It part one of this three part series looking at my preparations for playing the Battle of Cape St Vincent in time for the 225th Anniversary of the battle, I looked at the time line of events leading up to the Battle of Cape St Vincent which you can refer back to in the link below:
In part two I covered the process I went through, and am still working on, to shape Kiss Me Hardy (KMH) into a set better able to allow me to fight both large battles from this era like Trafalgar and Cape St Vincent, whilst also taking into account the needs for the rules to better facilitate playing the smaller actions often between unrated vessels, bringing together all the ideas and rule changes that have been developed since their publication back in 2003. See link below if you want to check out that post
In this post I'm looking at what I consider perhaps one of the most enjoyable aspects of historical wargaming, that is translating a particular battle or action to the tabletop with a collection, and my process of deciding how best to prepare a game that challenges the players to deal with a situation created by their historical counterparts and to see if they can come up with a better outcome, which of course has nothing to do with 'winning or losing' in the traditional meaning of that phrase .
I stress that latter point because it never fails to amuse me that some folks find the intellectual challenge of playing a game where winning the battle is not necessarily the objective that is being posed, but rather a fascinating opportunity to experience in a small way some of the challenges presented to both commanders and for the players to come up with their own solutions to them.
Indeed if you consider the fact, most historic battles were not 'balanced', to use a wargaming term, as most military/naval commanders went out of their way to ensure that they definitely weren't, and, if they could help it, in their favour, with often a miscalculation by one of the parties leading to a fight they might not necessarily have chosen.
However despite these facts about historic battles, there is a great opportunity to explore why events happened the way they did and the possible 'what if' situations brought about by the ingenuity of players operating within the given context but perhaps making different choices, and I find these kind of games only enhance the understanding of a battle that you had only previously read about or in the case of a land action, perhaps walked the battlefield.
Why would you want to play Trafalgar?
Nevertheless explore the comments of any wargaming forum and you are bound to find such throw away statements as;
'Why would you want to play Trafalgar when you know the British will always win?'
To which my answer would be;
'Not necessarily, if the objective of each commander was to get a better result from the game than either Nelson or Villeneuve achieved on the day; perhaps a very tough ask for Nelson, but then achieving a similar level of victory and surviving might be a simple ask for a British player.
Likewise that might indeed see the Combined Fleet thoroughly defeated, but if the surviving Franco-Spanish ships number more than the historical outcome, with Villeneuve escaping the debacle and grabbing the odd British prize in the process, then you could consider the result as a decisive win for the latter which may well have kept his reputation intact, and himself alive with Napoleon.'
Then if you throw into the mix, the performance of certain characters, that stand out in any given battle, other objectives become apparent that could impact on the overall assessment of a game result, with a little bit of thought beforehand.
Therein perhaps lies the difference in looking at wargaming as an intellectual challenge from the pages of history rather than a simple zero-sum game of win or lose, and where all the banter and chat in the post battle meet up in the pub, simply adds to the enjoyment.
So with that basic principle laid out as a foundation to my approach to planning any historical battle, let us turn our attention to the climactic Battle of Cape St Vincent and what we know.
Fortunately a lot of the initial work on a framework and basic structure of the game is mapped out by Nick Skinner himself with his scenario for running the battle, entitled Nelson's Valentines Day Massacre and published the 2008 Christmas Lardy Special available on the Too Fat Lardies web shop, and I was able to use this to compare and contrast with other scenario plans for other rule sets together with various written sources covering the battle.
However Nick's scenario plan for this game and his suggestions for setting up the respective fleets were my starting point and with further delving into my other references it proved quite an interesting exercise trying to find broad agreement particularly about which Spanish vessels were at the battle and where they were.
The set up map from the 2008 Christmas Lardy Special
My experience planning Trafalgar and other large games informs me that where you decide to start the game is important as often playing time is limited and the object of the scenario is often to pose the question to players:
'This is what your historic predecessor decided to do and the likely problems he faced. So what are you going to do from here?'
Thus position at or just beyond extreme gunnery range seems a good place to begin, posing an immediate challenge to both commanders likely to be presented with an early opportunity to fire and potentially inflict damage at extreme or long range, but, if doing so, losing that all important first broadside capability that can make the difference at short and point blank ranges.
So when I sit down to work out an initial set up those factors are front and centre of the placement planning process, which often necessitates knowing the ranges that various ships opened fire at at any time to get an idea of placement to commence the game, with the imperative to start matters close to or as near as the moment the fleets had the opportunity to open fire, this to save game time simply moving models on the approach.
In a well documented battle such as Trafalgar this plan presents less of a challenge than does Cape St Vincent where the best source I came up with was Adkin's in his 'Trafalgar Companion' who has put together an excellent series of plans showing the progression of the two fleets into the opening exchanges of fire with timings.
Adkin's excellent maps for all of Nelson's battles leading up to Trafalgar are a game planners dream when other sources are contrary and incomplete.
The timing is important because I wanted to begin the game with the British column bearing down on the Spanish gaggle of two distinct groups at that extreme to long gunnery range, giving that 'to open fire' challenge to both sets of players early on.
The map above shows the moment leading up to the British cutting the Spanish line and the battering of the Principe de Asturias, but I needed to move things back to allow for the run in that commenced about 12 noon and culminated in the eventual close action shown in Adkin's plan below as events evolved over the following two and a half hours.
Adkin's second map shows the battle unfolding, a stage of the scenario that will be left to the respective players
At an approximate ground or perhaps that should be 'sea' scale of two minute moves in KMH, with the British sailing with a bow wind giving their squadrons an approach rate of 10cm minus 1d6 of movement each turn (based on the slowest ships in the British fleet, namely the first-rates Victory and Britannia), and allowing about twenty of the thirty minutes to get HMS Culloden at the turning point ahead of Principe de Asturias, assuming an average move of 7cms per turn, I estimated the start position for Culloden to be about 90cms away from the Santisima Trinidad which I reduced to 75cms to be on the safe side in reducing the run in time.
Ship Record Sheet for HMS Captain and a certain Commodore Horatio Nelson, seen in his portrait from 1797 as a newly minted Rear-Admiral, commanding an elite Jolly Jack Tar crew who are potentially 'exemplary' and a model to the fleet, with this one ship a very distinct threat to our player Vice Admiral Cordoba getting a result out of this game, i.e. doing better than his historical predecessor.
This potentially creates 12 (extreme worst case) to 8 (best case) and 10 (average) turns of movement to break the Spanish Line (see what I mean about KMH and friction!) not forgetting Nelson's ability to pre-empt matters with a little manoeuvre of his own that is covered in the scenario rules (You'll have to get a copy of the 2008 Christmas Special to see how that works). Of course playing will clarify the game plan and it might still change, hence 'approximate' measures on the set-up map.
The distance set out between the two Spanish groups is as per Nick's original scenario plan and on setting up the table, looked about right with the Spanish struggling forward equally in a bow wind, all be it slower because of their large number of 'Poor Sailors'.
The result of this first stage of the plan produced the set-up map you see below.
My set-up map based on Adkins primarily, with Nick Skinner's scenario plan at top
The next step was to sort out what ships were present at the battle and where they might have been as the two fleets closed on each other.
To this end I am referring to the Spanish, as the British sailing order and order of battle are agreed by all the sources, but the Spanish are another matter and again I have taken Adkin's as a principle guide.
Another view of my table plan based on my set-up map to get a visual plan of the set-up
In Nick's original scenario plan the Spanish fleet is listed thus:
Spanish Fleet:
The Spanish fleet are all classed as Landlubbers and are organised as follows:
Zone 1 Spaniards: [Cordoba’s Squadron]
Teniente General Jose de Cordoba y Ramos aboard the Santìsima Trinidad
Santìsima Trinidad 130 (poor)
Mexicano 112 (poor)
Purìsima Concepción 112 (poor)
Salvador del Mundo 112 (poor)
San José 112 (poor) Admiral F. J. Winthuysen
San Nicolas 84 (poor)
Atlante 74 (poor)
Conquestada 74 (poor)
Soberano 74 (poor)
Firme 74 (average)
San Genaro 74 (average)
San Ildephonso 74 (average)
San Francisco de Paula 74 (poor)
San Ysidro 74 (average)
San Antonio 74 (poor)
San Pablo 74 (poor)
Neptuna 74 (poor)
Bahama 74 (poor)
San Domingo 74 (poor)
San Juan Nepomuceno 74 (average)
Terrible 74 (poor)
Zone Two Spaniards: [Moreno’s Squadron]
Commander Admiral J. Moreno aboard the Prìncipe de Asturias
Prìncipe de Asturias 112 (average)
Conde de Regla 112 (poor)
San Fermìn 74 (poor)
Oriente 74 (poor)
Glorioso 74 (poor)
Infante de Pelayo 74 (average)
The two Spanish groups set up with the British column placed 75cm away on the approach
From the sources I consulted I have changed the order of battle by removing four of the listed Spanish ships.
The two 74's, Infante de Pelayo and San Pablo were detached early on the 14th February when the Spanish heard British frigates signalling with gunfire in the morning mist, that they had spotted the Spanish fleet, and the two ships were sent off to investigate at 08.00, leaving Cordoba to fight the upcoming battle without them.
The map showing the movement of the various units during the St Vincent Campaign shows the passage of Cordoba's fleet from Malaga and through the Gibraltar Straits
The other two, Bahama and Neptune, were detached on the 5th of February as Cordoba collected the four Spanish mercury carrying merchantmen or urcas at Malaga, that he was ordered to escort to Cadiz on his way, with further support from a group of gunboats at Algeciras who were to provide escort through the Gibraltar Straits but needed escorting back to Algeciras once the fleet was clear; and thus Bahama, Neptune and Terrible were detailed for that particular job, with only Terrible returning to the fleet prior to the battle.
Thus with my Spanish order of battle refined I then turned to initial placement as the two fleets closed for battle, with only certain vessels specifically identified in various maps but by no means all the Spanish precisely indicated, rather highlighting the mess they had got themselves into during the turn to a NW heading that Cordoba ordered at 10am, as he set a course for Cadiz as the British double-column approached on his now starboard side
My new Spanish order of battle, with the various ships shown in the original squadrons by the use of *1st of Centre Squadron - Cordoba, ** 2nd or Rear Squadron - Morales and *** 3rd or Van Squadron - Moreno. Of couse the positions changed as the squadrons reversed course at 10 am.
This placement required a bit of educated guesswork using the original organisation lists for Cordoba's fleet that shows which ships were part of which of the three squadrons, namely the rear under Morales aboard the Purisima Concepcion, the centre under Cordoba aboard the Santisima Trinidad and the van under Moreno aboard the Principe de Asturias.
The order of battle is indicated in my fleet listing for the game seen above, and using this together with the known positions of various ships during the battle I started to place all the ships among the two Spanish gaggles based on their previous order of sailing prior to the turn at 10 am and so Cordoba's group have Morales's squadron to the front and Cordoba's behind, with any of Moreno's squadron not with him in his trailing group placed to the rear of Cordoba's lead group with my map showing the planned layout.
Close up of Cordoba's lead group - I like the table and the ship bases to be as uncluttered as possible and the small pennant numbers on the back of the ship bases have worked well in previous games to allow an unobtrusive way for players to quickly identify a particular ship and for me when looking at pictures to do the same when writing a game AAR. If you want to check the efficacy of this you can refer to the order of battle above to identify the ships in view and the set up map to confirm the positions.
Finally I decided to use the KMH Command and Control Signalling rules for our game, with a few adaptations that sees a slight change to the rules in Nick's article 'I Wish to Amuse the Fleet with a Signal' published in the 2009 Lardy Christmas Special.
The principle change sees commanders having a command range that allows their signals to be seen and interpreted by any ship in their command that falls within that command radius, which is further extended by repeater frigates. Thus frigates have been positioned among the fleets to allow for signalling at the start of the game, as new course headings and tactics will need to be communicated to the respective commands during the game, which should add another level of fun to the proceedings.
Cordoba's lead group - Note the repeater frigate placed bottom left of picture, just in range of Santisima Trinidad, extreme bottom right and in range of the ships in front of it up to the next frigate beyond, extreme left, centre top of picture. Cordoba has a poor rating and small command radius and the command and control of his fleet may well be tested to breaking point as the battle develops, with ships left to fend for themselves in an uncoordinated way.
With the fleet break point rules in play, the game will change at some point from a battle where both sides are intent on contesting the space to a different game where one side, likely the Spanish, is looking to extract itself and the other is looking to take advantage of the situation with the signalling ability of both fleets being an important component.
So the plan is to play as much of this battle at our club meeting this Saturday and to see if we can get our game to any sort of a conclusion with a follow up post covering all the fun of the day and the drama created together with some thoughts about what worked well and stuff not so well.
Finally, as touched on in my Xmas post, storage and transportability of any collection of models and required sea cloths is important and, if you missed it, you can check out my post in the link below that covers off those key aspects of putting on a game.
This aspect of game management was well tested last year with my trip up to Warlord Games in Nottingham to run the Trafalgar Anniversary game and the trusty RUB's and inserts are proving their worth yet again for this weekend's game.
A final check against the fleet list for the Spanish before being put into the boxes.
I now have the kit and collection together with a workable set of rules that should facilitate the big games I want to play and tick off the bucket list
A case of have game - will travel, and I am keen to explore different venues and play with other gamers interested in these big Age of Sail battles.
More anon
JJ
Sources Consulted:
The Trafalgar Companion - Mark Adkin
1797 Nelson's Year of Destiny - Colin White
Naval Warfare in the Age of Sail - Tunstall & Tracy
HMS Captain capturing the San Nicolas and the San Josef by Nicholas Pocock (RMG)
This post picks up from my previous one (see the link below if you would like to read it) looking at the time line of events that culminated in the pivotal Battle of Cape St Vincent of the 14th February 1797, changing the course of the war at sea in the French Revolutionary War.
When sitting down to plan this particular battle, my process involved pulling together several strands of different work that had been done in the last two years whilst building my collection of 1:700th Black Seas model ships produced by Warlord Games.
Those other strands of work entailed playing several rule sets that were vying for my attention to use for playing small historic ship actions as well as the large age of sail games like this, with both sets of work informing the other, and once having settled on a choice to tailor the rules around the games I wanted to produce, which always involves an element of 'adapt, adopt, improve' to fashion a set of rules that creates the games that develops the narrative created in the historical accounts of those actions and battles.
JJ's Wargames - War by Sail War by Sail was a strong contender for playing these 'big battle' type games. I like a lot about these rules, especially the detailed gun layouts and may well come back to these at some stage
This process is very subjective and for me tends to be a process of selection based on playability, fun with the inclusion of a certain level of detail and game mechanics that give the feel of the battles I'm looking to create, a by no means unique set of criteria to me but I hopes clarifies what I am trying to do.
I agree very much with the idea that the personal choice of rules is like personal choice in shoe size with absolutely no concept of 'right or wrong ', purely what suits one person to another being the deciding factor.
In the end I decided to use 'Kiss Me, Hardy' (KMH) from the Too Fat Lardies and written by Nick Skinner, with my original copy dating back to 2003, so by no means 'new'.
Any look through the back posts on the Devon Wargames Group club blog will show that the rules are well used and understood from our previous games at club which commended them to my thinking, that and being a fan of the Lardy ethic of friction, friction and a bit more friction please to create the games I love, and Kiss Me Hardy having the merit of having been used before to run large games, such as Trafalgar, meeting that essential requirement as well.
The chit draw method (I use chits rather than cards as I can't be bothered with shuffling and dropping stacks of cards) of activation is probably my favourite way to play age of sail, generating the situation where a perfect plan falls apart because some idiot of a junior commander doesn't quite live up to your demanding expectations or the enemy have the temerity to do something different from the plan you had mentally assigned to them and then you just have to get on with it and come up with a new plan, rather like the real thing.
Important bits of my game playing kit, my chit draw bag, game specific chits and the old 'angle of dangle' laser table pointer.
However that said, KMH in its original form has evolved a lot over the intervening years, thanks to Nick Skinner and the playing community, with ideas developed in the multiple editions of the Lardies Specials.
These additions include rules around Command and Control, Signalling, Squadron Building, deaths of key commanders, campaign development, fictional and historical encounters and battles which includes the 1797 Battle of Cape St Vincent, and rule changes to allow for better play with small ships and more detailed differentiation between ships, with even a look at the time scale and move rates used; all this added over the years in articles written by Nick and others that I have accumulated and that form a treasure trove of ideas if rather spread about in various printed sources, than can be problematic for referencing anything at any particular time, in a game for example.
The cover and index to my KMH compilation of every article, update and additional rules for the original core set of rules which is now on version 1.6 and includes 138 pages.
Thus I sat down over a year ago to rewrite KMH for me and the chaps I play with regularly, to include all those additions into a new complete master copy of the rules, indexed for easy finding of any particular rule, plus some additions that I have play tested, taken from the ideas in other rules that were part of the original mix, that now includes for example fleet and squadron morale; and I see my new format as very much a living set of rules to which I have other ideas to add, and test, in games to see if they will fit and join with those already included.
The master list of Lardy Specials with KMH related articles that helped in my new rules compilation
The other key aspect of KMH that commended them is, thanks to articles such as Brian Weatherby's 'Messing Around With Boats' that was published in the 2011 Christmas Lardy Special, and his work looking at the scaling of KMH and better defining of ship characteristics, illustrating the ground (sea) scale approximating to 1:900 and a time scale at two minutes per turn, allows for no need to adjust the basic measurements laid out in the rules and the easy adoption of the turn circles and gun ranges for 1:700 models.
So what you see here is a culmination of that work which necessitated some new game tools married with the new collection of models that has now been played with using these updated rules built around the core of Kiss Me Hardy.
Part of my QRS rewrite indexed by subject and page in the rules. The QRS also incorporates Chris Stoesen's 'To Covet Glory' small ship rule adjustments
In addition to a comprehensive indexed rule book I decided to write my own QRS having been dissatisfied with others I had downloaded from various sources, seemingly always finding that key rule missing during game play and requiring reference to the rules.
My QRS is broken into the various sections covering movement, firing, boarding etc with all the rule notes linked to the page covering them in more detail within the full rules if required.
My own experience shows that playing KMH produces that comfortable 'unconscious-competent' mindset very quickly, thus reducing dramatically, reference to either rules or QRS in equal measure.
Example of the Victory ship record sheet for Cape St Vincent with all the usual record data as well as the key crew abilities listed as a ready reference for this particular ship.
With the rules sorted out to my satisfaction I then turned to preparing my own Ship Record Sheets which having been play tested in a few games including at Clotted Lard have gone through a period of evolution to adopt suggestions for improvement by players using them and I am now happy with the current format which carries all the die roll modifications for firing, moving and strike test resolutions on the individual card saving time, having to reference them from the QRS, and significantly speeding up the process of assessing these key parts of any game, particularly during a large battle.
The Leeward Line Scenario played at Clotted Lard last year provided another opportunity to try out the new rules format to get things up to speed for bigger games in 1:700
As these record sheets were being play-tested I had been printing them out as required, but now I have a format I like, and that has proven itself under the rigours of a multi-ship games, I plan to laminate them on thick card ready for use in future games with the simple wipe of a cloth.
A sample page from my compilation of a hundred small actions, initially covering 1793 to 1801, which will provide ready to go historical scenario play set ups, married with the prose of William James explaining the situation that is presented, and contemporary artwork/maps (when possible) illustrating the vessels involved and where the action takes place.
In addition the new Ship Record Sheets work just as well for Small Ship actions using Sloops or smaller vessels and the To Covet Glory (TCG) rules from Chris Stoesen,
and I am busy at the moment converting the Sapherson & Lenton 100 Small Actions into a ready to use format using KMH or TCG.
Scourge vs Le Sans Culottes from our game in January 2021 which started the plan to pull together these first one-hundred small scenarios around a set format using KMH and TCG JJ's Wargames - All at Sea, Scourge vs Le Sans Culottes
This work started this time last year with a playthrough of the first action of the French Revolutionary War, Scourge vs Le Sans Culottes, 13th March 1793 with Bob and myself utilising ideas on how to play a game during lockdown with mobile phones and Zoom.
I put together a short video presentation of the scenario for YouTube, see link above, which gives a flavour for how these little actions are designed to be fought out, even with the checking out of a strange enemy sail flying false colours and challenging them with the signal of the day.
Each scenario will present the set up instructions depending on whether the game is based on a chase or meeting engagement and an indication of victory assessment based on the historical outcome and performance of the captains involved.
As I go I will use the Small Actions format of compiling my scenarios to do the same for the larger battles such as Cape St Vincent, so it should make setting up and running the games in future far less of an organisational chore and a very easy to run arrangement for club and other games.
Using the ideas from 'Messing Around With Boats' by Brian Weathersby, and 'To Covet Glory' by Chris Stoesen, I have been better able to tailor the stats around the historical records of the ships involved in these small actions, to hopefully produce some really interesting replays of these actions
With regard to large battle management, anything likely to slow the turn around of each game turn had to go. and that included cards and any shuffling required with managing an activation deck, and so all game turn management is governed with a bag of chits drawn and played accordingly, with all the chits simply put back in the bag to recommence a new turn.
Other game materials designed to save time and effort during play, with wind dials and arrow for placement about the table to help assess wind on a particular ship when in doubt, together with, gunnery angle device, turning circles, game chits in green, activation chits red/blue in the bag and strike test reminder chits that are placed by any ship that might need to test later in a turn. Laminated ship record sheets complete the set up ready to go, together with an angle indicating laser pointer to check those rakes are really rakes!
The work on getting KMH ready for big games has been very much looking at time saving and ease of play to get more turns played out on the table and a game resolution, and so I now have a kit of other stuff, such as turn circles, strike test markers, extra wind indicators, angle of wind checking circles and firing angle predictors which with the use of the laser pen easily checks if the target is in or out of any given broadside.
Cape St Vincent Force Specific Activation Chits. These are simply mixed with game specific chits and command chits for signalling and simply drawn from the with not a card shuffle in sight.
So with the collection of models constructed and the rules given a bit of reshaping I am now ready to play big games such as Cape St Vincent, and indeed others, and am now very much interested in shaping those game set ups, a process for which I will cover in Part II of this post.
This post is a follow up to my previous one looking at my building of the Warlord Games, Black Seas, Royal Navy Fleet starter box set of 1:700th model ships for a friend of mine Bob who wants to get his own collection of these very nice models going.
I built this starter box for my own collection about a couple of years ago as my 'Lockdown Project' and a search through the All at Sea post from back then will reveal the history behind the ships that are created with these models and so rather than repeat the exercise I will content myself with showing you the look of those I've just built which I've painted slightly differently to reflect an earlier Revolutionary War look to some of them
The Warlord Box Sets are a really great way to start a collection with a selection of models that will enable you to build a squadron of ships ready to start playing lots of smaller actions. If you check out my tutorials, I have put together a set of videos and downloads to show how I've gone about painting and rigging these kits.
For this project, started just before New Year, I just built the first-rate, the three named third-rates (Mars, Ajax and Colossus) and the three named fifth-rates (Naiad, Euryalus and Indefatigable).
British 100-Gun First-Rate
This powerful British first rate represents the largest ships in the British fleet weighing in over 2,100 tons, carrying one hundred plus guns and capable of consuming over 6,000 trees in their construction.
A typical armament would consist of 28-30 x 32 pounder long guns on the lower deck, 28 x 24-pdr guns on the middle deck, 28-30 x 12-pdr guns on the upper deck and 14 x 12-pdr guns, or occasionally 6-pdrs on older ships, on the forecastle and quarterdeck with HMS Victory carrying a couple of 68-pdr carronades on her forecastle to add to the mix.
HMS Colossus, 74-gun Middling Third-Rate
The HMS Colossus represented here is the ship launched at Gravesend in 1787 and wrecked off the Isles of Scilly on the 10th December 1798.
At 1,703 tons she was a larger middling class of 74-gun third rate and before her loss is credited with the battle honours Groix and Cape St Vincent.
HMS Colossus carried 28 x 32 pounder long guns on her gun deck, 28 x 18-pdrs on her upper deck, and 18 x 9-pdrs on her quarterdeck and forecastle.
HMS Ajax 74-gun Large Third-Rate
HMS Ajax was launched in 1798 at Rotherhithe on the River Thames and at 1943 tons was a large class of 74-gun third-rate.
She was a stalwart of the Mediterranean Squadron and is credited with the battle honours, Egypt 1801, Cape Finisterre 1805 and Trafalgar before her unfortunate loss by fire in 1807.
HMS Ajax carried 28 x 32 pounder long guns on her gun deck, 30 x 24-pdrs on her upper deck and 16 x 9-pdr guns on her quarterdeck and forecastle.
HMS Mars 74-gun Third-Rate
HMS Mars was launched at Deptford in 1794 and at 1842 tons would also be classed as a large 74-gun third-rate.
Much of her service was with the Channel Squadron where she fought and won a single ship duel with the French 74-gun Hercule off the Pointe du Raz near Brest on 21st April 1798, later seeing action at Trafalgar and seeing out the rest of her career in the Channel, off Portugal and in the Baltic before being put in ordinary in 1813.
HMS Mars was armed with 28 x 32 pounder long guns on her gun deck, 30 x 24-pdrs on her upper deck and 16 x 9-pdr guns on her quarterdeck and forecastle.
HMS Euryalus 36-gun Fifth-Rate
HMS Euryalus was a 36-gun Apollo class frigate launched at Bucklers Hard in Hampshire in 1803.
Her battle honours include Trafalgar and The Potomac 1814.
HMS Euryalus carried 26 x 18 pounder long guns on her upper deck and 14 x 32pdr carronades along with 4 x 9-pdr guns on her forecastle and quarterdeck.
HMS Indefatigable 44-gun Razee Fifth-Rate
HMS Indefatigable was launched originally as an Ardent Class 64-gun third-rate at Bucklers Hard in 1784, but, with 64's being made redundant for service in the line of battle, was one of several of these ships razeed to a 44-gun fifth-rate between 1794-95.
In this role she was to prove one of the more successful conversions most notably under the command of Sir Edward Pellew, perhaps the greatest of frigate commanders of his era.
HMS Indefatigable as a fifth-rate was armed with 26 x 24 pounder long guns on her gun deck, 12 x 12-pdr guns and 6 x 42-pdr carronades on her forecastle and quarterdeck.
HMS Naiad 38-gun Fifth-Rate
HMS Naiad (pronounced 'Niad') was an Amazon Class frigate built and launched at Limehouse on the River Thames in 1797.
Naiad was very active throughout the Revolutionary and Napoleonic War attacking French and Spanish commerce raiders under her aggressive commander Captain William Pierrepoint, which reached a high point in October 1799 when in company with HMS Ethalion 38-guns, Alcemene 32-guns and Triton 32-guns she helped in the capture of the two 34-gun Spanish frigates Thetis and Santa Brigida off Vigo.
The two Spanish frigates were carrying spicie together with a rich cargo of sugar, cocoa, cochineal and other valuable commodities that produced a treasure worth more than £600,000 and included 877 boxes of Spanish dollars.
The division of prize monies saw the captains of the four British frigates receiving sums in excess of £40,000.
Later in the Napoleonic War, Naiad would also add Trafalgar to her laurels before her long years of service were ended with her breaking up in 1898.
HMS Naiad was armed with 28 x 18 pounder long guns on her upper deck and 4 x 32pdr carronades along with 2 x 9-pdr guns on her forecastle and quarterdeck.
Bob's British Squadron mustered and ready for action.
All packed and ready for delivery at club in February
Next up: Planning and Preparation has been a lot of fun putting the Cape St Vincent project together for the 12th February at the Devon Wargames Group and in the next posts I take a look at what I've done to create this game.
