Hethwill

Good manners doesn't imply duels. Nor duels imply good manners. In truth good manners are and should be always the norm. Best of luck in your endeavours. The gaming world surely needs them.

Is not, that's why i gave my opinion on the opinions Statistic prove no one right and everyone wrong bothers me that the thread gets cluttered with "nay saying"

Not only after but actually during the era. Officers and enlisted men had to go through a "barracks ship" to get accustomed to the place, drills, space, routines, etc before setting on a cruise, no matter how short. Also many post Napoleon I wars RN men did serve their first commissions aboard the Victory at anchor, and other similar hulks. Simulating gunnery ( no powder, just the drills ), etc. Very cool photo.

let @qw569😳 do his statistics and don't be a hooligan transforming his thread into a "statistics prove me right!!!!" discussion. GJ m8 thanks for the data.

I know.

And yet not a single gun over 6 pounds recovered from the wreck with majority ranging from half pound to 2 pounds. ( given nominal 40 guns, 28 recovered iirc, let's keep believing she was a big gun monster )

Lighter shot loses speed faster even with equivalent suggested charge of 1/3 weight. Further. Drop due do gravity is exponential. Batteries did sight "flat" at roughly 1º40', not zero, to make up for the initial drop. Roughly 3-4 feet in the first 200m ( actually 195, 100 toises), rises to 20-23 by 400m (390m 200 toises). ( Boudriot ) Majority of gunnery tests conducted on land or stable ramps. Zero continuous roll. Point blank for a 8 livres would be 500m. This is just trajectory and reach, nothing to do speed/energy carried ( which ship composite construction does help to dissipate, is not a slab of steel ).

Maybe i explained myself wrong. When attempting to make a specific mechanic credible in game in regard to RL ( leaving other mechanics untouched leads to odd results ) as opposed to make all mechanics work together as credible as possible ( if changing one aspect, it replicates equally to all others ). NA is not a simulator, i get that.

That statement is not even close to reality. Damage to rig is present in absolutely every single naval engagement. From the ones that lasted 15 minutes with rigging getting blasted and masts falling overboard, to the ones that lasted 4 hours and more and seeing majority of ships with masts lost. One common factor across is that somehow for some reason the mizzen seems to always be the one that falls first. Just for the sake of anedocte, HMS Quebec battle against the Surveillante. Both ships ended with no masts whatsoever after an engagement that lasted some 3 hours ( is never non stop, there's lulls in battle, ships move away to repair etc, RL is not a game ) Now, let's get back to the game and talk about game. Timespace scale is 4x faster that RL in battle. Means we can accurately simulate 1 hour of battle in 15 minutes, and battle of 4 hours in 1. Is the damage that dramatic when seen at that scale ? Not a good thing to be dismasted in the first broadside ( note: if it happened IRL it should be able to happen in game ) but also not good to have invulnerabilities. I'd argue that modules and books stacking promote a specialization in dismasting, but all i read is suggestions focusing on touching HP and thickness and whatnot rather than - remove excess %% from books/modules to make marginal gains. I'd also argue that the gun batteries are stabilized with little to no dispersion connected to natural roll of ships, as we can keep the aim point steady. Game balance must simulate realism as a whole, not nitpick what fits. IMO

Not about size nor rate. About rig and wind.

All fine, especially with the effective ranges, contemporary gunnery tables are all fact in themselves and there's not "the one" that is absolute fact above all others, in which the others may present slightly different values, so the reasonable average for the game seems good. The ship as gunnery platform is intimately tied with positioning relative to - wind and opponent - as long as we can sail a 74 gun ship fast and beating ( 74 as reference, but applies to all ), the indirect effect to the gunnery is improved. Ship can sail and shoot from and to, almost to the eye of the wind and can wear back fast enough to make up for another reload cycle without pause. Happens too fast. Would enjoy a thoroughly review of all rigging type capabilities to be more approximate to real angles and speed. If a rig cannot beat beyond 60º... so be it. On a sidenote, related to the subject, added another study book to library.

Ship structures under sail and under gunfire by Prof. Francisco Fernández-González Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Navales Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Yes sir, but in game "deck height" makes difference, guess compromises is the word. There's a Module in game called Improved Mast Tops, specifically for use of musketry. I mean, musketry at sea at this time wasn't so different from bowmen during the transition of the late 16th century. Popinjay shooting remained and remains a specific drill born out of the need for use of shooting at sea. Specialised naval infantry could fight in land with regular performance, but land infantry would never get as good as purpose drilled naval men. One could argue that maybe Marines should be better in game, at firepower muskets, but i'd say it is actually the "non marine" crew that is too good. Marines are okay. One could argue "sniping" an admiral is a feat. I'd say is more a chance of luck and God know how many shot missed, but all that counts is the one that hits.

Deck heights difference does. Say a 1 deck ship to a 2 decker will suffer penalties. So on and so forth.

Esta discusión ha alcanzado su cenit y ahora va cuesta abajo muy, muy rápido. Cerrado.

Ah ! That depends on what the LGV has. Enemy ship might have Barricades and you won't know as it isn't a module.

You must read the text. Your orders are clear. I hope you read all the text, but in sum... Damage enemy ships. Reach port.

Was the entire point but at least I know it.

Sounds about okay Say 100 marines muskets, firing one volley... by RL statistics i'd say 16% hits is pretty darn good... even for Danish or United States navies marines standards in 1812... 😮 ( considered the best at that point in time ). Given you have accuracy bonus from shooting book i'd guess one can accept the increased perfect shots. Napoleonic wars ratio of shots per kill is 1:250 / 1:300 depending on which engagement you look at. Shooting at sea is very different from shooting in land, even the drills are different. For a GAMIFICATION of reality i'd say is pretty darn good.

You need specialized naval infantry, marines, whatever, to have the best drill with muskets. Add Marines books, try with Marines 5, then Marines 10, then Marines 15, with the same amount of Muskets and reply with the amount of kills. Much appreciated.

During BATTLE - Guns repair proposal Guns are repaired during Hull repairs Given the %% of Hull that can be repaired, technically in some situations it will bring back a ship from the dead to fairly "full" condition after two cycles with full guns. ------ My proposal is to NOT include Guns in the repair cycles. Any gun lost during the combat stays lost. Serves as balance for the repair mechanic. Very long battles will see vessels reduced to token batteries. This is proper. Very short battles reliant on repair books and modules will still be fierce and contested. Gun loss is somewhat tied to the woods used as i experience it. As I see it is one more factor to take into account when selecting which woods to use.

Totally biased poll options. I'd vote the last one but the text puts me off. I vote no but not for the reasons stated the option.