DeathGenie
-
Posts
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by DeathGenie
-
-
Missions with AI would be a lot easier for Brits to overcome then organizing the man hours that it takes to collect all resources needed for first rates. I don't think you realize what an effort they are at the moment, if you think it's easy.
However, I do like the idea of pirates being able to base out of free towns that are uncapturable.
Sure, there would be the complaint that it's harder to contain pirates... but so what? Blockade and actively patrol those waters if you want to slow down pirates, the ability to squash them to the middle of the map where there capital is seems a bit silly. It'll ensure pirates are only a factor for a limited number of nationals.
I really don't like pirates being involved in the conquest area of the game like they are right now, I think there should be ports that should just be uncapturable that are pirate only, sort of like pirate havens or something, just too lawless to really control, and then free towns as well that pirates get more ability out of like raiding flags and maybe a better shipyard than is at a pirate port that allows them to build larger ships.
Why should a Pirate 3rd rate get heavier guns? First of all, where are they going to get the 42lbers? Second, how are the sides of the ship going to stay intact with 42lbers? If the ship could carry 42lbers, they would carry them. Third, what are the downsides for so overarming the ship that it affects its stability, maneuverability, speed, exhaustion of the crew exercising larger guns, it would definitely require more crew in the same amount of space, which would mean the ship would be over crowded, etc?
Wait, are you being sarcastic, or no? Because while, yes, pirates did cut out gun ports and add cannon (usually only to previously undergunned trade vessels) they would not use heavier guns to do so. Pirates wanted to capture a ship, and larger guns would result in sinking the ship instead of capturing it.
I was definitely implying overcrewing and less stability, they would have not ever realistically gotten a 3rd rate so who knows what the pirates would put on that, some of the bolder ones if they had one might aim to take out a navy frigate or something if they wanted to, we don't really know what they would do on a 3rd rate so it was just an assumption but usually they found assorted gun sizes on all decks of sunken pirate vessels some up to very large sizes it just depends on what they got their hands on. We do however know that the few larger galleons and smaller rated ships they captured often times were put ashore and all the guns moved to one size and used like a fortress near a larger pirate port.
-
Pirates should have access to Pirate 3rd rates, ships that are captured and rebuilt versions. Larger guns, but with handling penalties. The purpose of this is to keep Pirates interested in getting one without pvp.
I agree, let us put 1st rate guns on 3rd rates and perhaps more of them as well, its a very pirate thing to do, pirates weren't opposed to adding more guns than a ship was supposed to have on a ship, they weren't concerned about the long term usage of their boats, it was a means to an existence, if they needed a new boat they took one.
Toothless Jack, I think the goal is to have Pirate ports (uncapturable) spread throughout the map near prime shipping lanes, so that, to address your concern, you wouldn't be restricted to just Mortimer Town.
If we see raiding implemented and pirate port capture removed I'd like to see pirate ports unable to be captured like this, it makes pirates a global threat which sadly we can't be atm, there's not as much you can do out of a free town. I would like to see more free town functionality for pirates too, they were havens for all especially pirates, perhaps if added functionality is added to pirates in free towns some of the pirate towns could be turned into free towns.
I should also note that as a pirate, not a national player I'm supporting these things, I also would like to see crafting limited, not to just pirates, but to nationals as well, I'd like to see 1st/2nd rates come in as a reward for very high level missions and not craftable, if they were rewards from hard missions with only 1 dura I doubt anyone would recklessly waste it just because they had enough economy as a nation to do so. This would also push people towards smaller ships, not necessarily frigates, but at least somewhat towards them, another mechanic perhaps can be created to make 3rd rates hard to get as well. Perhaps higher cost to craft so you see more 3rd rates in the nations who control better economic ports than other nations, gives a reason to cap ports besides location and the current "why not" factor..
-
We have said it somewhere already: Pirate on pirate xp will most likely be switched off sooner or later. It provides too many loopholes that cannot be controlled in any other way. Though we know that introduction of assist XP kill XP has reduced the damage farming needs for the gentlemen.
What was unexpected is the pirate organization and unity - which is actually a good thing
. And because they mostly fight other nations they don't need XP on each other. Ah yes the pirate organization was a sudden thing for us too, and @Prater if the only thing you have to complain about is pirates grinding xp on other pirates then stop complaining because it isn't happening, hasn't happened since honor kills were removed.
-
If pirates cannot take ports then other factions should not be able to take our ports either, I'm okay with a mechanic that allows raiding or something instead of taking ports, but if we're removing pirates from taking ports then we need several other mechanics to change as well.
-
1
-
-
Anyways I personally think Tommy shelby is just being a little baby about this, perfectly valid tactic regardless of the situation, Tommy's fault for being there in the first place. If you really don't like being stuck in combat and want to get out, press the surrender button or sail a faster ship.
-
3
-
-
Does the Privateer give a moral boost? I am pretty sure admin stated it had boarding boosts, but he didn't say how.
If its anything like the pirate frigate it has a invisible built in boarding parties upgrade, they mentioned it just has boarding boosts as well, but thats what the boarding boost is
-
I'm all for this, and I have suggested this elsewhere countless times. The problem, and what makes me pessimistic about anything like this ever happening, is every time I've seen admin chime in on the forums about Pirate nation-building, it's always "you should all just team up and stop them." It's never: "there are changes to the faction's goals coming that include trade route raiding and uncaptureable Pirate ports throughout the map."
I, too, trust the devs to put together a solid product. But so far their answers on Piracy leave me baffled.
This leads me to believe that there's nothing in the works, and the fantastic gameplay opportunity of Pirates acting as trade raiders instead of Just Another Faction seems to be going to waste. I really hope I am wrong.
'Pirate XP only for PvP' is just a means towards accomplishing the same goal of Pirates as extremely OW PvP-oriented instead of landgrab-oriented, but instead it's under the assumption that the devs intend to keep Pirates as Just Another Faction, as they seem to indicate. (It seems like I really struck a nerve with some of those who don't like PvP, that's fine if you don't like my suggestion). I would gladly take a re-structured Pirate faction mechanic, such as Death Genie and William Drake have neatly described here, instead of the original premise of this thread. In fact I would prefer it. I'm just sadly not sure the devs are on the same page, yet.
Alright I understand where you are coming from, but I feel like removing xp from pve would take out a lot of content for pirates too, that would mean they have to grind endless pve fleets to get gold to get ships they can actually sink pvp players in and then hunt down actual players who are a low enough rank for them to even fight that then dont run away, wouldn't just be slow xp, it'd be impossible xp. I agree pvp should be required for some component of the pirate faction to work, raiding especially sounds like a good idea from all of those who suggested it, and perhaps the nations can raid the pirate ports too?
-
1
-
-
You are right. But Netherlands or Denmark Building one is at least a possibility. The have the technical knowledge the immense infrastructure and the money to do it. A bunch of Pirates Building one just isn't a possibility.
The only nation that actually built a ship of the line in the caribbean is spain, in Havana, and that's only because they owned most of cuba and its immense size allowed for the immense resources required to build a ship of the line, there has to be a balance between realism and fun, if they wanted to go full realism I doubt we would see ships of the line in the caribbean at all, and we most certainly wouldn't see more than two per nation if we even got any. We'd also be able to dock large ships in shallow water ports by using a longboat to get to the shore.
-
2
-
-
I do not want them limited, i just want them out entirely. A "Pirate Nation" defending/capturing Cities and building 1st rate Ships of the Line on mass....common this is so unrealistic, it almost ruins the game for me.
I guess I didn't realize other nations building 1st rates was realistic either, oh wait, it isn't. Very few times did the major nations send ships of the line to the caribbean, and almost every time it was done was to quell piracy. Can't have an age of sail game without pirates mate.
-
What if pirates could "raid" them instead of conquest them? If a nation failed to stop a pirate attack on a port, then it would simply be contested until server reset the next day and have less resources than before? Maybe give pirates increased booty and allow them to purchase "raid" flags from every free port or designated pirate port?
Thoughts?
I like the idea of raiding ports, the reason I didn't add it to my post is I'm pretty sure its been suggested before, I do like the idea of it being contested until the next day, then pirates can "conquest" and still do the port battles and stuff, but it would then have no long term affects on the controller of the port. Perhaps make the "raid flags" cheaper than conquest flags since you don't actually get a port out of it.
-
1
-
-
You're clearly a teenager, and a fine example of the type of Disney Pirates the current faction mechanic has brought into this community. Is this the kind of behavior and language that the devs want to keep bringing into Naval Action?
If you read my second paragraph (right below the first, dontcha know) you will see that these were the stated goals of the game, and right now the reality is not consistent with the goals. It's not a personal complaint, I've quite enjoyed sinking you and other Pirates; PvP was getting a bit dull before the game was made available to the public.
The purpose of testing this game and participating in the forums is to create discussions about features that need further development - or those that seem broken/incomplete, based on previous development plans for the game.
Pirates won't magically change their behavior to only raid trade routes when there are more traders available to sink - they'll still continue to attempt national-style empire building, which is kind of boring considering all else they should be allowed to be capable of.
Gotta love when someone starts clearly losing a debate that's obviously founded on butthurt-ness turns into an age thing. Best way to start recovery is admitting there is a problem my friend. I read all your paragraphs, and in the other forums you've posted its all the same, I've never once seen a single good idea come from you because every change you've suggested only has your own goals in mind and not the goals for a flourishing game.
I suppose I should make it clear what I'd like to see for the pirate faction instead of just being sarcastic and passive aggressive toward Sharpe, which to set the record straight I've yet to even see in game or be sunk by, anyways off my random tangent there.
I enjoy pirates as they are, and from what I understand there are changes already coming that the devs have thought of, so I've yet to actually post my suggestions because I trust the devs, probably some of the best devs I've seen in game making so far. What I'd like to see is the removal of the conquest option for pirates, right now thats not a feasible option since there isnt terribly much to do in game besides sink npcs and go on conquests or pvp, but I'd also like to see ports that are pirate ports become uncapturable, when I started the map was static and ports didn't change, there were plenty of random places around the map that a pirate could port at and make a nice home base of, perfectly dotted around the map so pirates could become a presence that causes all nation's trade to be at risk if they didn't take the long way past the pirate ports. If pirates could never capture or lose ports it would encourage groups to take up residence long term at a port and make it their goal to control the area and disrupt trading, and as traders get better they start dodging pirated areas and the smarter traders get away, but then it forces the pirates to adapt and so on and so forth creating the vicious piracy cycle we've all expected. This also encourages pirate v pirate conflict as the only real thing pirates fought each other for was plunder, the pirate that could dominate the best shipping lanes made the most money.
Before any changes happen to pirates however there needs to be changes to the other nations to encourage piracy to begin with, the current trade and economic system does not encourage sailing around looking for traders to capture.. since there are no traders, its far more profitable at the moment to just go sink everything in sight than trade. We need to see the nations changed in such a way that a trader from a nation can trade with another nation for its goods that only that nation has, as they are a luxury in places they are not produced. In times of war trade did not stop, but tariffs and blockades were a good way to control the trading.
Anyways to sum everything up, 'Sharpe, quit being butt hurt, change trade, adjust the nations to allow a trade system between nations, and then change the pirates so they are a unique faction and not just an empire building nation with a black flag.
Much love
-Death Genie
-
We saw no npcs in open sea, near the coast, near the cities, near the water in general actually, not one npc on the ocean in 2 hours of searching
-
It's really discouraging to consistently hear this. Treating Pirates like an empire-sustaining faction is just not consistent with history. And yet so much historical detail has gone into this game. Which is frustrating, because an inconsistency like this is like watching Saving Private Ryan, but at the end Matt Damon uses a lightsaber on the Germans at Ramelle.
The best response I can give is from a thread I posted in a couple weeks ago:
In real life, GB, USA, and France were able to limit Piracy because Piracy was decentralized and lacking concerted firepower relative to the Nationals.
One can't make an historical argument ("well they suppressed piracy in real life, you can too") if Pirates ingame are afforded such non-historical luxuries as a centralized location with an unassailable defense fleet.
Also, Pirates were inherently different than the U.S. Founding Fathers in terms of political goals. The analogy posited is false. Aspiring nations such as the United States sought independence under a common banner, with the hopes of creating either a centralized political structure, or, in the case of the U.S., a looser decentralized confederation.
Any research on Pirates shows that Piracy was primarily motivated by short term, personally achievable goals such as profit, and freedom from debt collectors or the law. Nation-building is motivated by long-term, collective goals, that require independent actors to forego short term gain for a larger concept, for historical posterity and glory for future generations.
As short-term actors, many Pirates quarreled with and possessed animosity towards certain other Pirates more than they had towards nations. Yes, a select few literate Pirates did write of dreams of a Pirate paradyse, a land under the black flag, but such musings are akin to disruptive teenagers of the current age dreaming of a utopia without laws and police. They were pipe dreams, not based on what was realistically feasible, in other words. And this was yet a minority: most Pirates saw no future beyond the well being of their purses and their ships.
To treat Pirates as some sort of unified front that historically wanted to band together under a common flag and create a cohesive political empire that would span generations is, simply, wrong in the historical realm. I'm quite disappointed to hear that admin wants to treat them as such, as this game is so good at honoring history in other ways. This seems astonishingly inconsistent with history.
In addition to the inconsistency with history, there are also gameplay reasons to want the Pirate experience to be different. It's more fun for everyone if piracy is the scourge of the entire Caribbean, not just the scourge of the area surrounding Mortimer town, or whatever territory they own. To accomplish this, there should be uncaptureable pirate havens spread around the map, and gameplay reasons to keep Pirates visiting each haven (perhaps their endgame RvR goal is to sink a certain amount of tonnage in each sector). It seems like a huge missed opportunity if a Pirate "empire" spreads around Mortimer Town (arbitrary location), and players of Spanish, French, Dutch factions who rarely leave the Lower Antilles almost never encounter a single Pirate.
Anyways there were pirates that historically wanted to make a pirate nation, Blackbeard is one, there was also a group on Nassau who wanted to become an independent nation, before the english killed them that is... Not as a short term goal, they actually made steps to become their own nation.
Genie, it's not my goal to preach about making the Pirate faction being harder, but I do believe the faction should be different from the others. I want all you guys to have fun too. I know and like and respect many Pirate players. I want this game to succeed and that means making the best possible gameplay experience for all. In fact, if you read other posts I've made I actually suggest unique buffs to Pirate play, unique ships, customization, modules, etc, that nationals cannot have.
As stated above there's just so many gameplay opportunities that can be unlocked by allowing Pirates to fill their historical role. It would help the economy, diplomacy, RvR strategy, and it would just feel so fresh coming from a game like this. We already have 7 factions...is it more important to have an 8th that's completely identical, or more important to have an 8th that's capable of filling a unique and fun role?
Anyway, I hope what you say is correct about changes coming to Pirates, because I have not heard anything like that confirmed.'Sharpe, on 06 Jan 2016 - 2:31 PM, said:
Actually
Pirates are intended to be the most difficult faction.
You did start your post off complaining about how we're not the hardest faction and complaining that we xp farm off each other, which actually hasn't happened since honor kills were removed. When there are more players and more traders pirates will look like pirates rather than conquesting all of america's ports, because there will be reason to pirate, there isn't right now. You're pointing your finger in the wrong direction, the solution is not located in changing the pirate nation, but changing the other nations to encourage trade.
So from what I understand the reason you actually made this post was because you're butt hurt that the pirates are stronger than you and stealing all your ports, suggesting changes because butt hurt is not the right path.
-
Seven days at sea here, not sure why they aren't spawning, I'm wondering if maybe the spawn system is trying to spawn pavel fleets and it can't since they dont exist, but it thinks it spawned a fleet and since that fleet that it never spawned never dies it never spawns another fleet in its place?
-
I'm so sorry that you feel as though your enemies should have it harder than you, they are changing pirates to make them harder but this is not the way.
-
Apparently not: http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=4672
Hebe carried the same name in British service until being broken up in 1811.
Gardiner speculates that the British remembered the Leda-class Shannon for beating USS Chesapeake, while Lively-class Macedonian lost to USS United States.
Ah, makes some sense, I guess it could also be that its still in commission as a museum ship in Great Britain..
-
Good to know. More information is always good. I can see how sitting deeper could influence better wave resistance and increase speed, especially in deeper waves. So, now I guess the question is why did they choose the trinc? And screw frigates were frigates that had an engine. Later on when steam ships became big. Quite a few ships commissioned as Leda class were finished as screw frigates.A screw frigate?
I recommend getting Robert Gardiner's books (Frigates of the Napoleonic Wars and The Heavy Frigate) as soon as possible. He evaluates the sailing quality reports for each type of Leda.
Wikipedia can point you to the Ledas named Lacedaemon and Tanais.
It's no surprise that an oak ship was fastest. The lines were drawn for a ship made of oak, not something lighter. And when the British designed frigates (Lively, for instance), they tended to be fastest when stored deep.
-
From what I've read they are always referred to as Cydnus class, good to know its a sub class of Leda ships. From what I understand there was a ship named Leda, a Hébé class ship. Perhaps renamed Leda when the english captured it.The french never had a frigate called Leda. The french L´Hébé got captured and served as a base for the british Leda-class.
Cydnus was the first of the pin-built Ledas and to be able to distinguish between these and the 'normal' Ledas they´re referred to as Cydnus-class.
And both, Lacedaemonian and Tanais, were Ledas. Source: British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793 -1817, Winfield
-
What is your source for that? Gardiner records the Lacedaemon and Tanais* as the fastest of any Leda variant, and they were oak and fir-built, respectively.
And teak is far superior to oak for resisting corrosion and the rigors of service. The weak Ledas were, of course, the ones built from pine.
*Totally random name a ship, in honor of a place in Russia I visited once or twice.
I'd need to find the book I read it in, I don't remember the name of it. I can probably find it at the library if I go look again. As far as I know pine is lighter than teak, as far as the oak Leda being the fastest, was it turned into a screw frigate? I'm not sure I've heard of either of those two, don't remember them being listed in the list of Leda class frigates in the book on frigates I read. Are you sure those two are Leda class and not just other types of frigates? The only Lacedaemon I know is a sloop, and the only Tanais I know is a 3rd rate ship of the line built in france.
Aha. The french made the Leda. Interesting.
Oak much heavier and durable than teak. Also interesting. Is this the reason the Seringapatam (based on the french Président and also made of teak) sat a good deal deeper in the water than actually designed?
And the 'Cydnus-class' you mentioned were Ledas, just built of pine, not oak.
That could be it, it also depends on how thick it is, they have similar buoyancy, so if it was based on a teak ship and made from oak they might not have taken that into account. But yeah the Leda itself was made by the french, it was a french hebe class ship, the english captured it and based the Leda class on it. The trinc was the only teak Leda ship. What source lists the Cydnus class as Leda? As far as I knew they were commissioned to be Leda class ships, but were then modified and made into a new class of ship, "Cydnus"
-
Whaaaat? They were, like, the largest British frigate class. Probably the most mass-produced warship design of the era.
Have you even glanced at the current lineup of ships?
Every single rated vessel besides Pavel and Bellona has a claim to fame. Ontario, Niagara and Lynx made headlines within our lifetime. Mercury is legendary. Endymion, Amsterdam and most other planned vessels are also well-known. We only get obscure vessels when there is a gap that needs filling and a certain class that needs typifying. Each vessel needs to be able to stand in for dozens or hundreds more. It's called priorities.
The point is that Trincomalee, which the Leda class actually had a decent amount built, is representative of a lot of different ships and classes - the 38 gun 18lb frigate. Even the United States class had 3 ships plus all the 44 gun Superfrigates they inspired to be built, even into the 1830s. And the French claim that their heavy 40 gun frigates were the predecessors to the American Superfrigates.
Most of the ships in game have the same general characteristics that were generally universal among the ships of the same type. There weren't extremely drastic differences. An extra 100' + mast is pretty drastic/extremely obvious difference. How many ships of the time period had this? If there are 20 ships in game and this is one of them, that is representative of 5% of the ships in naval action. I'm fine with it if all in-game nations get fleshed out (have several ships of different classes/types) first.
Okay so just to clear things up, yes there were a good bit of Leda class frigates commissioned, many of which either, never sailed, or were cancelled or converted during the build process to either screw frigates or converted to another class of ship. (Seringapatam or Cyndnus) Many of the "Leda" frigates were actually of the Cydnus class. There were 24 Leda class frigates made (6 of which were also modified designs), and the Trincomalee is a poor representation of them. The american super frigates weren't inspired by these ships, those were already built by the time the french made the ship Leda. (Hebe class ship) The Trincomalee was a Leda class frigate, but the reason it's significant, is because its made of teak, which made it MUCH lighter (And faster..) than other Leda class frigates, and also much weaker. Oak is much heavier and more durable than teak.
@Prater you bring up a good point, it does have one more mast, but it is just a 26 gun privateer, it is faster, but turns much slower than other ships we currently have. But the biggest weakness it has, is since its a small style ship, the guns are tiny. It has 24 6 pound guns, and 2 12 pound carronades. Its not meant to fight as a ship of the line. It was meant to be a ship that a man who had a letter of marque had built to go run down and sack other nation's trade ships that were lightly armed, a good small pirate vessel that was... well easily destroyed by a frigate. Now I do agree that other more significant ships should come out first, including some good trader ships, and some good research ships, and maybe some bomb ketches. But, it is a pretty significant ship itself and as we get more ships it is a good ship for the devs to consider implementing. It doesn't fit with any of the ships we currently have and its hard to class it as OP since it probably could get sunk by a brig or a snow. Its a nice pirate ship and not much else.
-
1
-
-
I'm sorry for the uproar, it was me who hijacked your topic.
There is no point in denying the fact that those early developments, of the next generation of ships, sailed around at the closing of the 18th century, they existed and were build. However, at the same time, they were the exeption rather than the norm. A game like Naval Action tries to portray the era as it was. But since it is not possible to add each and every ship that ever existed to a game, the selection of ships for the game needs to be a good representation of what was a common sight. Since experimental, ahead of its time designs were exceptional for their time and because it is a waste of development budget to create a ship and then artificially limit the number of copies you allow to be in the game* because of their historical rarity, I think the game's development budget could better be spend at creating other interesting ships which were more typical of the time period.
*) The one thing I could see designs like this shine, is as unique ships handed out as a 'gold medal' rewards for the winner of some future live event. But for now, I haven't heard of any ideas for events like this from Game Labs. Who knows, maybe in the future?
anyhow, I'll let this thread turn back to its original topic and refrain from posting offtopic here again :-)
Cheers,
Brigand
To be fair the Trincomalee is also in the same... boat.. pun intended, as L'Invention. Very few Leda class frigates were made, and all of them were made in 1805-1830, and many were not used until 1840+ another example of new tech that wasn't very common I don't think the devs are overly worried about exceptions from the norm because of this. Ships like this are added because it increases the number of ships to choose from if everyone sailed the same ship it would be a bit more boring. You aren't really off topic here, its mostly a discussion about if these ships would fit in.
L'Invention is a privater ship, the first modern with four masts in 1799.
One deck with 28-guns: 26-guns of 6-pdr and 2 carronade of 12-pdr.
133´ of lenght and lean frame. Simple decor style of frigates of the late eighteenth century.
In another topic Surcof posted these plans, not sure where he got them he didn't say, anyone who can read these plans think they look about right compared to the specs listed on: http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/Ships/Fourmast_ships/Invention(1801).html ?
There may also be plans for this ship in the book "Index of fast sailing ships: their Design and Construction, 1775-1875 by David R. MacGregor" if anyone has a copy of this book. A bit of research online led me to that book but I cannot find an online copy of it.
-
L'Invention is a privater ship, the first modern with four masts in 1799.
One deck with 28-guns: 26-guns of 6-pdr and 2 carronade of 12-pdr.
133´ of lenght and lean frame. Simple decor style of frigates of the late eighteenth century.
You saved me a lot of work finding those plans, I was planning on doing some research to find them later for the post http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7607-four-masted-ships/as we were discussing L'Invention over there as well. Hairy Fishnuts posted this painting of it over there yesterday.I would love to see this beautiful ship added to the game
-
1
-
-
What I mean to say is that the game has been set at a timeline of 1690-1790 preferred. Having 4-masted ships sail around would hurt that image. As I mentioned, other than visual spice, the exotic designs add nothing game-play wise, while at deluding the image of the era 1690 - 1790.
~Brigand
Didn't realize this would cause an uproar, the main ship that I wanted was the four masted ship we've been referencing (L'Invention), the others such as the galleon were more so to show that ships like that did exist and weren't uncommon. I assumed the time period to be between mid 1700s to early 1800s due to Trafalgar being in 1805, This ship specifically I wanted to bring attention to was commissioned in 1799 and launched in 1801, its the early development of the next generation of ships. Something that would be interesting and add a bit to the era, not take away from it.
-
If you make a thread in the ship yard and find ships of the period with plans, i dont see why not however do note there are many ships in the work and it will take a while before any come to fruitation.
Good Idea, I spent a few hours researching to make sure I was posting correct information, I'd need to find plans
Galleons with a 4th (Bonaventure) mast are out of period.
That 4-masted privateer sounds interesting, but of course there are no images of it, nor descriptions of its rig.
I was surprised to learn that there were actually 3-masted schooners in the 18th century, with mizzen masts like a ship.
Yeah the 3-masted schooners and 2-masted schooners were developed relatively early, took some hundred and fifty years for someone to think to put a fourth mast on there, and yeah the galleons that were in use in this period, were mostly either manila galleons, which were all three masted, or other large trading galleons, the few four masted ones were for the most part decommissioned, as with any ship type however there were still a few around, some in the hands of pirates, some in the hands of merchants that couldn't afford a newer faster ship, would be interesting to see as a very rare ship
. And because they mostly fight other nations they don't need XP on each other. 
Pirate Mechanics Vote
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
I agree, even as a pirate, limited access to ships of the line doesn't remove anything from anyone, if we pirates cannot craft ships of the line it does strongly limit our port capping and large pvp battle capabilities, but you know what? No one is required to be a pirate if you dislike the idea of pirates being limited by nature don't be a pirate, if we do limit pirates to raiding and make their few ports across the map uncappable then we'll see pirates doing.. well piraty things, raiding ports, attacking traders, attacking naval officers who can't stand up to them. If you want nation play, play as an established nation, I'm sure the US and brits could use assistance as they obviously can't stand up to the current pirate faction, right now its just a nation like every other nation, we have other nations, if pirates become different than nations then we won't really lose people... we'll see some of the current pirates switching to a nation, but thats not exactly a bad thing huge nations with small amounts of pirates around the map in their strategically placed locations disrupting the trade lanes would be interesting. Right now what we have is a huge black nation crushing actual nations, not being pirates.
If we do see changes like this I'd also like to see an option to defect from the pirate faction to any nations, perhaps it costs a large amount of gold, but you have the ability to buy a pardon from a nation and become that nation. Enough gold that its not worth exploiting, but not so much that its impossible for a player to do.