Search the Community

“Make a quick write-up”, I thought. Yeah, well… TL;DR at the bottom. We’ll get to play with new-old acceleration soon that some of you whippersnappers might not have tried. The idea is to (hopefully) drastically reduce acceleration globally. I hope we also get acceleration based on hull size and shape. There have been differences in acceleration all along, but now with speed-Bellonas, Aggies and Rättvisans having much more firepower than the superfrigates, the game could use some help with viability between those “classes” in particular: The old school fat-bodies and the Napoleonic box ships. Here’s a reference of how much acceleration has increased since it was originally balanced. To my knowledge the increase hasn’t been deliberate and intentional but rather a by-product of various other changes and increased fidelity of the sailing simulation. We now have Endys that that can broad reach from 0 to 10 knots in 10 seconds or Connies that can do the same at beam reach in 22 seconds where it took about 80 seconds before. Even with the partly accelerated instance dynamic, it is clearly way, WAY too much to represent these ships in the best possible manner. “What’s it to me, jodgi?” Two things mainly. You may experience a loss of comfort when your ship accelerates slower than what you’ve grown used to. Feel free to use your cognitive abilities to keep the inevitable emotions in check when it hits you. Slower acceleration will also tax your planning and ship handling abilities. I suppose some of you have experience with driving large vehicles and can attest to the added mindfulness and planning that is required for the safe operation of humongous kinetic energy vehicles. I’ve had to read up to get learnt about ships, speed and acceleration. I currently know enough to make a complete fool of myself by boldly speaking of things I now should know I know too little about [breathing and contemplation pause]. “Principles of Naval Architecture, Vol II” has a section concerning the resistance a body is subjected to when moving through a fluid. Since you’re all a bunch of monkeys I’ll just point out some highlights. The total resistance is broken up in parts. A ship has to push away water according to its displacement (The old guy in the bathtub, remember?) waves and eddies form and that makes up 15-20% of the resistance. 80-85% of the resistance is friction. Some old English dude (duh) called Froude did some pretty nifty studies on planks he towed around in water. (Oh, look! another old guy in a bathtub!). Up until then shipbuilders relied on true and tested ideas with some rough rule-of-thumb math like “hull speed” (Vhull = 1.34 ∙ √Waterline length). Froude found that short planks had higher friction per unit area than long planks, he attributed this to water being accelerated along the length of the plank thus lowering relative speed which in turn result in less friction. The takeaway is this: Canoes suffer less friction moving through water than stunted prams. There is, of course, more to this story but if I drone on this particular subject I’m afraid you’ll start eating your crayons. Let’s look at our ships. Let’s assume the surface areas exposed to water on Constitution and Rättvisan are the same, they prolly aren’t but play along, please. The ship with the highest length/girth ratio would have the lower resistance and thus the highest potential for both top speed and acceleration. Yes, simplified, specifically for you, dear. Wouldn’t that be neat as a balance parameter? The simplest way is to make acceleration a function of speed. But we can mix it up with our ships that sometimes have very similar speeds but clearly different length/width ratios. If we use the simplest ratio almost ignoring the area of the wetted surface a Connie could accelerate 12% better than a Bellona, I suspect this would make negligible difference in the game so we could bump it to 25% and balance shit from there. Froude even towed a whole ship around and measured total resistance. It catches my interest because then we can clearly make out how much force (component vector along the line of travel) the sails would have to produce to propel the ship to a given speed. Just look! That's eight and a half metric tonnes of wind thrust to maintain almost 12 knots for the Greyhound! You can see that the increase in resistance with speed pretty much matches our in-game acceleration curves. Neato. I wonder if our deceleration curves also reflect this? I should do a test… Buckle up, Busters! NA is about to get more real! TL;DR Hell, no! If you can’t read it all and frikkin’ enjoy yourself in the process you have no business playing this game!

I have a suggestion to enhance Tutorials and help players skilling up. Implement a seperate battle scenario accessible from Port UI, like the tutorials. Call it like "Training Room". Players who get in there can chosse what ship they want to sail themselves (type, wood mix, long, medium or carro equipped, maybe even upgrade and knowledge selectable, for testing) and what enemy ships they want to encounter (ship type only, random layout). All in sandbox mode without effects on the rest of the game... So if a Player wants to check out if he can defeat a santi with a Fir/Fir Ingermanland, let him do. After that, he may want to check out if a Fir/Sabicu Ingermanland does a better job. If one player wants to show his mate some tactics: let them go into training room and sail there together. Let them do. It has no consequences... Gold, XP, Marks, ships... nothing gained or lost. Just training. I think this would be very helpful for newer or casual players to get into the game.

I made this Perk Calculator/Emulator, just to make an idea how your units will end. It could be helpful when deciding which Perks you want for a given Brigade. Ultimate_General_Civil_War_Perk_Emulator_v0.4.xlsm Usage: click the cells and chose options from a list. Feedback would be appreciated. I hope it helps.

Is demasting now too easy? Or is everybody now highly skilled? The demasting meta seems a bit over the top, replacing exchanging broadsides. I do get that historically demasting was a valid option, but now in OW PVP it seems like the only option. Masts need a buff. It's just too easy now.

Hi Captains, The other day i just got an idea about totaly different ranking system, closer to the real world rankings, ranking that is based on skill not just grinding alone. So to get further into explanation, my idea was that people still have to grind to reach a next step but after they reach it they unlock a test, test that makes you rank up and show your skill worthines of that rank. I remember some games i ve played in past that wanted "boss challenge" or certain score in limited time to be colected before passing to next level but i ve never seen it in online gaming where grinding is usually the only measure of someone strength. I am really happy that ranks here are limited and not like in other games where when the players reach max level they only add more levels and skills. BUT, i have noticed that as soon as i reached the final Rear Admiral rank game just lost some of its charm, yes its always great to have some goals, before reaching RA rank it was grinding to get there but after that it was just something missing, and i was not the only one that noticed that, also other clan members became less frequent players after reaching RA rank. Next question that came to my mind was what would be the challenge and i thought fighting AI ships is too predictable, but fighting lets say against two players of the same rank with at least 2:1 BR in their favor would be something that could be "Rear admiral" difficult, for example. So lets say that difficulty gets harder and harder more you rank up, really difficult to get to RA rank, dificult - Commodore, moderate - Flag captain, and lower ranks easy. So yes those hight rank players would have some benefits of bigger crew numbers naturally but it would at the same time mean that PBs could finnaly become more diverse since not all would be able to crew biggest and baddest ships. This would introduce much more strategicaly diverse battles combined of lineships and frigates. Atm the system forces us that we all sail only Victorys and L'oceans in 1st rate PBs, its a huge loss if some noob player with Surprise accidently joins the battle. But bad side is that this system could get abused if aliances, let say US and Brits are allys but they agree to become enemys for the sake of promoting themself up, cheating. So aliances would have to become fixed that oposing armys would fight fiercly not wanting the enemy to get promoted and rank up, getting stronger. Also lets face it, we havent been changing aliances a lot. Its mostly Brit-USA-VP vs FRA-SPA-Danes-Swedes. Well it could be also set to different aliances based on historical facts or some thing like that. So to actually make this rank up there could be "Promotion event" or something like that accesible in missions window on specific hours when the server population is at its peak and opponents would be picked randomly. Defenders or lets say the ones fighting against player that wants to rank up would get certain rewards for participating or maybe something else, something to motivate them that best players would join. I was thinking that it would be even better to put this battles in OW but realised this could get abused by players with multiple accounts in different aliances. Atm we already have a large base of high ranked players (including me) and it would be a bit dificult to convince all of them that now they wont be able to sail big ships right away. But lets say we all keep our grinding XP and people only would have to do "Promotion battles" to rank up properly to whichever skill rank is suited for them. If they are good and skilled this means only few battles for reaching RA rank and im sure that would be a epic battles. This new rank system could surely add some excitement to the game. Just imagine how proud would a flag captain be if he sank a rear admiral player. Just imagine diverse ship port battles. Well its just an idea, might work or not, depends how it would be implemented to find the right ballance.

My Fellow Sailors: A few ideas i have thought about, and talked about on global, have finally been written down. A few of these have been brewing for awhile, and a few came up while writing. Im sure most of these have been talked about, and may be in the forums. No, i didn't search the forum for these topics. No, i don't really care if there are other threads covering these. These are my thought, basically as they came to me, either through reading notes or remembering conversations. Lets help the devs bring out the potential of Naval Action. ------------------------ Fire Barrels ------------------------------------------------------- Ships with horrible turning can be destroyed by smaller ships. A surprise can stern camp a santi and take it down without too much trouble(Just tons of time). Trading ships also have a habit of being ganked, chained, and capped. To offset these annoyances, i propose fire/exploding barrels. The intention would be to deter or slow down a following ship. It would be a barrel dropped off the stern of the ship, with a timer set by the player(slider?), and it explodes and causes a large flame. The barrel wouldn't be meant to destroy the ship, just cause minor damage. It could potentially catch sails on fire, and cause some sort of crew or rigging shock. If the barrel exploded towards the rear of the ship, it could cause rudder damage. The timer would have a time to detonation range of 3-30 seconds, so it has the ability to damage pursuers that are further away, as well as close up. The timer would need to have a variable on the actual set time (due to a fuse having to be measured and cut in battle) between a flat 15-25% time variation. The other option would be 10% on the "too short" side and 25% on the "too long" side. This allows for the chance it can prematurely explode and damage the ship of the person dropping the barrel. Each ship shouldn't have more than 3-5 barrels, scaled to the rate of the ship. 4th-5th rates have 1 or 2 barrels, 3rd rates 3, 2nd rates 4, 1st rates 5. If a ship is carrying barrels, no less than 2 should be carried in case one doesn't explode. Rates lower than 5th shouldn't need them due to shallow hulls/lack of player use. The barrels could be an upgrade option (non permanent since its only barrels) with each "tier" allowing more barrels than the last (Basic -> Exceptional). Also, a prep time should be included, with the option to drop the barrel early. Dropping the barrel early would increase the "error" range of the fuse, up to 15% greater than a fully prepped barrel. This also opens up the option for a skill, such as decreasing fuse error or lowering the prep time. The purpose of the barrels wouldn't be to act as a main weapon, but as a last resort for defense. ------------------------ Officer Skills ------------------------------------------------------- Officer skills allow us to make our sailing styles a little more unique. Sadly, the skills don't vary enough to keep anyone guessing how an enemy ship will handle in battle. I propose keeping the officer skills, but also adding Captain Skills. Your officer gets 1 "skill" point per rank, with a max of 10 points. The diversity of skill choices to ship choices isn't that great. Captain skills could be implemented to switch that up a bit, make people guess a little more. Captain skills would be attached to the players avatar, not their officer, and would gain a few points at certain rank milestones. The captains skills could include things like cannon trials(reload speed, dispersion,etc...), rigging specialist (Sail rising and yard turn speed, lower damage to sails), shipwright (adds extra bonuses to ships beyond what the regular player makes, use less LH or supplies), boarding training (similar to marines, but for the crew), wind master (adds slight speed bonus to ship), entrepreneur ( better prices in port shops, lower costs for contracts), hull tech (better/faster repairs while at sea or in battle,High enough level allows 2 repairs in battle), shipboard defense (better defense against boarders, defensive only), leadership (adds more overall crew to the crew pool, not to the ship itself). The milestones could be set points between each rank. Each rank could have 2 milestones( current level -> milestone I -> milestone II -> next level), with each milestone giving a certain amount of skill points. Rank 1(Thief) starts with 3 points, milestone I gives 2 points, milestone II gives 1 point, rank 2 (Rascal) gives 3 point, milestone I gives 2 points, milestone II gives 1 point, etc . . . up to rank 10 (Curse) which will give 3 points, but no milestones since it is the highest rank. Having a system like this will make grinding feel more rewarding, while making each player more unique. The skills could be categorized by sailing, crafting, and trading. Having the option to choose a captain skill, without the risk of losing them, would make players feel more connected to the game community. It would also allow specialization of each player, such as a player being a dedicated ship builder, but not having the same sea prowess as a dedicated fighter. This wouldnt negate the "perks" (no longer skills) one would get from their officer. The officer perks would allow everyone to have a baseline set of attributes so they could still do a little of everything. ------------------------ Port Shop ------------------------------------------------------- The port shop needs a little streamlining. If i sell something at the bottom of a list (i.e resources), it sends me back to the top of the list. While it is only a minor inconvenience, that little bit of time adds up to a lot of frustration when trying to sell quickly. The slider when buying/selling is also a pain to use. Using a +1,+5,+10 next to the slider would be helpful. When buying cannons the shop only allows 1 purchase at a time. I think the maximum should be raised to at least 5 when buying. If i want to use the same cannon for bow/stern chasers and broadside, i would like to be able to buy them all at once. With the lag in the system, that can also become frustrating. ------------------------ Warehouse ------------------------------------------------------- The warehouse can become extremely cluttered, and difficult to find something. I know there is an option to show certain types of items, but being able to create my own tabs would be beneficial. Tabs such as "ship build", "future upgrades", or "trade-able goods" would make playing a little less cumbersome. An option to "Show items in shop" would also be appreciated, so i can choose to not see the items in the shop and accidentally sell them. ------------------------ Ship Docks ------------------------------------------------------- Currently we can only have 5 ships docked at a port. I think the maximum should be raised (8-12) through gold purchases. To keep it a little less cluttered, a building (private dockyard) could be built, and each upgrade increase the maximum ships allowed in the port. ------------------------ Clans ------------------------------------------------------- Clan ranks are a big miss when it comes to forming a community . The current system of owner/officer/member seems a bit shallow for a group of people playing together. The ability to have more "ranks" in a clan would give people a view-able goal to strive for, and to show their value to that clan. It can also be set up to allow clan members to be easily recognized of their role (crafter, trader, raider OR Leader,1st mate, 2nd mate, senior crewman, junior crewman, recruit). Having the ability to transport goods from ANY city to the clan warehouse would be nice, or showing on the clan page where the warehouse is located. I appreciate everyone who took the time to read through, and all comments will be appreciated, and discussion is encouraged. Great games are not made. Great games are shaped. Shaped by the ideas of players, and the following discussions. Naval Action has a ton of potential, and i would like to see it become one of the greats. Fair winds and following seas --- Wonderbread O7 Please excuse my lack of observation, I did my best to make sure there are as few grammatical errors as possible.