Hethwill Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Yesterday I spent a couple hours more playing this game. Was great fun and attended 2 big full pvp battles and a few very LONG pvp light ones. Given it was my most extended session I became more observant to some details. Especially that the battles are mostly resolved in the long range cannonades. This means that the battles drag forever and ever with surviving ships always keeping distance. Shooting at medium distance gives me the same chance of crippling the opponent and does not open my ship to sure shot close range. So yeah, everyone keeps distance and the battle drag for a long time. Long range shooting is too precise making it the most viable option, especially to mess up sails and masts. Medium range feels like as good as short range so, why should I get close ? I mean, I can be as precise as I need from a safe distance. This forces everyone, apart from the more daring captains, to play the long range-keep distance game. Given that land artillery, let's say a 12 pounder, has a effective range of 800-900m ( but given lines of infantry as targets who cares about inaccuracy but crews kept their cannonade until the lines reached 400m in open sights ) I would estimate a naval non-stabilized version would be way worse in the way a battery salvo would scatter. As it is, and myself as a culprit as well, we keep well over 600m distance with high accurate shots but I guess the Devs telemetry and logs can testify this. Can the developers review this factors ( especially dependency of gameplay in long range shooting ) to make the battles more dynamic and "historically" enticing ? Many thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 It is somewhat historical. Until the Treatise on Naval Tactics by Sir John Clerk of Eldin line battle was considered the correct way to battle - but it usually led to inconclusive results and long battles. Nelson changed it and moved closer to melee range. Due to drop in penetration and damage over distance you get a lot better damage at close range. If fleets stay in the distance this currently leads to historical results. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 Many thanks for the answer Admin. The book is the "treatise for naval warfare" for the timeframe for sure. I guessed as much we would be playing through its model Seems the mentality of the players have to change then to achieve more decisive results. So, what is stopping us from getting close, Nelson style ? We get massacred by long range volleys way before we reach "close range". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Rodney Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Nothing is stopping us, thing is somebody needs to take responsibility. If you charge in at the wrong time and the enemy can counter that strategy you are doomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 It is somewhat historical. Until the Treatise on Naval Tactics by Sir John Clerk of Eldin line battle was considered the correct way to battle - but it usually led to inconclusive results and long battles. Nelson changed it and moved closer to melee range. Due to drop in penetration and damage over distance you get a lot better damage at close range. If fleets stay in the distance this currently leads to historical results. The lines of battle were a LOT closer than that, though. No one ever did any damage past 1000 yards, which is where many Naval Action battles are decided nowadays, based on who is lucky enough to have their heaviest ships placed farther to leeward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 Nothing is stopping us, thing is somebody needs to take responsibility. If you charge in at the wrong time and the enemy can counter that strategy you are doomed. Yes. Therefore leading to 1 hour long battles as the majority opts for long range shooting. There are exceptions and very good players at timing their carronades ( I try to do it a lot ! ) but overall ( and after experiencing more combat than usual yesterday ) It becomes a very prolonged affair. At a time we had two Snows always keeping long range distance. Battle ended by timer. Another battle was actually with big ships. The way the frigates behaved was simply... to take advantage of the long range accuracy and damage. Took a ton of time to end and eventually we won because of that. Long range is too precise, plus I can snipe with 1 shot at a time instead of unleashing the full side. Not a lash on my enjoyment but is simply annoying. OW will change this with the chances to disengage. I am talking about fight to the "death" scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebsif Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 The lines of battle were a LOT closer than that, though. No one ever did any damage past 1000 yards, which is where many Naval Action battles are decided nowadays, based on who is lucky enough to have their heaviest ships placed farther to leeward. because wait for damage 4.0 then long range shots will just bounce off the sides unless they land on deck as illustrated by my prophetic paint skeelz: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meraun Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Yesterday I spent a couple hours more playing this game. Was great fun and attended 2 big full pvp battles and a few very LONG pvp light ones. Given it was my most extended session I became more observant to some details. Especially that the battles are mostly resolved in the long range cannonades. This means that the battles drag forever and ever with surviving ships always keeping distance. Shooting at medium distance gives me the same chance of crippling the opponent and does not open my ship to sure shot close range. So yeah, everyone keeps distance and the battle drag for a long time. Long range shooting is too precise making it the most viable option, especially to mess up sails and masts. Medium range feels like as good as short range so, why should I get close ? I mean, I can be as precise as I need from a safe distance. This forces everyone, apart from the more daring captains, to play the long range-keep distance game. Given that land artillery, let's say a 12 pounder, has a effective range of 800-900m ( but given lines of infantry as targets who cares about inaccuracy but crews kept their cannonade until the lines reached 400m in open sights ) I would estimate a naval non-stabilized version would be way worse in the way a battery salvo would scatter. As it is, and myself as a culprit as well, we keep well over 600m distance with high accurate shots but I guess the Devs telemetry and logs can testify this. Can the developers review this factors ( especially dependency of gameplay in long range shooting ) to make the battles more dynamic and "historically" enticing ? Many thanks. . i have played about 60 battles by now and mostly battles start of at longdistance with both lines approaching each other until one of the fleet turns in and attacks. This mostly happens when one of the fleets get split up because of bad communication or something. Mostly the other fleet will use the chance to attack and cut off. So one way or an other pretty much every battle i have seen (havent been to tarflager) turn into a close combat fight at some point. Wich is fun :-) i never had a battle finished by timer... not a single one.. how many battles have you played? (no offense) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetworth Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I actually find most battles begin as a line fight, but by the end devolve into close range slugfests with little fleet cohesion. BTW, love the graphic nebsif, but you forgot to label the mast 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 i never had a battle finished by timer... not a single one.. how many battles have you played? (no offense) Very few. Started on NA last weekend with a regular 2 hours (give or take) in the evening, so I guess about over a dozen and under twenty (?) maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathaniel Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) I don't know how soon Damage Model 4.0 is coming but i still want to bump the topic,because long range behaviour now is a lot worse, than Admin's reply implies. Right now long range damage is way to high, the penetration debuff isn't really as large as it should be. At least from a player perspective (i know, on the developers side it can look very differntly) it looks like something relatively easy to implement. Even less penetration on long ranges than now and a lot more wide shot dispersion would do the trick instantly and alow for more realistic, close quartered battles. Lines are OK of course, but they should happen at half the distance they happen now and require a lot more maneuvring and commanding skill. I am sure, that will also add to the testing, data-gathering value, since you'll be able to gather more realistic data, than from two lines on max distance, just dumbly ping-ponging eachother to death. Edited February 22, 2015 by Nathaniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I've been in 600 or so battles and had only a handful end by the timer, I think most Captains want to "get busy" - few have the both the patience and shooting skills to be snipers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueMyChin Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 It is somewhat historical. Until the Treatise on Naval Tactics by Sir John Clerk of Eldin line battle was considered the correct way to battle - but it usually led to inconclusive results and long battles. Nelson changed it and moved closer to melee range. Due to drop in penetration and damage over distance you get a lot better damage at close range. If fleets stay in the distance this currently leads to historical results. Do you have enough data on ballistics to introduce limited gunnery stores yet? Players choosing a load-out of what shot and amount to take would help prevent the snipe-fest, I bet. It would probably mean battles get closer faster and less shots are fired per battle but they would be likely to end sooner as each shot does more damage.. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathaniel Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I've been in 600 or so battles and had only a handful end by the timer, I think most Captains want to "get busy" - few have the both the patience and shooting skills to be snipers. The fact that, as you correctly state, fights eventually often end up in melee due to lack of patience/skill doesn't mean, that damage on long distances is not both historically and gameplaywise OP. You shouldn't be able to get a ship sunk on 1km+ (focus fire or not), which you can now do easily. As i said, i have nothing against line fights, they are great, but they should carry the risks (and rewards) of maneuvring at medium distances, holding the line up with great difficulty and skill, and not just two fleet bantering at each other at minimum speed and unrealistic distances with no real chance of mistake except just failing to aim "properly". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austrum Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Nothing is stopping us, thing is somebody needs to take responsibility. If you charge in at the wrong time and the enemy can counter that strategy you are doomed. I have to agree here. Nothing stops the players from doing this and it can be extremely effective when someone does a Nelson and cuts the enemy line of battle however, most players prefer longer range battles so that is what we typically have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathaniel Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 But again, lower the effectivety of long range firing by, say, two times, and voilà, problem solved, a lot of new Nelsons raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted February 24, 2015 Author Share Posted February 24, 2015 But again, lower the effectivety of long range firing by, say, two times, and voilà, problem solved, a lot of new Nelsons raised. Guns make the tactics. If we have guns that are precise at long distance we going mainly for long distance. I doubt Nelson would go in close if he had percussion and rifled cannon. But alas he did not have a choice but to bear mass shot at close range where he knew every shot would hit and hurt. But, aiming high and taking advantage of a shot spread can mess and effectively nullify the enemy plans - french at the american independence war completely messed the english fleet by concentrating fire on their rigging proved effective in the overall strategy and denied them entry to Cheasapeake bay. Spread value in the XML seems okay but might be deceiving. Deviation is a 4 for every 100m. A 1000 yards shot ( roughly 920m ) has scattered 40m which is absolutely over precise. ( if I am reading the values correctly ). Maybe after the 400 - 800 yards the value should cease to be linear ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now