Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/18/2015 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    The clue of this post is to show where the current gaps in the line-ups are and which ships we suggest to fill those gaps. Currently you are looking at V1.1 In this version the suggested line-up for Denmark has been added! Intro for previous post: The dutch line-up here is the proposed line-up for the danish faction. M: Prindsesse Lovise 1731 12: Ørnen 1800 6-pounders 24: Tranqvebar 1761 4-pounders, 6-pounders 24: Christiansborg 1758 9 pounders 36: Raae 1709 9-pounders, 12 pounders 44: Freia 1819 6-pounders, 32-pounders[C], 18-pounders 66: Prinds Christian Frederik 1804 9-pounders, 18-pounders, 24-pounders 60: Oldenborg 1740 9-pounders, 12-pounders, 24-pounders [Alternative] 74: Danmark 1794 9-pounders, 18-pounders, 36-pounders 70: Norske Løve 1765 9-pounders, 18-pounders, 24-pounders [Alternative] 78: wenden 1703 9-pounders, 18-pounders, 24-pounders [Alternative] 80: Neptunus 1789 12-pounders, 24-pounders, 36-pounders 90: Christian VII 1767 6-pounders, 12-pounders, 18-pounders, 32-pounders 90: Frederik V 1753 6-pounders, 12-pounders, 18-pounders, 32-pounders [Alternative] 94: Dannebroge 1692 6-pounders, 9-pounders, 18-pounders, 24-pounders [Alternative] 90: Christianus VI 1733 6-pounders, 12-pounders, 18-pounders, 24-pounders [Alternative] 110: Fredericus Quartus 1699 4-pounders, 6-pounders, 12-pounders, 18-pounders, 36-pounders Regarding the alternatives: They are famous danish vessels, yet their armament is clearly insufficient to equal a foreign equivalent. Note: In this line-up there is no 50-gunner. Simply due to the lack of plans. Also, the christiansborg carried 12-pounders. These have been changed to 9-pounders in order to fit the line-up. Regarding the suggestions for the dutch, these are currently on hold. Until other lines have been expended more, they will be added. Regarding the danish suggestion, duely noted and incorporated. Regarding the french suggestions, they are planned for the next update! Regarding the reclassification of the Diana, under consideration. Looking for alternatives.
  2. 2 points
    Merely Dutch propaganda....
  3. 1 point
    Neptunus, 80-gun, Danish third-rate Construction Copenhagen Launched 1789 EOS 1807 Dimensions Length 189' 7' (imperial) Breadth 49' 11' Armament LD 30x36-pounders UD 30x24-pounders FC & QD 20x12-pounders Any additional information is much appreciated! *I fully missed to boat on this one, posted the wrong image (the wrong Neptunus, the other one is ariving shortly)- Corrected in edit*
  4. 1 point
    I thought I'd throw this out there.... just to see if I am alone in this, way off the mark or actually onto something. I am talking about the visibility of the damage inflicted on the enemy, and other glues as to their seaworthiness and ability to fight. After watching numerous videos its quite apparent that the visual information on the enemy has a huge impact on the engagement and the tactics employed. I'll say it, I feel uncomfortable with the idea of having such accurate info on my enemy. Surely this brings into play an unrealistic mechanism that removes any element of risk or skill on the part of the Captain fighting the engagement, and his/hers ability to judge whether they are winning by visual clues and hard won experience.... By removing the enemy damage indicator, the Captain would have to rely on his assessment of the enemy ship, its speed, its maneuverability and its visual damage. Whether also its Broadside weight and gunnery is lacking due to damage inflicted. I also note in one engagement that the Captain of 1 ship knew how many repair counts the enemy ship had left and had used!!!! It may be too hardcore but should the damage inflicted be more vague? Your valued thoughts and opinions Gentlemen?
  5. 1 point
    Hey admins, with the recent changes to how AI traders can leave battle (distance of 750+ meters), I was wondering if it would be possible for us to test that system with player ships in the near future. Many ships like the bellepoule, renomee, and many others lack front chasers despite being capable of catching those players, but never will due to the current mechanics. Unless those ships are designed to fit into a team fighting environment I would love to see them be viable in pvp chases if the leaving mechanic was distance based. This would still allow ships with front chasers to have the advantage of being able to chain as they close, while giving ships with rear chasers a chance to use them to slow down their attacker.
  6. 1 point
    Why do Pirates fly the "Jolly Rodger"? The answer is simple, to inspire fear and make capturing a prize more easy. Pirate players don't have a lot of access to the same services that other factions do so the ability to cause fear is really their "Ace in the hole". So a pliable game mechanic to help and separate pirate players from the rest should be the accusation of Different levels of "Fearsome reputation" that equal a very real bonus when boarding. The Ranks could be anything; for example. "Laughable" "Unheard off." "Fearsome" "Terrifying" "Tyrant of the sea" "The Devil Himself" Each level could be allotted it's own flag and boarding bonus. In PvP the players would recognise the different flags and feel different levels of anxiety, or amusement, accordingly. How much bonus Is given in boarding and how it is expressed I leave for the developers and discussion as this is such a powerful tactic already and any changes should be implemented wisely. That being said a fearful reputation is something every pirate should feel is well worth acquiring. So on to bounties, Players should be able to place there own gold as bounties on pirates, The bounties are cumulative, so multiple players can add to the bounty total. If a pirate player is captured via boarding (or sunk- I'll leave that up to discussion) the pirate is "captured and hung". Their reputation is reset to the lowest level and the player or players involved collect the bounty. Needles to say putting a bounty on a low rep pirate is not going to be much of a payback if you suffer at his hands but it may add up to something in the future as he racks up more victims. On the other hand, as a pirate player, having a very fearsome rep will be a useful thing and a source of pride but you are more likely to acquire a price on your head from your irate victims and the bounty hunters to go with it. Problems with this may be pirate players, once they have a decent price on their head, getting together with their friends to arrange a staged fight and collect the gold. To counter this I suggest gaining reputation as really hard work taking a lot of time and effort. This will also balance out that boarding is already a powerful tactic and any bonuses gained outside normal upgrades should be hard won. This way hanging onto his rep will always be worth more than the money to the pirate as it is his bread and butter. Yarrrrr! What be ye thinkin on this?
  7. 1 point
    Diana, 20-gun, Danish sixth-rate Construction Nyholm Dockyard Launched 15.7.1818 Broken up 28.11.1822 Type Corvette Armament MD 20x18-pounders Any additional information is much appreciated! *Current information is from threedecks*
  8. 1 point
    That´s the wrong Neptunus, Steel Your plan shows the Neptunus of 64 guns, built 1749, designed by Barbé, if I remember correctly. Here´s the one that matches your description: Length 189' 7' (imperial) Breadth 49' 11' Launched 1789, wrecked 1807 en route to England Quite an impressive ship with a very nice stern and head, I really like the style of the late 18th century danish designs (until Hohlenberg became fabrikmeister ). By the way, does anyone know how heavy the danish pound was?
  9. 1 point
    Pas besoin de troll / flood sur le forum français.
  10. 1 point
    Stand by. There will be a publically-verifiable method posted soon. It's really not hard, since there's no point being accurate to the last little square inch. Any HP proposal should not take the majority of variable construction techniques into account. Wood type, bulwark thickness and the spacing of scantlings should matter for penetration, not planking HP. All three of these variables are choices that should be open to crafters. Therefore they should not have any HP effects 'baked into' specific ship types. They should only have an effect based on the customization of each in-game vessel.
  11. 1 point
    Which is entirely within the bounds of realism. 160 is an excellent day's run in the trades. 200 puts a big fat grin on the skipper's face, and 90 is somewhere nearer average. Here, for instance, is Renommee making a fine voyage towards Jamaica at quite a respectable pace. If she were sailing in NA at that speed, the distance would have been covered in just under 7 hours of playtime.
  12. 1 point
    Real Life minute. 1 Game Minute is about 0.8 Real Life seconds. Good luck keeping track of that Also, forgot to mention, that the bad thing about not having a large 360 degree compass is that you have to estimate your heading if not on a tick.
  13. 1 point
    arr the captian of the flyingdutchman needs a ship i look for a ship that can be tested and the game i want to help you but you cant puchace the game anymore so i just ask this to a dev on the post before i say testers has drop because other games but i think this is the best game and wanna help you for recomment and recive data to make the game better i hope u have trust in me the royal dutch navy the flyingdutchman
  14. 1 point
    26*18-pounders 10*6-pounders Length p/p: 138' 6' (danish feet) Breadth: 36' 8' Danish 18-pounder frigate concept, this time by R. Phil, dated 1808, not built. Like Hohlenberg´s ships, it has a very narrow stern and a V-shaped hull, not a very common feature for frigates until the 1820s (besides Forfait´s ships and it´s french and british derivates) The text says it´s been designed with the 'nye arimetisk Constructions Methode', which I assume is Chapman´s parabola method.
  15. 1 point
    24*18-pounders 12*6-pounders Length p/p: 137' (danish feet) breadth : 36' 6' Danish frigate project by F. Krabbe, dated 1770, not built. Like Chapman´s big privateers (ANM, plate XXXI, XXXIII), it features an unusually heavy armarment for it´s time (France and England started building the first heavy frigates in the late 1770s/early 1780s). Another interesting particularity is the presence of a flush deck. As with all of Krabbe´s designs, the hull shape shows a substantial french influence.
  16. 1 point
    Storman Danish 4th Rate 44 guns (1703) Her info:http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7650-stormandanish-4th-rate/
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
    I agree as well, as a naval captain you wouldn't sit back and be like "Oh my friend is in danger, however I can't do anything because it's an even fight!" You know what you call people that fight fair? We call them the deceased.
  19. 1 point
    Yea, it is very early in the time line for the game. Could have it uses -- perhaps an escort for slower traders.
  20. 1 point
    This might be a littlebit oftopic but it's this issue that I was thinking of that brought this up in my mind. The main issue in here is really the game itself. What is the purpose of the game? Is the purpose of the game to grind up until you are on the top with top ships? If so then players should be able to deside themselfs what is the best ship to do that grind with. If the game forces player to take "lousy" ships it's only going to be fustrating and make players abandon the game. There also lies a bigger problem. Once you are on the top you loose interest because there is nothing to gain anymore. No then if the purpose of the game is to do something else than to just have the biggest ship. Forexample if there is a complicated diplomacy between the nations that players influence and the main goal is to make your own nation dominate on the game and the for the whole deal to succeed you have to make allyes and play the game of thrones so to speak and the ships, money, trade and the battles are just means to gain resourses to make your nation win then the grind does not really matter does it? Main issue here is that the ships do not have any purpose. If say cutters would be great trading ships. Sheap to by and sail and carry a deasent amount of cargo then people would sail them to trade and make profit. If then again privateers would have big crew for the ship of her size and still fast as hell then pirates would favour Privateer. This would also reguire it to be possible to board with multiple ships at the same time. Also different ships would be easyer to accuire in different parts of the map. In general small ships could be easyer to get and build, sheaper to sail and manage and available in everywhere. Then again big ships like Victory or Santissima would require a special port to build, would cost hell to buy and would only profit if you are going in to a big battle where you have alot to gain like attacking a harbor. Players could get money as a loot only when they capture things. Not from destroying them. Bigger ships bigger gain yes, but not from attacking a small trade vessel. I think that making the grind system harder again this early stage is pointles. There are things that should be implemented in the game first. Just like before when devs wanted to test how loosing a ship would affect players in sea trials. It was pointles then and I still think that implementing things that do not fit in to the current state of the game do not actually give any real infromation on gamemechanics. Make ships reguire food for the crew, planks and cloth for the repairs in the cargo and cannonballs ofcourse. That will already affect the players choise of ships. If you then add missions that the players gain trough their own nation and a system where you can only rank by the succeeding those mission it will also affect the game and make it less fustrating that to have sink ships with certain ships.
  21. 1 point
    A couple of simple thoughts: - make cost (upkeep) a much bigger factor, i.e., ships require a certain amount of goods to stay operational (rum, food, water), and larger ships require a large amount of goods. make larger ships way more expensive, and players will have to be more strategic about how to deploy them. - make speed a much bigger factor, i.e., make it impossible to effectively hunt small pirate/privateer ships with a large frigate or SOL.
  22. 1 point
    Why not mix it? Just as an example (i dont really know how much these distances are in-game^^): less than 600m: no leaving 600m-999m: 5 minute timer 1000m-1199m: 2 minute timer 1200m and above: You can leave any time
  23. 1 point
    I would like to see something like this added. Where you can select the average knots at which the ship has traveled in the top right and then you can move the vector-line in the direction you sailed. Making the line longer would mean longer sailing at e.g. 14 knots for 2 hours 40 minutes. When you change the speed to 8 knots then the line you would get for a travel duration of 2 hours 40 minutes would automatically be shorter. So really, someone only has to change the knots the ship sailed and then point the line in the direction you sailed and adjust its length until you see 2h40m (which is the time you sailed until you changed course )
  24. 1 point
    -Unions Left Flank at Stake- July 2nd. // 15:00 Hold this Ridge at all Cost! A.A.R. // AoP // Determined - II / III Corp's- http://imgur.com/a/3uSK7 ============= Causalities Reflect the Resolve of Both Armies. AoP- 10,418 // ANV- 10,623 ========== Great Fight by the AI!+++ This Battle was a a desperate Affair. I did have my hands full. My Artillery Batteries on my right, and LRT played a pivotal Role with this being a Draw.+++ The ANV Divisions showed great strength of will, trying to push the AoP off of Cemetery Ridge, and Little Round Top! I had no choice I didn't even try to gain Big Round Top. I wanted to delay the First Corp's Division as Long as possible before they could drive into me from the left with there Brigade's. There Artillery was accurate,and murderous throughout the whole line. They were positioned back n well supported!+++ ---- 15:45- General We Need Fitzhugh's Reserve Batteries on the far right. Kershaw/Posey/Mahoney's Brigades are moving up in force! 16:54- General The Rebel's Have mounted a major Push up thru Devil's Den in the Center.Four of our brigades were sent tumbling Back in a rout. -** Harrow's Brigade is in a Desperate Fight with Wilcox n Semmes Brigades,Wofford's Brigade of ~1600 is right behind Wilcox, there is heavy losses. -Longstreet's Brigades Have Gained BRT. Sickles Division is in a Struggle on the Far Left, Burling's Brigade Has been driven Back... 16:55- General, BarksDale is coming thru the Wheat Field he is supported on his right with Perry's Brigade. Quickly YOU must Stop Barksdale n Perry's advance before he reaches Wilcox n Semmes. Shift Hall n Graham Brigade's to their 'Left to meet His forward advance. My God Sir! Madness I say, Madness.''Men Loading firing/screaming wildly in the Melee! Whole Brigades intermingled. The smoke of the weapons, the Din of battle is unbelievable. Men obsessed with Grabbing there fallin colors, being clubbed with muskets, bayoneted, Men being shot, spinning from the impact like tops, n falling never to rise again. 17:20-18:26- General There is a lull in the battle, there is sporadic Battery fire on the right with Light Musket engagements on the far left. We are regrouping/reorganizing all Brigades to move forward,and Forming a Battle line. The far right will hold with the Artillery in support. I fear there will be a new push to LRT from the far Left thru Devil's Den n from Big Round top. 19:00-19:44- General Sykes has pulled his Brigades/Batteries back, n reformed in the area of LRT. The ANV's 1st. Corps Brigades did n try n make a fight but at this time. Both armies are pretty well played out. Nothing Gained for the ANV, but the blood letting, n losses were heavy for both Combatants. ============================================= About the Picture with this AAR: With leveled bayonets and at maximum forward speed, 262 Minnesotans attack Wilcox's 1,600 Alabamians on July 2, 1863, at Gettysburg. Painting by Don Troiani. ----------------- ** Note---- The First Minnesota Volunteer Infantry Regiment(Maj. William J. Colvill, Jr. 'Commanding)belonged to the -- II Corp's> 2nd. Division> 1st. Brigade of ** BGen William Harrow. At a pivotal moment in the 1863 struggle at Gettysburg, Major General Winfield Scott Hancock, commander of II Corps, ordered the First Minnesota to charge into a situation where it would be outnumbered by at least 5 to 1. The general's purpose was to buy minutes of delay with human lives, and one survivor spoke afterward that he expected the advance to result in "death or wounds to [every single one of the attackers.] The regiment fully and instantly obeyed the order, suffering at least 82% casualties among those making the attack; this action contributed significantly to the preservation of a key Union defensive position on the heights of Cemetery Ridge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Minnesota_Volunteer_Infantry The regiment is best known for the dramatic charge at the battle of Gettysburg. On the evening of July 2, 1863 the regiment attacked Wilcox's Alabama Brigade as it was preparing for the final push to break the Union line. Confederate General Wilcox stated in his report, "This stronghold of the enemy, together with his batteries, were almost won, when still another line of infantry descended the slope in our front at a double-quick, to the support of their fleeing comrades and for the defense of the batteries." The line of infantry was the First Minnesota. They crossed over 200 yards of open ground and charged the Confederates in spite of five to one odds. The rebels recovered and in five minutes killed or wounded over 170 of the 300 plus men. The survivors did not panic but fell back to their original position and rallied around the remnant of the flag waiting for a counterattack that did not come. http://www.1stminnesota.net/
  25. 1 point
    We will post here if we switch off servers deliberately
×