ORIGINAL: gazfun
hi doomed mantis
If you like playing Empires at Arms maybe we could get together electronically Im with a few guys in Brissy who play it my email at the moment
GArry
Advanced Naval Rules
Moderator: MOD_EIA
-
DoomedMantis
- Posts: 1357
- Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
Sure, but I gather your talking about when the game comes out?
I shall make it a felony to drink small beer.
- Shakespeare
- Shakespeare
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
I agree with you. EiA reflects better French army strenght than Royal Navy superiority, specially in campain games. It's easy for Spain and France to make an alliance in Febreuary, but in january the whole Spanish navy joins French Navy in Amsterdam or Brest and makes a sortie in February (121 ships against 100) just before Russian Navy could do anything to help the brittish. +1 roll dice doesn't reflect Royal Navy superiority, and more important, In fact, if Spain and France are both good players can invade England in February and maybe force a surrender in a few months.
I think maybe there will be some rules about naval deployment. For example, Holland fleet always in Amsterdam (I force the players to do it), 30/35 french ships in Brest and the rest in Tolon. Spanish fleets must be deployed in Cadiz (the bigger fleet), Coruña and Cartagena, and British between the Channel, part in Gibraltar and other places.
I think maybe there will be some rules about naval deployment. For example, Holland fleet always in Amsterdam (I force the players to do it), 30/35 french ships in Brest and the rest in Tolon. Spanish fleets must be deployed in Cadiz (the bigger fleet), Coruña and Cartagena, and British between the Channel, part in Gibraltar and other places.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
ORIGINAL: fjbn
I think maybe there will be some rules about naval deployment. For example, Holland fleet always in Amsterdam (I force the players to do it), 30/35 french ships in Brest and the rest in Tolon. Spanish fleets must be deployed in Cadiz (the bigger fleet), Coruña and Cartagena, and British between the Channel, part in Gibraltar and other places.
The idea of the Grand Campaign Game is freedom of action, such restrictions to represent a historical set up at the start of a scenarion (as already printed in all versions of the rules) is preferable, but if you suddenly start restricting where the Spanish should put their fleets (for example) then you will be arguing over where every nation must put their units and that goes against the spirit of the Grand Campaign Game (not to mention the idea of taking over the direction of your country - we have even started games in Econ Phase of December 1804 to put some builds into the game for realism). The British would have a hard time arguing against the scattering of their fleet across the board at the start of the game (they had a LOT of trade routes to protect and sacrificed much of their patrol ability to be at Trafalgar) and in a race to consolidate the fleets at a central point in power, the French have the interior lines.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
ORIGINAL: DoomedMantis
Think of the consequences if Trafalga and the Nile were won by France. Quite conceivable both.
What? Highly unlikely.
The French Navy was in a very poor state compared the Royal Navy for this period. The Royal Navy were much better seamen, could fire approx twice as fast, better led and more experienced. They also were far more confident and morale was high.
Trafalgar and the Nile were not flukes. These two engagements were won by a culmination of factors which stacked the odds heavily in favour of the Royal Navy.
A commander having a bad day or a magazine explosion would not have altered these two battles outcomes much.
For a game like EIA, I do prefer to see game, so water down the RN a bit or improve the opposing fleets by all means.
However, lets not kid ourselfs here. The Royal Navy was VASTLY superior to its French and Spanish opponents during this period. To put this kind of realism in the game would mean a lot of Trafalgars.
Heads up by god, those are bullets, not turds!
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
Not to open a can of worms but.......
The biggest change in the Royal Navy was one of leadership, not resources. To say the Royal Navy was vastly superior is something we can do now since we see what that training did, but if Lord Admiral Howe (Nelson's mentor) and Lord Admiral Nelson had not implimented changes in the Royal Navy it would have faced a foe who outnumbered it, and may have out led it. Do not forget that in the American Revolution, Britain lost control of it's entire home coastline to what can best be called a band of privateers under the command of a diplomat (John Paul Jones, 3 "major" ships, under command of Benjamin Franklin) and failed (even with better ship design) to stop Yorktown, and was held in check during the West Indies Campaigns.
The Britsh had better designed ships that were smaller and less numerous than the French alone, not to mention a combined French-Spanish Fleet. British naval command and drill made the difference (just as lack of it allowed the Americans to defeat the British Army "ready, level weapons, fire" ever hear of aiming?) in these battles. Nile started with the British attacking a French fleet at anchor [X(] and they were outnumbered, but still pulled off the victory. Nelson gave his life making Trafalgar a victory by using agressive tactics against a force superior in guns and numbers but not SKILL. The right deaths at the right time, different outcomes in history can make ANY battle go a different direction (which is why we all play these games [:D])
The biggest change in the Royal Navy was one of leadership, not resources. To say the Royal Navy was vastly superior is something we can do now since we see what that training did, but if Lord Admiral Howe (Nelson's mentor) and Lord Admiral Nelson had not implimented changes in the Royal Navy it would have faced a foe who outnumbered it, and may have out led it. Do not forget that in the American Revolution, Britain lost control of it's entire home coastline to what can best be called a band of privateers under the command of a diplomat (John Paul Jones, 3 "major" ships, under command of Benjamin Franklin) and failed (even with better ship design) to stop Yorktown, and was held in check during the West Indies Campaigns.
The Britsh had better designed ships that were smaller and less numerous than the French alone, not to mention a combined French-Spanish Fleet. British naval command and drill made the difference (just as lack of it allowed the Americans to defeat the British Army "ready, level weapons, fire" ever hear of aiming?) in these battles. Nile started with the British attacking a French fleet at anchor [X(] and they were outnumbered, but still pulled off the victory. Nelson gave his life making Trafalgar a victory by using agressive tactics against a force superior in guns and numbers but not SKILL. The right deaths at the right time, different outcomes in history can make ANY battle go a different direction (which is why we all play these games [:D])
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
I think difference was training. Royal Navy average gunfire sequence was 1 shot every two minutes or less. French and Spanish navy lasted more, and their shots were less acurate. That makes the difference and explains how Trafalgar and other battles (Camperdown, St Vincent...)ended in British victory. French guncrew acuracy decreased in an incredible way after the Revolution. This is the main reason to explain Nelson tactic in Trafalgar. A direct aproach against a French navy in 1780 could have ended in a very diferent way. Maybe British still could have won the day, but the cost would have been much higher. French Admirals and specially the crew were much better too.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
And by the way, you say that British designed better ships. Of course not. French and specially Spanish designed much better ships. but the difference was the crew. Read O'Brian books or many others about that theme and you will see Brit officers point of view.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
French and Spanish did not use copper hulls and had shorter ranged cannons, thus were slower and though more guns, it took longer to get them to bear.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
They used copper hulls, at least Spanish. In Nelson's opinion, Spanish ships were by far the best designed, much better than British. About short range, it depends more of caliber than other questions, and Royal Navy used to fight at short range, so this is not important. It's more important that Royal Navy was the only one who introduced carronades, lethals at short range. And the same ships sailed with a English well trained crew increased its eficience.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
Captured French and Spanish ships were almost always "bought in" to the Royal Navy due to their excellent design.
British crews and the fact they always closed to arms length as fast as possbile usually won the day.
British crews and the fact they always closed to arms length as fast as possbile usually won the day.
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
There are many reasons why GB was better at sea than SP or FR.
In the spanish side, the main reason was the bad crew, mostly people from jail, the bad shipbuilding political, very big ships wiht lot of gun power but slow and usually a very bad "finger" assignament of commanders.
But, I have to say that spanish ships were not bad as Nelson said (his first flagship was a captured spanish one!)
French, well, the main problem, as far as I read, was that they spend many years blocked by the brits and this makes a big deal.
GB had better shot rate and guns, good admirals and a logical ranking for them and support from the goverment.
There is a "funny" thing about the spanish nav, the money to spend was less than the one assigned to the royal court!!!!
About the fate of the big sea battles, well, RNavy won the most important ones of the era, but THEY ALSO LOST other ones, small ones, 3 on 3, 1 on 1, battles, but of course, what we can do if the history is written by the winners....
In the spanish side, the main reason was the bad crew, mostly people from jail, the bad shipbuilding political, very big ships wiht lot of gun power but slow and usually a very bad "finger" assignament of commanders.
But, I have to say that spanish ships were not bad as Nelson said (his first flagship was a captured spanish one!)
French, well, the main problem, as far as I read, was that they spend many years blocked by the brits and this makes a big deal.
GB had better shot rate and guns, good admirals and a logical ranking for them and support from the goverment.
There is a "funny" thing about the spanish nav, the money to spend was less than the one assigned to the royal court!!!!
About the fate of the big sea battles, well, RNavy won the most important ones of the era, but THEY ALSO LOST other ones, small ones, 3 on 3, 1 on 1, battles, but of course, what we can do if the history is written by the winners....
Santiago y cierra España!!!
RE: Advanced Naval Rules
Anyone who has played Wooden Ships and Iron Men knows it was the British Iron Men and not their wooden ships which one the day.
If Nelson were killed by a sniper, I think that would definitely had an effect on the outcome. As for the Spanish French tag team being too strong, well the British still have the edge. In EIA the Spanish can ally with the British or stay neutral too. If you play TNW, the British face the French-Spanish from the start. So the British have to use diplomacy to keep the Spanish from pounding them. If the Spanish ally with the British, they can sail unhindered and not risk losing their gold convoy. If the British take VPs from the Spanish, they will not win. If the French invade Spain, the guerillas are annoying and many troops are tied down.
greg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
ORIGINAL: DoomedMantis
Think of the consequences if Trafalga and the Nile were won by France. Quite conceivable both.
What? Highly unlikely.
If Nelson were killed by a sniper, I think that would definitely had an effect on the outcome. As for the Spanish French tag team being too strong, well the British still have the edge. In EIA the Spanish can ally with the British or stay neutral too. If you play TNW, the British face the French-Spanish from the start. So the British have to use diplomacy to keep the Spanish from pounding them. If the Spanish ally with the British, they can sail unhindered and not risk losing their gold convoy. If the British take VPs from the Spanish, they will not win. If the French invade Spain, the guerillas are annoying and many troops are tied down.
greg