Do you have any links or references regarding the use of hexes or later in symmetrical warfare (success against hugely outnumbered or out-teched enemies doesn't prove anything)? If it happened, it's strange that Wikipedia omits it.
Actually, Wikipedia (which isn't the best source for such things) recounts a number of heavier warships that participated in naval battles. For instance, the Leotophoros- an "eight" which was actually said to perform exceptionally well in terms of speed/handling:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leontophoros
Wikipedia is an extremely poor source though, for most anything. Even random articles on the web are often more informative- such as this one:
http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/GiantShips.htm
Note this passage in particular:
[Catapults] became a part of every up-to-date fortress and siege train, and gradually they began to be deployed in the more mobile warfare of the battlefield. At sea they may have played a role in the naval arms race that led from the trireme, with its three banks of oars, to huge vessels with as many as 40 banks. Evidently the underlying assumption was that catapult fire could decimate the enemy boarding force while their ship was still too far away to grapple or ram. The larger the ship was, the more catapults it could carry and the more stable its firing platform was. This interpretation, then, sees the catapult superceding hand-to-hand warfare at sea as the cannon did 2000 years later. Eventually the advent of the new battle tactics, of armored ships called cataphracts and of Roman efforts to dominate the entire Mediterranean combined to reduce the size of warships once again. In a political parallel to land warfare, the influence of the citizen-rower was diminished in the process.
Are you claiming that decere not deceres is the singular? I would genuinely appreciate it if you could tell me on what basis you do so. The Wikipedia article clearly contrasts "the deceres" with "the quinquereme", strongly implying that it is using the singular in both cases.
No, I believe you are correct in using "Deceres" as the singular. What I was talking about is that "Deceres" is a more appropriate term than "Decareme" or "Decaremes"...
The former is precisely the one-upman-ship lol. What else are flagships for other than PR and perhaps intimidation/psych(-out) warfare?
Are you serious?
Flagships are important for being the heaviest, biggest, and most importantly- hardest to sink ship in a fleet. The flagship needs to be particularly hard to sink as it is the ship the admiral and other naval leadership will typically be found aboard. It's important that it be made difficult for the enemy to sink this ship, so they can't simply easily win a battle by sinking the enemy leader's ship...
Heavy Artillery Platforms were invaluable too. Like I said, particularly in assaults on coastal cities. The biggest and most powerful cities in ancient times were typically heavily fortified coastal cities, and heavy artillery was typically required to break them.
The latter is a troop transport (galley) with more cargo spaces.
They clearly do not benefit from more ranks of oars since they are slower and less manoeuvrable.
I accept your point that their increased bulk allowed them to carry more offensive weaponry and more troops that would also be used in an offensive capacity. But as you concede, they are very much a specialty ship and relied on quins backing them up en masse for any kind of effectiveness. This would make them a very useful add to the mod as an upgrade of the Siege Quin - rather than their current 'role'.
The move to slower, heavier warships in the Classical Period was done for good reason. Boarding became increasingly more important in naval warfare, at the expense of ramming...
Ramming required an enemy to get close enough that they could typically be boarded. The Romans particularly made use of this fact through implementation of the "Corvus" (Crow's Beak) on their Quinquremes, for instance. If an enemy got close enough to ram you, you basically latched a giant bridge with a spike on the end of it onto their ship, and the smaller ship's crew was pretty much doomed.
This actually led the Carthaginians to have to circle around the Roman fleet and approach from BEHIND (and the sides) in the Battle of Mylae:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mylae
On the other hand, if the enemy kept their distance, you could easily outclass their ranged weaponry with a heavier warship's much heavier carrying capacity for siege equipment. Either way, the enemy was in trouble- often their best bet was to turn and run when faced with a slower, heavier enemy fleet. (Quinquremes were themselves less maneuverable than Triremes- but considered superior warships)
Further, if you board an enemy ship, you can capture it and re-use it as a weapon for your side in future engagements- helping to replace your own losses in the battle. Ramming doesn't allow for this (unless the enemy ship's crew surrenders before their ship is catastrophically damaged).
Like I said, the Deceres should have a higher strength than the Quinqureme- but not by much. Maybe only 10-15% higher (making it not necessarily worth the extra cost to build- Size Matters would let you simply train a larger number of Quinquremes, and merge them up where necessary, for a much more cost-effective strategy). Their greatest advantage should be in their ability to bombard enemy cities from the waves (or enemy fleets from a distance), with significantly greater firepower than the Siege Quinqureme.
They should also have a larger cargo capacity than the Quinqureme (with Size Matters, both Quinquremes and Deceres have Cargo Capacity).
The Deceres should not replace the standard Quinqureme in the tech tree either. rather, they should be an (optional) upgrade for the Siege Quinqureme (in much the same way some other units at different tech levels coexist)- but have a higher base strength and ranged firepower.
Regards,
Northstar
) the ballpark...
So far they seem to be working. Then when the game is not on fight or flight, no pursuit or early withdraw exists and the withdrawal value becomes halved (thanks to coding - nothing to be done in the xml itself). This is also across the board and keeps the values to something within 100% (though it doesn't absolutely have to since there's a diminishing return on values over 50% when not on fight or flight.)
