Demasting too easy?

[Kloothommel]

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.

[Cmdr RideZ]

4 hours ago, Tac said:

I am simply stating that in most of the battles i face it is the de-masting that is deciding the battles and little else and therefore for me de-masting at the moment is to powerful,not sure what the rest of your post is about tbh in regards to mine.

I like to keep things simple.

I went a bit off topic here, and will go a bit more...  There are plenty of players who wanted to have even weaker masts than we had before the wipe.  So now we got those.

Plenty of players who want to just shoot masts, and that is about all they want to do.

They had to make chains to cause high damage, as masts are ultra weak.  Just so that those would have some use.  Still everyone is shooting masts as that is so easy at the moment.  Just changing your ammunition type to chain is probably too much for some guys.

If you suggest something else than massive rake damage or mast sniping/raking, this community gives pretty strong no for that.  At some point we had insane rake damage, and there were some calling that out.  Most of our community said that it is freaking awesome now, just about perfect.  A day or two later it was noticed that one cannon ball was able to kill 80 crew.  They nerfed as it was clearly way too much.  After that it was once again perfect, just about right for our community.  It was nerfed again, and...  And again...  But after every time it was perfect for our community members.

So people who asked nerf for masts, and before this that insane crew damage.  Please can you stop destroying our combat mechanism.  Stop asking devs to implement your clearly bad ideas.  And devs really could have some kind of idea how things are, so we do not have to test shit like this again.

[Guest]

12 hours ago, The Red Duke said:

For the roots it seems always under 250m needed - in some situations 50m for best results. For the top sections, for sure the 500m range can do depending on the weight of shot.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Been hunting Ingermanland AI (trying to figure out how to get the elusive BPs) and demasting them at the base at 300-500m. Granted, the Indy's guns pack a wallop, so maybe it's a caliber thing.

[Fellvred]

11 hours ago, OneEyedSnake said:

If anyone goes and looks up age of sail battle photos. You'll notice that many ships are missing masts. In my opinions masts are not easy enough to tear apart yet. At full sail if they get hit at all they should fall over. Give battle sails a purpose..

One idea could be to turn battle sails into a toggle similar to the brace command, with a cooldown. This could be an abstract way of getting the ship ready for combat and making the rigging less vulnerable. Thickness and hp of the 'mast' (not including topsails?) would be increased  but speed, turning and control would be greatly decreased. Any demasting would need to be a concerted effort rather than the one of two broadsides we're seeing at the moment.

It could create some interesting tactical choices and again increase the importance of the wind and positioning.

[The Wren]

Simply have the guns shoot where they are actually aiming at in relation to the heave and roll of the ship. In real life the guns are scattered all over the place if in heaving swells. Aiming and taking single snipes at the crows nest is ridiculous. I'm not a sailing engineer but from what I understand that most real life demastings probably were the result of using chain to tear away the supporting standing rigging. Masts were not permanently rigidly installed. They were set into the keel in a socket and were adjustable with the standing and running rigging. They move and were under a lot of strain to set them at specific angles based on sailing conditions. The main mast for the Constitution for example had three sections. The lower section is one huge mast that goes from the keel right up to the first crows nest. This is a monster of a mast and to have it snap off at the deck is ridiculous. Shooting away its supporting rigging would affect it but would hardly cause a failure since its massive weight is going to keep it basically in place. The middle and upper sections were the most vulnerable since the rigging was extremely important to support them. Tear away their supporting rigging and the loss of support would then allow the weight of the masts themselves and the forces that the sails were applying to them to essentially tear themselves apart.

In the game, throwing a full broadside of cannonballs at the center crows nest should result in a few lucky mast hits. But right now sniping and hitting every time with a long cannon is extremely unrealistic and in my opinion is a severely flawed game mechanic that many people are taking advantage of. 

[maturin]

Quote

This is a monster of a mast and to have it snap off at the deck is ridiculous.

Happened all the time.

[The Wren]

2 hours ago, maturin said:

Happened all the time.

I beg to differ. Topgallants came down and made a general mess of the deck but total annihilation of the main mast was much rarer and it wasn't the result of a few sniped 9 pound cannonballs. Most severe dismastings were the results of storms and collisions.

[maturin]

28 minutes ago, The Wren said:

I beg to differ. Topgallants came down and made a general mess of the deck but total annihilation of the main mast was much rarer and it wasn't the result of a few sniped 9 pound cannonballs. Most severe dismastings were the results of storms and collisions.

You really need to look at some paintings.

Even frigate duels often resulted in dismasting.

I have read a few references to lower masts withstanding multiple shot "through" them, but never so much as the 8-10 hits required by NA.

We can safely assume that loss of lower masts was usually accompanied by shredded shrouds and stays from other shot.

[ajffighter86]

I wonder if cannon accuracy is more of the issue than the strength of the masts. I think the strength of the mast is about right as it is in the game, especially with multiple repairs available.

I also agree that there should be some strategic benefit to using battle sails.

Edited June 12, 2017 by ajffighter86

[Kloothommel]

The main issue is that demasting seems to be the ONLY tactic in ow. That's my problem with the current setup.

[Hethwill]

6 minutes ago, Cornelis Tromp said:

The main issue is that demasting seems to be the ONLY tactic in ow. That's my problem with the current setup.

Messing up the rigging has always been a favourite tactic.

But before we had murder 4 pounders snapping Essex masts from 1000m or more away and ultra powerful and accurate grouping of chain shot.

Is our collective memory this short ?

[Kloothommel]

29 minutes ago, The Red Duke said:

Messing up the rigging has always been a favourite tactic.

But before we had murder 4 pounders snapping Essex masts from 1000m or more away and ultra powerful and accurate grouping of chain shot.

Is our collective memory this short ?

It isn't. But I miss actuall shooting hull instead of getting lucky and hitting the masts first because I got lucky and got the most accuracy mods/skills/books. See the problem there?

 

[Hethwill]

You can. and you will melt it while they snap your mast. You will repair the rigging better than they will repair hull.

[maturin]

1 hour ago, ajffighter86 said:

I think the strength of the mast is about right as it is in the game, especially with multiple repairs available.

About right from a gameplay perspective, of course.

The masts are a lot stronger than in reality. Maintopgallant mast on a 24-gun ship is only 7.5 inches in diameter. Obviously a single hit with a 5-inch ball is going to smash it to splinters, but you would need multiple hits in-game.

[The Wren]

1 hour ago, maturin said:

About right from a gameplay perspective, of course.

The masts are a lot stronger than in reality. Maintopgallant mast on a 24-gun ship is only 7.5 inches in diameter. Obviously a single hit with a 5-inch ball is going to smash it to splinters, but you would need multiple hits in-game.

I agree on this much. The main problem is that the cannons can hit that 7.5 inch mast with dead on accuracy and that is ridiculous. Using a cannon on a moving ship to hit a 7.5 inch mast that is at least 30 yards away and on another moving ship is a lucky shot at best. An entire 12 ball broadside which results in one or two lucky mast hits would be more understandable.

[Kloothommel]

29 minutes ago, The Wren said:

I agree on this much. The main problem is that the cannons can hit that 7.5 inch mast with dead on accuracy and that is ridiculous. Using a cannon on a moving ship to hit a 7.5 inch mast that is at least 30 yards away and on another moving ship is a lucky shot at best. An entire 12 ball broadside which results in one or two lucky mast hits would be more understandable.

Smoothbore cannon, round and unstabilised projectiles. Mastshooting should be lucky, not default.

[maturin]

29 minutes ago, Cornelis Tromp said:

Smoothbore cannon, round and unstabilised projectiles. Mastshooting should be lucky, not default.

Most mast shooting is done with entire broadsides, not ranging shots. Which means you can't affect the accuracy there without totally resetting the most basic feature in the game and taking three big steps towards simulator territory.

[The Wren]

11 hours ago, maturin said:

Most mast shooting is done with entire broadsides, not ranging shots. Which means you can't affect the accuracy there without totally resetting the most basic feature in the game and taking three big steps towards simulator territory.

Do you mean that most mast shooting is done with broadsides in the game or in real life? There are tons of snipers in the game, I've personally met a few in OW. Just look at LiquidCitys videos on YouTube. He is deadly as hell and drops masts almost at will with very few shots. The way the game is balanced right now, if you run into one of these snipers the battle is already over. I got tagged off Beaufort last week, we were both in Surprises, I managed to outsail the Pirate and removed all of his rear armor and was raking him getting cannons and crew. Damaged one of his sides pretty good too. I made a bad tack and he was able to snipe my main mast severely crippling me. As that was being repaired he took the mizzen mast. With the repair cool down I was now stuck and he took the foremast as I could no longer maneuver with any authority.  Needless to say he then positioned himself off my stern quarter and started to destroy my stern armor. Rather than sit there watching him slaughter my crew before finally boarding me I just surrendered and gave him the ship. After the fight I was a little pissed off, not because I lost the fight (I've done that plenty of times ) I was pissed because I lost to a bad game mechanic that this guy was crafty enough to take advantage of. I was beaten by a technique not talent.

As far as taking big steps towards simulator territory, the Devs seem torn as what their vision of this game is. Sometimes they lean towards historical accuracy and sometimes they lean toward arcade game play. There is a bit of design schizophrenia going on here.

Don't take this as a rant. I am venting just a little bit. This has been a good thread and I think that we are all on the same page in that we all really like this game and want to see it do well. There are just a bunch of wrinkles to iron out in order to get there.

Cheers!

 

[ajffighter86]

It's now easier to dismast a ship with raking ball than it is to actually shoot the mast. There doesn't seem to be much middle ground with the developers. Either you buff things to the point of being downright silly, or pour on the weak-sauce.

Cannons are already starting to feel like pop-guns and paint-scratchers again, and I'm concerned what will happen when people start putting mast-boosting refits on their ships.

One of the reasons I came back is due to the new damage model making cannons feel powerful again. Sad to see we're back-tracking already.

Edited June 14, 2017 by ajffighter86

[ironhammer500]

2 hours ago, ajffighter86 said:

It's now easier to dismast a ship with raking ball than it is to actually shoot the mast. There doesn't seem to be much middle ground with the developers. Either you buff things to the point of being downright silly, or pour on the weak-sauce.

Cannons are already starting to feel like pop-guns and paint-scratchers again, and I'm concerned what will happen when people start putting mast-boosting refits on their ships.

One of the reasons I came back is due to the new damage model making cannons feel powerful again. Sad to see we're back-tracking already.

Do you really want to go back to where ships sank in like 5 mins after being hit? Where a single broadside  took half ur hp...no thanks i prefer the longer drawn out fights, just wish there was more rewards to a long drawn out epic battle, then a quick easy battle.

[ajffighter86]

1 hour ago, ironhammer500 said:

Do you really want to go back to where ships sank in like 5 mins after being hit? Where a single broadside  took half ur hp...no thanks i prefer the longer drawn out fights, just wish there was more rewards to a long drawn out epic battle, then a quick easy battle.

There's a difference between long-and-drawn-out fights and indestructible. We already brought back multiple repairs. ok, fine, it's a money sink I suppose. But multiple repairs + masts that take no damage due to their thickness out-matching all but the heaviest of cannons seems to be pointing us back to the pre-wipe ironclads that so many people got disgusted with.

[ironhammer500]

2 hours ago, ajffighter86 said:

There's a difference between long-and-drawn-out fights and indestructible. We already brought back multiple repairs. ok, fine, it's a money sink I suppose. But multiple repairs + masts that take no damage due to their thickness out-matching all but the heaviest of cannons seems to be pointing us back to the pre-wipe ironclads that so many people got disgusted with.

But do you remember the days when you could just put 10 leaks easy into a Live oak ship and instantly sink it in like 2-3 mins? Or just ram it and they instant sink.

 

Well those times sucked and for one of those who advocates hardcore gameplay, yet you want easy mode battles? I find a good battle should be 30mins long, should keep you on the edge of your seat and always make you think, even if you lost you come away thinking man that was a fight.

Not oh im sunk in 5 mins how boring.

Edited June 14, 2017 by ironhammer500

[Blackjack Morgan]

Just get rid of multiple repair kits....we had them before in the past and they were not a good idea. I wouldn't even be opposed to getting rid of them all together but I guess they do lend themselves to some tactical decision making. However, having multiple repair kits Is just miserable....