Damage model 2.0

[admin]

Hello everyone.

Would like to open up the damage topic again for a fresh discussion and feedback. 

It will cover existing and planned systems. 

 

Part 1. Outcomes

There are 6 outcomes of the combat for the losing party

1. Ship sinks
2. Ship burns out or explodes due to catastrophic chain of powder fires
3. Ship surrenders due to catastrophic morale loss or captains decision. 
4. Ship is boarded and crew surrenders
5. A combination of the above
6. Ship withdraws successfully and escapes

 

Currently not all systems are in place but it is a good time to discuss implementation of all of them as we are closer and closer to the finalization of combat mechanics.

 

Ship sinking

 

This will happen due to 3 factors. 

1. Slow disintegration of the ship hull due to cannonball damage - letting more and more water everywhere (harder and slower to plug) - this part is implemented

2. Leaks under or close to the waterline (easier to plug) but a lot more water comes in. this part is under implementation

3. Certain events - ship turns over due to collisions or other factors (water is in through ports). this part is not tuned and not final. current collisions are not ideal.  

 

Ship burns

 

1. A hot cannonball can cause combustion of certain flammable ship parts (sails and powder are very vulnerable)

2. There will be several types of fires: small that can extinguish and disappear even if left alone, dangerous - ones that needs to be taken care off by crew, and catastrophic - ones that cause gunpowder combustion and rapid series of fires leading to the powder room explosions. Dangerous fires will become catastrophic over time if left unattended. 

There are real life examples of ship explosions due to catastrophic fires - in one a Spanish 74 exploded after 5 raking double shotted broadsides from 5 English ships (mostly 74s and 80 gun ships). 

 

Ship surrenders during combat or boarding (Morale)

 

We will provide mechanisms and economic stimulus for players to surrender. Players and fleet commanders who accept honorable surrenders will be also rewarded. Such systems will be mostly automated to avoid trolling and enforce honor by the game mechanics. (e.g. in some other games you can get a ransom but still kill an opponent). 

We are not sure if we should give the crew the ability to surrender themselves due to morale loss. Its still up to a discussion. But our overall opinion is - never take control out of player hands.

 

Morale systems are not designed yet and we can come back to morale discussions later. 

 

 

Part 2. Damage philosophy

 

Damage is dynamic. Depending on the condition of your ship you will get more or less of various damage type. Such systems are currently under implementation. 

 

Examples of this are 

• Crew taking more casualties if planking is intact (due to splinters)
• On the contrary the chance of masts falling or damage to cannons is higher if the side planking is destroyed. 
• Higher chances of fires if certain parts of the ship are exposed, or lower chances of fires with heavy leaks (water is freely available) 

We will soon implement angles of penetration and balls will have less damage and sometimes zero damage if you hit the broadside at narrow angles. 

 

Part 3. Modules and performance changes due to damage.

 

Most ship modules will have 3 conditions 

• Not damaged
• Broken/Not working - under repair - will exist for a limited time immediately such event. 
• Repaired - higher chance to break again and lower performance. But still working. 

Our position is - never take full control from players (we said it above). We believe that permanent damage cannot exist in the video game. Its fun once, but over long term it can significantly degrade player experience. 

 

Some of the systems are not finalized yet. But we want to achieve that every action should have consequences.

Every damage point can degrade (or improve) performance of the ship. 

 

Current system is nice but a bit simple. We will add more elements to it within next month. 

 

1) Crew loss affects reload, turn rates, acceleration and speed of raising sails. In the future effects of lower crew will be expanded. 

2) Sail conditions affect turning, acceleration, speed and heel. System improvements are under way. 

3) Hull conditions affect protection of crew and internal modules. 

4) Leaks will change position of waterline and degrade ship speed and turning (+ limit ability to use lower decks) - will be implemented in the future. 

 

 

Current plans

1) tuning and fixing of cannonball damage at angles

2) tuning raking fire

3) tuning leaks 

4) adding fires and under waterline damage

5) improving sinking mechanics. 

6) tuning the sail damage mechanics

 

If we missed anything let us know

 

we are particularly interested in discussing under water leakage and ship fires. 

 

post will be updated as new info comes along (in case we missed anything)

[maturin]

We will soon implement angles of penetration and balls will have less damage and sometimes zero damage if you hit the broadside at narrow angles.

Обальдеть.

 

And the rest, too, about waterline changes... hardcore.

 

 

 

2) tuning raking fire

I coincidentally just wrote a post about this. In short, the current problem is that shots that strike the stern or bow hitbox from any angle count as raking fire and do large amounts of crew damage. So even if I fire from an angle where the shot would only break the captain's windows, or clip the quarter (corner) of the hull, it registers as raking fire.

There's nothing special about shooting at the stern (rudder aside), unless the angle of impact allows the ball to travel down the length of the deck. Enfilade is everything.

 

 

 

 

we are particularly interested in discussing under water leakage and ship fires.

 

Theses are very complicated topics that no one here will have much valid experience or knowledge of. Our theories are worth less without actual real-life testing. So these mechanics are more open to being freely balanced for gameplay purposes. Nevertheless, I have a few points.

 

Leaks:

As we all know, sinking is slow.

Flooding occurs through shot-holes. It doesn't matter if you have ten holes to starboard and two to port, or if all twelve holes are on the starboard side. They all let in water based on their diameter.

The exception is if the shot-hole is in the bow. Then ship speed would increase flooding, most likely. Or at least make repairs less effective. Maybe speed increases flooding risk across the board, who knows.

Furthermore, shot holes can start or stop flooding based on heel angle. I think that this is the most important flooding mechanic. If you take the Constitution, she can heel enough to put her ports under. After a long battle, that means that she could suddenly start flooding through dozens or scores of holes by switching tacks, even if none of the damage was actually below the waterline. Alternately, if she was sinking  from damage to the starboard side, she could start sailing away on a starboard tack to bring those holes up out of the water and pump. This would be a dynamic, completely naturalistic repair buff. It's exactly what you guys want to do when you talk about a game without magic POTBS skills. It also provides a realistic implementation of the current 'face unarmored broadside to enemy' mechanic.

 

I would like to see an independent hitbox for the gundeck. If a shot hits below a frigate's gundeck and above the waterline, it essentially does no harm. It hits a part of the ship where there are no crew and no guns. On the other hand, it creates a hole that could start flooding if the ship sets full sail while close-hauled in higher winds. So instead of damaging the ship's ability to fight, you limit her ability to maneuver, because she will flood. The best way to escape from a more powerful ship that has brought you to close action? Send every ball at the waterline and run away upwind on the proper tack. If she tries to chase, she will start to flood and slow down too much to chase you. Doing that in a game would make me feel so fucking smart.

 

Fires:

Main point is that the magazine is located under the waterline. This is common sense for all rational ship designers. If anyone knows of exceptions, please correct me. So there are no lucky shots that hit the magazine.

In game terms, I envision fires as being similar to flooding, albeit more terrifying. They destroy your ship if left unchecked, but can be brought under control if you drop out of the fight to deal with them. There should also probably be too kinds:

 

Rig fires: sails are fairly flammable, and standing rigging is coated with tar, making it a real tinderbox. One thing I will say about Empire TW is that it had pretty rigging fires. The crew would probably be able to cut away the masts and save the ship from being engulfed entirely. In the game, rigging fires should most often be caused by the courses catching fire from muzzle blasts. That will teach people to use their battles sails! Or alternately, you can set the enemy on fire by engaging at point blank (and here I mean less than 10 meters), because the burning gun wadding can fly over onto the enemy vessel.

 

Deck fires: These are the ones that can rage uncontrolled and reach the magazine. I'm not really sure what the biggest rick factors are. Fallen sails can lie over gun barrels and ignite, but this is difficult to implement. If cartridges are stored on-deck, that would be a risk, but I don't know whether that was done. One thing I do know is that guns could burst open and explode if they overheated. That would be a fire-starter and massively disruptive to the operation of the whole deck. If you fire your guns uninterruptedly for many broadsides, there could start being gun malfunctions (dismountings or explosions). But maybe that's too harsh on players.

 

 

• Crew taking more casualties if planking is intact (due to splinters)
• On the contrary the chance of fire or masts falling or cannon damage is higher if the side planking is destroyed. 
• Higher chances of fires if certain parts of the ship are exposed, or lower chances of fires with heavy leaks (water is freely available)

If you like the gameplay consequences of dynamic damage, go for it. I know I have argued for the first item, but realistically, I don't think the difference will every be a big one. If you look at that famous carronade video, even after extreme damage taken from 32lb carronades, the hull of the imaginary Niagara is still almost entirely intact. 6-inch holes don't amount to much.

 

Also, you wouldn't want to pump using the floodwater in your own hold. It would be full of grime and debris and would clog the pumps. I guess a bucket brigade could use it.

 

More hull damage=weaker masts is the best idea. Shot will inevitably strike the chainplates and shrouds, which extend down below the gunports, weakening the masts. I would even say that it should be next to impossible to destroy lower masts (on heavy ships) until the hulls are shot up and shrouds cut. Sacrifice some realism for balance by using realism as an excuse! And that would mitigate the impossibility of replacing lower masts, which should not be possible, despite your aversion to permanent damage. (May I suggest jury rigs?)

 

 

1. Slow disintegration of the ship hull due to cannonball damage - letting more and more water everywhere (harder and slower to plug) - this part is implemented

2. Leaks under or close to the waterline (easier to plug) but a lot more water comes in. this part is under implementation

This is the one thing I'm confused about. Every leak will be near the waterline because roundshot doesn't go through water (and your ballistics simulation makes them sink instantly).

Unless we're talking about rowboats, weapons in this era simply weren't powerful enough to destroy a ship structurally. Is this a game-balance thing, to put a hard limit on the amount of fire a ship can take?

[Brigand]

Thanks for sharing this with us, I feel honoured that we are asked to contribute to this.

 

For shots near the waterline, I think it would be most desirable to have several small hitboxes (see image) and keep track of whether or not this line of hitboxes is below the water (because of heeling). This would allow for holes 'betwixt wind and water' to only contribute to sinking if these holes are actually submerged.

 

 

I would further like to point out that the amout of water that 'pushes' through a hole below the waterline is becoming less and less as the pressure difference between the inside of the ship (air) and the outside of the ship (water) is lessened. This results in lots of water rushing in at first, but, once the hole is under the waterline on both sides, the amount of water flowing in is a lot less.

 

Fire is a difficult question to get historic data on, so it leaves quite a bit of room to implement it as you want and use it to balance the gameplay. However, some points seem to be quite clear:

 

• Fires happened during battles, they where not that uncommon.
• Ships burning all the way where a lot more rare, but it did happen.
• Ships exploding where rare as well, but again, it did happen.

 

With regard to the last bullet point (ship explosions) they seem to have happened more in times of chaos; when a good part of the crew was disabled and the powder monkeys (the boys responsible for bringing up the gunpowder from the magazine to the gun crews) had a lot more chance of falling over some debris and spilling the powder across deck. So maybe the number of wounded crew + the hull & sail damage together should combine to increase the chances of having explosions happen.

 

Explosions usually wouded a good part of the crew around the incident. So even if the explosion is small enough for the ship to survive it, the crew numbers should be deminished by an explosion.

 

Cheers,

Brigand

[Thomas Blackwell]

Fantastic to hear what you are currently working on, and what you have planned! Keep up the amazing work!

[maturin]

With regard to the last bullet point (ship explosions) they seem to have happened more in times of chaos; when a good part of the crew was disabled and the powder monkeys (the boys responsible for bringing up the gunpowder from the magazine to the gun crews) had a lot more chance of falling over some debris and spilling the powder across deck. So maybe the number of wounded crew + the hull & sail damage together should combine to increase the chances of having explosions happen.

ABSO-lutely.

 

And again, this is realism and gameplay in harmony. It means we don't have to constantly worry about the remote chance of exploding, except in situations where death is a possibility anyways.

[Johny Reb]

Current plans

1) tuning and fixing of cannonball damage at angles

2) tuning raking fire

3) tuning leaks 

4) adding fires and under waterline damage

5) improving sinking mechanics. 

6) tuning the sail damage mechanics

 

If we missed anything let us know

1. As part of your penetration calculation should be a consideration of range as well as that would effect the penetration at different angles as well. Arc of the shot at range could also be considered but may not be necessary to go into that kind of detail. But a shot fired at longer distances will no longer be traveling a straight line. It will begin to angle down as gravity begins to take over inertia. So a ball entering the starboard ship above the waterline just barely may exit the ship below the waterline on the larboard side.

 

You stated that permanent damage cannot exist in a game and therefore it won't be implemented. Regarding this I think you should consider mast damage as an exception to the rule. You have two problems I see that you are gonna need to balance in order to have a successful game. First, enough variety in the fights (damage, crew, shot, powders, modules, penetration, etc) to make the fight interesting without magical skills. The second, The slower the fights (realistic ship speeds, reload, less damage do to penetration models, etc) the harder it will be to keep peoples interest. Compare it to WoT or Warthunder. Their fights are 15-20 minutes a piece. If fights are commonly taking 45 minutes to an hour then you should concern yourself with how many will not play the game when so much time is devoted to every fight. Whats the attention span of players on average (I'm more concerned with the initial match play release)

 

2. I agree with Maturin

 

3. Flooding through the bows should be higher as Maturin stated but I don't think repairs to the bow should be less effective. A repair is a repair. Rather, I think they should be slower. The carpenter would have to fight the force of the water that would be coming through those holes like a fire hose but once in place should be considered repaired. Also, slowing the ship down should make the repairs to the bow leaks more efficient.

 

4. Maturin said, "Rig fires: sails are fairly flammable, and standing rigging is coated with tar, making it a real tinderbox. In the game, rigging fires should most often be caused by the courses catching fire from muzzle blasts. That will teach people to use their battles sails!

 

A ship blowing up should be a very very rare occurence.

 

I didn't like this idea for gameplay initially but the last sentence perked my interest and now I'm a believer. To combat shots below the waterline by reducing sail and heel then I'm afraid that you could give a decided advantage to one side over the other in fleet actions. A mechanic that encourages battle sails, which this idea would do, will meet your expectations that "all actions have consequences". A fleet could take the risk in the name of speed and therefore position advantage but they have a significant risk of fire if they do so.

 

5. Moving in the right direction

 

6. One shot should take out the lower part of a mast. Multiple shots maybe but loss of rigging more likely and loss of rigging plus ball hits definitely. A nice dynamic would be pressure on sails. If you loose a third of your mast stregnth and the health bar drops by a third or is color coded then you know that it is time to reduce sail to keep your mast from going overboard. You could take the risk of keeping the sail on but the right enemy shot could put it out of commission quickly.

[maturin]

To combat shots below the waterline by reducing sail and heel then I'm afraid that you could give a decided advantage to one side over the other in fleet actions.

That's already the case with heel limits on gun elevation. Anyways, the leeward fleet can always switch direction, or heave to, or simply slow down.

 

Also, the advantage was one of the factors in choosing windward vs leeward positions historically.

[Johny Reb]

The disadvantage is in duration you are reduced sails. If you need more range you can quickly reduce sails and take your shot then raise sails again without suffering to much penalty in deceleration. If your taking on water and therefore need to reduce heal you have to do it continually. Getting ahead of your enemy is one of the most important tactics in a line fight. Its like a flanking maneuver. You can turn the van of their line giving you "interior lines" allowing you to melt them.

 

Flipping sides wouldn't work against this tactic as the enemy is on its way to "crossing the T". If you flip, you give them your stern and moving your line of fire off their line even though they still have firing arcs on your rear ships.

 

This tactic also works both from windward or from leeward. From windward... a strategic charge, from leaward... forcing their van to turn head to weather and bringing their line to a halt.

[Marion van Ghent]

All in all I like your plans for the damage model in Naval Action. I'm not even sure there's much to discuss thereupon. Where things get interesting -- and potentially complex -- are a) how it is indicated for the player (UI) and how and when a player can repair or mitigate damage.

 

For example, as others have suggested, having heel and underwater damage interact is a potentially important gameplay element. Holes that are high and dry on one tack may flood when on the other. If this is implemented, a player needs this information and needs to be able to direct crew to repair the damage -- ideally before the holes become submerged. Compared to a simple hull damage and "repair hull" button, the complexity of the UI is increased dramatically.

 

Similarly, if multiple fires can break out on a ship -- say one on the forecastle and one on the gun deck astern -- a player may need to know the severity thereof and direct crews to one or the other or both. On top of directed repairs and other crew factors -- say pulling men from the guns to make or reduce sail or cut away fallen rigging or repel boarders -- things can get very complex, very quickly!

 

Personally I'm all for the complexity, but I also appreciate that it would be best practice to have AI handle these priorities sensibly if one is otherwise occupied (or still learning the game and getting used to it). No small task, so I'm wondering just how "deep" Game Labs intends to get here. On the one hand, depth increases player involvement and keeps interest in the game; on the other hand, it increases the steepness of the learning curve.

 

-----

 

As for rigging damage and repair, I do hope that it will be impossible to do whilst under effective fire. I understand that's another tricky subject, though. Perhaps if "crew suppression" is a factor -- e.g. if exposed crew is "stunned" or otherwise less effective when actively taking heavy casualties -- it can be done well.

 

I also hope that repairs will be limited -- i.e. you only have so many spare spars and masts, and none of them can be a full replacement for a lost lower mast. I'd love seeing a ship limp out of line, under cover of friendly ships, jury-rigging a spare main topmast to replace its lost foremast

 

-----

 

Lastly, one quick note on fire control. It is my understanding (from Lavery and other sources) that the same pumps used to control flooding were used for fighting larger fires. This means that the number of functional pumps a ship has can be very important: if you're a small merchantman with only two pumps, a leaky hold, and a fire on deck, you'd damned well better hope neither pump gets shot away I do recall that sometime in the mid 18th century the pumping action was improved enough to allow spraying of the rigging; if I can find that information later (possibly tomorrow) I'll post it should no one beat me to the punch.

[BrutishVulgarian]

I believe ships rarely sank due to battle damage in those days.    Cannon fire could turn ships into battered useless hulks but winning side would have to burn them.    I mean, either burn the ship or wait hours or days for it to sink.

 

I think a realistic crews would scrag their Captain and surrender after taking enough casualties, depending on their loyalty and experience.

 

There probably weren't that many explosions but I wouldn't mind seeing a lot of explosions, who doesn't love kerplosions?

 

I'd like to see damaged masts going over the sides and acting as sea anchors, until they are cut away.

 

I don't believe ships fired heated shot because it was suicide....... red hot shot, lit furnace,  smoke filled, crowded, chaotic, bloody, rolling deck,...    Forts fired heated shot, though.

[BungeeLemming]

 

I don't believe ships fired heated shot because it was suicide....... red hot shot, lit furnace,  smoke filled, crowded, chaotic, bloody, rolling deck,...    Forts fired heated shot, though.

Nope they didnt. The French experimented with the idea but its totally incapable on a floating platform.

 

Fires happens mostly because flying wadings hit flamable materials. They often got stuck between the parts of standing rigging.

The balls themself can not cause any kind of fire unless they hit something thats on fire already.

There is a reason why the only light/ fire on the ship was that in front of the powder-room.

Night battles rarely happened.

 

Long range shots can not set a fire.

 

 

A fire may have certain possible threads:

burning steering ropes -> disabled rudder

burning rigging and of course the wood wich is everywhere on the ship.

If a gun is loaded a fire can ignite it and a uncontrolled cannonshot goes off. The gun is disabled. (burned ropes, burning carriage all the stuff..)

 

All the other stuff I am waiting on the new build to argue with.

But the ideas here are all reasonable.

 

[Johny Reb]

I think fires in detail could be very hard to design as a really fun gameplay mechanic. The best idea I've heard yet is the increased chance of fire when not in battle sails. This seems to me to have true purpose. I'd love to test all the ideas above to see if I'm wrong but in the end I think it would probably be best that fires would be rare and not seen in every battle. It would be another crew focus on the UI or combined with the Survival focus. The location of the fire is irrelevant. The AI handles that. Fire suppression is linked to the pumps which of course must be in working order.  Explosions should be even more rare than fires and be linked to duration of fire, as only an out of control fire could reach the powder magazine. It would be to discouraging to players IMO if there ship were always blowing up. Players arn't gonna want to loose a ship through bad luck so fires and explosions have to be able to be protected against and fought against in a skillful way. Keep luck out of it. How many of the testers have watched a ranging shot take out a mainmast? I've seen it. In fact is was the first ranging shot of the fight. How discouraging for that player but it can be dealt with so the player still has fun. But imagine if that first ranging shot caused an explosion and ship was gone instead. That player wouldn't just be discouraged. They'd be PISSED and not at the players but at the game and that can't be good IMO.

[BrutishVulgarian]

If a ship has to sink for gameplay purposes, I would prefer an exciting explosion but I would agree lots of random explosions would be frustrating.

[Ned Loe]

Fires

 

I want to go back to GTA and make an example. In GTA you have to find and shoot a gas tank door in order to trigger an explosion. So, each ship should have a weak spot (Powder hold) and only when that weak spot gets penetrated X amount of times it will cause a complete ship destruction. It could be a unique hit box with a counter. Lets say 5-20 direct hit box hits depending on the ship size. 

 

 

(80 Guns Ship)

So, a hitbox got hit:

5 direct hits - small fire will start (10% chance to cause dangerous fire, self extinguish after 1 min.) 

10 direct hits - dangerous fire will start (20% chance to cause catastrophic fire after 10 seconds, use (ship extinguisher skill) to eliminate fire. 

15 direct hits- catastrophic fire will start (30% chance to cause a ship explosion after 20 seconds), use (ship extinguisher skill) to decrease fire size to small. 

20 direct hits - 95% to cause the explosion and destroy the ship (must be in battle effect). Get distance and repair.

 

Same thing can be used for underwater leakage.

 

* % used only to display an example

[BungeeLemming]

But like I said:

If you only shoot the balls and the wadings play no role. (maybe 100 meters and more) there should be no possibility to ignite a fire.

There is no reason for it. Even when you hit metal it will only cause a small spark. But decks are watered to prevent just this.

fuses are hang over waterbuckets to minimalize the risk of fire.

 

There is only one hitbox that will cause a fire. But thats the explosion of a lucky powderroom hit. (wich should be VERY uncommon)

 

 

Fires should be possible at close range only.

gameplay wise it could give luck a role where I would not want to play the game. (long range shots causing fire I mean)

[Alex Connor]

Only possibility of a long range fire is that the crew has failed to clear for action properly and have left something flammable on deck.

 

As for magazine hits, on a Ship of the line the magazine is about 15ft below the waterline and protected by the hull, the deck above it and a lot of water, all but impossible to hit directly. I don't know of a single Ship of the line vs Ship of the line or frigate vs frigate battle that resulted in a magazine hit.

[maturin]

I want to go back to GTA and make an example. In GTA you have to find and shoot a gas tank door in order to trigger an explosion.

Can anyone else get me a "hell no!"

 

And the powder magazine is underwater.

[PIerrick de Badas]

First of all about fire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ship_Orient_%281791%29

 

Placé au centre du dispositif décidé par Brueys, l'Orient avait commencé par foudroyer le Bellerophon. À 19h30, intervenait le premier drame : la mort de Brueys, presque coupé en deux par un boulet. Une heure plus tard, son capitaine de pavillon, Casabianca, était blessé gravement à la tête. Jusqu'à cinq vaisseaux anglais s'acharnèrent sur l'Orient. À son bord, plusieurs débuts d'incendie avaient été maîtrisés, mais le feu reprenait sans cesse, alimenté par les peintures et l'huile répandues sur le pont. À 21h45, un nouvel incendie se déclara dans les porte-haubans d'artimon à bâbord et se propagea dans la mâture. Mais cette fois, il devint incontrôlable. Selon la loi des séries, tout se conjugua pour enrayer la lutte contre le feu à laquelle les hommes de la batterie de 24 avaient été appelés : pompe à incendie brisée ; haches de combat inaccessibles ; seaux dispersés... Le vaisseau était la proie des flammes de l'avant à l'arrière. Devant l'ampleur et la violence du sinistre, Ganteaume décida de noyer les poudres, mesure ultime pour sauver le bâtiment au prix de son désarmement. Le maître calfat ouvrit les robinets. Mais c'était trop tard, le feu progressait plus vite l'eau. Ganteaume n'eut d'autre alternative que d'ordonner l'évacuation de l'Orient. Dans le sauve-qui-peut général, une centaine d'hommes parvinrent à monter sur une chaloupe ; quelques-uns s'embarquèrent sur un canot à demi-calciné ; d'autres s'accrochèrent aux mâtures et aux débris entourant le vaisseau en flammes ; les blessés restés à bord moururent brûlés vifs. Vers 22h30, le fleuron de la marine française explosa dans un fracas épouvantable, ébranlant les vaisseaux environnants, les couvrant de débris enflammés.
Cet événement rarissime alimenta la légende, accréditée par Napoléon, qu'il constitua le tournant de la bataille alors que celui-ci intervint à la tombée de la nuit avec l'arrivée des " renforts " anglais. C'est confondre cause et conséquences. Le dénombrement des victimes de l'Orient est impossible, dans la mesure où l'effectif réglementaire de l'équipage, qui s'élevait à 1 130 hommes, était loin d'être complet au moment du combat. Il manquait notamment la moitié des servants dans la batterie de 12. Les Britanniques ont souvent avancé le chiffre de 70 survivants, qui correspond au nombre d'hommes recueillis à leurs bords. Le contre-amiral Decrès, commandant des frégates, donna un décompte de 760 rescapés.

 

Ship orient was placed on the center on the french line and was attacked by 5 brit ship on the same time. After few times fire start into the mast and due of many problem like pumper broken, lost axe and more, fire become bigger and not under control.

It was decide to make the water go into the powderroom but fire was to big and it was decide to disband and flee the ship.

70 french people were saved by brits ships but more survive. We can't know how many die because Orient's crew was not complete

 

 

 

 

I think you can find interesting information about that but it's the more famous ship that take fire and explose.

[PIerrick de Badas]

About ship sinkind and reat shot

I don't think that most of the battle have to finish by seeing a ship sunking. If we want to stay a bit realistic we need to decrease the number of ship which are going to sunk.

Anyway, for thoses who have to sunk, i don't really love the common system we get in all games

When you loose armor and reach a certain amount of armor, you start loosing hull or take water (like in potbs). Rear armor is ofc smaller than broadside armor but why the hell should i sunk from a rear shot? I loose my guns, and my crew and i take water byt how a ball can and travel the ship part to part and reach underwater line?

 

Here is the hitbox i would propose ( a bit simple i know)

 

Armor:

Destroying armor by shooting upper the water. You loose guns, crew, crew morale and more you get damaged armor more the mast under the deck can take damage

 

Hull

When shooting under the water into the ship, you start take water. You can use repair to stop it or let it go. More you take water, slower you go. More you wait to repair, less effective is  the repair (it's harder to join the hole if it's far away under the water or in lower deck if this one is plenty of water). Taking water decrease crew morale but less than armor shoot that kill crew and decrease more the moral of crew.

 

Mast

Mast have their own integrity. When you shoot on mast you decrease their ability to survive the battle. On a certain ammount of HP, mast integrity become falling if you keep full sails on them. More you got sails on mast, faster they loose integrity.

Mast fall is not "luck shoot" but integrity falling and user not repairing them

 

Guns

more the armor is destroyed, more guns are destroyed. Each gun destroy kill x people. You can't repair gun into battle

 

Sails:

Sails are destroyed by any shot. Chain shot destroy more sails than round shot. if a mast fall sails on the mast are destroyed.

 

Rudder, pump etc

There is no integrity for them. It's "luck" that make them work or not. When an element take shoot, he got x% of chance to be affect. First shoot make it work 75%. second shot 50% effective. 3 shoto destroy it. You can repair it.

 

Crew

You get master carpenters, sailer gunner etc but you got an amount on crew. Crew is the key of the battle.

When you take fire, crew can be kill and panick.

When crew panick, you can't use it for a time. When he is kill, you can't replace it.

When crew lost their morale and is to much panick, you're ship is auto surrendering. More you train you crew, more you improve their moral and less is your ability to auto surrender.

If you got to much people dying, you can't use everything on your ship like turning into the wind, shoot etc etc.

If you are in focus fire: armor shoot affect the crew

If you are in focus sailing, sails shoot affect the crew

etc

 

Fire

If your ship got x% on armor and %avalble crew, you get a chance to get a fire into your ship. It has to be rare. more you let the fire go, more your ship is damaged. Fire can destroy a ship if it is not control. When you try to fix a fire, your ship can't shoot neither turn. Everyone is focus on dealing with fire. If your ship is burning and you ram an another ship you get a chance to give him fire. It make firing ship dangerous for ships around specially as they are not under control.

[Alex Connor]

Perrick, I like your ideas, especially about crew.

 

If fact, I'd go further and make crew the main focus. After all it is the men of a ship that make her fight, for all the size difference a 1st rate with only 10 men on board would be a helpless victim of a sloop with 50.

 

The purpose of firing on a ship is not to sink it. Instead, the intent is to kill the crew and dismount cannon, destroying that ships ability to fight, or to bring down masts and rigging, to disable mobility.

 

So in effect the hull is armor for the crew and cannon, as this armor is damaged, holes appear, it becomes easier to kill the crew and destroy cannon. Damage below the waterline produces flooding, this means the captain must send some of their crew to the pumps, there are now less men for the cannon and sail handling so the ships fighting abilities are reduced. Similarly, a fire means crew are needed to fight it, again less for the cannon and sails.

 

Dismasting is a valid tactic in both large and small fights. In a small fight disabling an opponents mobility lets you take up a position to fire without reply and force a surrender, where for a larger fight disabling one ship lets you fight the rest at a numbers advantage (this was the french tactic). The two are more balanced against each other than PotBS, someone shooting at the hull may be able to kill enough crew and destroy enough cannon (which cannot be revived/repaired) that the enemy no longer has the firepower to finish dismasting.

 

That point about crew morale and auto-surrenders is a very good one, this would give an incentive to surrender in a hopeless fight, keep your crew alive for a more worthwhile fight instead of sacrificing them in pointless defiance.

[modernknight1]

Hello All,

 

My first post here. I am very impressed with your thinking and methods on this topic. If you would like I can provide some very rudimentary damage solutions I used to use in military and analytical simulations.

 

I don't know how early you plan to take this game's development - I am hoping at least 16th century eventually and I know there are a lot of fans of this era.

 

Historically speaking, I would add that there are actually quite a few examples of powder magazines exploding from hits during the 16th and 17th centuries. The best ones I can think of right off the top of my head are Sir John Hawkins destruction of the great Almiranta galleon Santa Clara at the Battle of San Juan Ulloa with the great aging Hanseatic carrack Jesus of Lubeck. Also there's Heemskerk's famous attack on the Spanish fleet at the Battle of Gibraltar where the Dutch Admiral's flagship Aeolus destroyed one of the great battle galleons - I think it was the Our Lady of Vega, but I can't remember. Several of the lesser actions of the Anglo-Dutch wars also resulted in capital ships lost to powder magazine explosions but I would have to look them up to remember the battles and ship names.

 

Regards,

 

MK

[maturin]

Funny you should show up, modernknight. Because not seconds ago I was fruitlessly trying to research a question you might be able to help with. It regards terminal ballistics of roundshot, quite relevant to the thread.

 

 

There are two things that I have read:

 

1) In close combat gunners used lower powder charges in order avoid penetrating both sides of the enemy vessel (supposedly allowing to ball to ricochet around the deck and cause additional mayhem instead of smashing right through). It is possible that the explanation of rationale here is incorrect, and they were just trying to save on powder, reload time and above all barrel heat.

 

2) Carronades were so destructive not just because of the large diameter shot, but also because of the low velocity. It was apparently thought that low velocity shot (so long as it was able to penetrate the hull) would create larger holes and more splinters. This makes some amount of intuitive sense to me, but is also surprising, given what I've heard about bullet wounds. So is it plausible that an overpenetrating 24lb ball going slower will smash up more timber?

 

This second idea justifies the first one. I read one of your forum posts referring to higher velocity shot doing more damage, but maybe you were talking in game terms.

 

 

Powder charge could be conceivably be a game feature, customizing your gunners' activities. Or if high charge always corresponds to long range and low charge always corresponds to short range, then it could be automated. In that case, long range fights would consume more expensive powder and increase the danger of overheated guns.

[Johny Reb]

Powder charge could be conceivably be a game feature, customizing your gunners' activities. Or if high charge always corresponds to long range and low charge always corresponds to short range, then it could be automated. In that case, long range fights would consume more expensive powder and increase the danger of overheated guns.

It would bring some balance into the fight as well. This way long gun ships won't just kite the carronade ship without a little risk.

[Brigand]

I don't know how early you plan to take this game's development - I am hoping at least 16th century eventually and I know there are a lot of fans of this era.

Initial model line up range from 1680 till 1820. (see admin's post)

 

Historically speaking, I would add that there are actually quite a few examples of powder magazines exploding from hits during the 16th and 17th centuries. The best ones I can think of right off the top of my head are Sir John Hawkins destruction of the great Almiranta galleon Santa Clara at the Battle of San Juan Ulloa with the great aging Hanseatic carrack Jesus of Lubeck. Also there's Heemskerk's famous attack on the Spanish fleet at the Battle of Gibraltar where the Dutch Admiral's flagship Aeolus destroyed one of the great battle galleons - I think it was the Our Lady of Vega, but I can't remember. Several of the lesser actions of the Anglo-Dutch wars also resulted in capital ships lost to powder magazine explosions but I would have to look them up to remember the battles and ship names.

It has been noted before that explosions did happen. Whether these explosions happened from cannon ball hits, or from other events during the chaos of battle, is not all that clear. In the time period of this game, magazines where generally speaking build well below the waterline, special 'light rooms' where adopted to make absolutely sure there was no source of fire anywhere near the powder, decks where watered, etc, etc.

 

By far the most explosions that did happen, happened because of a fire on the ship. And it may be worth noting that fire destroyed a lot of ships without there ever being an explosion. So, in other words, while fires where somewhat common, explosions where exceedingly rare (but yes, they did happen). Luckily the real world in this case is in line with what makes a good gameplay mechanic.

 

~Brigand

[BungeeLemming]

I only want to summarize where this thread is going to..

We all agree on:

 

distinguishing between hits above the waterline and below:

 

above means damage to crew, cannons, sides, masts etc.

below means damage to the hull and therefore taking on water over time.

Hits between wind and water causes a dymanic feature to the intake of water. More heel - more water    (edited this line)

 

crew damage does several things:

first of all it reduces the speed of any maneuver, reload, pumping etc.

How is crew loss defined?:

devs idea is very sweet imo:

 

Second - crew loses have to be separaided to light\heavy. Light wounds can be easely treated & crew returns to it`s work. Heavy wounds are not treated during battle (such damage can`t be restored in battle, only in ports).

That means there is a surgery somewhere in the ship.

 

Morale  :

There is a good quote/ idea devs have themselvs:

 

We have base morale + bonuses\cap`s given by previous dids (losing or winning, battle eskape), how long you have this ship\crew, how many teammates are in some radius, number of enemy ships in radius & so on.

 

Taking wind, nice broadside, disabling musts, destroying guns\ruder\etc boosts morale.

 

1 frig vs lineship - you have penalty to morale, but if you overmaneure lineship, you'll have nice boost.

2 frig vs lineship - like before, but have bonus from nearby ally.

 

Trafalgar - outnumbered by ally french-spanish fleet, but they have lower morale bonus because they are not of the same nation. That just about morale aspects of Trafalgar.

 

 

Fire on deck is a topic wich is talked over. II stated my opinion already.

 

Also Rigging damage is not final. But ideas arepresent.

- Masts have a health system like ships.

- sails are reduced by a fix number when hit by a) cannonball, grapeshot c) chainshot.

- other things i forgot

Mast/ rigging/ sail repairs is not talked over in the official forums yet I think.

 

 

Maybe someone records the topics most of us have the same opinion about?

That would be nice. (I tried it a bit here)

Somewhere on the start where everyone can find it easily one can edit a post.