Naval asspects of the war ?

Naval asspects of the war ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815

Message

CSSS -> Naval asspects of the war ? (7/29/2004 4:12:23 PM)
After Tralfagar the French knew they could not go head to head with they British fleets , but then they switched to commerce raiding as did the Americans in 1812. These Raiders almost bankrupted the British empire is there going to be an abstraction of this in the game?[;)]

ardilla -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/29/2004 5:12:57 PM)
I think so, since they add the new ship´s types for transport troops and privateers to protect your own contry trade or disturb other´s countries trade. But Marshall can clear this out better [;)] BTW, how is going Marshall??

Marshall EIIis -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/29/2004 5:16:12 PM)
sorry dude, ur wong. Until 1812 the french did go un building ships of the line, and in numbers they got closer to the Brits... in fact, there was indeed a lack of skilled crews, and training for them wasnt easy... So there was still a good chance to get the Brits after Trafalgar, while the british fleet suffered a lack of raw material from the continent. So ur wrong in almost all ur points [:'(]

wfzimmerman -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/29/2004 7:50:29 PM)
The fundamental problem for the French (and everyone else) was geography. Their fleets were blockaded in ports and could not sally, thus were less experienced and less skilled: vicious circle. The game should model the conceivable possibility of "No Trafalgar" -- in other words, European fleets free to sortie and join.

CSSS -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/30/2004 1:53:59 AM)
Ellis , I nowhere said the Frech stopped building ships of the line, I said they did not try to go into head to head en mass fleet egagements. They diverted a LOT of resourses into raiders and lettrs of marque for others. In MANY documented sources the commerce campaign was VERY sucessful. I would measure such an attemp to said was was so wrong on all points before taking such a pointed response. CSS

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/30/2004 4:46:22 PM)
CSS: You should note that the other "Marshall EIIis" is not me! Somebody is obviously hijacking my ID! Apologies for the other "dude". The proper name would be Marshall ELLis. To get back to your questions: We are implementing a privaterring system that is an abstract of what you are talking about. The light ships can be assigned to privateer missions where they are commerce raiding. You'll have an option of what nation's commerce to focus on BUT that nation can also assign light ships to commerce protection. Hope this helps Thank you

shanebosky -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/31/2004 3:39:02 AM)
Is it necessary to be at war in order to mess with someone's commerce through privateers, or can one wage a sort of commercial guerilla war without a formal declaration?

yammahoper -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (7/31/2004 9:35:56 PM)
If the game sticks with the board games handling of such situations, you must be at war. There are circumstances where war can be declared out of turn, but they are rare. It is possible raiding could be just such an exception, i.e. raiding is allowed but they nation being raided may then declare war immediately, even if an enforced peace is in effect. I have no idea what approach was taken, but both offer very interesting possibilities in the game, and abuse. Lynn

fjbn -> RE: Naval asspects of the war ? (8/10/2004 2:59:23 PM)
I think that this opinion is not posible, because GB along the History was very clear in that point. If your fleet stars to represent a menace to Royal Navy, your fleet will be destroyed. For example, Dannish Navy in 1800 or French Navy in WWII. In both cases, Royal Navy destroyed ships that, if they were added to Napoleonic Navy or German Navy, would be a serious theat to Royal Navy. Solution? Destroy them. Call it realism or cinism, but this point of view has prevented Britain to invasion.[&o]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.828125