hey did any one ells catch this?

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:59 am Post subject: hey did any one ells catch this?

i am not sure how historically accurate they want to make the mist mod, but they have the time period WAY off for the weapons they have...........

now i may not be all that smart, but if it is one thing i do know, it is military history, and the part of military history i know the most about is the weapons.........

any way it is a EASY fix from what i have seen on the site.......

they list the time period as the 16 century, or the 1,500's AD

i cant say that i have seen all of the weapons that are going to go into the game, but i know that the flint lock did not come around until the VERY late 1600's. they where not widely used until the early 1700's

in the 1,500's the mechanisms used where #1 and most common (a LOT cheaper) was the match lock. this is basically a metal device that holds a burning rope soaked in sulfur called a slow match........ there was a lever where the trigger would go today. when you depressed the lever, the burning rope would come down and ignite the pan (the powder in the pan that is) in the same way the a spark from the flint and steal would in a flint lock weapon.

the #2nd one was almost exclusively for the very rich (like king rich) it was known as the wheel lock. i do not know what the material used to create the spark was (not flint) called, but a high tension spring (that was very prone to malfunction) would spin about 3 revolutions against a metal back plate creating a spark. the mechanism was very heavy and required a key like device to re wined the wheel. it did have its advantages over the matchlock though. all of which revolve around the continuously burning match.
#1 there was 1 less thing that needed constant replacement (that is if you where not too hard on the gun itself)
#2 the burning match could be smelled by both animals and pp from a long way.
#3 it was not quite as vulnerable to bad weather
#4 it was just plain safer to use

Oh and I almost remember seeing something about rifles in the game��
Although gun makers did rifle the inside of barrels from the late 1600�s on, it was not to create spin on the ball, and there by improve accuracy. It was first used as a attempt to make it easy to clean the barrel of powder and lead residue. In fact many guns that dint have it where often un loadable after only 15 shots because the build up was so great that you physically could not ram the ball down the barrel. EDIT:because of this, most military weapons had barrels about 2 or even 3 calibers larger than the ammo they loaded them with END OF EDIT: Any way, in the us, a few gunsmiths realized that a certain combination of groves and twist actually made the gun shoot further and more accurately. That is the origin of the Kentucky rifle. After the 1730�s it was widely known and many British sport arms makers included rifles in there catalogs, but it dint catch on with any of the worlds militaries until during the American revolution. It was however used quite a bit by people at sea, both by the worlds navy�s, marines, merchants, and pirates. But it was never issued, they had to buy it with there own money from a gunsmith.

the easy solution would be to just change the date to the early 1700's, but again i don�t know how concerned they are with historical accuracy so it may not even be a problem.

i just like it when they set the time period and have everything be accurate to it but the events that take place when they make games.
_________________
YAT YAS

if You Ain't Tracks, You Ain't Shit

Last edited by Drunken Monkey on Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:05 am; edited 1 time in total

DarkCloud · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 5:42 am Post subject:

Arrr, tis true. I think I said something bout that aaaaaaages ago. Would be cool if the team kept it in the 16th century and had matchlocks, it would be different Very Happy

but I guess its just easier to switch to 18th century
_________________

Bunny wrote:

It's like a british nugget! Razz

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 5:47 am Post subject:

ya from what i have been told they are almost done..........it would be a bitch to re make all the guns and stuff.......maybe in a later beta version but i don�t want to wait another day for this to come out........let alone the time it would take to re skin and model the weapons

edit: err you know it might be a good idea if i take a look at Caesar�s Legions too...........if some one can give me a ling and some info, i can tell you what i know.......and if i spot anything that might need changing

edit: err you know it might be a good idea if i take a look at Caesar�s Legions too...........if some one can give me a ling and some info, i can tell you what i know.......and if i spot anything that might need changing
_________________
YAT YAS

if You Ain't Tracks, You Ain't Shit

RCSI · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:22 am Post subject:

oh forget the history
we want crazy action and gameplay Very Happy

_________________
Remove the lid of this barrel, for there be Rum inside!

SupaFly · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:51 am Post subject:

i think theyre shooting for early 1700's anyway... granted it was the end of the major pirating in the carribean, but it makes more sense that way... there are 3 major crews left, the cut throats & the black bucs & the cursed pirates are leftovers from the old days of pirating.... besides, reload times arent gonna be near accurate, so its all kinda moot anyway
_________________

Brutus · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:54 am Post subject:

Yeah, I agree. I recognized similar things with the ships too. It is more like 1700's. At least in BFP, dont know about Mist yet - but I THINK it is similar.

It's a game though, not a boring simulation. Anything goes in a game - its about fair fun. So... just imagine yourself as a time travelling pirate from 1800 going back to the 1600's to kill the undead Pirates and wipe out your foes before the unfair 1800's where your team has been almost eterminated and had all their rum stolen. Or were the undead pirates more like 1800 too? Wink

_________________

CountChocula · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 12:31 pm Post subject:

Drunken Monkey wrote:

edit: err you know it might be a good idea if i take a look at Caesar�s Legions too...........if some one can give me a ling and some info, i can tell you what i know.......and if i spot anything that might need changing

actually, Caesar's Legions is very historically accurate, I don't think you have to worry about it Wink

_________________

Quote:

[20:43] -≠∫ĆŤ∫≠- ŜρξčļαГ јỈмMﻻ: we'll aim for bender
[20:43] -≠∫ĆŤ∫≠- ŜρξčļαГ јỈмMﻻ: but use a lot of napalm

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:20 pm Post subject:

ya large ships frome the 15-1600's where also a lot more castle like and wider in the beam than the ships in bfp and from the look of it, mist too.
i only made this post because i sa this, and was like WTF?

copied from the mist site:
- 16th Century Weaponry
Load your musket and grab your sword, this is not the place for machine guns and rockets. Choose from an assortment of flintlock weaponry or cannon when 'yer lucky enough to find heavy iron, but never forget your trusty cutlass in battle. Reloading wasn't the fastest procedure of the time, so make every shot count.
_________________
YAT YAS

if You Ain't Tracks, You Ain't Shit

Cpt. LandLubber · Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:43 am Post subject:

15 and 1600's ships were ugly as heck. prettiest ships that have ever sailed was a frigate of about 1800.

the wheellock was a steel wheel spinning against iron pyrite. not too far from what modern-day lighters do.
_________________

DarkCloud · Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:31 am Post subject:

Still, I think matchlocks would be pretty cool =P

Frigates aren't that great a ship, ship of teh line for teh win!
_________________

Bunny wrote:

It's like a british nugget! Razz

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:05 pm Post subject:

ya but most countries (like the us) could not afford de ship o de line so they just built some of the best frigates ever maid (they pwnd the britis over and over again) such as ol iron sides herself, the USS constitution.
also less famous ships like the USS Constellation.

the fact the ships of the line where SOO huge and cost SOO much money meant that there where not that many of them, and so it was not often that they met in battle. + any other ship would throw here own guns over the side if it meant avoiding a encounter
_________________
YAT YAS

if You Ain't Tracks, You Ain't Shit

Last edited by Drunken Monkey on Tue Jul 26, 2005 3:08 pm; edited 1 time in total

DarkCloud · Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:14 pm Post subject:

Pff... r0y@l nA\/eH f0r t3h w1n!!!1111

You yanks didn't pwn shit all! >: )

Well... u might have done, I only know a bit about naval history
_________________

Bunny wrote:

It's like a british nugget! Razz

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:05 pm Post subject:

LOL lmaf

the whole war of 1812-1814 you brits where marching up and down the coast line waiting for your ships that never came back Twisted Evil

you actually did a LOT better fighting us on land, but what most pp dont know is that, for the most part, the war started at sea, was mostly fought at sea, and ended at sea. and we pwn at sea Very Happy

we dint really have a navy (we did but it was very small) but was had hundreds of frigates roaming the sea as privateers for the good old US of A. they actually wanted to go for British military ships more than the merchants because we needed military ships a lot more than money, so they got more money for bringing back a nice British war ship (such as another frigate) than for a merchantman. + our frigates where much bigger, much heavier of gun, much thicker and closer spacing of the ribs (made our ships very resistant to cannon fire, and some even cannon proof) and also much faster on top of all that Twisted Evil

in a frigate v frigate battle, it was not really a fair fight.

out of all the battles at sea the British got into with us, they really only had one clear victory. in the battle between the British SHANNON and the USS Chesapeake. both ships where very badly damaged during the battle, and on her way back (the Shannon) with the Chesapeake in tow behind here, was stopped and promptly surrendered to another US ship. so even that victory was very short lived. (oh this was after both ships made port in Boston, it was on the way back to Brittan that the recapture happened)
_________________
YAT YAS

if You Ain't Tracks, You Ain't Shit

Cpt. LandLubber · Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 2:04 am Post subject:

Well, despite your pwnage at sea (just due to big heavy frigates), you didn't actually win the war Smile

it was sort of a draw

And some of us could afford ships of the line, but had them stolen by the goddamn brits Sad

Copenhagen 1807 will forever be in our hearts
_________________

DarkCloud · Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:45 am Post subject:

We don't learn about the war of 1812 or anything like that, just european history at skool, so what I know about it is pretty limited

I know we pwnz0rd your white house tho Twisted Evil

Guess u owned us there then, the British navy was only powerful at that time becuase it had so many ships, most of them were old shitters and outdated, but we still kicked some arse Twisted Evil

fucked up the french and spanish old skool!
_________________

Bunny wrote:

It's like a british nugget! Razz