Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Penetration and armor thickness feedback - moderated

Recommended Posts

The hull thicknesses across the board are too high and the bounces incurred skew the rest of the shot performances all out of proportion. It's hard to judge best what to change while it is like this.

All the post battle damage assessments in the captains logs and shipyard repairs for the Constitution and United States consist of prying 32lb carronades out of planking, and when 18 longs penetrated they were pryed out of knees and frame timbers and even on her big hull many of these penetrated clean through. There are accounts of balls passing clean through 1st rates at Trafalgar, no doubt some 18s there at the close quarters it was fought, but not any carronades.

However when a carronade did penetrate a ship it delivered most of its energy to the wood, and thereby just penetrating, thus creating a catastrophic hole and a ton of splinters. Thus the period term 'smashers'. Whereas a long shot of the same weight would punch clean through from the same range and do less hole damage and less splinters, but retain energy to dismount cannon, break pumps and run down the gundeck like a wild pin ball. 

Carronades should kill more crew in the immediate area of penetration and create a nastier leak, but not a whole lot else. 

The problem could be (and only the devs will know) is in the actual size of the cannonballs in game. They are awfully large (I understand the graphical need for players to see them) but we have 18lbers that are far bigger than 5" diameter and thus the shot holes are far bigger than they would be and with having solid crew hit boxes instead of individual crew with natural spaces between themselves, we are getting much higher crew kills when the pen is tuned to more historical levels, with these oversized balls hitting the continuous hit boxes.

I know there are limitations, the models is still wonderful, I'm simply pointing out what may be a situation causing this problem.

Edited by NorthernWolves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NorthernWolves said:

The hull thicknesses across the board are too high and the bounces incurred skew the rest of the shot performances all out of proportion. It's hard to judge best what to change while it is like this.

All the post battle damage assessments in the captains logs and shipyard repairs for the Constitution and United States consist of prying 32lb carronades out of planking, and when 18 longs penetrated they were pryed out of knees and frame timbers and even on her big hull many of these penetrated clean through. There are accounts of balls passing clean through 1st rates at Trafalgar, no doubt some 18s there at the close quarters it was fought, but not any carronades.

However when a carronade did penetrate a ship it delivered most of its energy to the wood, and thereby just penetrating, thus creating a catastrophic hole and a ton of splinters. Thus the period term 'smashers'. Whereas a long shot of the same weight would punch clean through from the same range and do less hole damage and less splinters, but retain energy to dismount cannon, break pumps and run down the gundeck like a wild pin ball. 

Carronades should kill more crew in the immediate area of penetration and create a nastier leak, but not a whole lot else. 

The problem could be (and only the devs will know) is in the actual size of the cannonballs in game. They are awfully large (I understand the graphical need for players to see them) but we have 18lbers that are far bigger than 5" diameter and thus the shot holes are far bigger than they would be and with having solid crew hit boxes instead of individual crew with natural spaces between themselves, we are getting much higher crew kills when the pen is tuned to more historical levels, with these oversized balls hitting the continuous hit boxes.

I know there are limitations, the models is still wonderful, I'm simply pointing out what may be a situation causing this problem.

The build of the ship is important here.  I know that if you build your ship with stiffness and strong hull with live oak wood type, your ship will have a tremendous amount of thickness.  The base thickness of the side of a first rate is 75 cm, but with stiffness and strong hull, it is nearly 90 cm thick.  This makes the hull of the ship completely impervious to smaller guns and greatly decreases the range most guns can penetrate the hull.  Also, on smaller ships, if you double either regional thickness or strong hull with stiffness, you can get some pretty tanky ships as well, and I think the problem becomes worse in the smaller ships because smaller guns have a more difficult time penetrating.  The bottom deck of an Agamemnon gets 24 lb guns with a penetration at 500 meters of 90 cm and with these tank builds, you can buff that thickness so high that most shots will bounce with just a small angle of your ship.  The base thickness of the Agamemnon is 68 cm thick, but again stacking stiffness/strong hull gets you up to 81 cm (I think not sure on the maths here) so if you angle your ship, most shots will just bounce off. 

I have pointed this out before, the devs need to do away with double stacking specific trims to achieve ships that are overpowered.  You should not be able to double stack stiffness and regional stiffness or strong hull.  Much in the same way you should not be allowed to double stack 2 speed trim options, like pirate refit and speed, or speed and regional speed. 

Also, some of these trims need to be strait up nerfed.  Building your ship out of live oak already gives you a pretty huge buff to hit points and thickness, yet strong hull gives you another 7% on top of that thickness, and another 5% hit points.  Its pretty ridiculous.  The biggest offender, which was pointed out to me recently is regional thickness, which gives you a flat 5cm more thickness, so you can add 14 cm of thickness to any ship just buy going stiffness, regional thickness, live oak wood type.  So a frigate with a base of 60 cm, can be buffed up to 74 cm of thickness.  Which means, to even penetrate the side, if your in a surprise, you need to close the gap to 250 meters, assuming your using 9lb longs.

Edited by Yar Matey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unhistorical buffed armor thickness is an obvious recurent topic that needs to be solved.

Another one that could be discussed is how even penetrating ball shots have no effect at all until you reduce one side to zero Hp. While shooting sails start to cripple the opponent since the first hit.

How shooting hulls with cannon balls from long cannons (from any range): the base of naval combat, such a looser move in-game compared to chain-shots and boarding fit ?

_______________________________________________________

My suggestions:

1- Historical thickness

2- Tie the penetrating shots with the crew efficiency (1 penetrating shot to the hull for exemple will induce 0.5% slower [reload/crew transfer/leaks repair]  time on the damaged side of the opponent , to represent how damages influence the combat effectiveness of the crew on this part of the ship (debrits on deck slowing movements, shock induced by penetrating shots and the sight of the damages).  That way hull dmgs would be on par with sails damages, long guns shooting hull would have a little more use. 

 

(I've already suggested on another topic reducing the long range accuracy and the number of chain shots and tying sails damages to rigging shock effects/manoeuver speed in a same way) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2016 at 8:29 AM, maturin said:

Uh, lolwut?

Let me chew this up for you since trolls usually need that.

He mean that the tournaments are like an indicator what can be done in OW too. If there are any unbalances or exploits you will see them faster and easier in the tournament.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2016 at 3:55 AM, Hodo said:

Suggestions 1 and the third one, reducing long range accuracy I would love to see happen.   

 

Helping one mechanic will kill another. What is going to happen to long cannons? Fightings will either start getting closer and people will favor carros or meds more or it simply will take longer time due to more misses, which means time for battle instance will have to be increased. And while its not, fights will be up close, which also means less options in battle.

We dont need to test another limitation. Right now longs are more accurate, but due to lack of pen and less dmg they are not OP. Its a good balance as it was intended.

Honestly, actual battles are fine and have far better balanced mechanics than OW. We should concentrate on bringing OW up to speed of battles. Then continue fine tuning both 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin, Check out This thread and the linked spreadsheet. I go into fairly good detail on the Internal and External ballistics of cannons. The data within the spreadsheet is fairly adjustable, too, and keeps things nice and proportional to each other.

Having carronades drop off to zero (or even negative?!) penetration at range is absolutely silly (I shouldn't be able to deflect a carronade round by holding up a piece of paper). Additionally, shot of a specific size should lose energy at the same rate, as a proportion of its velocity, as any other shot of the same size no matter what gun it's fired from and should always decay to a certain minimum penetration at their hypothetical "infinite" range (if the ball was dropped from space, a.k.a. terminal velocity.)

As far as thickness goes, I feel like the overall thickness of hulls is acceptable, but masts are way too thick. IRL, the HMS Victory's mast is around 94cm in diameter. While it's true that there have been issues with demasting being too easy, I feel that reducing the mast thickness to approximately 4/3rds the hull thickness is a good start, and give masts an additional 30-50% HP buff to make demasting a challenge, but not practically impossible. (Gankers do not demast, they chain, generally)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a quick test to confirm what the numbers suggests in the the latest 10.2 patch.

A Surprise only has a theoretical ability to bring down the lower section og another Surprise's  main mast and then only by using double charge.

 

 

Out of the aprox. 25 charged balls that hit only 7 had pen with 43 damage. It takes 7 hits for a 9pdr long to bring down a Mercury mainmast so the ~300 hp damage of 7 pen hits is insufficient for a surp mainmast. Without charge shot you can shoot at the lower mast until the cows come home to no avail.

Maybe it is a good idea for charged balls to have a much higher probability of pen with damage? It's still a high risk proposition. A surp has 40 charged shots and you need to connect at least 1 out of 4 balls or the gamble fails and the house takes it all.

Edited by jodgi
Fanx, Jon Snow, turns out you do know something...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still a little uneasy about the overbuffed masts...

I thought I'd visualize pen vs. masts, still haven't found a pretty way of doing it but I gotta start somewhere:

2e0aebcb44344a8f4248b288a0803ad6.png

Could you guys confirm mast thicknesses for trinco, connie, endy, aga... and so on?

(Is wiki updated and reliable as far as masts are concerned, Olav?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently got hold of a copy of Bashforth's published experimentation with his Chrongraph, which has refined certain of the parameters for transonic and supersonic drag and includes a set of penetration parameters derived by Didion at Metz.

These are quite different from those commonly assigned to the Poncelot form, and result in higher penetrations for low velocity shot, higher penetration overall for reasonable C18th-C19th shot velocities, and includes values for Oak, Elm, Fir and Poplar as separate materials, with various earth, stone and brick fortifications as well.

Poplar and fir, the common mast materials are very much less resistant to the passage of shot than the Oak, Beech or Elm sides are, so the inflation of resistance/ineffectiveness is even stranger than the inflation of size alone suggests. (Penetrations in Fir around 80% more than in Oak, Poplar a bit weaker again - Elm is 30% weaker than Oak.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thickness on 1st rates is broken with cartagena+navy structure refit upgrade. You can barely penetrate these things now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

battle feedback.on a ow fight on 17-11 2017 above fort orange 

 

battle against:   2 wasa and a  Bellona  (3 Swedes players)

(Dutch) :1 bucentaur,  1 bellona, 2 wasa, 2 surprises 1 rattlesnake, 1 Wappen von Hamburg and, 1 endymion ,and 1 pirate frigate (9 people)

the beginning of the battle after a 10-minute chase from coro coast to north of fort orange where we tagged them  into battle 

when the battle starts the tag was not that good but we managed to get 1 ship close to them an was shot within 3 minutes when and after  the battle started 

after about 15 minutes we managed to get closer to them, we constantly were  hitting sails,  in the meantime, they repaired 2 times

in the meantime one of the wasa was leaving ,so a Bellona and a wasa were still kept in battle (2 ships still in battle) 

the one who left had 70 % sails and even sailing speed up to 10 knots (i was in a buc and did not gain distance much on that ship 

the 2 ships had both 65% sails and had still remark=able fast speed compared to their sail damage

the funny part was when i gave them 2 broadsides(buc cugarian sabicu) to the wasa ,the bellona ship hardly received any damage a full load did 14 hull hits and about 4-8 percent damage on his side 

it seemed almost unpenetrated and the level of damage was really not much (4-8%)

   he shot at me, the buc  (cugarian[almost strongest] -sabuco)and 30% armor was gone in a sip (?) 

also the wasa and the Bellona(now 65%sail) turned like if it where rowboats with still huge speeds

anyway we all ended up 9 ships with a complete shot down ships, where the wasa and the bellona where almost fully intact and repaired like if the carpenter's shipyard of carthagena was also on board... 

 

my conclusion was ;

9 ships, can not sink a wasa and a Bellona  (pvp upgraded ships)

repairs :  is ridiculously overpowered and to much (at least 5 times (sails and armor) and could still shoot if they where only on the guns)

and upgrades what give the ships unrealistic battle mechanics 

a buc what can not shoot a wasa is for me unrealistic .(.?)

they had the pvp upgrades  what are not realistic to the 9 other players the battle time was 1 hour and 30 minutes 

2 enemy in battle an one was of the enemy who escaped and more than 60 % armor left,  where the Dutch had 3 ships sunk 2 ships demasted and  the rest shot away , and had to escape otherwise the last broadside would have sunk me and them is ( ....)

 

it's an unfair fight, but also an unfair outcome...

for me, it was very disappointing to see the difference between upgrades and players who don't have them

1 player of the 9 players said they also would quit 

after bin humiliated in chat:  with....:  who's next,....  i had to leave (10 % left on one side and 15% on the structure and 0 % on the other broadside)

450 rum, and about 56 hull and 5 rigs gone,

my reward was 600 xp after 1hour and 30 minutes 

i asked my self,  was it fun ...and came to the conclusion it was not ,it felt like donkey shot fighting game mechanics from cheats 

fighting in the old days(with all his flaws) of the game, was more fun,... than today  

balance is probably an issue , but it is getting more out of balance than it has ever been before.

( pvp marks is now a game breaker,[feelslike] and i really don't understand why you put it in the game after been removed before ) 

 

just my thoughts

1:14:40 says it all....

greetings Thonys

See also the result from the other sides view 

nice bragging tho..

 

Edited by Thonys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×