Jan van Santen

Hello Felix, as per usual a minor remark to your great work: Since ship compare "permanent" lists Cole pump, shouldnt Kitt's pump be there, too ?

Hi Felix, as frequent user of your map I noticed yesterday that the PvE map is blank. All I see is the background, no ports, nothing else. At the same time war server map works as iusual

confirmed for pirate hostility at North Inlet, August, 9th, 20.++ map time

Here is the full experiment (German) and it shows that a cannonball did not penetrate lo/wo even at a 15 distance (starts at 30 mins) https://www.zdf.de/dokumentation/terra-x/die-korsaren-freibeuter-der-meere-100.html

Actually even a 6 pounder didnt penetrate a lo/wo hull, even below 100 m. The docu used a 6 pdr shot against a model of the "Constitution" hull. wo would be penetrated, lo/wo would not. The experiment was done for "Master and Commander- The true story" docu. I cant access the actual docu atm, but the experiment can also be seen here, around 7:50

Once more time to answer to an "exploit" call of yours with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_exploit In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, speed or level design etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers. Tldr: since devs recently installed a mechanism to teleport to a port battle itself, we are pretty safe to assume that teleporting to a hostility is intended and thus no exploit....

i used the status quo, current values. Checked on na map and in shipyard.

Only issue i see with this is PvE server. As non consensual PvP is strictly not wanted there, the feature would have to be PvP server only.

rangoon/rangoon India base speed 12.38 fir/fir India 12.01 same as with locust, they will be worthless after next patch, current spreadsheet seems to suggest new england fir will be the new trader wood....

Access is not an issue on PvE. While historically correct, the question remains: should it be an issue on PvP ? My suggestion would be (if Devs want to stick with spawn in ports only...) to give all of the rare woods 1 spawn in a free port. Eg: African tk now is: Willemstad, Oranjestad and Fort Baai. Instead: Willemstad, Oranjestad and Aves. (Ofc I still think the ways proposed earlier are better: drop from loot, chests, event....) The "free port spawn" could even generate more action on PvP server imo.

Why not teak style ? Fir ok fast Fir (s) great faster Rare Firs super fast but rare ?

your best choice is netlify's ship comparison (once the devs have finished hotfixing) https://na-map.netlify.app you could also use the devs own spreadsheet, but thats to confuddled for good old crafting me.... https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mM1LEvwbt1tXOudiDUpTsT97wum_DvZDEs-S1YrkVBw/edit?pli=1#gid=1878153524

Following the vids on https://sampsonboat.co.uk about restoring a historic 48 ft/14.6m (LOA) race cutter will quickly rid you of that view: If you want a top quality wooden ship and have a choice of the best materials, still today you use seasoned live oak and seasoned white oak for frame and planks. Other woods are used in special parts of the ship only, teak eg for deck planks. Zjere are several episodes in the video series where the shipwright takes care to pick the best woods and explains his choices. Also this ship won the Fastnet regatta, being one of only 2 out of 15 ships actually reaching the finish....which goes to show that lo(s) /wo(s) doesnt historically mean "slow" but it meant tough.... Same as the oak built Endymion was faster than her pine (fir) sister ships... Building a ship from tk entirely was limited to shipyards in regions that had plenty of tk but none of the better woods.

Not iirc. I did eg point you to the fact that cargo for cargo missions should not have zero weight as it had on testbed. You still brought it to live patch with zero weight ...and later had to fix it bec it led to an exploit like mechanics of clans stockpileing missions. Also i am sure players could have pointed you to the flaws of the timber patch after testing on testbed. But ofc its your choice whats the greater problem and your call what takes more work. In the end I think testing patches on live server is detrimental for the games reputation, its reviews...and its sales.

What's got "timber stats for next week" to do with exploit fixing ? And where did players complain about exploit fixing ? On the contrary, it was players pointing to what needed to be fixed several times after that half-ready patch was released. Speaking for myself only, and pointing a) to a thing that could easily have been fixed by testing the patch before going live and b) to the fact that several other posters had to point the devs to similar flaws of this patch: