Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 87

Thread: House Rule - Carronades

  1. #1
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default House Rule - Carronades

    Chaps, the lack of carronades in the rules has been mentioned here and elsewhere. I thought I'd draft a simple set of additional rules to cover them. Here's a starting suggestion:


    Shooting at long range (yellow) - no additional effect


    Shooting at medium range (orange) - draw "A" damage chits equal to 1/3 gunnery rounded up in addition to normal damage


    Shooting at short range (Red/Purple) - draw "B" damage chits equal to 1/3 gunnery rounded up in addition to normal damage

    Comments welcomed :)

  2. #2

    Default

    Everything I know about carronades is what I vaguely recall from the issue of S&T containing Fighting Sail that I received at roughly age 11. But didn't mounting carronades involve a tradeoff--giving up longer range firepower to get more throwweight close in?

  3. #3
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmiracle View Post
    Everything I know about carronades is what I vaguely recall from the issue of S&T containing Fighting Sail that I received at roughly age 11. But didn't mounting carronades involve a tradeoff--giving up longer range firepower to get more throwweight close in?
    Not in most cases. Carronades weren't counted as part of the standard ship fit, which is why you see 38 gun frigates mounting 40+ guns, as they shipped extra carronades. They were also lighter than equivalent long guns and were mounted on slides rather than wheeled carriages so they were easier to fit in areas less useful for more traditional pieces.

    Some ships though did land all their long guns to give themselves an extremely heavy short range punch. Obviously in these cases there was a penalty in terms of ineffectiveness (sometimes total) at longer ranges.

  4. #4
    Comptroller of the Navy Board
    Captain
    United States

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    WA
    Log Entries
    4,298
    Name
    [RESTRICTED]

    Default

    ISTR that over-carronading contributed to the taking of USS Essex...

    This ties in with an idea I had for "ship upgrade" cards--how would we value an extra 4 carronades on, say, a 32 vs. on a 74?

  5. #5

    Default

    Not sure what my opinion is on what the actual rules should be, but I do feel we do need rules for carronades. They add quite a bit of difference to the way a battle would be fought - do I have a ship that's heavily cannon armed or do I have a significant number of carronades? Tactically I think it would add a lot the game as the carronade ship would be deadly at close range where the weight of shot could just devastate the enemy, while the enemy works to try to stay at longer range to maximize the use of his long guns. Based on my limited playing thus far, I think it'd change a lot of the dynamics of movement and game tactics.

    Just my two cents - have to think more about what I think the rules should look like.

  6. #6

    Default

    If you're trying to simulate a ship that had a handful of carronades to supplement the cannons already there, it's possible that is already included in the different damage chits for range. Ares could verify this. If you're trying to simulate a ship whose primary armament is carronades, then a ship card similar to the captain/crew deck cards would be the best way to implement.

  7. #7
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    I'm fairly sure they aren't. The difference between those with and those without certainly isn't.

    I've found the carronade question to be particularly relevant in campaigns. We've runa few in the past where some players have gone carronade crazy and sought any opportunity to rearm their ships, maybe reading too much on the career of the Essex. sometimes its paid off, sometimes it ended as it did for Essex, with an unbalanced armament against someone with longer arms. But it did add something to the campaign, and to the uncertainty when going up against what appeared to be a regular '36 but might not be.....

    Whatever we come up with a simple rule addition on a card in the same way as the captain and crew ability cards is probably the thing to aim for. it works well for weapon upgrades in X Wing

  8. #8
    2nd Lieutenant
    Serbia

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Србија
    Log Entries
    539
    Name
    Heмaњa

    Default

    Mayby simple table, something like

    0 - 4, no effect
    5 - 8, 1 extra counter for full broadside, otherwise no effect
    9 - 12, 2 extra counter for full broadside, otherwise 1 counter

    or something similar (this is just example)

    And about decreasing of fire power due to losses": each loss would decrease fire power for one level (9-12 becomes 5-8 etc.)

  9. #9

    Default

    Since I don't have my copy, I can't look at the damage chits, but here's my take.

    A ship that has significant carronades (i.e. something that has been armed with 18 cannons and 30 carronades, not a ship with 4 carronades) - you do something like minus one chit at long range, plus one chit at short range. If you really wanted to create more difference, you could do minus two at long range, plus two at short - even halve the long range and double the short if you really wanted. To me, that's the easiest way to do this.

    Alternatively you could look at the difference between the chits in A versus B etc. You could even say carronades use a more potent chit level, but only operate at short range. I.e. a ship that has 2/3/2 would use one set of chits for long range damage (a lower damaging chit set) and the highest damaging chit set at short range.

    In my mind, keeping it as simple as possible is key. Since the different chits with different loads/ranges are already integral to the game, I'd look there for the solution. Either number of chits or type of chits.

  10. #10
    Master & Commander
    United States

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Log Entries
    2,027
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    And for fans of the Russians, there's this freaky beast, the "edinorog" (unicorn): http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypld...&pNum=&pos=156 ....

  11. #11
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Yes, but its another weapon that spectacularly failed to make any impression on naval warfare until more developed forms appeared a few decades later (and even then their effects have been rather overstated)

  12. #12

    Default

    I would be interested in knowing how the firepower factors for ships were determined to start with, particularly how carronades were figured into the equation. Not having my order yet and being able to have a good look at the game, I'm not sure of how everything balances out. The game may be way too simplified to adjust for gun range and type differences.

  13. #13
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    David probably has the most experience in this area with both the armament and the game. But I think the range in this game might be to short to effectively differentiate the cannon and carronade ships?

  14. #14

    Default

    IMO any campaign or scenario for 1812 lake battles needs specific rules for carronades. Many of the smaller ships, brigs in particular were armed primarily with carronades. Also as was previously mentioned, the USS Essex and an earlier SoL example would be the HMS Glatton (Cpt Bligh in command!).

    A prime example of a game effect would be Lake Erie, where the American's being primarily carronade armed had to close the range with the British line while under fire from their long guns. A good play test start might be to exclude long range shots (except bow chasers) from ships armed primarily with carronades.

    Eric

  15. #15

    Default

    I think I would have firepower numbers for each range based on number of guns for that range. Something like long range for larger long guns only, let's say 12 pounders and larger, medium range for smaller long guns such as 6 and 9 pounders, and short range for carronades. Damage chits would be based on gun size.

  16. #16
    Master & Commander
    United States

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Log Entries
    2,027
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    David probably has the most experience in this area with both the armament and the game. But I think the range in this game might be to short to effectively differentiate the cannon and carronade ships?
    Given the vagueness of scale in the game (the ships may be 1/1000, but we have no idea how long a turn is), it's hard to tell what ranges actually are. However, cannon fire was generally ineffective past about 200 yards -- not because the cannon couldn't reach, but because aiming tech was near to nonexistent (and coupled to the fact that both gunner and target are moving three-dimensionally...), so really, "range" should be more a matter of "can the gunner hit" rather than "how far does the shot go".

  17. #17
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    My thinking was more along the lines that if we decide that range should be a stat for the carronades, is there enough difference between the current ranges to make that a viable option?

    In game turns, how often are we going to be at long range where carronades (if we limit them to half rang and less) are out of range but the long cannon ships can still effectively attack? In almost all of the games I've seen, the ships end up in close range for 90% of the fighting, or even stuck yard arm to yard arm.

    At what point in the Age of Sail did carronades supersede regular cannons?
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    My thinking was more along the lines that if we decide that range should be a stat for the carronades, is there enough difference between the current ranges to make that a viable option?

    In game turns, how often are we going to be at long range where carronades (if we limit them to half rang and less) are out of range but the long cannon ships can still effectively attack? In almost all of the games I've seen, the ships end up in close range for 90% of the fighting, or even stuck yard arm to yard arm.

    At what point in the Age of Sail did carronades supersede regular cannons?
    I don't think they ever superseded long guns, rather for larger ships added to the broadside throw weight at close range. Also since they were smaller and lighter they could be mounted higher on the ship, ie; Victory's 68 lb smasher. For smaller (unrated) ships the advantage was the ability to place much heavier weight on the broadside than could be done with long guns. The penalty was in lack of "effective" range.

    I think if the Captain knew his opponent was primarily armed with carronades then he could stand off at long range, which is what happened with the USS Essex.

    Eric

  19. #19

    Default

    Sorry to ask the stupid question, but just to double-check, I presume it has been confirmed that none of the models in the first wave carried carronades at the time they are portrayed?

  20. #20
    Master & Commander
    United States

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Log Entries
    2,027
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    At what point in the Age of Sail did carronades supersede regular cannons?
    Never -- in fact, as tech advanced, the emphasis was on ever-longer-ranged guns. The problem was not "could the cannon reach"; the problem was "could the gunners hit the target".

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmiracle View Post
    Sorry to ask the stupid question, but just to double-check, I presume it has been confirmed that none of the models in the first wave carried carronades at the time they are portrayed?
    Several folks may have researched those ships in particular, it is possible but may be unlikely on the earlier British ships. See this Wikipedia excerpt:

    Carronades initially became popular on British merchant ships during the American Revolutionary War. A lightweight gun that needed only a small gun crew and was devastating at short range was a weapon well suited to defending merchant ships against French and American privateers. In the Action of 4 September 1782, the impact of a single carronade broadside fired at close range by the frigate HMS Rainbow under Henry Trollope caused a wounded French captain to capitulate and surrender the Hebe after a short fight.[4]

    The Royal Navy was initially reluctant to adopt the guns, mainly due to mistrust of the Carron Company, which had developed a reputation for incompetence and commercial sharp practice.[5] Carronades were not even counted in numbering the guns of a ship. It was Lord Sandwich who eventually started mounting them in place of the light guns on the forecastle and quarterdeck of ships. They soon proved their effectiveness in battle. French gun foundries were unable to produce equivalents for twenty years,[5] so carronades gave British warships a significant tactical advantage during the latter part of the 18th century — though French ships mounted another type of weapon in the same role, the obusier de vaisseau. HMS Victory used the two 68-pounder carronades which she carried on her forecastle to great effect at the Battle of Trafalgar, clearing the gun deck of the Bucentaure by firing a round shot and a keg of 500 musket balls through the Bucentaure's stern windows.

    The carronade was initially very successful and widely adopted, and a few experimental ships (for example, HMS Glatton and HMS Rainbow[5]) were fitted with a carronade-only armament. Glatton, a fourth-rate ship with 56 guns, had a more destructive broadside than HMS Victory, a first-rate ship with 100 guns. Although Glatton and Rainbow were both successful in battle, the carronade's lack of range against an opponent who could keep well clear and still use his long guns was an arguable tactical disadvantage of this arrangement.

    In the 1810s and 1820s, tactics started to place a greater emphasis on the accuracy of long-range gunfire, and less on the weight of a broadside. Indeed, Captain David Porter of USS Essex complained when the navy replaced his 12-pounder long guns with 32-pounder carronades. The carronade disappeared from the Royal Navy from the 1850s after the development of steel-jacketed cannon by William George Armstrong and Joseph Whitworth. Carronades were nevertheless still used in the American Civil War in the 1860s. The last known use of a carronade in conflict was during the First Boer War. In the siege of Potchefstroom the Boers used 'Ou Griet', an antique carronade mounted on a wagon axle, against the British fort.[6]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carronade

    Interesting bit about the English suspicions of the foundry.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    My thinking was more along the lines that if we decide that range should be a stat for the carronades, is there enough difference between the current ranges to make that a viable option?

    In game turns, how often are we going to be at long range where carronades (if we limit them to half rang and less) are out of range but the long cannon ships can still effectively attack? In almost all of the games I've seen, the ships end up in close range for 90% of the fighting, or even stuck yard arm to yard arm.

    At what point in the Age of Sail did carronades supersede regular cannons?
    I think once everyone gets the hang of the movement system and maneuvering their ships better, we could see situations where range would make a difference. I have played in games using other systems where I kept my distance to take advantage of having guns with longer ranges and it does work quite effectively.

    I don't know if trying to tinker with the existing SOG combat system would be workable as it might throw the system out of balance. SOG, like WOG, was designed to be a simple game and in doing so gives up detail for simplicity. For those times a more detailed game is desired, we might have to just play a different game.
    Last edited by Coog; 01-06-2014 at 15:18.

  23. #23
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Okay, I did not think they ever replaced them... so my thoughts would be that they should only be fired at C/D range and use added counters from either the A or B set. Perhaps an easy solution would be to add the current fore/aft number to the standard fire power being dealt by the ship.

    So, if we take an undamaged Commerce De Bordeaux, it has a 4-7-4 fire power, a long range full broadside would throw 7 A counters. At short range (should we call this special range since all the ammo there is considered special?) it would throw the 7 for the full broadside and 4 extra B counters (if we decide on B) for the carronades? After taking four boxes of damage, it would throw 5 for the full broadside and an extra 3 for the carronades. This would simplify balancing how many of each type was destroyed as the ship took damage. I would also be ease to add up how many counters you deal out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    Okay, I did not think they ever replaced them... so my thoughts would be that they should only be fired at C/D range and use added counters from either the A or B set. Perhaps an easy solution would be to add the current fore/aft number to the standard fire power being dealt by the ship.

    So, if we take an undamaged Commerce De Bordeaux, it has a 4-7-4 fire power, a long range full broadside would throw 7 A counters. At short range (should we call this special range since all the ammo there is considered special?) it would throw the 7 for the full broadside and 4 extra B counters (if we decide on B) for the carronades? After taking four boxes of damage, it would throw 5 for the full broadside and an extra 3 for the carronades. This would simplify balancing how many of each type was destroyed as the ship took damage. I would also be ease to add up how many counters you deal out.
    I kind of like that kind of thinking for a reference, but.....
    Ya know...on a stern rake that's (17) B counters. We need to be careful not to get too carried away with this stuff.

  25. #25
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Yes, rakes could be a problem... but than we can just say that the carronades don't get the extra "rake" counters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  26. #26
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    Given the vagueness of scale in the game (the ships may be 1/1000, but we have no idea how long a turn is), it's hard to tell what ranges actually are. However, cannon fire was generally ineffective past about 200 yards -- not because the cannon couldn't reach, but because aiming tech was near to nonexistent (and coupled to the fact that both gunner and target are moving three-dimensionally...), so really, "range" should be more a matter of "can the gunner hit" rather than "how far does the shot go".
    Maximum range was in the region of 2k-3k yards. Typical effective engagement distances started at about half that, but obviously there was a keenness to bring the range down to "point blank" or less

  27. #27
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coog View Post
    I don't know if trying to tinker with the existing SOG combat system would be workable as it might throw the system out of balance. SOG, like WOG, was designed to be a simple game and in doing so gives up detail for simplicity. For those times a more detailed game is desired, we might have to just play a different game.
    for an age of sail game SGN combines an interesting mix of complexity and simplicity. Crew management for example is at the higher end of the complexity scale for an Aos set of rules, yet the gunnery system is remarkably simple and coarse in its coverage. It really is a very interesting combination. that coarseness in the gunnery system opens up many possibilities for modification to develop an expanded system for actions involving only frigates and smaller ships.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
    for an age of sail game SGN combines an interesting mix of complexity and simplicity. Crew management for example is at the higher end of the complexity scale for an Aos set of rules, yet the gunnery system is remarkably simple and coarse in its coverage. It really is a very interesting combination. that coarseness in the gunnery system opens up many possibilities for modification to develop an expanded system for actions involving only frigates and smaller ships.
    David are you suggesting the "coarseness" in the gunnery system is a deliberate design intent to allow for later modification, or that's the way it is and it just happens to be amenable to modification?

    ie Did you let slip future release information

  29. #29
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    Yes, rakes could be a problem... but than we can just say that the carronades don't get the extra "rake" counters.
    A simpler way to state this would be: Carronades damage counters are add after all other modifiers. Also, because of the ranking rules (well, mainly because of them) I think carronade damage should be drawn from the A set regardless of range they are shot at. We don't want to make them to powerful or they will supersede the long guns in the game.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    A simpler way to state this would be: Carronades damage counters are add after all other modifiers.
    The raking bonus and "first shot" bonus don't compound IIRC, so there would be a precedent for not compounding carronades too...

  31. #31
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmiracle View Post
    The raking bonus and "first shot" bonus don't compound IIRC, so there would be a precedent for not compounding carronades too...
    it appears they do stack...

    When playing with Standard Rules, calculate the effect of the Raking rule and the First Broadside rule independently.
    One would figure up the additional counters for the Ranking, add them to the normal shots and do the same for the First Broadside. You would not however, add the Raking shot to the normal ones, than take that total and apply the First Broadside rule to it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    it appears they do stack...

    One would figure up the additional counters for the Ranking, add them to the normal shots and do the same for the First Broadside. You would not however, add the Raking shot to the normal ones, than take that total and apply the First Broadside rule to it.
    Yeah, additive but not compounding.

    So if you have a gunnery factor of 5, and were firing a a hypothetical 1/3 bonus carronade rule, a first broadside, and a stern rake you would draw 5 + (5/3 = 2) + (5/3 = 2) + (5/2 = 3) = 12 chits, not ((5 + (5/3 = 2) = 7) + (7/3 = 3) = 10) + (10/2 = 5) = 15

  33. #33
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmiracle View Post
    Yeah, additive but not compounding.

    So if you have a gunnery factor of 5, and were firing a a hypothetical 1/3 bonus carronade rule, a first broadside, and a stern rake you would draw 5 + (5/3 = 2) + (5/3 = 2) + (5/2 = 3) = 12 chits, not ((5 + (5/3 = 2) = 7) + (7/3 = 3) = 10) + (10/2 = 5) = 15
    Ah, sorry about that. I misread your "compound" as "combined". I'm still leaning towards just using the the ship's current fore/aft gun number as carronade bonus counters drawn from the A set. Less math involved and rules out raking and first broadside altogether.

    But as a bonus number of damage counters, there is no real drawback to sailing a ship with them.... which would lead to everyone sailing with them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  34. #34
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Berthier View Post
    David are you suggesting the "coarseness" in the gunnery system is a deliberate design intent to allow for later modification, or that's the way it is and it just happens to be amenable to modification?

    ie Did you let slip future release information
    No, the coarseness I'm referring to is in the lack of range in broadside factors that makes it difficult to reflect differences between ships, in particular at the smaller end of the scale. For example, we have the Amazon (32 gun, 12pdr with a Burden of 2, BS of 4), Concorde (32 gun, 12pdr with a burden of 3, BS of 3).

    So how do we reflect a 36, 38, 40, or a 44, or a 50, or a 64? Or the difference between a 32 gun frigate with 12pdrs and one with 18pdrs? Between our 32 gun 12pdr frigate (BS4) and our 74 gun SOL (BS6) we have not a lot of scope to split out variations in gunnery so the "buckets" into which frigate and small SOL firepower is going to have to be placed will have to be pretty broad (I'm guessing up to 38s and 40s will have a BS of 4, 44s and 64s a BS of 5, so your Africa / Constitution matchup will probably be just that, at least in terms of firepower).

    But what I'm suggesting is that one could put together a very nice small ship variant where (for example) a 24pdr 44 could have a BS of say 8 and a burden of 6, down to a 9pdr 14 gun sloop with a BS of 2 and a burden of 2, and then place other ship types in between with appropriately scaled BS and burden factors. so maybe a 36 gun 18pdr would have a BS of 6 and a burden of 5, whereas a 12pdr equipped ship might be 5 and 5, whilst a small 24 gun 12pdr might be 4 and 4. These are just illustrative numbers, I've not done any calcs to see if they work well but hopefully you get the idea.

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    But as a bonus number of damage counters, there is no real drawback to sailing a ship with them.... which would lead to everyone sailing with them.
    Yeah, in my apparently mistaken understanding of carronades as a tradeoff, it would have been easier to model--lose factors at longer range, gain factors at closer range.

    In a scenario-builder situation you could pay some extra points for carronades. But I think the jury is still out on how (and how well) that system will work.

  36. #36
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    But as a bonus number of damage counters, there is no real drawback to sailing a ship with them.... which would lead to everyone sailing with them.
    Which is pretty much exactly what happened eventually, but for a goodly portion of the period covered by the title of the rules, and for most of the earlier period that is getting good coverage in terms of models, that wasn't the case, and there were definite differences between those with and those without.

    So you could ship them if they were carried historically, or if one is putting together hypothetical or "tournament" style games you could have them as something a long with enhanced crew and captain abilities that could be purchased to tailor individual ships

  37. #37
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    As a trade off...

    At long range (A) you subtract the current fore/aft guns from your full broadside for having carronades.
    At medium range (B down to the C/D range) it as printed on the ship log.
    At close range (C/D) you add the fore/aft guns as bonus A damage counters.

    That works alright for full broadsides, but not at all for shooting with the fore or aft guns :(
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  38. #38
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
    So you could ship them if they were carried historically
    Which the majority of people will not know. So t would but to the community to work this out (similar to the Stats Committee over on the Drome?) and post them. If we went this route, we could assign the number and type of damage counter to each ship for its carronades. That might give us the greatest resolution in game terms.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  39. #39
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    As a trade off...

    At long range (A) you subtract the current fore/aft guns from your full broadside for having carronades.
    At medium range (B down to the C/D range) it as printed on the ship log.
    At close range (C/D) you add the fore/aft guns as bonus A damage counters.

    That works alright for full broadsides, but not at all for shooting with the fore or aft guns :(
    And if I can quote and reply to my self....

    If the notion of less math is thrown out the window, we could use that same long, medium, short principle to the standard 1/3 rule already in the game...

    A Range: subtract 1/3 (rounded up) current guns from firing arc
    B Range: Normal shots
    C/D Range: add 1/3 (rounded up) current guns from firing arc
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  40. #40
    Master & Commander
    United States

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Log Entries
    2,027
    Name
    Chris

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
    Maximum range was in the region of 2k-3k yards. Typical effective engagement distances started at about half that, but obviously there was a keenness to bring the range down to "point blank" or less
    That was my point -- as noted in the _Constitution_/_Java_ fracas, Bainbridge let one rip at half-a-mile away (880 yards), and accomplished Nothing. Most accounts of battles, the fighting is maybe 25-50 yards apart, because the inadequacies of targeting made scoring hits much farther out almost impossible.

    <- looks at the ever-growing tangle of complication, and wonders if it's really worth bothering

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    That was my point -- as noted in the _Constitution_/_Java_ fracas, Bainbridge let one rip at half-a-mile away (880 yards), and accomplished Nothing. Most accounts of battles, the fighting is maybe 25-50 yards apart, because the inadequacies of targeting made scoring hits much farther out almost impossible.
    But it did occur...USS United States vs HMS Macedonian...and as far as Bainbridge goes, we've discussed his competence before.

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    <- looks at the ever-growing tangle of complication, and wonders if it's really worth bothering
    It may be just easier to replace the whole gunnery system with something home grown.

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Royal Hajj View Post
    As a trade off...

    At long range (A) you subtract the current fore/aft guns from your full broadside for having carronades.
    At medium range (B down to the C/D range) it as printed on the ship log.
    At close range (C/D) you add the fore/aft guns as bonus A damage counters.

    That works alright for full broadsides, but not at all for shooting with the fore or aft guns :(
    I kinda like this really simple version.

  43. #43
    2nd Lieutenant
    Serbia

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Србија
    Log Entries
    539
    Name
    Heмaњa

    Default

    Seems fair!

  44. #44
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coog View Post
    But it did occur...USS United States vs HMS Macedonian....
    Indeed it did. And remember at Trafalgar the Allied line opened fire at 2200 yards, with effective damage beginning to be inflicted at 1500 yards.

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
    Indeed it did. And remember at Trafalgar the Allied line opened fire at 2200 yards, with effective damage beginning to be inflicted at 1500 yards.
    I think if you look at the larger fleet battles, especially in the 18th century, you'll see that the engagements were at longer ranges, of course they weren't always decisive either!

    Some of the effectiveness at longer range also depended on the sea state, very calm at Trafalgar and thus more hits at longer range (or damage to the rigging in this case).

  46. #46
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeRuyter View Post
    I think if you look at the larger fleet battles, especially in the 18th century, you'll see that the engagements were at longer ranges, of course they weren't always decisive either!
    Part of the reason for this is the difficulty of manoeuvring a long line of ships effectively. And this is still an issue today. I was involved in an exercise with another navy which included a squadron in line astern engaging a target. Despite several attempts the rearward ships were unable to engage the target at all due to having to conform to the manoeuvres of the squadron as a whole. Poor "tail end charlie" had to sit for over an hour until the serial ran out and we moved on to the next phase of the operation watching the leaders having fun whilst they couldn't bring their weapons to bear.

  47. #47

    Default

    Shouldn't this thread be in the "House Rules" forum? Just sayn'

  48. #48
    Surveyor of the Navy
    Captain
    UK

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Log Entries
    3,143
    Name
    David

    Default

    Yes of course it should

  49. #49
    First Naval Lord
    United States

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Log Entries
    1,551
    Name
    Keith

    Default

    Its in there right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    I just didn't want to be seen as the, "Thread Pirate Roberts" and get too far off topic.

  50. #50

    Default

    Now it is. Thanks David! What about the other thread started in "The Chippy Shop" forum - the Howitzer thread?

    Just trying to be ship shape and Bristol fashion!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •