XX inch Dahlgrens and Rodmans, Nope.

[christof139]

There were only a few, maybe 3 or 4, and one was sold after the war to Ecuador maybe, XX-inch Rodmans that were produced, none saw combat. 15-inch dahlgrens saw combat in Monitors and elsewhere, not many but they did.

The game has this ficticous XX-inch uber weapon, maybe could make it a 15-inch Dahlgren??

Chris

[Dasara II]

I agree on this subject with christof139 and at the very least add a couple more ship guns in between these giants, so that the more common naval guns can be chosen for upgrades.

Maybe the the Union will be able to have a couple XX-inch gun ships in later 1864.

[ericbabe]

These guns were produced during the war for use in the war.  It's true they were never fired in anger in the war, but, uhm, so what?  Forge of Freedom is a game that allows some things that didn't actually happen in history to happen during the game.  The USS Puritan was built to fire a 20-Inch Dahlgren -- these guns were about to be put into use when the war ended.  I see no reason to exclude them just because they didn't quite make it into the war.

[chris0827]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

These guns were produced during the war for use in the war.  It's true they were never fired in anger in the war, but, uhm, so what?  Forge of Freedom is a game that allows some things that didn't actually happen in history to happen during the game.  The USS Puritan was built to fire a 20-Inch Dahlgren -- these guns were about to be put into use when the war ended.  I see no reason to exclude them just because they didn't quite make it into the war.

I don't think anyone would complain if the showed up at the end of the war but you can get them in 1862 now.

[General Quarters]

I have forgotten whether getting them in 1862 has some prior condition. Is there a research prerequisite? If so, that just means you get them in 62 only if you make that a priority. Would that have been historically impossible?

[Twotribes]

If even ONE was available during the war then they are "historical" unless of course you want the designers to research the weapon distributions and ensure that all naval, cavalry, artillery and Infantry units are "appropriately" equipped. Or maybe just a set cap on each time of firearm used.

[christof139]

These guns were produced during the war for use in the war. It's true they were never fired in anger in the war, but, uhm, so what? Forge of Freedom is a game that allows some things that didn't actually happen in history to happen during the game. The USS Puritan was built to fire a 20-Inch Dahlgren -- these guns were about to be put into use when the war ended. I see no reason to exclude them just because they didn't quite make it into the war.

There were only 3 or 4 or so 20-inch guns made I do believe, not many. The Civil War Arty. page has info on these, I can find the link and post it. Also, I may be thinking of that huge gun that weighed over 100,000 pounds, and of these there were only 3 or 4 made. However, the 20-inch Dahlgren never made it either, and we would have to check to see if these are the same gauns. I'll look tonight and post.

The 15-inch Dahlgren was the biggest gun used in quantity, then 8, 10 and 12-inch Old and New and Rodman Columbiads and the 9 and 11-inch Dahlgrens. The Rodman was a Columbiad, although some Dahlgrens may have been cast using the rodmane process, not sure off-the-top-of-my-head. This info. is all on the inet. and I have some books on the subject. These are the guns that would be historical to use in the game, they, particualrily the 8, 9, 10 and 11-inchers, along with the multitude of 24 and 32 pounders of many models, and both SB and Rifled.

There was a nice, what was was it, a 300pdr. Armstrong at Ft. Fisher, the largest gun that came from Britaind I do believe, and most Armstrongs, Blakelys etc. siege/naval/coastal defense type guns were smaller.

There was the large converted Union Frigate, the USS Roanoke, with 3 turrets that was built, and kept in the navy yard at dock since it couldn't float worth a yahoo, and not even in a slight to mild swell which would cause it to nearly roll-over. Since the roanoke was built and could float somewhat, should that be put into a historical game?? IMHO no it shouldn't.

You see, many people like to keep things a wee bit more historical, otherwise things do get to be Turtledovish and Victorian Sci-Fi like.

Chris

[christof139]

OK, only 7 total of 20-inch Rodmans and dahlgrens were cast, and none were used in combat in the ACW, although 2 were latter sold to Peru and used by Peru in the war with Chile.
 
See for yourself. Here are the sources. This is an excellent site, and these people have spent years researching ACW Arty. info.
 
Not to say I told you so, but I did. [&:]
 
First the 20-inch Rodman, only 3 cast, and 1 was latter sold to Peru. Pic is 4th from bottom of page here:
http://www.cwartillery.org/ve/rodman.html
20-inch Rodman gun, Model of 1861. Total length, 243.5 inches; weight, 116,497 pounds; total production for U.S. Army Ordnance, 2; known survivors, 2. The first 20-inch Rodman was completed at Fort Pitt Foundry in August 1864 and survives outside Fort Hamilton at Brooklyn NY. The second was cast at Fort Pitt Foundry in 1869 and survives at Fort Hancock NJ. A third was later cast at Fort Pitt Foundry and sold to the government of Peru.
Second, the 20-inch dahlgren, only 4 cast, 1 defective and sold to Peru. The other 3 saw nNO service and were scarpped in 1897.Picture is of the gun in Peru. Pic is second from bottom of page here:
http://www.cwartillery.org/ve/dahlgrens.html
XX-inch Dahlgren. Total length, 216 inches; weight, 97,300 pounds; total production, 4 by Fort Pitt Foundry 1864-67; no survivors. Of the four made, one was not accepted and was sold to Peru. The other three saw no service and were sold for scrap at New York Navy Yard in June 1897. The photograph shows the one purchased by Peru when emplaced at Callao; the gun was inscribed "BEELZEBUB". After being captured by Chile in the "Guerra del Pacifico" (1879-1884), it was taken to Chile where it was last seen in Arica but is no longer there. We hope to determine its present location shortly.
Here is the main Artillery Index page, and this is a great site, as it explains that differences in gun types and models, and gives insight as to just where and how many were cast. the Confeds. cast about 400 8 and 10-inch Columbiads in the war, and some were rifled and banded.
 
Sincerely, Chris [>:][>:][>:]

 

[christof139]

Oops. I forgot the main ACW Arty. Index site address. Here it is:

http://www.cwartillery.org/ve/index.html

And you're quite welcome, Chris [X(][X(][X(][X(]

[christof139]

Oops again. [&:] Here is the Arty. Index by Bore diameter, this is what you want to look at and use. here it is:

http://www.cwartillery.org/ve/bordex.html

Chris [>:][>:][>:][>:]

[Dasara II]

Look, I have no problem with the XX inch Dahlgrens, t just that I would have thought that there would have been a few more naval gun upgrade options for your ships.

Remember we are talking about ship upgrades here (I am anyway), even the CSS Virginia (Merrimac) only had IX inch Dahlgrens!

I just find it strange that one of the first options to upgrade you 'ships' in Nov 1861 is the biggest guns that were built in the civil war and that there is not any choices in between. That's all [8D]

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: Dasara II

Look, I have no problem with the XX inch Dahlgrens, t just that I would have thought that there would have been a few more naval gun upgrade options for your ships.

Remember we are talking about ship upgrades here (I am anyway), even the CSS Virginia (Merrimac) only had IX inch Dahlgrens!

I just find it strange that one of the first options to upgrade you 'ships' in Nov 1861 is the biggest guns that were built in the civil war and that there is not any choices in between. That's all [8D]

Well if you read the blurb for naval improvised they bunched all the guns under that. Naval is at best a secondary thought in this game.

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: christof139

OK, only 7 total of 20-inch Rodmans and dahlgrens were cast, and none were used in combat in the ACW, although 2 were latter sold to Peru and used by Peru in the war with Chile.

See for yourself. Here are the sources. This is an excellent site, and these people have spent years researching ACW Arty. info.

Not to say I told you so, but I did. [&:]

First the 20-inch Rodman, only 3 cast, and 1 was latter sold to Peru. Pic is 4th from bottom of page here:
http://www.cwartillery.org/ve/rodman.html
20-inch Rodman gun, Model of 1861. Total length, 243.5 inches; weight, 116,497 pounds; total production for U.S. Army Ordnance, 2; known survivors, 2. The first 20-inch Rodman was completed at Fort Pitt Foundry in August 1864 and survives outside Fort Hamilton at Brooklyn NY. The second was cast at Fort Pitt Foundry in 1869 and survives at Fort Hancock NJ. A third was later cast at Fort Pitt Foundry and sold to the government of Peru.
Second, the 20-inch dahlgren, only 4 cast, 1 defective and sold to Peru. The other 3 saw nNO service and were scarpped in 1897.Picture is of the gun in Peru. Pic is second from bottom of page here:
http://www.cwartillery.org/ve/dahlgrens.html
XX-inch Dahlgren. Total length, 216 inches; weight, 97,300 pounds; total production, 4 by Fort Pitt Foundry 1864-67; no survivors. Of the four made, one was not accepted and was sold to Peru. The other three saw no service and were sold for scrap at New York Navy Yard in June 1897. The photograph shows the one purchased by Peru when emplaced at Callao; the gun was inscribed "BEELZEBUB". After being captured by Chile in the "Guerra del Pacifico" (1879-1884), it was taken to Chile where it was last seen in Arica but is no longer there. We hope to determine its present location shortly.
Here is the main Artillery Index page, and this is a great site, as it explains that differences in gun types and models, and gives insight as to just where and how many were cast. the Confeds. cast about 400 8 and 10-inch Columbiads in the war, and some were rifled and banded.

Sincerely, Chris [>:][>:][>:]

So I assume from this continued insistance that certain weapons not be allowed even though they were made and could have been used ( and made in greater numbers) that the whole weapons upgrade system should just be eliminated. Just let the "historical" weapons appear with the units at the discretion of the AI. There no problem.

[Dasara II]

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

ORIGINAL: Dasara II

Look, I have no problem with the XX inch Dahlgrens, t just that I would have thought that there would have been a few more naval gun upgrade options for your ships.

Remember we are talking about ship upgrades here (I am anyway), even the CSS Virginia (Merrimac) only had IX inch Dahlgrens!

I just find it strange that one of the first options to upgrade you 'ships' in Nov 1861 is the biggest guns that were built in the civil war and that there is not any choices in between. That's all [8D]

Well if you read the blurb for naval improvised they bunched all the guns under that. Naval is at best a secondary thought in this game.

Yes I did read the blurb, but can't a man dream of having more guns to choose from [;)]

O.K. Naval war/theme secondary, totally understand, just thought I would throw a suggestion around. By all means keep all improvements to the land war, I have no problems with that.

[christof139]

So I assume from this continued insistance that certain weapons not be allowed even though they were made and could have been used ( and made in greater numbers) that the whole weapons upgrade system should just be eliminated. Just let the "historical" weapons appear with the units at the discretion of the AI. There no problem.

Who in the heck are you suppossed be?? It is very unhistorical to have uber weapons in a game that were produced in a total quantity of SEVEN pieces and that were never used in combat. That is Sci-Fi to me.

There were also only about 86 or so 15-inch Dahlgrens produced and used, so those are OK but aren't in the game, and if they were they should historically replace the super uber weapon 20-inch Dahlgrens and Rodmans, because I would guess that the grand total production number of 7 of both Dahlgrens and Rodmans have been lumped together. Any weapons that were produced mid to late war, as the 15-inch Dahlgrens were, should require much research etc. before a player can purchase them. Heck, the widely produced and used 9 and 11-inch Dahlgrens aren't even in the game, but instead the game has all 7 of the 20-inch Dahlgrens and Rodmans that were made but NEVER USED IN COMBAT, Very historical. Well over 1,000 9 and 11-inch Dahlgrens were produced AND USED IN COMBAT, yet they aren't in the game. 9 and 11-inch Dahlgrens ARE NOT IMPROVISED WEAPONS, but state-of-the-art heavy and powerful weapons systems.

It would be very easy to change the 20-inch dahlgren to the 15-inch Dahkgren, and add the 9 and 11-inch Dahlgrens. Not one of these large and powerful workhorses burst in the ACW BTW, at least none is recorded to have burst, yet you try to imply that the game's Improvised Waepons Classification includes these splendid and powerful state-of-the-art 9 and 11-inch Dahlgrens. There must be a quirk in your thinking and reasoning processes!!!

Funny, seems you and a few others toot on their horns about having some historically correct aspects of the game when it suits your little narrow-minded thought patterns, but when other people point-out some glaring and important historical errors that give the game a Sci-Fi aspect, then for some reason you begin to preach, as most hypocritical, vain, and narrow-minded people do. What a joke.

You want historical accuracy then you whine about the facts when they are presented.

How old are you. What is your experience with the military, history, life in general?? I have some serious reservations concerning these matters.

I could care less if the Devs change the game or not, but they have made some glaring boo-boos here, and if they or anyone else expects people not to notice these things then I pity them.

If someone tells me I am wrong and shows me the info. to support that, I sure as heck don't whine like a snivellin, coddled, brat about it, and am glad to have been corrected and enlightened about the subject matter.

I guess some little overly egotisitical egos are easily bruised.

Ta, Chris

[christof139]

Well if you read the blurb for naval improvised they bunched all the guns under that. Naval is at best a secondary thought in this game.

I would think that Improvised Naval Weaponry would refer to older 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 32, 42pdr., 8 and 10-inch Old Columbiad SB and Rifled guns, NOT newer, state-of-the-art 8, 9, 10, 11 and 15-inch Dahlgrens, NewColumbiads, and Rodman Columbiads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is constructive criticism, as many others have given here.

How can you state that '... AT BEST Naval is a secondarythoght in thi game.'?? Blockade Running is very important to the South, and helped my game efforts greatly. Also, the threat of and implementation of Northern Amphip. Ops. upon the Southern Coast is a real pain and hassle in the early to mid war period. If the South leaves its coast undefended it will get wallopped fast and lose the game as the north gobbles-up coastal provinces and cities, thereby drastically reducing the Southern economy. That is very secondary?? Uh-huh.

There are errors in the land weapons too, as I and others have pointed-out.

It's OK to generalize to a degree, but it is also possible to have more historical and accurate generalizations. Remeber the Liege Rifle conversation, I stated it was a piece of do-do based on historical knowledge and actually owning one, and the game itself states the Liege is a piece of do-do, yet one of the devs had to say it wasn't and it was another rifle etc., when the game itself stated what I stated!!!

All in all, I think the game is OK, pretty darn good, so what is the problem!??!

Sorry to have a great interest in the ACW and etc., but that is the way it is.

Chris

[ABridgeTooFar]

Ugh!  Nothing more than a forum bully.  So only a few uber Dahlgren guns were produced IRL.  This is a game where you can change what happened IRL.  You can have McClellan lead a successful campaign against Lee, the South can actually win the war, the North can choose not to follow the Anaconda plan, and the Union War Department can be directed to produce more uber Dahlgren guns.  To me that seems like alternative history, which is what these games are supposed to create.  Call it sci-fi if you would like but that would not be a proper description.  If a weapon was able to be produced during the war then it should be available to the player.  If the weapon was rarely available IRL then make it more expensive or more difficult to produce.  But that is just my "little narrow-minded thought pattern"

[Dasara II]

Well put chrisof139, I do believe that this is a great game and in the end any "criticism" is not aimed at the anyone who helped build this game. It is rather "constructive" talk about how Forge of Freedom can be the best game it can be.

As I have acknowledged before in regards to the navy side of things being secondary in this game, you can not dismiss how important the navy aspect is to the entire strategy of winning the American Civil War.

It's not like someone is suggesting that we absolutely need Detailed Naval Battles, all that is being suggested is a couple more options that is in context the real navy war.

Will not making naval changes make this game worst off - hell no.

Take it or leave it, after all this is a democracy [:)]

[christof139]

So I assume from this continued insistance that certain weapons not be allowed even though they were made and could have been used ( and made in greater numbers) that the whole weapons upgrade system should just be eliminated. Just let the "historical" weapons appear with the units at the discretion of the AI. There no problem.

Forgot to add, yup, you are an 'assumer', not good.

I never mentioned the weapons upgrade system should be eliminated, but YOU DID!!

It can be revamped to get rid of those seven 20-inch dahlgren and Rodman uber weapons that were never used in combat, in fact at least one of those wan't produced until 1869!!!

So, you must be a Victorian Age Sci-Fi enthusiast, and are not too concerned with ANY type of historical accuracy?? I wouldn't assume this myself, but would take an educated guess.

And yes, only "historical' weapons should be used in a historical game, otherwise the game becomes a Turtledovish and Victorian Age Sci-Fi game.

Chris [>:][>:][>:][>:]

[General Quarters]

I think this is a matter of personal preference -- how much a player wants to push the boundaries beyond what happened to what could have conceivably be done.

Personally, I think it would be interesting to have additional naval guns to choose from, and I see why someone said it seemed odd to be able to jump right away all the way to the uberweapon. Perhaps those should be available only after more naval research, or should be more expensive than they are now.