Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Fluffy Fishy

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Fluffy Fishy last won the day on August 26

Fluffy Fishy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,232 Excellent


About Fluffy Fishy

  • Rank
  • Birthday July 19

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    : La Arsenale di Venezia
  • Interests
    Venetian History, Maritime History, Martial Arts, Watersports

Recent Profile Visitors

1,925 profile views
  1. Fluffy Fishy

    Crafters Need quality control

    I miss the old system, sure it had faults but you could basically craft what you wanted in the way you wanted it. Players should be able to craft and sail the ship that suits them most. I'd happily do away with the RNG and just have flat ships so everyone is equal and it becomes more skill based again. The current system that relies too much on giving your ship the best bonuses you can stinks and destroys balance because changing a ships stats up to around 30% is near impossible to balance properly. It would be cool to see some kind of system of diminishing returns going on where it becomes increasingly expensive to create a marginally better ship, and as the more you squeeze out of it the lower the gains but it should be controlled by the crafter, giving a proper sense of quality vs quantity that was there historically. Crafting notes kind of made sense, to make them work better they just needed to be non tradable so you were forced to make them yourself and spend hours on making them, the idea that you can spend more hours on a ship to make it better makes total sense in a MMO world, and if you stagger them by saying something like 0 notes for a basic ship, 2 notes for green, 5 notes for blue, 10 notes for purple and 16 notes for gold it would probably balance fairly well, you'd have access to the ships you wanted. One of the main issues with the game economy right now is its missing equilibriums and consumer surplus, it would benefit the game so much to allow players to make more market lead choices as they do in real life, crafting needs these aspects to be a fulfilling task, rather than what it is at the moment which is just asymmetrical RNG favouring middle of nowhere ports, ports that take you away from the community and make the experience more grind ridden as a whole and therefore the game experience worse, in the hope it promotes RVR, which it doesn't.
  2. Fluffy Fishy

    Naval Action Meme collection

  3. Fluffy Fishy

    Bring boarding to a new level

    The first points you make about rifles being new contradict what you said in the last post, you even contradict yourself a little in the first 2 paragraphs of this post. Elite rifle units have been around as long as rifles so no they weren't a particularly new concept to infantry at all, for the most part the use of rifles as a percentage of army composition didn't even raise a significant amount during the period the game is set either, sure there were more riflemen but there were more everything and considering quite a few major and successful military nations didn't bother using rifles because they were unconvinced of the benefits even for skirmishing it kind of brings home the point and generally the use of rifles in battle is romanticised and blown massively out of proportion because they had rather limited advantages over muskets. Marines sometimes were and sometimes weren't drawn from regular infantry, it depended entirely on how the commissioned officers decided to recruit their men which was an entirely devolved process and they were drilled to be able to act effectively in their roles at sea, sea service muskets weren't less accurate than land patterns, they did however have slightly less stopping power but only when splitting hairs. Marines served all over the ship, they were stationed in the rigging, the fighting tops and all fighting decks, it was important to station marines on the gun decks so as to deal with men climbing through gunports during boarding but also offer some small fire support during gun reloads. Smoothbore weapons aren't wholly inaccurate, no one would call modern battle tanks inaccurate, they almost unanimously carry smooth bore turrets, taking it back to shotguns, you actually see fairly limited accuracy improvement using a slug from a rifled shotgun vs a smoothbore shotgun, the same goes for rifled and non rifled slugs when fired from a smoothbore weapon, taking this back historically when precision engineering was much less refined this difference only becomes more marginal. Rifles only start to get significant advantages over smoothbore with better engineering and the invention of the minie ball, the traditional 18th century system of patching rifled muskets with leather or cloth giving limited advantage over typical smoothbore and generally only useful for light infantry type roles. Ships wouldn't fire guns all at once or many at all really, you simply wouldn't see 20-50 guns firing at once, typically around 2-5 would fire in the opening broadside but then guns would fire as loaded plus the system of ropes and tackle would absorb the vast majority of the recoil, leaving the ship as a stable firing platform, which was essential considering the small angles of roll and heel associated with large ships, especially ships of the line. Marines would learn to move with the ship, waves follow a distinct pattern meaning the ship would too, which for the most part you can account for just like with breathing. The reason officers walked around the ship during combat was because it was their job, they had to lead and command the crew, and for the most part the officers doing the majority of the legwork are the low ranking midshipmen and lieutenants. if you have ever read an account of Nelson Trafalgar the Victorys senior staff all chastised Nelson for his presence on deck and his example proves that it was entirely viable and historical for shooters in the rigging to provide accurate fire onto decks at long ranges, made even more to the point by the fact the French didn't use rifles. Pistols weren't inaccurate at 5ft, sorry but that's just nuts, typical pistol accuracy of the era was 5-8m depending on the design and length of barrel, typical sea service pistols were accurate to around the 6m mark. Duels had a fairly high survival rate from design, they typically agreed 5-10 paces, meaning both combatants would take at least 5 paces so 10 overall, roughly equivalent to 7.5m or 15m at 10 paces at the edge of the accurate range of the pistols. Muskets aren't short range weapons, by no means are they long range but calling them short is just propagating the typical myth of them being short and inaccurate, which they weren't. Aiming wasn't really done, again another myth, presenting is not aiming and this is something that is probably the fault of hollywood and friends, this is something probably better explained with land warfare than sea, you wouldn't aim at someone or something you would present your musket to the face of the enemy fire and reload, you don't aim because it one slows down combat, two tires the combatant and three disrupts unit cohesion. The concept of aiming was so alien to to the typical soldier of the era it was considered barbaric, with the most notable example being Ferguson not shooting Washington in 1777 because aiming at a man in such manner was considered vulgar, its something still seen today with typical soldiers finding it incredibly difficult to aim at another human and typically fire low or high.
  4. Fluffy Fishy

    Bring boarding to a new level

    This isn't really true, the accuracy of muskets is grossly under represented. Hitting a target at 100m wasn't too difficult and an experienced soldier could do it with a good degree of success. The general recorded incidents of a platoon fire hitting nothing come either from after the battlefield is covered in smoke or more often from when an inexperienced officer misjudged range and told their men to shoot far too early. Muskets were not inaccurate weapons, if they were they wouldn't have been adopted so universally as they were. Rifles weren't a new technology in the 1700s either, rifling had been around since the late 15th century, there are some really fantastic and ornate examples of early 16th century rifles in museums mainly across northern Italy and Southern Germany. They were however quite expensive to make and only a few nations properly maintained their rifling technology because it wasn't too beneficial over standard smooth bore weapons for the cost involved, something that was only really started to be seen in the 19th century. Ship rolling doesn't create a particular problem for small arms, its main issues come for larger guns, it just takes a different approach to firing, something marines were fairly well trained in during the time and shots were often taken successfully from around the 120m distance. Going back to volley fire as a concept and how it was used it was more a doctrinal thing that was to do with preserving energy for prolonged engagement. Soldiers were taught to present rather than aim, as it was seen as beneficial to the long game due to the weight of the muskets themselves, aiming with heavy 18th century weapons meant tiring men too quickly leaving them vulnerable to sustained fighting which lead to the weapon not being the inaccurate part, but the technique itself preferring longer combat with faster shooting, which lead to the misconception of muskets being particularly inaccurate.
  5. Fluffy Fishy

    Bring boarding to a new level

    Muskets still have decent accuracy at 100m, potshots taken at men in the rigging would be quite effective, plus the amount of ammunition a ship would carry would be plenty enough to support this kind of fire. Ships opened musket fire a little bit beyond 100m when in naval combat but its rare ships would fight prolonged at that kind of distance anyway, they needed to close the gap much more to make their gun batteries accurate in all but the calmest seas. There are some fairly good musket range shooting demonstrations on youtube if you want to look which clearly show typical musket calibre being able to hit about 50% of the time at 100m, although these shooting vids are aimed shots, which wouldn't be so typical of the era. I will leave a nice quality vid in the spoiler below
  6. Would it not be better to create some kind of boarding curve where speed is a larger influence on what you can and can't board say a system like this: 8kn - 0.5 difference 7kn - 0.75kn difference 6kn - 1kn difference 5kn - 1.25kn difference 4kn - 1.5kn difference 3kn - 2kn difference 2kn - 2.5kn difference 1kn - 3kn difference 0kn - 3.5kn difference Giving a curve to the numbers would mean more need to match speed, it would also take away some of the madness of the idea where a ship going 8kn could pull a ship going 4kn as the current numbers of the notes state. 4kns difference would do catastrophic damage to the ships and their rigging should they decide to pull each other in as has been pointed out earlier in the thread.
  7. I think there would be a fair amount of publicity if she went to sea during the middle of her most recent restoration work as she would have been at the bottom of Boston harbour. They stripped away the planking and caulking to the point she was no longer watertight to conduct major structural work to stop her collapsing in on herself under her own weight. It was a complex and intricate repair job that required her to be in dry dock for a long period of time so as to be done properly, famously making HMS Trincomalee the oldest floating warship in the world for the entirety of the 2 year period the repairs took place over before her recent refloating last year. By all means share these youtube videos though. Here is an article from the navy times that briefly discusses her refloat announcement https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/04/05/uss-constitution-to-return-to-water-after-latest-restoration/ Here is the museum blog which contains some detailed step by step information of her restoration (you do have to click "+ load more" a few of times though to get the whole 2015-17 period) https://ussconstitutionmuseum.org/blog/ You mean the British admiralty? The same period where they appointed people like Robert Seppings to important positions and adopted some of the most significant changes and adaptions to ship design of the entire age of sail era, The Napoleonic era spurring forward one of the most innovative periods of naval development and pathed the way to the end of the age of sail in its entirety as Britain invested in its wooden walls.
  8. I'm very aware of the concept, never tried it for a historic ship though, it has always seemed to me as something far more useful for modern steel built ships. Do you or does anyone here have a figure more appropriate for wooden warships by chance?
  9. That is very interesting, I have long had suspicions that the 13kn often stated as constitution's top speed was rather dubious, I'm also interested to know if the 12-13kn quotations are her flying studdings too. I just struggle to beleive a ship built as heavily as she is with such weighty woods would be nearly as spritely as people often beleive her to be, especially considering how much mass she had in the water, sadly however I haven't seen data either way to confirm or deny my suspicions. I have however seen quite a few reports looking at her and her two sisters disappointing speed and handling during their first years of sailing and how much work went into improvong both these characteristics. The more I look into her performance and architecture the more i doubt her status as a frigate at all and the more she looks like a new breed of 50 gun ship with more modern dimensions ironing out some of the flaws of the old 50s similarly as do the ships who follow her style into the 19th century.
  10. Fluffy Fishy

    Classic Connie--Your Killing Us Here!

    Not especially, her sister ships all made 14kn, she just had something weird going on that no one understood enough about physics to understand during her lifetime.
  11. Fluffy Fishy

    Classic Connie--Your Killing Us Here!

    That's not true it's too heavy, you get a stiff structure but the sailing qualities are harmed in general due to the fact there is so much weight in the hull rather than the ballast, raising the centre of mass of the ship ironically giving a more tender performance than a stiff one. The change speed change of using live oak in any ship is one that makes perfect sense, they should also heel more.
  12. Fluffy Fishy

    Classic Connie--Your Killing Us Here!

    Do I have to? There is already so much wrong with this thread surely there must be some old threads you can quote from. The summary is most of what we "know" about connie is propaganda and that when president (the finest ship of the class) was captured by the British they were less than impressed by her.
  13. Fluffy Fishy

    Le Requin Testing and Feedback

    That is kind of historically accurate, but not for the reasons it should be. History shows us that xebecs are the answer to xebecs thanks to their incredible light construction and fantastic sailing profile giving them a massive edge over more traditional patrol ships, not because they are worthwhile navy vessels. They are perfect for disrupting trade and general raiding, especially in lighter winded areas but dreadful in actual combat. A Requin being a solution to a Requin isn't a bad thing if its done right, but right now with their unhistorical thick hulls and reasonable HPs its poorly set up both for game balance and history.
  14. Fluffy Fishy

    Storm weather in port battles?

    Can we make it so storms also appear more frequently in the areas of the map that are most prone to storms for example the Venezuelan coast os pretty famous for having something like 1/3 of the worlds lightning strikes. It would also be pretty cool to see more weather affecting ships properly, for example heavy weather meaning you can't use the main gun deck on some of the larger ships like bucentuare and the first rates.