Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Combat feedback

poll questions  

189 members have voted

  1. 1. Combat length feedback

    • Too long
      24
    • Just right
      151
    • Too short
      14
  2. 3. Cost of mistakes

    • No effect - mistakes has no effect on combat
      27
    • Just right
      148
    • Too costly - impossible to recover
      14
  3. 4. Damage of a perfect broadside

    • Too low
      43
    • Just right
      136
    • Too high
      10
  4. 5. Crew loss during battle from cannonball fire

    • Too low
      36
    • Just right
      110
    • Too high
      43
  5. 6. Sail damage

    • Too low
      22
    • Just right
      129
    • Too high
      38
  6. 7. Mast damage

    • too low
      78
    • just right
      102
    • Too high
      9
  7. 8. Raking (cannon loss + crew loss)

    • Underpowered
      78
    • Just right
      82
    • Too strong
      29


Recommended Posts

The Red Duke    6,298

That is the reason why I suggested the one circle battle solution that is open for at least 15 minutes with BR balance Attacker 1.0 : Defender 1.3. It helps to avoid 6 vs 1 gank. You can organise your fellows to enter a pvp battle. Blanace helps to keep the battle almost equal and only a small risk for attacker. Currently If we try to attack players in enemy area we will get a lot of NPC. And NPC battle are absolutely not interesting for most of us. We should find a solution to create balanced open sea pvp battle where we can use our tactic skill and we also need a possibility to organize our available close players. That is the one circle solution, 15 minutes and BR balance. I am sure we will get proper pvp fights according to these changes. 

 

Sure, it is your view on it.

 

I don't mind taking on the players. And it would be a good 1v2. I like those and the present RoE gives much more of those than before as i've been experiencing it.

 

The bots however ( player fleets ) did unbalance things.

 

Mind you, and all, despite wearing a custom made #nofleets t-shirt I also understand their usefulness to the playerbase base on median time/proficiency.

We may think of way to fine tune them.

 

I shall repeat, I have no issues with the present RoE, for me it is the best compromise yet without benefit to any of the combatants and squadrons must sail tight if they want to spawn together, so nor more flying taggers and magical spawns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Puchu    747

Dear Devs,

The combat itself right now is just plain amazing!!!! 

Talking from a 1vs1 standpoint here, its near perfect!
Every approach, going for hull, for masts, for sail for crew, is viable. Doubleshot and doublecharge have a good place.
Carronades are devastating in close combat as they should be, but worthless in long range combat, just how it should be. 
Sterntanking and bowtanking are completely gone!
Angling is more important than ever.
Maneuverability is king, crewloss matters, gunloss matters, im loving it!
All ammo types have their place and their situation where you want to use them.

Good job! 

PS: Brace is fine, i expected it to be horrible, but it actually is fine. Even with brace on, you dont really want to sterntank, you will still loose a lot of crew and cannons and rudder. 

You see me very happy! 

PPS: (Groupfights still have issues with boucy bellpoules and carronadehugging "strategies" but we will find a way to sort that out.)

 

Thanks so much for the range increase on the duel room!!! (now only remoove the repair kit cost ;) )

Edited by Puchu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Siegfried    850

I like the actual combat a lot too. But that bots that player can bring to battle is a real pain. A player attacking in a warships would be imposible to bring bots in. Over all things when the other player have inferior ships and sail alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akd    2,622
8 hours ago, Puchu said:

PPS: (Groupfights still have issues with boucy bellpoules and carronadehugging "strategies" but we will find a way to sort that out.)

I agree with you entirely that the combat model is in very good shape.  I also agree, however, that the above is a concern and is related to two minor problems in the model:

1. Incorrect conception of carronades that devalues heavy long guns.  See Lieste's many posts on this subject.

2. Exaggerated penetration model and inflated hull / mast thicknesses, especially 5th-6th rate hulls.

-penetration model gives relative thickness protection that exceeds straight line calculation of relative thickness.

-no partial penetrations leads to all or nothing results for integrity damage and bounces at absurd angles (e.g.bouncing almost straight back toward the firing ship).  Only all or nothing should be crew / gun damage behind the hull.  Richochets should be reserved for low-angle deflections, or shots that contact with energy "spent" at angles closer to normal.

-lighter long guns are almost completely non viable in combat as they deflect even from bulwarks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Puchu    747

Well, for 1vs1 combat the system is amazing atm and many of the factors you describe dont come into play in even duels.
(I personally think im too bad to properly beat lo strong hull ships with teak ships, but its definitely possible, although they seem very strong.)

But for group fights it seems like there is an issue with the feeling of equality and actual equality. 

Some of it imo is just a simple br issue, e.g. in the Small Battles, it currently is hard to judge if a fight is "even" or not. It was allways harder than ppl thought, but it seems it has become even harder now. 
If we look at some fight examples, this might become clear.

1vs1 connie vs bp: at long range the connie will win because it can just demast and kill the bp. easy fight for the connie
1vs1 connie vs bp: at short range the bp will just get and stay on the connies ass forever and the connie will just die (mostly bp's will run carronades imo) 
so in a 1vs1 situation this fight is totally fine.

But if you look at a groupfight 2vs1 it is alrdy hard for the connie to slow down 1 smaller ship enough to not get any of them on her ass, because, well we know that once someone is on her ass she just dies. 

if we scale the fight up, 2 connies vs 4 belle poules... the connies will get wrecked, since there is no way they can prevent all 4 of them from getting on their sterns. 

The point is, that in larger fights the side with more players and with the more maneuverable ships is strongly favored to win, whereas in 1vs1 situations it might be entirely different. Again im not complaining about the mechanics themselves, although i think even a slight numerical advantage is more significant now than it was ever before, im just saying that what people and br thinks are "even fights" mostly are not and need to be reevaluated. 

Many people claim to only fight "even fights" but fighting with a numerical advantage no matter how small it is, and no matter if your ships are lower br, is nowhere near an even fight. Same goes for the perception that smaller ships are inferior. Due to the new crew damage model smaller, more maneuverable ships have become way stronger in comparison to their former state. Especially once you reach a quantity of them where they cannot all be slowed down enough. 

Basically +1 player in a fight is alrdy a massive massive advantage and smaller ships are not necessarily inferior to bigger ships. The 2nd is a really good thing imo, the 1st... well ... we know that issue and it will never get solved, its just part of the game and human nature, but we really really need to reevaluate our own perception of "equal fights" (and some br needs to be adjusted if it's to be a balance factor.)

(I dont think lighter guns are non viable. In a small ship all you need to do is survive utill you get on someones ass. If you manage to do that you repair and you are golden. The lighter guns can shoot massive amounts of chain and on the sternrake they dont care about the bouncing, i think lighter long guns are totally fine.) 

pps: I forgot: #Noaifleets but i will add "above cerberus rank" because i think they are fine for noobs. Once you get to the surprise a captain should be able to handle himself. The Ai ships you get dont add anything to the combat, they wont make it more interesting, since for pvp players, beating ai is not even worth the time spent. I will come up with another suggestion for the AI fleets: I really dont know why the Ai is there, but if it is there to prevent ganks, why doesnt the game calculate br and equalize it with the AI fleet? That way if you get attacked by 1 player, you will get a 1vs1. If you get attacked by 3 player ships, you will get 2 fleet ships. That way the AI would be "potential reinforcements" and not just default running helpers. They would help someone if he gets ganked but they would not interfere with even fights. (And there once was the idea of putting captains on defense duty, so they could take command of the ai ships. Thaaaat feature would be amazing! Prioritize group members, clan members and then the rest of the nation. You could sign up for defence duty and if someone with an ai fleet gets attacked, you get a message: "[OCEAN]Ellis is being attacked and asking for your help. Do you want to take command of his "Trincomalee" Yes - No" If noone is on defence duty you get ai, if someone takes your offer, you will immediately take command of the ship the player has brought into his fleet and will join your friend in battle. Crewloss and such ofc will be payed by the initial ship and crew owner, in this case Ellis. ;) )

Edited by Puchu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sea Archer    120

Dismasting is too easy at the moment. Yesterday I needed not a full broadside of my frigates longs to kill the foremast of a brig. Either the masts are too easy to hit, not strong enough or the dismasting damage model should be reworked (e.g. taking shrouds and stays into account).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Texas Sir    3,662
1 hour ago, Hodo said:

The foremast on a brig is pretty weak, but I think it has the the same hp as the bow of the ship.  The armor (thickness) of the foremast is less than the main mast on any ship.  So yeah it is easy to take the mast off of a brig with a 18lb frigate.  Seeing as that ship can almost sink a brig in 2 passes.

and not to mention the two ships he's talking about.  Your talking about a light ship and a frigate.  I would hope it would be easy to demast one or even sink.   I really havne't seen much problems with demasting it's all the dang idiots that shoot nothing more than sail shot that is annoying.    They shoot it at you sails, your broad side, your water line, air. They shoot it at every thing while you blow there broad side out and than wonder why they sink and think we are OP.  Well while your shooting my sail I'm putting leaks into your water line.  I can fix those sails later, you can't fix those leaks once you sink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think combat start to become close to finished, apart from recent masts changes, the combat seems to be close to finalised.

 

 I've been advocating for crew morale and rigging damages but i can understand that it would add more problem than what it could solve at this stage of développement.

 

 What i can imagine as last tuning to combat mechanics is to greatly reduce chain shots accuracy/range and maybe limit the number of chain shots per battle the same way you do for the perkshot (i don't ask you to make chain shots a perk) In exchange, sails damages should be also linked to the sails manoeuvering speed (raising sails/turning masts) and to mast hp. And maybe battles sails could grant a little bit more protection from shots to the sails

  This is to emulate the damages to the riggings, a ships who took enought chain-shots to the sails to be reduced to 20-40% have a great chance to suffer a lot of damages to the riggings, weakening the masts and reducing the possibility to manoeuver. Right now manoeuvering is only affected by crew loss, my suggestion could rebalance this.

 About the crew, i've read somewhere that hull hp bar is to emulate a combination of damages to the structure and crew morale (in a way). I can live with that but what cause me a problem is that this force sinkings even without leaks to force the victor/looser scheme if the one who loose choose to fight till the end. In exchange, and because now we have to pay for crew, i think after each battle, a % a crew loss should return for free, like a kind of doctor perk for all situations (less crew saved if battle lost and ship sunk, more if you surrender or survive and your team win) to emulate crew rescued, recovering morale or from injuries. The doctor perk giving just a small bonus on top of it if the ship don't sink.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cmdr RideZ    647

Hull can be actively defended by sailing well.

Mast damage, not that much.  Sail damage, not that much.  Grape damage, not that much.  Rake damage (crew, cannons), not that much especially if you are in a bigger ship.

I like skill based games to be honest.  The game has this kind of 1 trick pony "tactics".  For example purely and just focus to take out masts or rake.  I do not like this to be honest.

Masts, sails, crew(grape/rake) -> Should be balanced so that those are in line with Hull damage.

edit.

Hull could have slightly less HP.

It is probably possible to stack a bit too much stiffness atm.

Edited by Cmdr RideZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stiffness will probably be changed with the shipbuilding/perk/upgrades redux.

Hull, i've not tested yet but i understand that's what they try to achieve with the tested structure healthbar, making hull damages potentially more damaging and viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cmdr RideZ    647

I am not sure if I am playing the same game with everyone else...

Demasting is extremely fast on live :(  Like ridiculously fast.

If someone thinks that demasting is about skill, please give me a break.  It is way too easy to hit those masts.

Devs, seriously, fix this already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Inkompetent    117
On 2017-05-03 at 1:28 AM, Cmdr RideZ said:

I am not sure if I am playing the same game with everyone else...

Demasting is extremely fast on live :(  Like ridiculously fast.

If someone thinks that demasting is about skill, please give me a break.  It is way too easy to hit those masts.

Devs, seriously, fix this already.

Consider that all the above posts are from pre-wipe and went through a few variations of general damage. What we have currently is a pretty different system. I actually think an entirely new thread might be needed not to mix data from both systems, making the poll entirely irrelevant and the thread confusing.

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

×