in "ordinary".

USS Ohio was part of a 7 ship project calling for ships with no less than 74 guns, she was pierced for 104 guns total, armed with 90 at the earliest.

[BungeeLemming]

Dont *point* at me or other mods with stuff thats ingame. I am a volunteer helper on the forums. Not a dev. I write my personal opinion which can differ totally from the opinion of others.

Mercury is ingame cause she actually fought a ship of the line and came out victoriois. Thats why. Its an incredible feet to have on your side^^ And thats all I can tell you. Other than that I cannot look into the minds of the devs

[Slim McSauce]

So then for all intents and purposes the Ohio fits into required parameters, right? Its just a matter of voting it in and having her modeled

 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Slim Jimmerson

[Spartan0536]

13 minutes ago, BungeeLemming said:

Dont *point* at me or other mods with stuff thats ingame. I am a volunteer helper on the forums. Not a dev. I write my personal opinion which can differ totally from the opinion of others.

Mercury is ingame cause she actually fought a ship of the line and came out victoriois. Thats why. Its an incredible feet to have on your side^^ And thats all I can tell you. Other than that I cannot look into the minds of the devs

Mercury did not defeat an SoL, she fought her way out of battle to live another day, still quite a feat, but she did not sink an SoL.

I was making a general comment which is quite popular with many on the forums about "cutoff dates", I have heard everything from 1800, to 1810, and 1820. Using the Mercury as the latest ship year, this allows the USS Ohio to fit within the timeline, it makes it incredibly hard to argue from a date standpoint.

BTW the USS Ohio also fought in combat during the Mexican - American war firing her guns and shots landed on target during a siege. She also did anti-piracy operations in the Mediterranean under the direct command of Commodore Isaac Hull. While not as decorated and especially not as well known as the USS Constitution, the USS Ohio did partake in combat meeting that "requirement".

Also during her time off the coast of africa she partook in operations against slave trade.

She is considered by many US Naval historians as the first successful SoL for the US Navy, she is important and meets the criteria, if only barely.

Edited September 27, 2017 by Spartan0536

[Talos]

I already mentioned the first generation 74s that were in service in the 1810s. USS Franklin, Washington (which we don't have plans for), USS Independence, and USS Columbus. Only Columbus was worth anything (though she was a bad sailor, she was the first SoL that was decent), the others were horrible sailors or in the case of the Indy, had to have her lower deck gunports caulked shut because they were so low. Those are the only US 74s in service in the timeline. No, Ohio was not a 1st rate, her armament was much the same as the earlier ships (Columbus had, for instance, 68 x 32-pdrs and 24 x 42-pdr carronades), the only US 1st rate is Pennsylvania.

 

With Ohio's case, she was launched into ordinary, her hull was completed but she wouldn't have been rigged or fitted out. I do not feel she meets the criteria. Though the ship was initially launched in 1820, she was part of a new generation of much more powerful ships and would be destabilizing. As far as representative ships go, Lynx (the schooner) is also an American ship, but Rattlesnake was a typical privateer, not a USN vessel. The most representative US ships we could include from the War of 1812 are the large ship-sloops which comprised most of the fighting ships. Essex is far from representative, she was a tiny 32-gun frigate armed entirely with carronades, something like New York or John Adams would be a more typical medium frigate for the USN. Constitution was also far from the first well-known and recognized 24-pdr frigate, that honor belongs to the French frigate Forte of 1794 which was taken in RN service along with her sister L'Egyptienne. Not only were they the start of the Royal Navy's 24-pdr frigate program, but Forte was most likely also the source of inspiration for Humphreys when he designed the American frigates.

[Talos]

Responding to a PM, I threw together a gallery of plans of all the US SoLs, both proposed and built. This includes their lines and body plans and fore and aft views.

 

https://imgur.com/a/EamQj

 

And as it's the subject of this thread, here is Ohio from that gallery. Full size is in the gallery.

Edited September 27, 2017 by Talos

[DeRuyter]

7 hours ago, LeBoiteux said:

Nope as players have access to all the ships in game, whatever their in-game nationality. No national tree. Misplaced pride.

IMHO, ships that 'should' be implemented are those :

• we have reliable plans of,
• that are built and armed during NA timeframe,
• that are interesting in terms of gameplay, line-up gaps, looks...
• that are the most representative of the domestic production of the period,

whatever their nationality.

I think this quote bears repeating. IMO not every nation needs or should have every class of ship in the game. The USN in the time period was known for frigates and commerce raiders. Initially this was a strategic choice and only later as the navy grew did you see even 74s.  As the OP mentioned the USS Wasp or USS Frolic would be good additions for the US - ship-sloops. The Dutch ships were limited in size because of geography. etc.  There should be some national flavor to ships but when you can build or capture most ships in the game there really isn't a reason to shoehorn in an uncommon design just to have a 1st rate, etc.

[Talos]

If we do the Hornet/Wasp sloops from 1806, it's a good opportunity to use the stern carvings for Hornet I recently uncovered. A rare piece of information for US ships of the era.

 

As before, fullsize images in this gallery. https://imgur.com/a/hAqE8

Wasp and Hornet 1806

Hornet Stern Carvings

For comparison, Wasp/Peacock/Frolic of 1813

[LeBoiteux]

23 hours ago, Talos said:

If we do the Hornet/Wasp sloops from 1806, it's a good opportunity to use the stern carvings for Hornet I recently uncovered. 

Indeed.

I'd really love to see USS Hornet and USS Wasp in game.

On the other hand, in the 16-24 gun ship category, there have already been some US ships implemented in game : Brig and Navy Brig, Prince de Neufchatel, Rattlesnake, Niagara ; mostly 2-masted ships. If that category was to be widened (and I hope so), there might also be some room for 3-masted non-US ships (corvettes), especially Spanish (such as the Descubierta), Dutch (Venus...) and French (La Diligente…) ones. 

Edited September 28, 2017 by LeBoiteux

[Talos]

I didn't realize brig and naval brig were US designs. What were they based on? Prince and Rattlesnake are privateers and not US Navy ships though! Is that the Great Lakes sloop Niagara? The schooner is based off the Lynx too, if I remember correctly.

 

The design I want to see the most is the RN's Cruizer/Snake, in both two and three-masted configurations. Second-most built wooden warship ever. Perfect counterpoint to the Wasp/Hornet too. With only one hull they could get a two-for-one deal in production costs getting it in the game. As far as others, Spain has the brig Vincenjo, which was the basis of Aubrey's HMS Sophie in the Master and Commander books, the French have the Bonne Citoyenne, and the Danes have the Fylla/Little Belt too.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Talos

[SteelSandwich]

Fair american from the.top of my head..

[LeBoiteux]

26 minutes ago, Talos said:

The design I want to see the most is the RN's Cruizer/Snake, in both two and three-masted configurations. Second-most built wooden warship ever. Perfect counterpoint to the Wasp/Hornet too. With only one hull they could get a two-for-one deal in production costs getting it in the game. As far as others, Spain has the brig Vincenjo, which was the basis of Aubrey's HMS Sophie in the Master and Commander books, the French have the Bonne Citoyenne, and the Danes have the Fylla/Little Belt too.

You've forgotten, among others, HMS Myrmidon/Amazon (La Panthère). 

[Talos]

1 minute ago, LeBoiteux said:

You've forgotten, among others, HMS Myrmidon/Amazon (La Panthère). 

I was trying not to put too many in a wishlist! Mostly I was just leafing through my copy of Gardiner's Warships of the Napoleonic Wars too.

[LeBoiteux]

7 minutes ago, Talos said:

I was trying not to put too many in a wishlist! Mostly I was just leafing through my copy of Gardiner's Warships of the Napoleonic Wars too.

I for one favor earlier designs (early/mid 18C) 

[Oliver Hazard Perry]

I really hope that they put in either this or the USS Pennsylvania as it was designed. It would be nice to see a third or first rate or even some of the 74 gun ships as well.

[AUAcuso]

7 hours ago, Oliver Hazard Perry said:

I really hope that they put in either this or the USS Pennsylvania as it was designed. It would be nice to see a third or first rate or even some of the 74 gun ships as well.

A beautiful ship I will agree, however, it was quite a late ship and didn't see any combat, so I doubt it to be put in sadly.

The Ohio is one of my personal favourite ships and I would love to see her in-game, I also understand that she only just meets the criteria, if she is put into the polls, I would vote for her in a heartbeat

Edited September 30, 2017 by AUAcuso
grammatical error

[Surcouf]

On 27 septembre 2017 at 4:25 PM, Talos said:

With Ohio's case, she was launched into ordinary, her hull was completed but she wouldn't have been rigged or fitted out. I do not feel she meets the criteria. Though the ship was initially launched in 1820, she was part of a new generation of much more powerful ships and would be destabilizing. As far as representative ships go, Lynx (the schooner) is also an American ship, but Rattlesnake was a typical privateer, not a USN vessel. The most representative US ships we could include from the War of 1812 are the large ship-sloops which comprised most of the fighting ships. Essex is far from representative, she was a tiny 32-gun frigate armed entirely with carronades, something like New York or John Adams would be a more typical medium frigate for the USN. Constitution was also far from the first well-known and recognized 24-pdr frigate, that honor belongs to the French frigate Forte of 1794 which was taken in RN service along with her sister L'Egyptienne. Not only were they the start of the Royal Navy's 24-pdr frigate program, but Forte was most likely also the source of inspiration for Humphreys when he designed the American frigates.

If la Forte and l'Egyptienne inspired the future American frigate, it is these new frigates which inspired the new French frigates in 1820/1824 but also the English frigates.

The Baron Tupinier thinks of the French frigates of 24-pdr by bringing them closer to the American frigates.

There are, however, several differences between the French and American frigates.(Weight of ball, number of sailors, weight of food, shell volume, but also larger pieces of wood for Americans, etc.)