Bowchasers and Stern guns

[Naharaht]

Looking at what we have seen of the ship bases and the combat video on the Kickstarter website, it appears that no provision has been made for using bowchasers and guns fired from the stern windows. I have sent an e-mail to Ares about this.

[Cmmdre]

:takecover: Good call David. Both have the capacity to change fates. :surrender:

[7eat51]

We had a brief discussion on this, but not much to discuss given no associated firing arcs. I imagine this will become fodder for house rules.

[Berthier]

I think it will be pretty easy to develop firing arc templates to be place over the ships (similar to those used in the Ironclads boardgame system). These could be scaled differently for the different ships, downloaded and printed onto clear acetate. Alternatively they might make a nice item for the Anchorage shop!

I think a single damage chit draw only for these as they were usually smaller gun calibers though they could still be loaded with chain etc. It would require another one or two action chits - fire bow, or fire stern chasers, plus chits for reloading. They wouldn't be used often as they would take up a chit play but when needed they would add much to the game play.

[Cmmdre]

I think it will be pretty easy to develop firing arc templates to be place over the ships (similar to those used in the Ironclads boardgame system). These could be scaled differently for the different ships, downloaded and printed onto clear acetate. Alternatively they might make a nice item for the Anchorage shop!

I think a single damage chit draw only for these as they were usually smaller gun calibers though they could still be loaded with chain etc. It would require another one or two action chits - fire bow, or fire stern chasers, plus chits for reloading. They wouldn't be used often as they would take up a chit play but when needed they would add much to the game play.
Excellent solution Daniel. I like the firing arc templates.

[David Manley]

We discussed chase guns during playtesting. I guess they just didn't make the cut. The scale of the game doesn't tend towards straightforward solutions for them for any but the larger ships.

[Berthier]

Hey David, well they didn't make Ares cut so what a nice opportunity for the 'tinkerers' to come up with our own solution. :happy:

[David Manley]

Hey David, well they didn't make Ares cut so what a nice opportunity for the 'tinkerers' to come up with our own solution. :happy:

Yes, the trick is to come up with something that makes them noticeable without making them overbearing, given the range of gunnery factors you have to play with.

[The Royal Hajj]

Plus, in game terms, adding those might have made the ships seem like they could fire pretty much 360°. Most of you are more up to speed on this subject than I am, but I don't recall chasers being used that often in the things I have read. I can see at least the bow chasers being used a lot in a game.

[David Manley]

Chase guns are only really useful in, well, a chase scenario (d'oh) for obvious reasons. If you were going to leave stuff out they'd be on the list. But then again in campaign games in particular I've seen them used a lot - if the ship you just have to disable is high-tailing it out and you don't have the way on to turn and fire a broadside then chase guns are all you'd have to slow them down. so their not being in the rules will niggle a few people. I'm thinking something like this - one firing point forward and aft with a narrow firing arc, some kind of method to limit damage - perhaps drawing 2-3 chits (maybe 3-4 for smaller ships with lighter guns) instead of one, but only applying the lower chit, only drawing "A" chits regardless of range, only scoring special damage if it comes up on 2 chits, or something like that.

[Cmmdre]

It is safe to say it will come up at times and needs something in place to settle the issue. Who wouldn't want to take a shot at a a ship just a little faster than yours and score a lucky shot. :cannonboom:

[7eat51]

Chase guns are only really useful in, well, a chase scenario (d'oh) for obvious reasons. If you were going to leave stuff out they'd be on the list. But then again in campaign games in particular I've seen them used a lot - if the ship you just have to disable is high-tailing it out and you don't have the way on to turn and fire a broadside then chase guns are all you'd have to slow them down. so their not being in the rules will niggle a few people. I'm thinking something like this - one firing point forward and aft with a narrow firing arc, some kind of method to limit damage - perhaps drawing 2-3 chits (maybe 3-4 for smaller ships with lighter guns) instead of one, but only applying the lower chit, only drawing "A" chits regardless of range, only scoring special damage if it comes up on 2 chits, or something like that.

Would range be a full or half ruler?

[David Manley]

Full ruler in most cases.

[The Royal Hajj]

I still think gamers would use them quite often. What's to stop to players from firing away with bow chasers as they close the distance before they turn broadside on? In that scenario, you would most likely have the free action slot to do this.

If I was going to allow them in my games, a very narrow arc, 2 A damage chits and only apply special damages. After all, that would signify the "lucky" shot we want to replicate in the game.

[RichardPF]

I still think gamers would use them quite often. What's to stop to players from firing away with bow chasers as they close the distance before they turn broadside on? In that scenario, you would most likely have the free action slot to do this.

If I was going to allow them in my games, a very narrow arc, 2 A damage chits and only apply special damages. After all, that would signify the "lucky" shot we want to replicate in the game.

I wonder if the fore and aft extent of the bow and stern broadside firing arcs and the lack of bow and stern chaser firing rules was some sort of compromise trade off.

If so, I don't know that I would agree with it.

[Cmmdre]

Makes complete sense to me Keith. A reload period figured in and you got some House Rules. :cannonboom:

[7eat51]

I wonder if the fore and aft extent of the bow and stern broadside firing arcs and the lack of bow and stern chaser firing rules was some sort of compromise trade off.

If so, I don't know that I would agree with it.

I concur. I have read so many stories lately of bow and stern shots, that to exclude them does not make much sense. I would like to hear the rationale to see if I am missing something concerning game mechanics.

[Diamondback]

From most of the deck plans I've seen, the chasers compete for recoil- and crew-room with either the forecastle, quarterdeck or end-of-gundeck artillery, so... basically if you wanted to fire chasers AND a partial broadside, you'd need it to be only the half opposite where you're firing chasers.

[Beowulf03809]

I can see chasers being a possibility for an Ability Deck card. I'm not sure what game mechanics will be in place for assigning upgrade cards (and limiting what you can have) but maybe making them an upgrade vs. a 'given' option would reduce the usage to begin with. And of course an Action would need to be assigned.

And, as mentioned, if someone uses a chaser perhaps limit the broadside options they can use that turn. If you fire a fore chase gun, then you can only use the rear-arc broadside on the same side (reflecting that some of the fore area is impacted by the use of the chase gun).

I always like to have more accurate representation, and tactical options, as long as they don't detract much from the game or make anything overpowered. But if these were left out completely intentionally and the extended arcs are the representation of the potential I can live with that.

[The Royal Hajj]

Wait, so now we have left and right chasers (otherwise, which broadside gets effectively reduced)? If so, now gamers could fire the chasers every turn at the same target. Even worse. Just playing devils advocate here guys, but you can see how this could roll down hill causing all kinds of rule problems.

The Crew ability could be a neat way to do it. There would be room on the card to list out the rules for it and limit it in usage as well.

[Beowulf03809]

I am not familiar enough with the chasers to know if there was really a left/right issue with them but was going from some earlier posts. Hope I didn't add to any confusion in the discussion.

I do recall reading that for some ships they would move some of their guns from normal broadside to the chaser positions. If so then maybe a limit on firing all but aft-broadside (either side) if you use your fore-pointed chase guns, and only fore-broadside (either side) if you use your aft chasers.

I still feel, not having seen anything in print yet ( :rum: ) that Ability Card options may be a good way to add this officially or unofficially in the future if not already accounted for in the rules. This way they could also be limited to certain classes of ships that may have actually had and used them with some regularity. Considering that when reading the accounts of Trafalgar and how none of the British ships seed to face fire from a chaser while cutting the Combined's line and raking them I don't believe the French and Spanish SOLs present had these. Likewise no British ships seem to fire any bow chasers while closing with the Combined. Even if there was only a slim chance of scoring some mast damage I would think that chance, and the cover the smoke would provide, would have been motivation enough to give a few shots with bow guns if present and if they didn't interfere with the preparations for the massive broadsides to come.

[Diamondback]

Victory for example would have had to roll mains up forward, and for frigates and posts ships like HMS Diana and HMS Pandora... well, it's mighty tight up front, tighter than I'd be comfortable as an engineer or officer with asking my crew to fire one gun while dodging a recoiling second.

Cannot strongly enough recommend the "Anatomy of the Ship" series, even though I wish they'd publish MANY more volumes in it and reprint the older ones... and find someone worthy of completing the volume on Raleigh that was left unfinished by the passing of author Portia Takikjian.

[Cmmdre]

Chase Guns
These guns, as the name implies, were used in the chase of another vessel or when being chased, in turn, and the best of these were either 9 pdrs, on smaller vessels or 18 pdrs on larger warships. These weapons were usually precision bored, and were always "long" guns. They were as accurate a gun as was available in the period. They were mounted in the bows and the stern of a ship, and were mounted on sea carriages, as with broadside guns. Both Chase Guns and Broadside Guns were counted in the calculation of the ships "rate" and the weight of her broadside. The U.S. ships of the period were very similar in "rate" to the British vessels as indicated below. For example:

-- A Fifth Rate British ship (heavy frigate) included those with two gun decks and the number of guns from 32 to 44. A Sixth Rate British ship (light frigate) would have a single gun deck and 20 to 28 guns. The rate was written as a frigate (38), or frigate (24). A 9 pdr. frigate's (24) guns would mean that she could throw a broadside of 108 pounds (9 pounds x 12 guns). This broadside weight was generally used to determine which ships could be attacked and which ships should be left alone. Obviously a vessel throwing a 108 lb. broadside would wish to think twice before taking on a warship throwing a 288-pound broadside (frigate 32--18 pdr). There were of course other considerations such as rate of fire and maneuvering ability, not to mention the experience of the captain, and the handiness of the crew, but the weight of broadsides was a major consideration. Three broadsides in five minutes were considered to be the mark of a very well worked up ship, and few warships attained such.

Borrowed this information from this site.
http://www.navyandmarine.org/ondeck/1800gundrill.htm

[Berthier]

Most SOL's had stern gun ports (usually 2 I think) for firing at chasing ships. Some would have had dedicated guns, some would have had to have had the rear most guns on the gun deck manhandled into position (not much fun I would have thought). Bow chasers as DB pointed out would have been in a very confined space and offered limited visibility of the target.

[Cmmdre]

I guess if you were not well liked by your superiors you ended up pulling such duty. :cry:

[pward]

I would like to see these added to the advanced rules somehow, or perhaps optional rules. Some very practical solutions posted so far... perhaps we will see something down the pike.

[Diamondback]

Boss, I wasn't saying "half" like "port/starboard" but "fore/aft."

Example: "If you are using Bow Chasers, you may only fire broadsides using the rear fire arc; if Stern Chasers, you are restricted to the forward arc for broadsides."

[Gunner]

Has anyone read anywhere about a bowchaser doing any damage to a frigate or SoL?

[Coog]

Has anyone read anywhere about a bowchaser doing any damage to a frigate or SoL?


In the early morning of the 23 June 1812, USS President under the command of Commodore John Rodgers, spotted a ship on the horizon to the north-east which turned out to be the frigate, HMS Belvidera, commanded by Captain Richard Byron, whereupon Rodgers immediately gave chase, with the Congress following close behind. The Belvidera had already been informed of the inevitability of war by a passing New York pilot boat and herself immediately turned about, crowded on all sails and began flight to the north-east with a fresh wind behind all ships coming from the west.

The USS President was an unusually fast frigate and by noon had gained on the Belvidera, now only some two and a half miles distant, approximately 75 miles south-west of Nantucket island. While the President was closing its distance with Belvidera Captain Byron began clearing the decks and preparing for action and made ready his stern guns. By 4:30 the wind had relaxed some but the Belvidera was now close enough to be engaged. Seizing this first and tenuous possibility, the President's forecastle bow chasers fired the first shot of the war, by Rodgers himself, with two more almost immediately following. All three shots struck Belvidera at her stern, striking the rudder assembly and captain's quarters, killing or wounding nine men. With only a few more shots needed to disable the British vessel the President fired again, but the tide of battle turned when its gun burst, killing 16 men, wounding others, including Rodgers who was violently thrown back with his leg broken from the impact. There was a pause of panic about the entire ship, as now every gun was suspected. Byron seized the opportunity and fired his stern chasers, killing yet another six men. The Belvidera continued a brisk fire, causing damage to the rigging and foresails. The President continued chase but without adequate foresails to stabilize her bearing was now yawing and began to lose ground, allowing the Belvidera to escape and return to Halifax, taking with her the news of the declaration of war.

[Cmmdre]

Here is an example visually. I haven't read anything yet but I'll let you know.

[Cmmdre]

Thank you for the information Coog. Interesting fact about the burst cannon.

[Coog]

While American built ships tended to be better than British ones in one regard to the quality of timber available in the United States, British cast guns were superior to American cast guns due to a better industrial capabilities.

[Cmmdre]

While American built ships tended to be better than British ones in one regard to the quality of timber available in the United States, British cast guns were superior to American cast guns due to a better industrial capabilities.

Makes complete sense.

[Gunner]

So to recap, the bowchasers did some damage to the enemies rudder and killed or wounded 9 men, but exploded and killed 16 of his own plus some wounded.

This doesn't sound like a reason to add them to the game.:takecover:

[tmon]

Also who nowadays would want to play a scenario that lasts for hours that a stern chase would take?


So to recap, the bowchasers did some damage to the enemies rudder and killed or wounded 9 men, but exploded and killed 16 of his own plus some wounded.

This doesn't sound like a reason to add them to the game.:takecover:

[Naharaht]

Coog's account demonstrates exactly the use made of bowchasers and stern guns. They were fired by the best gunners to try to obtain critical hits on the other vessel (the rudder, wheel or rigging) in order to slow it down. Naval battles could last hours in those days anyway, even when ships drew level and fired broadsides.

[Gunner]

And that's why God created House Rules.

[David Manley]

So to recap, the bowchasers did some damage to the enemies rudder and killed or wounded 9 men, but exploded and killed 16 of his own plus some wounded.

This doesn't sound like a reason to add them to the game.:takecover:

Thats a VERY selective example. There are many, many historical examples of ships using bow and stern chasers with effect.

[David Manley]

Also who nowadays would want to play a scenario that lasts for hours that a stern chase would take?

players involved in campaign games and other events that go beyond a simple 1 hour game on "games night"

[Berthier]

Additionally, the beauty of wargaming is that the time scale does not need and rarely does, match real time. A stern chase may take hours or days historically but can still be gamed quite quickly. It mightn't make for the most exciting event but it could be the end of a scenario where if the ship escapes the player manages a win or draw but if she is taken the pursuer wins the match. Realistically, any game where ships need to exit the playing area can become a stern chase and as such I think house rules for bow and stern chasers is a must, regardless of their effectiveness.

[RichardPF]

Thats a VERY selective example. There are many, many historical examples of ships using bow and stern chasers with effect.

IIRC, there is a chapter in Mr. Midshipman Hornblower that recounts a battle with two galleys off the coast of Spain.
These were not large treasure galleys but long narrow ships similar to those used a millennium or more earlier.
The galleys were still formidable weapons as they were not dependent on wind and, I believe, were only armed with bow chasers.

[Cmmdre]

Additionally, the beauty of wargaming is that the time scale does not need and rarely does, match real time. A stern chase may take hours or days historically but can still be gamed quite quickly. It mightn't make for the most exciting event but it could be the end of a scenario where if the ship escapes the player manages a win or draw but if she is taken the pursuer wins the match. Realistically, any game where ships need to exit the playing area can become a stern chase and as such I think house rules for bow and stern chasers is a must, regardless of their effectiveness.

Agreed. A good House Rules regardless. :hatsoff:

[Berthier]

The traditional galley had the cannons concentrated at the bow. Their shooting direction was limited to forward in the direction the galley was sailing.

from http://stutenzeehistoryblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/the-battle-of-lepanto-and-its-influence.html4277 (http://stutenzeehistoryblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/the-battle-of-lepanto-and-its-influence.html)

42784279from wiki

[Cmmdre]

Nice example Daniel. Would come up in a Barbary Pirate conflict. :hatsoff:

[jasperrdm]

How about this quick and dirty house rule. Ball only, reload 3 turns fire every 4th turn, use the smallest firing arc of the ship. Does not use an action slot.

[Cool Breeze]

How about giving them no firing arc at all. Just use the base width extended in a straight line (think rail-gun in space games).

I think it best captures the "limited effectiveness" (compared to main guns), without slowing play, albeit at the cost of being quite abstract. It also captures in a much shorter time-frame the careful maneuvering one must take in a chase scenario.

[Gunner]

If your going to add bow or stern gun house rules, I think those would be the first ones to be taken out if raked.:cannon: