Commonwealth Navy = Nelson's Navy?

[Retroactive]

So I've recently been reading about the British navy in the early late 18th and early 19th centuries, and I thought that there were some interesting parallels between them and the Commonwealth Navy almost a millenium later. Bear with me here:

1. The British navy was spread between far-flung ports between which communication is erratic and takes a long time. It had ports in the Mediterrainian, in the South Seas, in Canada... communication was by packet ships, dispatches, and the occasional warship assigned to a new fleet. These ships had to travel long distances between friendly ports of call and were subject to interception by enemy forces, making communication between ports difficult.

Late in Transcendence, the CSC captains are absolutely desperate for news from the Commonwealth- and anyone who's waited at a corporate supply station hoping that his order won't get destroyed in transit knows how uncertain travel between ports in Transcendence is.

2. Fleets in each region are overseen by a flagship and gather together in flotillas when not engaged with the enemy. This parallels the CSC-centric system in later systems.

3. Ships were liable to sustain heavy damage during combat, and stingy or poorly supplied fleet outfitters left many captains responsible for paying for damages and for supplies and equipment needed for their vessels. Some repairs could be performed at sea; others required returning to port. All commanders hoped to capture well-supplied enemy vessels, from which they could loot vital supplies and recieve a percentage of the net worth of the captured ship.

4. Captains were not assigned to tours of duty on ships per se, but were instead offered commissions which they were free to accept or decline. However, commissions were neccessary for career advancement; many lieutenants and captains languished on shore unpromoted because they were never able to serve commissions.

Likewise, performing well on missions is vital to promotion in the Commonwealth Navy.

5. A British home-guard unit called the Sea-Fencibles patrolled British territorial waters during the Napoleonic wars, fighting French privateers, smugglers, etc. The Fencibles consisted of unemployed merchant captains, older naval officers, and young naval officers unlikely to recieve promotion.

The Commonwealth militia and navy are similar entities.

------

The player more resembles a privateer than a regular naval captain- he supplies his own ship but is legally permitted to harrass enemy vessels and is not subject to naval regulations, not assigned to a commanding officer, is able to move freely, etc.

One thing that struck me is that some British captains equipped their vessels weapons to their own preferences. Some, preferring close-quarters fighting, requested of the port outfitters short caronnades that fired heavy shot short distances; others preferred "long guns" that fired smaller broadside weights of metal but with greater accuracy and range. Some captains even purchased their own cannons and sidearms to supplement those supplied by the Navy; others purchased additional shot and powder to gain an edge in battle. Every captain had his own methods of sailing as well, favoring certain sails and different behaviors depending on the weather, etc.

The Commonwealth ships are pretty uniform and in this sense they resemble the American Navy of that period, which commissioned a bunch of identical small sloops and heavy frigates to make a consistent fleet. Meanwhile, the British used all sorts of ships, from old 50-gun two-deckers to small 24-gun frigates; three-deck, 74-gun line-of-battle ships; carronade-toting fireboats; and much more.

Anyone interested in 19th-century naval life should check out the works of Patrick O'Brian, who wrote many excellent novels on the subject.

[george moromisato]

Fascinating post! Thanks for sharing!

I like the parallels that you draw. Back in the 18th century the world was truly large. Today you can get live video from a battle on the other side of the world in real time; but imagine a time when the fastest way to get a message London to the Fleet was to sail all the way there. Naturally you would expect ship captains to have an awful lot of discretion.

In Transcendence, the galaxy is similarly large. The fastest way to get a message from St. Katharine's to the Fleet is to send a ship through the stargates (assuming you know where to go). The CSCs are largely fighting the Ares without much communication or help from the Commonwealth government.

I'm glad some of that flavor is apparent in the game, but I definitely want to do more.

Thanks for posting.

p.s.: My only exposure to Patrick O'Brian is through the movie (Master and Commander). I don't know how closely that tracks the books.

[evilbob]

oh, I have to say this: when declining a mission... "why don't you get us some tea or something?" Now that's a parallel.

On a more serious note, I find that very interesting. Maybe there should be independent commonwealth battleships, equipped like the British (Haha, my dictionary complains if I don't capitalize the 'B' in British) ships- with varying gear- some captains preferring small numbers of omni weapons, others preferring massed missile weapons?

EDIT: oh, this is where random device tables would come in handy for AI ships.

[Blitz]

Which ships would vary? The CSC's, the centurions or, if it is ever introduced, the Aquilla cruiser? And if the commonwealth ships vary, then shouldn't the Ares fleet have different configs for the Tundras and the Cometfalls? And what about the scarab and polar superfreighters. If you compare them to ships, then as cargo vessels, wouldn't they differ? And maybe you can introduce special graphically coded gunships for elite pilots which will have better equipment, higher fire rate and accuracy....

[evilbob]

the ares and CW are different entities- not just different countries, but different... things, and accordingly their military should vary- the CW are desperate against a better equipped force, so would use whatever was to hand, while the ares could afford a(n?) unified force.

[Blitz]

Well, okay, so we'll have only the CW with variable ships. Which ships are going to be variable? Would all the centurions and CSC's vary or only one of them? And what about the smaller factions?

P.S. It's a unified force. An is not used before all vowels but before all vowel sounds.

[Boris the Cat]

P.S. It's a unified force. An is not used before all vowels but before all vowel sounds.

A bit off-topic, but that's a great explanation! *copies for later use*

[FAD]

P.S. It's a unified force. An is not used before all vowels but before all vowel sounds.

...and a good example being as stated; A unified force.

As to:

An unidentified object.

Just remember this easy method: If a word starting with U where U sounds like YOU, then A is appropriate.
Where as the U sounds like UHH, then An is appropriate.

Getting back on topic...

That's a pretty kewl idea! And going a little step further, having the Commonweath fleets that have been and are far away from 'home' even look a bit ragged and war-torn in appearance. Although that would mean a little tex tweaking to make them look that way, it would help add to the effects of them being way out there fending for themselves all that time.

[Boris the Cat]

And going back to the a/an business, the same rule applies to "the". Th[uh] car - Th[ee] umbrella.

Don't we all feel educated now?

[Blitz]

And going back to the topic (which incidentally wasn't the subject of this topic and this topic was supposed to be in Commonwealth anyway because it just drew parallels between how space travel in the future would be like sea travel in the 17th century) once more -
The game uses some sort of tech to display destroyed ships and stations. This makes destroyed ships and stations look different each time. I don't think this feature is exposed through the code but it would be a cool and easy way to make the CSC's and centurions in the later systems look battered without having to use sprites which would make them all look the same. Wouldn't it be weird if all the centurions had scratches in the exact same areas....

[Retroactive]

Blitz;

I believe that the game overlays the image of scratches onto the damaged ship's sprite. This works for wrecks because they do not rotate, but would probably not work for ships that are still "alive" and moving arround because the scratches would not rotate exactly in the same way as the ships (because ship rotation sprites are not from directly overhead) and it would look really wierd.

[Yugi]

Blitz;

I believe that the game overlays the image of scratches onto the damaged ship's sprite. This works for wrecks because they do not rotate, but would probably not work for ships that are still "alive" and moving arround because the scratches would not rotate exactly in the same way as the ships (because ship rotation sprites are not from directly overhead) and it would look really wierd.

Meh, it would be easy enough to create a few damage graphics at the correct angle.

[Blitz]

(because ship rotation sprites are not from directly overhead)

What do you mean they are not directly overhead? I thought the ships were rendered 3D models from exactly above and with a stationary light source. The light source shouldn't create any problems with the scratches. Or am I missing something important again? I'm really bad with graphics....

[Yugi]

If the graphics were directly overhead, then you wouldn't be able to see the end of ships (or the sides or front, depending on the ship's direction).

[Blitz]

So, that's how it works... I never noticed it. The camera is tilted a little towards the bottom of the screen, isn't it? It's visible only on the larger ships like the CSC or the worldship. It's either absent or not noticable on smaller ships like the Wolfen or the EI%)). Allso. even among the larger ships, its visible only with ships which are many layered or have a significant depth factor.