How historical is AC4 in reality?

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Hello,

I'm interested in how historical AC4 is in reality? Now for example:

- Mayan Ruins scattered throughout the West Indies, has there been any actual sightings?
- What would have Captains have said to their crew, what kind of code language they would have used when they used to set sail or board a ship?
- Why aren't the French featured in this?
- No Port Royal, Tortuga, or any other good settlements.
- Man of War in Jamicia? Would there have been Man of Wars in the Caribbean as they are expensive ships to maintain.
- A ship like the Jackdaw wouldn't be able to take on a Man of War right?
- Now here's what I'm interested in:

What sort of books would the writers have used for this game? What sort of maps? Like the General History of Pyrates? One of the things in AC4 that could have been included was the traditional hunt for treasure, yes its been a pop culture stereotype, but treasure makes a good plot if done well. Has there been any incident where Pirates attempted impossible expeditions to hunt for treasure in sunken wreck-coves? In AC4, there's a scene in the retirement, where you can obviously do those annoying tailing missions. But if I remember, there's like some chest boxes full to the brim of gold and jewels. You can't loot it obviously.

In fact what is the obvious books they would have gone too when making scenes when Edward and Mary Read are in that abandoned Mayan Temple?

To all those pirate enthusiasts and historians, how accurate is this game, and what primary and secondary sources would they have used? And how would they have done research to map out the Caribbean's rich environment?

This is just a curiosity, but if we look at the animated movie of El Dorado, ok, but the reason is the amount of research they used, and the plot about treasure and gold.

In reality, have pirates gone to the New World and have gone into Aztec and Mayan Ruins and taken treasure out of there?

[napoleon boneaparte]

https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscr...accurate_were/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistoria..._the_warships/

Just something to add.

[RedGuard]

the more Assassins creeds there are, followed by more money, the less they care about history...so probably little resemblance at all.

[Cyclops]

AFAIK (not having played the game but from watching my nephew play) they have done an "Indiana Jones" style exciting but not very accurate pirate flavoured adventure. Its not as bad as the Pirates of the Caribbean nonsense (East India Company in the West Indies? Wut?) but don't be writing any essays for university based on it.

Syd Myer made a lovely old game called Pirates! in the 1990's (I played it on the Amiga) which combined some historical accuracy and steep difficulty into a fairly simple gameplay with wind gauge, four principle nationalities, historical localities, sea combat, ship to shore gun duels, land combat, personal duels and the Silver Train and Treasure Fleet which followed historical routes (you had to ambush the Silver train from Peru when it arrived at one of the ports near Panama, I forget which one and the best place to intercept the Treasure Fleet was off Havana).

There were cute RP elements like flirting and marrying local ladies, or seducing them so they'd be your informant, personal health problems (especially if you were wounded or imprisoned) as well as fantasy elements like huge hidden pirate treasures (who hides treasure? They spent it on rum and peg legs historically) and a narrative based around lost family members (you entire family has been kidnapped and held in hidden locations).

There were four eras representing quite different landscapes and you could play a pirate or a pirate hunter or even a lowly trader just depending on in game choices. Being a pirate in the 1580's was difficult, Spain was dominant and had strong local fleets across the map, and the non Spanish holdings were tiny and poor. the 1660's onwards were a happy period for piracy as the Dutch French and English interlopers used pirates to disrupt the Spanish and each other, but in to the 1700's the four established powers were no longer interested in harbouring pirates anymore so it was a tough period.

[conon394]

- Mayan Ruins scattered throughout the West Indies, has there been any actual sightings?

Nope, evidence of some trade but nothing like the vast Maya cities of the mainland like you mean to be asking about.

- What would have Captains have said to their crew, what kind of code language they would have used when they used to set sail or board a ship?

Umm what captains, when, from where on what ships?

- Why aren't the French featured in this?

Developer choice if set in the 18th century they should be.

- Man of War in Jamicia? Would there have been Man of Wars in the Caribbean as they are expensive ships to maintain.

Certainly in and around major wars between leading powers. Spain could build Ships of the Line in Havana and at least sometimes had some smaller ships of the line in Caribbean waters with consistency. But in general no certainly not in the numbers that seem to exist in the game.

- A ship like the Jackdaw wouldn't be able to take on a Man of War right?

What is the rating of the Jackdaw supposed to be?

but treasure makes a good plot if done well. Has there been any incident where Pirates attempted impossible expeditions to hunt for treasure in sunken wreck-coves?

No.

In reality, have pirates gone to the New World and have gone into Aztec and Mayan Ruins and taken treasure out of there?

Just let the Spanish organize the extraction and try and nap a treasure ship.

[Cyclops]

...
Just let the Spanish organize the extraction and try and nap a treasure ship.

Indeed IIRC the amount of silver the Spaniards extracted from Peru by mining (rather than looting) smashed the silver market in Europe, and to a lesser extent the Gold market too. The New World civilisations lacked advanced engineering (OK they had neat terraces and irrigation but their pyramids were just Minecraft stacks) and iron tools to really exploit the mines they had so they literally just scratched the surface.

[napoleon boneaparte]

What is the rating of the Jackdaw supposed to be?

Single-deck brig.

And if I recall correctly, broadsides in game are done simultaneously, which is kind of a big no-no due to the massive recoil that could end up tipping over the ship, especially in rough seas.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

@ all

Thanks for the great answers! Obviously AC4 was a mix of historical liberties and that's fine, its fascinating to find out about this era. I'm tending towards 1700s, but then there is the debate of the fact that when did the golden age of piracy end? What do you all think?

Another thing I learnt was that there were plenty of Spanish and French pirates that were the equivalent of the English ones, but they're not given so much coverage as their English counterparts.

A ship like the Jackdaw would have really needed to use everything at its disposal if it were to take on a massive man of war. I mean like, if Captains say 'set sail', etc?

Could pirates have gone to the Yuctan and taken gold from there since it was part of the Spanish Empire? I mean would there have been a Spanish Governor controlling the Mexican Penisula just like Torres from AC4?

I have read about the battle of Cartegas De India, where a Spanish Admiral by the name of General Blas De Lazo defeats an English navy that is besieging the city of Cartagena. So there were man of wars, but not as numerous on the three nations ruling this side. It was only if the nations decided to send a massive navy you would have seen them.

I'm not sure about POTC because although it ignored the French and neglected the Spanish, both of these two empires, had they been included would have made for some interesting story play. It is very much an Indiana Jones Style game, but the exotic locations are jumbled up, and the geography looks a bit squashed. It would have been nice had they designed some missions relating to secret treasures, or more locations about the Ancients that came before, or even just do some historical stuff. The RP features you mention would have added a lot more immersion from Syd Mier. The links really have some great stuff, however in the official artbook of AC4, there are designs of a French ship, more like a man of war. I guess that was used in AC Rogue more often.

Here's another question, the designers presented a 'progression' system for building your ship. In reality, if a pirate came from England, and he had to become the richest pirate and have a great big ship, would he have looted ships and continued to add on cannons and upgrades? I think that would have been a hefty price to pay for the upgrades. In comparison to some other games, AC4 is really well researched, despite its numerous liberties.

How would Captains of any vessel been able to make it through rough seas if he only fired on side? AC4 and Empire Total War have some simialrites, although the ETW ships looks like as if someone really squashed them. The AC4 ships by comparison are much bigger and more manoeuvrable. I also note that during the late age of piracy, they look completely different from the Golden Age.

So what would have been their locations, their hideouts, and what cities would they have placed their headquarters? This question addresses more about the Later age of Piracy and what they did. They don't get much coverage compared to the Golden Age Pirates.

Another thing, in the game you saw a few Italians, would any people from Eastern Europe, Poles, and if we go to Germany, Venetians, Greeks, are there any records of them visiting the New World during the golden age of piracy? It is also said somewhere that the navies that came into the Carribean, were more interested in fighting with each other, did this happen often between the three empires where their navies fought each other?

For AC4, what it would have taken to make it a very adventurous but also heavily accurate pirate game? One thing's for sure that Ubisoft took out of the Hollywood book, dress the French in blue when it should be white, the Spanish in yellow when it could have been white and blue. And the English have their distinct famous Redcoats, although I'm not too sure about the bright saturated colours, nor are the officer's clothing's, the big ones, are very convincing. Is there any good link to colonial uniforms for French and Spanish troops in the carribean?

By the time of AC Rogue's setting, there is no piracy around that time or is it very limited?

[IlluminatiRex]

What I always find interesting about the AC games is that even with all their inaccuracies, there's always weirdly accurate things they include. If I remember correctly, the out of the actual treasure fleet that sunk in 1715, one ship mysteriously was unaccounted for.

So the game uses that mystery to give Edward his ship.

[conon394]

Single-deck brig.

Than no, simply no - the only thing a Brig would do is run away as fast is could, if in range of the guns a Ship of the Line it would be burning wreckage.

There is a reason there is a rating system for ships (of the age of sail) and its not just gun numbers although that is part of it. Yes a Ship of the Line had a certain minimum number of guns, but its also important is the size/type of those guns and weight of metal they throw. A 4 pounder as a very different matter than a 32 pounder. Also critical is how robust a ship of the line would be and the difference in ts crew size, that is the massive numbers on a Ship of the Line vs a Brig.

Its instructive that Thomas Cochrane's victory with Brig HMS Speedy over the Spanish Frigate EL in 1801 is considered kind of stunning. Cochrane was a brilliant commander and damn lucky. His Brig fairly standard even a bit big for the era (certainly larger than one typical a century earlier) at 14 4lbs and some swivel guns and a compliment of up to 90. The Spanish Frigate had 32 guns: 22 12 pounders 8 8 pounders and 2 24 pounder carronades and around 320 men. No officer would have wagered on the Frigate loosing. By comparison a British 3rd rate Ship of the Line (80 guns) around 1720 or so would have had 26 32 pounders, 16 12 pounders, 24 6 pounders (+ 4 more on the quarter deck), and around 520 men. A brig would have run away - period. A first rate just makes the ideal (of a Brig victory) even more ludicrous with its 28 42 pounders, 28 24 pounders, 28 12 pounders, and another 16 6 pounders in upper decks and 850 men.

And if I recall correctly, broadsides in game are done simultaneously, which is kind of a big no-no due to the massive recoil that could end up tipping over the ship, especially in rough seas.

I have no ideal what you mean here. The recoil of a Ship's own guns would not roll it nor would firing and being struck at the same time as firing, since that is what they were designed to do and endure. Eventually obviously one ship might end up a de-masted, a-fire hulk with too little crew to sustain damage control, so it might roll I suppose. Certainly however the broadside of Brig would be hardly noticed if at all by a Ship of the Line.

-------------

If I remember correctly, the out of the actual treasure fleet that sunk in 1715, one ship mysteriously was unaccounted for.

Nope all accounted for. If you are thinking of the Griffon then the confusion is that she was French and sailed to Brest. Thus she is not counted as sunk or lost by the Spanish since never would have been so noted.

[napoleon boneaparte]

Forgive my poor wording. I was trying to say that on no wooden ship did every gun of a broadside fire at once, they fired one at a time (per deck at least) with almost no gap in between. (This created a wave effect visually extending from Bow to Stern, or vice versa) This was done because if, for example, HMS Victory fired her whole broadside at once (some 50 guns per side) the shock could and most likely would damage the ship heavily.

[conon394]

Nope. Sorry myth. Depending on the angle of attack you might fire as you bear in sections or individually (think raking fire since the traverse of a gun was limited). The limited traverse, add the relative movement of the ships (to each other) and rolling in the water and angles (of approach or maneuver) the ideal opportunity to actually a fire a full broadside to maximum effect was unlikely but it did occur. There is however simply no technical reason you would not in general if the situation warranted it. After all your first salvo is likely the only time you have the opportunity for a true full broadside anyway if you looking for that effect (that is the moral impact of a full broadside). In particular in this case firing at a small nimble ship it would be a viable and useful option since aimed fire would be less useful or possible. Some old, damaged or overloaded ships might want to avoid a full broadside but even they would be very unlikely to risk the spectacular fate you suggest.

The myth is persistent, and is often ascribed to battleships of the modern era as well.

I'd be curious as to where you encountered the ideal.

[Cyclops]

... the only thing a Brig would do is run away as fast is could, if in range of the guns a Ship of the Line it would be burning wreckage....

Yes there's some rare defeats of Spanish Galleons by smaller vessels but these are all zerg rush situations. The biggest concentrations of Galleons were the Treasure fleets and that was only ever captured once by some Dutchman and they ran the country for a couple of years off the profits: on other occasions individual ships were sunk or captured but typically the big ships could blast the smaller ones if they caught them: there's even instances IIRC when smaller cannon fired at a Galleon and experienced the demoralising sight of the ball bouncing off the teak hull.

.... There is however simply no technical reason you would not in general if the situation warranted it. After all your first salvo is likely the only time you have the opportunity for a true full broadside anyway if you looking for that effect (that is the moral impact of a full broadside). ....

Indeed both French and English/Great British gunnery doctrine in the 18th century featured broadsides especially in full battles: I believe this goes back to the 17th century Dutch and English naval wars but I forget where I read that, maybe in the "Wooden World" by some bloke called NAM Roger?

There's a lot of myths that crop up in popular imagination. A Greek friend of mine learned I was interested in classical warfare and he said to me "Did you know Alexander the Great trained his army to fight walking backwards? And they were the first to do this" which is a bizarre factoid with no basis AFAIK (I combed Arrian for details about this and there's none). Apparently its a commonplace that old Greeks tell their kids.

There's bizarre myths about terms like "don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes" which is a nice literary expression and may even have been said but is in no way a useful command in battle and is not mentioned in period musketry manuals e.g. The Manual Exercise, As Ordered by His Majesty, in 1764. Variations have been attributed to commanders back to Gustav Adolph but there are sources suggesting it was sensible military advice or even doctrine:

http://teachinghistory.org/history-c...istorian/25687
"It was a practical command for 18th-century armies, considering the inaccuracy of smooth-bore muskets and the risk of ammunition shortages." Just think, all one would have to do was order the men to charge with their eyes closed and the enemy would not fire!

In general historians have almost no idea about military matters (just as military historians often know very little about general history) so these sort of myths abound even in serious works.

Its funny to think firing a broadside would topple a ship over. Did they fire the other broadside at the same time to balance it?