Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
rediii

Hotfix for mastthickness

Recommended Posts

What are the builds of the Wasa and vic? Any answers on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin dont give up yet.. (test this)

shooting the top gallant just needs a buff..

give it 100 %(for you to decideside  )more buff and  instead of one ball you must hit the top galant  with 3 balls instead of one (to shoot of the TOP gallant)

also topgallant shot of, reduces only 2 % of the overall sail damage so a 3 master is max 6 % sail damage for the top galant SECTION( ALL 3 SECTIONS)

 

-Increase hp : top gallant .

-and reduce:  counted sail damage for the topgallant  to the overall sail damage counter (to perhaps 2 percent per topgallant)you have the numbers you can adjust it

 

ps: a top gallant is not a big sail,and should not have the big impact on damage it has now

even when top gallant is shot off,  you do the captain a big favor in battle :)  the heeling is gone than  :)) 

see the opportunity

the guns of the defender are getting much more dangerous now 

575px-Balclutha_main_topgallant_mast.jpg

Edited by Thonys
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, William Death said:

The only reason I can see to need a perk at all is to avoid people constantly using one or the other. It is fine that the perks cost only 1 point each. Don't balance masts on the basis of someone using charge or penetration modules or mast thickness modules or...

Has nothing to do with the stuff you explained.

It is a computer game gents, nothing more, a computer game.  You normally try to create a balance in it.

Like if in 1st person shooter shotgun is more accurate, does more damage and easier to hit than any other weapon.  You go and buff it?

If in MMORPG you have skill called "throw sand", which blinds your opponent for 1 minute.  You say that is realistic and should be free because there is sand everywhere.

If I have enough crew and ships to sail a fleet of 4, why perks are so expensive?  I should be able to do it because I have the stuff right?

If it is OP and cheap.  We should do nothing?  Fine.  No wonder this game has so bad balance with stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

Has nothing to do with the stuff you explained.

It is a computer game gents, nothing more, a computer game.  You normally try to create a balance in it.

Like if in 1st person shooter shotgun is more accurate, does more damage and easier to hit than any other weapon.  You go and buff it?

If in MMORPG you have skill called "throw sand", which blinds your opponent for 1 minute.  You say that is realistic and should be free because there is sand everywhere.

If I have enough crew and ships to sail a fleet of 4, why perks are so expensive?  I should be able to do it because I have the stuff right?

If it is OP and cheap.  We should do nothing?  Fine.  No wonder this game has so bad balance with stuff.

So...we want accuracy to be nerfed closer to historical levels, but we want masts buffed way past historical levels for gameplay...we also want people to sacrifice more perk points to have double charge/double shot because it helps balance gameplay even if it is not historical.

I can't help but feel we are picking and choosing which elements can be historical and which ones need to be "balanced for gameplay." I can understand and even support that system, to some extent: it would be really boring if it took ages to set sail, accelerate, turn, load guns, etc, and if 1 broadside from a first rate was almost guaranteed to sink or neutralize any ship smaller than a 3rd rate, that would be unbalanced as well. However when it comes to looking at demasting, people often "go crazy" with the nerf and buff encouragements. Demasting should be just as viable as hull shooting, stern raking, or boarding. In many demasting cases, the demasted captain could have prevented it with his upgrade selection, battle tactics, or ship choice. I seem to notice most people these days shoot for topmasts or topgallants....that slows you down some, but really I think it is as much demoralising as anything else: many people consider the battle lost when they lose a mast. For that reason, I like to go for masts, even if I don't "need" to (as in, I'm already catching the enemy). It also is good insurance that the enemy doesn't try to leave battle.

Regarding fleet ships...I could care less if everyone runs around with 4 fleet ships. Its not like AI can do much of anything useful anyways. The way I look at it, those perks are just there to make you waste your captain points so that you can't be 100% trader spec and 100% combat spec all the time. I can understand the logic there for gameplay balance. I personally run around with 1 fleet perk and sometimes have a throw-away 5th rate in my fleet to serve as a distraction when I'm hunting alone. If I capture something worth keeping (rarely happens), I can destroy the junk ship and take the good one.

And I don't see how you can consider double charge or double shot OP if you only get 4 broadsides worth of it, and the perks are within everyone's reach. Double charge doesn't help you too much if you shoot it out of small cannons into a big ship, neither is it worth using if you can already penetrate the hull or masts of the ship at the position you are in. Double shot is limited in range and has an "interesting" flight pattern: requiring you to aim carefully to land all your hits.

You can also attempt to counter your enemy's use of either shot type. If you suspect your enemy is loading charge, focus on keeping extreme angles if he is going for hull, or follow the standard procedure to make masts harder to hit if he is shooting for those. If you suspect he is loading double shot, just remember to keep good hull angles and gain range if you need to.

 

Speaking of balance, I feel that the combat changes in the recent patch (tweaked as needed), along with some mast HP buffs, and the BR rebalance would have combat as near to perfectly balanced as it has been in a long time. Of course, that still leaves upgrade and skillbook availability in desperate need of balancing, but that is another topic. Of course, with RNG in crafting again, all that balancing went out the window so to speak and we are back to square 1 for rebalancing: a LO/WO Santi is not a LO/WO Santi anymore: it can have extra permanent slots, extra buffs, or it can be a regular old 3/5 which is the junk grade for crafted ships now. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2018 at 1:06 PM, Suricato Rojo said:

IMHO the actual system is OK... I would just add a bit more thickness to masts.

Totally. I played one combat order when patch 15 begun and the IA ships destroy me one stick two times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, William Death said:

So...we want accuracy to be nerfed closer to historical levels, but we want masts buffed way past historical levels for gameplay...we also want people to sacrifice more perk points to have double charge/double shot because it helps balance gameplay even if it is not historical.

However when it comes to looking at demasting, people often "go crazy" with the nerf and buff encouragements. Demasting should be just as viable as hull shooting, stern raking, or boarding.

Accuracy and mast hp are more or less the same.  Both make masts to last longer.  From meta perspective, you can do either to reach the same target.  Accuracy will also affect other long range activities.  Higher HP can be used to counter unrealistic accuracy.

They could make those two at least 2 point perks.  Right now Pood Edinorogs are OP and nerfing these perks will make those even more OP.  They should nerf Pood Edinorogs.

There is more to this game than targets to aim.  I would like to see more tactical elements in it.  It had more tactical elements, slowly community asking less and less.  Community seems to like that we have clear targets like masts or stern to shoot.  Even if we had very low stern and mast damage the combat would work, it would be simply different.

You know what is the most difficult thing for most?  To win constantly by wrecking side hull (1v1 or 1v2 or even 1v3).  This is so difficult for most that they rather take mast sniping.

Very weak rigging makes tactical elements less important.  For example wind was important thing irl, that is probably clear for all?  If you dont have it and you are simply able to wreck someones masts with ease, is that correct in our cherry picked realistic game?  Maybe I have misunderstood something.

Tactical elements would fit really well in this kind of slow paced shooter game.  Critical targets simplify it.  Tactical-Shooter, this is what NA should be in my opinion.  Masts and rigging in general has to be so strong that people actually want to fight from the wind, for real.  Age of sail, right?

This game is also ganking game.  Stronger rigging in general is helping gankers to survive but also helping their targets to have decent fights.  Creates also better balance between fast and tanky ships.

If that one thread was true and realistic, boarding was not that useful tactic.  In this game boarding implementation is terrible.  From game development perspective I would decreased its value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

You know what is the most difficult thing for most?  To win constantly by wrecking side hull (1v1 or 1v2 or even 1v3).  This is so difficult for most that they rather take mast sniping.

How do you know that? This totally depends on your and your enemys ship. 

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

×