Civ VII and Ships (and the water the sail in)

[Boris Gudenuf]

Yal missing the point current naval capabilities allow for a couple battalions of marines, in civ we talking armies and divisions. Aint know one have the naval infrastructure for that.

Using the capabilities of modern states as an argument for a mechanic for all of history is flat Fantasy.

First, because the reason few modern states have the capability to land, say, a division anywhere is because none of them foresee the need for that capability. On the other hand, when they did foresee the need, during WWII the USA, Britain, Japan, and the USSR all managed to land divisions on a shore and maintain them there, but that capabilty for modern military units requires expensive investment in specialized equipment that has little use anywhere else, so without a specific need, few have bothered since.
On the other hand, the need for such specialized equipment and infrastructure was not present prior to the 20th century.
In the Mexican War, the US landed an entire army at Vera Cruz, Mexico without any special equipment, ships, or training - with no losses at all in either men or animals, an amazing feat of military planning and improvisation, by the way.
The Byzantine navy had some specialized horse-transport vessels. I mention them because they are nearly the only example of any specialized naval craft for 'landings' or supporting land forces before the 20th century.

You are missing the point that your argument only applies to the last few turns of the game, and is completely inaccurate for most of the game.

 

[9gkj548hkm20vk79dj689bnj4]

Just a couple ideas I had to spice up water tiles in 4X games, where they are usually just empty space:

1) Make water tiles bigger than land tiles. (I haven't played the games, but I think the Paradox Studio games do this.) Water combat will be much more likely.

2) Have random events on water tiles. Storms, icebergs, unforeseen rocks and reefs, getting lost, pirates (!), doldrums, mutiny, the onset of scurvy. The chance of these random events will decrease the longer you explore certain water tiles...your navies becoming much more experienced navigating certain waterways.

 

[Zaarin]

2) Have random events on water tiles. Storms, icebergs, unforeseen rocks and reefs, getting lost, pirates (!), doldrums, mutiny, the onset of scurvy. The chance of these random events will decrease the longer you explore certain water tiles...your navies becoming much more experienced navigating certain waterways.

This makes me think the Sargasso Sea would make a great Natural Wonder.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Just a couple ideas I had to spice up water tiles in 4X games, where they are usually just empty space:

1) Make water tiles bigger than land tiles. (I haven't played the games, but I think the Paradox Studio games do this.) Water combat will be much more likely.

2) Have random events on water tiles. Storms, icebergs, unforeseen rocks and reefs, getting lost, pirates (!), doldrums, mutiny, the onset of scurvy. The chance of these random events will decrease the longer you explore certain water tiles...your navies becoming much more experienced navigating certain waterways.

And a region that can have a constant 'centennial storm' like a strait between Korea/China and Japan. Where two most significant historical events in East Asian history (Particularly Japanese) took place
- Yuan invasion of Japan. where Yuan's fleet was later swept away by a centennial Typhoon. the storm itself was saw by Japanese as a blessing of gods which saved them. dubbed 'Kami-Kaze' afterwards.
- Introduction of Firearms to Japan. Where a Portuguese Nau (not sure if it was 'Nau do Trato') was swept ashore and must be repaired (Strong Portuguese 'Nautical Science' can determine what could a captain order his ship and crew to do next), During a tenure of repair, a ship crew sent a hunting party armed with arquebuses (likely of Malaccan Istingar designs) for forgaing operations and was spotted by a peasant under Tanegashima fiefdom (or a samurai under supervisions of the said domain) who were impressed by a feat of this foreign weapon so the first contact between the two--a number of arquebuses (of Istingar designs) were sold to Tanegashima overlord and later copied... and yes not without Portuguese blessings (they even sent in some technicians to solve crew cutting problems a year after, because Japanese weaponsmith didn't have any idea to replicate European screwcutting techniques!)

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Using the capabilities of modern states as an argument for a mechanic for all of history is flat Fantasy.
.....
The Byzantine navy had some specialized horse-transport vessels. I mention them because they are nearly the only example of any specialized naval craft for 'landings' or supporting land forces before the 20th century.
.

Name of Byzantine landing craft please. surely associated to Chelande (Byzantine supergalley that later copied by everyone else around them particularly Italian CSes and Arabians.) which was originally designed to carry warhorses in significant numbers but I don't think to land asore on its own or is it?). the ship name is surely Medieval Greeks).
And are these armored cavalry seen here 'Tagma' in Civ6 DLC (Under Tsar Vasil II's rule)? is this unit comparable to Classical Era Cataphracts (or it is!) or High Medieval Euro Knights?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Name of Byzantine landing craft please. surely associated to Chelande (Byzantine supergalley that later copied by everyone else around them particularly Italian CSes and Arabians.) which was originally designed to carry warhorses in significant numbers but I don't think to land asore on its own or is it?). the ship name is surely Medieval Greeks).
And are these armored cavalry seen here 'Tagma' in Civ6 DLC (Under Tsar Vasil II's rule)? is this unit comparable to Classical Era Cataphracts (or it is!) or High Medieval Euro Knights?

The ship in question was the Khelandion, which Theophanes calls a Horse Transport but other contemporary (10th century CE) Greek writers use interchangeably with Dromon. That tells us that both ships were full-decked biremes with lateen sails. Arab accounts call al Byzantine warships Khelandion, which probably means that they and Dromons were almost identical in appearance and size.

The illustration, however, is fanciful. The Khelandion used a device called a Climax, which was a ramp from the deck parallel to the hull that could be lowered towards the prow when the ship beached so that horses could trot down from the deck to the beach. It is unknown whether the riders ever rode a horse down the ramp but there is no indication of any 'doorway' in the hull of any medieval warship.

Byzantine Kataphractoi were as well-armored as any western Knight of the 10th - 11th centuries and by then were using a couched lance, so they would be Knights in all but name. BUT the original 'thematic' cavalry forces of the 7th century, although heavily armored, used a thrusting spear so would not be 'knights' as Civ uses the term to define units.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ So then Byzantine Chelande LST ramp was more akin to ones used in Mordor's assault barge seen in LotR trilogy?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

^ So then Byzantine Chelande LST ramp was more akin to ones used in Mordor's assault barge seen in LotR trilogy?

No, what you are showing here is a raft with sides. Put it in an open sea and water would be coming through that 'front gate' in streams, and it would break up in no time.

The Khelandion ("Chelande" seems to be the Latin name) had ramps fixed on one end to the forward deck so they could be swung out from the deck to the beach and horses led down the sloped planking to the ground without more than getting their hooves damp. Dromons by contrast had no built-in way of getting anything from deck to ground without an intermediary smaller boat like the Ousiakos or a pre-built pier. The Khelandion could not only drive up onto the beach, it could off-load horses and men right onto the beach.

The largest of the Khelandions found/described (so far) were about 80 meters long with a beam of 10 meters. Put another way, their hulls were almost 10 meters longer than a 100-gun 1st rate Ship of the Line of 1800! - And so, they were at about the extreme limit of length for an unreinforced wooden hull and would have been in trouble if used in rougher seas like the north Atlantic compared to the Mediterranean. A hull that size with the much greater tonnage (and beam) of a later ship of the line required internal bracing and iron reinforcing members to withstand those seas, and those advances didn't happen until after 1805 in the British Royal Navy dockyards.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

The largest of the Khelandions found/described (so far) were about 80 meters long with a beam of 10 meters. Put another way, their hulls were almost 10 meters longer than a 100-gun 1st rate Ship of the Line of 1800! - And so, they were at about the extreme limit of length for an unreinforced wooden hull and would have been in trouble if used in rougher seas like the north Atlantic compared to the Mediterranean. A hull that size with the much greater tonnage (and beam) of a later ship of the line required internal bracing and iron reinforcing members to withstand those seas, and those advances didn't happen until after 1805 in rthe Royal Navy dockyard at Portsmouth.

Which means Ships of the Line should be firmly in Industrial Era? Isn't that the same era as Ironclads which the earliest seagoing ones made in Europe were intended to be SotL replacements?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Which means Ships of the Line should be firmly in Industrial Era? Isn't that the same era as Ironclads which the earliest seagoing ones made in Europe were intended to be SotL replacements?

Earliest 'prototype' for Ships of the Line was the Sovereign of the Seas, or Royal Sovereign, built in 1637 CE in Britain and the first ship in the world equipped with "100 big guns" by Charles I's orders. Rebuilt in 1660 so that all the big guns fired broadside, so it could fight according to Blake's Fighting Instructions of 1653, which ordered all ships to fight in a "line of Battle". After that, only the biggest ships could take their place in a line of battle and survive there against other Big Ships, so Ship of the Line became the title for all such warships.

From 1660 to 1805 the wooden-hulled Ship of the Line carrying 50 or more guns firing solid shot weighing up to 42 - 48 pounds was the most complex mechanism ever built by humans up to that time, and the measure of every European navy's strength. After 1805, Great Britain and later, other navies began adding wrought iron strengthening fittings to the hull bracing, which allowed the ships to get longer, increasing the tonnage from 2000 - 2800 tons to 4000 - 5200 tons and the maximum number of guns from 100 or so to 120 - 140. In the 1840s both France and Great Britain also started fitting steam engines and screw propellers to existing Ships of the Line so they weren't at the mercy of the wind when maneuvering in battle - but they still relied on sails for 'strategic' movement. Between them, France and Britain alone converted over 75 wooden Ships of the Line into auxiliary steamers, but by the 1860s they were scrapping the wooden ships by the dozens because explosive shells with percussion cap fuzes made wooden ships essentially suicidal. Ironclads of all kinds become the new 'capital ships' starting in the 1860s

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ Tell me about wrought iron reinforcing pieces for hulls. how does it looks like?
What are the first ships with with such iron reinforcement pieces? did it comes out by the time of Napoleon Bonaparte? Did the HMS Victory and USS Constitution build with these iron reinforcing things?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

^ Tell me about wrought iron reinforcing pieces for hulls. how does it looks like?
What are the first ships with with such iron reinforcement pieces? did it comes out by the time of Napoleon Bonaparte? Did the HMS Victory and USS Constitution build with these iron reinforcing things?

The effective limit to the size of a wooden ship was length: if you made it wider it got slower and harder to maneuver, and if you made it taller (added extra decks) it provided a massive wall of a hull to catch the wind and make it even less maneuverable. The 4 -decked Sanctissima Trinidad was nicknamed "El Ponderoso" by its crew for just that reason.
But after a certain length in certain seas (and the North Atlantic was the effective 'test' of wooden ships in northern Europe) the ship suffered from 'hogging' or 'sagging' - when the hull and keel deform downward or upward due to wave action, causing, in extreme cases, the keel to snap and the ship to break up (it's still a problem: as late as 2013 a container ship sank due to hogging and I believe the resulting lawsuits are still on-gong).
The classical Greek Triremes had a cable stretched from stem to stern to provide 'counter-tension' and keep the ship more rigid in rough seas, so the problem was not limited to the sailing ships of the 16th - 19th century, either. But it effectively meant that all the wooden warships maxed out at just under 200 feet in length - any longer and the ship was less seaworthy, not more.
There were two possible solutions, if you didn't want to produce more "Ponderosos".
1. Diagonal wooden bracing within the hull, to increase the 'stiffness' of the combination of keel and frame. Robert Seppings, who was Master Shipwright at Chatham Naval Yard in Britain, introduced this (based on some Dutch experiments earlier) in 1800 in a frigate (HMS Glenmore) that was being rebuilt, and then in a ship-of-the-line (HMS Kent) being rebuilt in 1805.
This method has an obvious limitation, though: extra internal bracing reduces the space within the hull to carry anything else - like ammunition, rations, or crew - and so you quickly reach a point of diminishing returns where you have a ship that is wonderfully seaworthy but completely worthless,
2. Reinforce the wooden frame with wrought iron pieces, chiefly along the hull and at the connections between frame pieces, to increase the overall strength of the hull - and also replace wooden timbers that have to be grown over decades into the proper curved or angled shape for hull frame members, timbers that were becoming very difficult to afford in increasingly-timberless England in the late 18th century (as far back as the mid-1600s it was estimated to require 40 acres of Old Growth forest to build one large warship, and by the 18th century even with managed timberlands it took more acreage and up to 30 years to get the oak timbers preferred for ship-of-the-line framing), Seppings also helped to introduce this innovation after 1805 and especially after 1813 when he became Surveyer of the (Royal) Navy, or chief naval architect for the British Fleet.

HMS Victory was built 1759 - 1765 and had a gun deck 186 feet long, USS Constitution was built in 1797 and had a hull 175 feet long, and both were pre-iron or wooden internal bracing.
By contrast, HMS Queen, the last purely sailing ship of the line ordered by the Royal Navy and built in 1833 - 1839, had a 204 foot long gun deck and carried 110 guns, more guns, and heavier ones, than HMS Victory (Of Victory's 104 guns, only 28 were 32 pounders, the rest were 24 or 12 pounders, while 100 out of Queen's 110 guns were 32 pounders, giving her a far heavier 'broadside' firepower)