Ship Behaviour Under Bare Poles Is Unrealistic

[Thomas Cochrane]

The most unrealistic thing about the movement of ships is what they do when their sails are down.

 

In the game they effectively come to a stop, facing whichever way they were going.

 

If we exclude currents and tides (which I think are not yet implemented) then the only force acting on the ship with its sails down is the wind.

 

For modern boats the bit with the engine in the heaviest (usually the stern) so it has the least movement due to wind. As a result a vessel under bare pole will head up into the wind and stand with its nose into the eye.

 

For these old boats I presume that the weight is pretty evenly distributed (maybe someone could correct me if not). So I reckon that unless the boat is exactly balanced it will turn either nose to wind or nose down.

 

If they did turn to be nose downwind they would run slowly under bare poles in any weather. In very heavy weather I've known ships to run downwind even approaching hull speed just under bare poles.

 

Would it possible/desirable to implement an approach whereby ships with their sails down turn downwind and run away?

 

You can also lock the rudder which will make the ship turn under bare poles – this is already implemented I think.

 

 

 

[Balck]

Capital suggestion.

[maturin]

And equally important, a ship under bare poles should soon develop a heavy roll, spoiling gunnery. That, combined with loss of rotation control, should teach all these newbs a lesson.

 

My soul bleeds every time I see players in a sailing game sitting at the edge of a fight without a scrap of canvas flying, sniping away with long guns. Fie, fie, fie.

[Yankee jack]

Bare poles.?

 

Each ship is different and will act differently depending on hull configuration and design etc.   Also wind speed has a great influence.   In a light breeze the ship could easily turn broadside to and just drift.  I heavy air it could be possible to get enough weigh on that the rudder has some affect.  In any case rolling will be aggravated.

 

Depends on how deep the GL team wants to get into that?

[maturin]

Here the question isn't about realism or depth. It's how we can draw on realistic limitations to discourage some incredibly ugly, gamey behavior and teach people to actually sail their ships.

[Ned Loe]

Or they can add the anchor drop animation when completely stopped. This will keep the ship steady. However, it would take time to raise the anchor. Good suggestion. 

[Thomas Cochrane]

Bare poles.?

 

Each ship is different and will act differently depending on hull configuration and design etc.   Also wind speed has a great influence.   In a light breeze the ship could easily turn broadside to and just drift.  I heavy air it could be possible to get enough weigh on that the rudder has some affect.  In any case rolling will be aggravated.

 

Depends on how deep the GL team wants to get into that?

 

I do not agree. The tendency of ships to lie ahull under bare poles (and then to get knocked down) is the result of impact from the waves (not the wind). The waves are necessarily coming from the same direction as the wind. In the almost flat waters of most maps the ships wouldn't lie ahul, they would turn to present their narrowest aspect to the wind. The exception is the storm map where a ship should lie ahull and then be knocked down.

[Thomas Cochrane]

Or they can add the anchor drop animation when completely stopped. This will keep the ship steady. However, it would take time to raise the anchor. Good suggestion. 

 

Yes that would be cool. Need to factor in depth for anchoring and swing. IRL you need 2.5-5 time more length of cable than the depth because an anchor must lie in a long curve so that the force is almost all horizontal and not vertical. That's how they get off the anchor, they sail up to it and then pull from directly above. 

 

In any case vessels at anchor drift so that the anchor is to windward and will spin around the anchor point if the wind changes. 

 

Being hove to is another option, which I mentioned in another post. They would need to fix the ability to set the jib on the opposite tack for fore and aft rigged vessels, for square rigged ships I don't know how they do it. 

[Thomas Cochrane]

And equally important, a ship under bare poles should soon develop a heavy roll, spoiling gunnery. That, combined with loss of rotation control, should teach all these newbs a lesson.

 

My soul bleeds every time I see players in a sailing game sitting at the edge of a fight without a scrap of canvas flying, sniping away with long guns. Fie, fie, fie.

 

That's a fantastic idea, I hadn't thought of that.  Also roll could be a big factor in other areas. For example when running you roll a lot but when close hauled you hardly roll at all. 

 

If I go out in a modern sail boat even if I'm going under power I put the main up for just that reason, it's godawful to be powering along in a sailboat with no sails up because you feel every bit of roll on every point of sail. The main stabilizes the vessel the vessel a lot. 

 

Another step would be to introduce weather helm and lee helm in manual sails configuration but that's a bit technical I guess and maybe already included in the turn mechanic? (That is where you can unbalance your sails so they turn against each other - for example on a bermuda rig you can carry too much jib or genny so that you turn away from the weather, or too much main and you turn into the weather).

[maturin]

 

Another step would be to introduce weather helm and lee helm in manual sails configuration but that's a bit technical I guess and maybe already included in the turn mechanic?

That's actually already implemented for square rigger. Unbalance your rig and the ship will naturally turn. Weather/lee helm is always very manageable in the game, but you do have to correct for it with manual skipper.

 

You can actually wear ship without touching the rudder.

[Prater]

I don't know how to heave to in real life.  And it might not be correctly implemented in game.  However, on all ships, it is implemented.  The only time you run into trouble is if you are running directly down wind, and from my understanding "heaving to" in real life running down wind wasn't possible, but I could be wrong.  It is just none of the diagrams I have seen show that.  The wind is always coming across the beam.

 

In the fore-and-aft rigged ships, drop down to dead slow, move your boom in, you will go very slow.

 

 

But yes, we need something to be done about the bare pole full stop landluberry practice.  It is the worst thing about this game in my opinion.  This is a SAILING game.  Not a "stopped floating fortress" game.

[maturin]

Unfortunately, in the game right now, a cutter can heave-to perfectly... but only when running dead downwind. Ie, the opposite of reality.

 

You just sheet in your boom all the way and sit there happy as a clam.

 

How we prevent that, I'm not sure.

[Yankee jack]

I do not agree. The tendency of ships to lie ahull under bare poles (and then to get knocked down) is the result of impact from the waves (not the wind). The waves are necessarily coming from the same direction as the wind. In the almost flat waters of most maps the ships wouldn't lie ahul, they would turn to present their narrowest aspect to the wind. The exception is the storm map where a ship should lie ahull and then be knocked down.

My experience at sea is that most ships/boats DIW, lie broadside to the wind.   A large ship running under bare poles will struggle to get her head pointed downwind, let alone up wind.  Makes sea anchors very useful.

 

Don't know about getting"knocked down" under bare poles?  I know it happens but very unusual?  Rolling the masts out, very likely.

 

Maybe we're splitting hairs?

[maturin]

The main question is: How can we develop a 'shorthand' for reality that will function easily and simply in the game, in order to punish playing at sea forts?

 

I'm sure most people think I'm always pushing for a hardcore tall ship sim, but actually I just look for ways to simplify reality in a playable way that is inspired by real techniques.

[Prater]

^^

The cutter can heave to on other courses if you put your boom opposite auto skipper.  But, like I said, dont know if that is realistic or not.  You will eventually start going backwards.

[Thomas Cochrane]

^^

The cutter can heave to on other courses if you put your boom opposite auto skipper.  But, like I said, dont know if that is realistic or not.  You will eventually start going backwards.

 

Oh okay.

[Rudi Starnberg]

I'm not convinced we really need to simulate ships drifting with no sails, of course it happens in real life but you need to ask yourself in what situation would that behavior actually have a significant effect on the outcome of a game? I can't really think of any, in game a ship drifting down wind at .2 knots is not really any different from a ship stationary. What is far far more important, like maturin said, is stopping people playing ship forts. It would be nice to see a greater effect on of rolling on gunnery in general, not just when stationary, but before that can be implemented we need an improved mechanic for firing guns. When your guns fire at a random time over 3 seconds, imagine how frustrating it would be to be trying to fire at the right time of a roll cycle, you can already see this in storm games when people tend to send 3/4 of their shots into a wave they couldn't time for.

 

Until the game has come up with a solution for that, I don't think rolling should be allowed to have too much impact on gunnery, so that leaves us with spinning on the spot as the other aspect of ship forts. Quite simply just make a ship with no sails up not be able to turn at all. Technically it might not be 100% realistic, and it won't be 100% effective at stopping people from abusing stationary gun platforms, but it will remove 90% of the abuse and can be done very quickly and easily until something better can be devised. 

[maturin]

The auto-stabilizing guns are probably here to stay.

 

I am proposing that roll continue to have a negligible impact on gunnery during mild conditions, UNTIL you try to play at sea forts. Than we hit your over the head with the realism stick!

[Balsafer]

I have a question are ships irl able to turn with no sail power?

[Thomas Cochrane]

I have a question are ships irl able to turn with no sail power?

 

In a absolute flat calm they wouldn't turn at all without oars. 

 

Usually there is a enough wind that they will begin to turn very slowly just on bare poles, though it can happen that you are completely becalmed. 

 

There is also the effect of tide and current would have the effect of moving the boat and generating some way so that the rudder would have some effect.

 

But in answer to your question: generally yes, at least to some extent but it could take a very long time to turn around (like hours).

 

Edit: Thinking about it more I guess it also depends on size because I've seen Hobie Cats without gennys (i.e. main sail only) get stuck when the wind fails and they seem not to be able to turn at all, maybe the bigger ships have more forces acting on them?

[maturin]

I have a question are ships irl able to turn with no sail power?

You can tow ship's head around with boats, or use an anchor.

 

But the turning in-game is waaay to fast and instantaneous to boot.

[Crankey]

Very good point OP.

 

Looking forward to all aspects that would have effected a sailing ship being in game. Do we know what the Devs have planned yet as far as outstanding effects is concerned ?

 

Without a bare minimum of sail set to hold/balance a vessels heel it would roll at the whim of the ocean waves. This would definitely NOT be good for gunnery unless the sea state was dead calm or close to it.

[Kngsbrg]

I do not agree. The tendency of ships to lie ahull under bare poles (and then to get knocked down) is the result of impact from the waves (not the wind). The waves are necessarily coming from the same direction as the wind. In the almost flat waters of most maps the ships wouldn't lie ahul, they would turn to present their narrowest aspect to the wind. The exception is the storm map where a ship should lie ahull and then be knocked down.

 

 

Yes that would be cool. Need to factor in depth for anchoring and swing. IRL you need 2.5-5 time more length of cable than the depth because an anchor must lie in a long curve so that the force is almost all horizontal and not vertical. That's how they get off the anchor, they sail up to it and then pull from directly above. 

 

In any case vessels at anchor drift so that the anchor is to windward and will spin around the anchor point if the wind changes. 

 

Being hove to is another option, which I mentioned in another post. They would need to fix the ability to set the jib on the opposite tack for fore and aft rigged vessels, for square rigged ships I don't know how they do it. 

 

 

That's a fantastic idea, I hadn't thought of that.  Also roll could be a big factor in other areas. For example when running you roll a lot but when close hauled you hardly roll at all. 

 

If I go out in a modern sail boat even if I'm going under power I put the main up for just that reason, it's godawful to be powering along in a sailboat with no sails up because you feel every bit of roll on every point of sail. The main stabilizes the vessel the vessel a lot. 

 

Another step would be to introduce weather helm and lee helm in manual sails configuration but that's a bit technical I guess and maybe already included in the turn mechanic? (That is where you can unbalance your sails so they turn against each other - for example on a bermuda rig you can carry too much jib or genny so that you turn away from the weather, or too much main and you turn into the weather).

 

agreeing with you on most things, but you need to learn how to multiquote... 

 

OT: I like OP's notion

[Sir Henry Morgan]

I have a question are ships irl able to turn with no sail power?

Yes! They do. But you cant controll it. A ship normaly turns in to the wind. And its astounding how fast they do that. Even with low wind speeds. It depends of the surface the ship is facing the wind. As well the mass of the ship and its shape. And of corse the windspeed and water current. With an anchor its exactly the same, only difference, you end up in a stabel position lying in the wind. Because of that you allways have to consider where to throw the anchor and how long to let it go. Otherwise ships can crash together in a bay. Therefore ships have allways a safe distance between each other so when they orbit around the anchor point while wind changes direction. Otherwise they can touch each other.

 

It wouldnt be a great idea to set anchor in battle and thinking, im in a fixed position. You wuld drift downwind and then sitting there with nose to the wind like a duck.

And the other thing with anchors, throwing an anchor in shallow waters is no problem. if the ground is about 20m deep, you need at least 50m chain. The chain has to lie down on the ground approximately the length of the waterdeepnes. Otherwise it wouldnt grab right. So guess now how long the chain has to be if the water is 200m deep... And how long it takes to raising the anchor back.... so that couldnt be a great tactic in battle

Edited February 16, 2015 by Sir Henry Morgan

[Portsdown]

Ref. rotation under Bare Poles. What is being forgotten is that the ships of the time could, and did, raise and lower masts and yards. In this situation the yards are most important, because of the time issue. Raising and lowering yards without spreading the sails would change the windage of each mast, allowing a multi-masted vessel to have moderate control of her rotation. Not perfect control, but enough to lie approximately head, broadside or stern to wind.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Portsdown