Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Fluffy Fishy

Tester
  • Content Count

    1,001
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Fluffy Fishy

  1. That goes too far the other way for me, I'm quite picky with ship aesthetics. My favourite ships are all from the 1780s. I'm most fond of designs from this period when the waist is fairly enclosed but still a feature. It doesn't really matter if its a frigate or a line ship either I just like a nice bulwark without the enclosed design of spardecks which I think look a bit square and blocky but I don't like the lego pirate ship vibe either 😄
  2. I don't normally like spardecks but I really like this one, its such a shame she's out of period for NA.
  3. I have spent the last few days dipping into Battlefield Gothic: Armada 2, it will be interesting to see how these two games compare, although no doubt I much prefer the age of sail setting to the Warhammer world, I have no interest in warhammer its just what looks like one of the few tactical "naval" combat games on the market right now. I'd be interested to hear if the dev team here has played any Battlefield Gothic and what they have liked, disliked and how it might inspire features of Ultimate Admiral. I have to say I find the broadsides in space quite satisfying, although I don't like the more gimmicky parts of Armada 2 like the extra powerful abilities. I'm also not a great fan of the campaign urgency mechanic or the lack of a grand campaign but its not the end of the world. Its still an enjoyable experience if you like the kind of game, even though I don't care the slightest for Warhammer lore or world building. I doubt I wouldn't drop Armada 2 in a hearbeat to play a good age of sail naval combat game so I'm still itching for ultimate admiral news
  4. Id love to see this change but it has to be accompanied by the death of thickness meta, structure should play a much more important role in the game than thickness. Thickness as it currently stands is an entirely ridiculous mechanic that is neither historical nor fun.
  5. For the purpose of discussion its probably worth dropping this topic in here too, even though I have edited some of the values now, there is are some interesting posts on there. Most importantly there are 2 tables on there that are useful to the discussion here, I will post them below. Typical Guns British (453g) French Livre (489g) Russian Funt (495g) Spanish Libre (459g) Turkish Okka (1282g) Dutch Pond (494g) Venetian Libbre Sottili (301g) Portugese Libra (459g) Swedish Skålpund (425g) Danish-Norwegian Pund (499g) 6 2.718 2.934 2.97 2.754 7.692 2.964 1.806 2.754 2.55 2.994 9 4.077 4.401 4.455 4.131 11.538 4.446 2.709 4.131 3.825 4.491 12 5.436 5.868 5.94 5.508 15.384 5.928 3.612 5.508 5.1 5.988 18 8.154 8.802 8.91 8.262 23.076 8.892 5.418 8.262 7.65 8.982 24 10.872 11.736 11.88 11.016 30.768 11.856 7.224 11.016 10.2 11.976 32 14.496 15.648 15.84 14.688 41.024 15.808 9.632 14.688 13.6 15.968 36 16.308 17.604 17.82 16.524 46.152 17.784 10.836 16.524 15.3 17.964 42 19.026 20.538 20.79 19.278 53.844 20.748 12.642 19.278 17.85 20.958 68 30.804 33.252 33.66 31.212 87.176 33.592 20.468 31.212 28.9 33.932 Britain (453g) France (489g) Russia (494g) Spain (459g) Turkey (1282g) Netherlands (494g) Venice (301g) Portugal (459g) Sweden (425g) Denmark-Norway (499g) 42lb 36lb 68lb 36lb 14 okka 40lb 50lb 36lb 36lb 36lb 32lb 30lb 60lb 24lb 9 okka 36lb 40lb 24lb 30lb 24lb 24lb 24lb 48lb 18lb 5 okka 30lb 30lb 18lb 24lb 18lb 18lb 18lb 36lb 12lb 3 okka 24lb 20lb 12lb 18lb 12lb 12lb 12lb 30lb 8lb 1.5 okka 18lb 16lb 9lb 12lb 8lb 9lb 8lb 24lb 6lb 3 Kantar (169.5kg) 12lb 14lb 6lb 8lb 6lb 6lb 6lb 18lb 4lb 1 Kantar (56.5kg) 9lb 12lb 6lb 4lb 4lb 12lb 48lb Obusier (French lb) 1/2 Kantar (28.3kg) 6lb 9lb 4lb 3lb 48lb Obusier 8lb 36lb Obusier (French lb) 6lb 3lb 68lb Carronade 36lb Obusier 6lb 30lb Obusier (French lb) 200lb Tirar Bombe (30lb) 2lb 32lb Carronade 30lb Obusier 3lb 24lb Obusier (French lb) 120lb Tirar Bombe (20lb) 24lb Carronade 24lb Obusier 96lb Carronade 18lb Obusier (French lb) 18lb Carronade 18lb Obusier 68lb Carronade 12lb Obusier (French lb) 12lb Obusier 48lb Carronade 36lb Carronade 30lb Carronade 24lb Carronade 18lb Carronade 12lb Carronade 8lb Carronade 6lb Carronade 1 Pood Edinorog (63lb) 1/2 Pood Edinorog (29lb) 1/4 Pood Edinorog (9lb)
  6. 36lb was a pretty common weighting in the age of sail though, while the actual weight of shot varied quite a bit Russia, France, Spain, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and Denmark-Norway all used 36s. Its also the largest service long gun in the Spanish, French, Portuguese, Danish-Norwegian and Swedish navies. I still stick to my point in having extended use of it benefiting the general balance in such a positive way, especially considering the stats on the 36s in the current state. It would make players think twice about the current L' Ocean meta.
  7. When you are casually admiring the work of Sir Thomas Slade and his designs and you suddenly get reminded how awkwardly racist people were in the 18th and 19th centuries....
  8. I wasn't really sure where to put the Dutch, I figured it suits them to be there because that gives 5 of the current factions to each side, realistically they should probably be with the French as the Batavian Republic during the Napoleonic period but that leaves a slightly uncomfortable imbalance with 6 nations to 4, although realistically numbers of nations don't really matter much, with player numbers being the real driving force. It was just a rough suggestion for potential grouping. You can always add a bunch of other internal flavour nations to each faction leaving you with something like: 1) France, USA, Spain, Denmark, Poland + Kingdom of Italy, Confederacy of the Rhine, Kingdom of Naples 2) Britain, Sweden, Russia, Prussia, Netherlands + Austria, Portugal, Ottomans 3) Pirates + Berbers Alternatively you could also split potential flavour nations between the factions that represent the same area to create something like: 1) France etc + Batavian Republic, Kingdom of Italy, Confederacy of the Rhine 2) Britain etc + Netherlands, Italian States, Holy Roman Empire 3) Pirates Alternatively you could create a slightly more complicated system of core factions then the additional nations where you use the current Alliance system to block the more loose states like the Netherlands or the USA to belong to either one of the core factions but with the fluidity to swap between the two but thats getting a bit more complex. Either way establishing two major factions and have as well pirates would at least in my mind be very beneficial to the game and likely sort out some of the major issues the game has with PVP and RVR and the dynamics it currently has.
  9. I think quite a lot of people have been having this same idea for a long time, the amount of nations currently in the game is crazy and excessive especially when you think of how few actual players the game has retained now. There is no real reason why the game shouldn't have 2-4 factions and it would be better for everyone. I fully agree with the whole nations within nations idea and we could loosely base factions on say the napoleonic wars and lump together something like this: 1) France, USA, Spain, Denmark, Poland 2) Britain, Sweden, Russia, Prussia, Netherlands 3) Pirates Then you could always add other nations like Portugal and the Italian states or whoever else you please to give national identity within the factions involved.
  10. This all looks very exciting, thank you for sharing the screenshots. It looks like it will be quite different and out there, I can't wait to play it. I hope I can get involved in the project somehow 🤞 I will be eagerly watching the rest of the development cycle.
  11. Will there be scope for expanding on these two figures to include a more generalised campaigns in the future, say following for example the 7 years war rather than specific historic figures and their personal service? This all sounds very promising, I can't wait to hear more.
  12. This does look like a suddenly interesting something, Sign me up. Now if only I can work out a way to get into that testing forum....
  13. A potential suggestion for the Flags DLC for touchy US players to fly from their Constitution Classics
  14. For those of you who may not be aware there is currently a large collaboration project going on between a group of youtube creators that is looking in quite some depth at Naval history, one of these videos in the collection talks about ships of the line and provides some fantastic points I haven't really thought about before. Its well worth a watch for those who are interested in the subject. Hope you enjoy
  15. The Leon Trionfante class was modified between each series to bring it up to date with the contemporary practices. There were various changes to the various structural elements of the class over the 80 odd years they were being produced. The most notable difference being the stern as you point out, with the older designs having 4 ports and much more decorative features while the more modern ships were cut for 2 stern ports and had much more modest and up to date practical features like stronger bulwarks, there were also various minor changes to the hold and the inner works of the ship to improve the sailing qualities. There are even more noticeable changes and upgrades between the San Michele Arcangelo class if you check the differences between San Michele Arcangelo and Concordia, of which there are both pictures on this thread (1st and 7th pages). On a more general level ship classes aren't as heavily defined as people might think, ships frequently received upgrades and various minor refits where things like pumps were brought up to date with more modern versions similarly to system upgrades on modern warships today so as to prolong their lifespans, this thought path was also applied to general classes, especially classes that had such a long lifespan as the Leon Trionfante, with a class service history of over 100 years, something pretty rare for warships of the era, especially considering that they were active warships for the vast majority of that time too, rather than being confined to ordinary or used as hulks. I wrote out a more fleshed out piece on the Leon Trionfante class to give her her own forum post a while back you might like to check out, I haven't really gone into much detail of the various modifications between the 4 different series though. I hope that helps answer at least some of your questions.
  16. She's got some pretty interesting features going on there, it might just be the model but those curves are quite unusual, plus her beakhead and bowsprit angle, the tumblehome and pretty much the entire structure over the waterline seems pretty curious. Are those measurements in french feet? What are her metric values? Nice post, do you have any more information, especially around her design?
  17. Honestly I would just prefer the old battle end screen brought back with loot being assigned there, it was far less of a pain than the current mechanics. Looting in a lot of ships is just a massive pain and the idea of looting sinking and captured ships is just kind of gimmicky and doesn't really add anything to the game. It was sad the battle end screen abuse wasn't addressed in a way that maintained the old and now lost mechanic but made it impossible for the people using it to use it in the manner they did.
  18. Probably the best value for money and most available is the Age of the Galley, part of Conway's History of the Ship, they are very cheap second hand online, it gives a pretty good basic history of the entire naval era. Bizarrely the paperback copies tend to be more expensive than the hardbacks too so you can get yourself a nicely laid out fairly comprehensive introduction to galleys. I've got some other more specialist books that are a bit harder to come by that go into some detail, but they are mainly centred around Venetian galleys though. Galleons and Galleys, Venetian ships and shipbuilders, Fleets of the World The Galley period and Guido Ercole's Le Galee Mediterranee 5000 anni di storia techniche e documenti, Galeazze Un sogno Veneziano and Galee Veneziane per Capo da Mar are all really good books. There are some other really good books out there but I can't recommend them fully as I've not read/owned a copy of them. The French galley La Reale is pretty well documented, its a shame the era doesn't get as much attention or romanticised as much as the age of sail. Hope this helps
  19. 9kn isnt unusual for a swift built galley, the fact olympias is built with sitting benches is a bit strange. Galleys in the gunpowder age had their benches arranged in a similar fashion to the classical era warships so much so medieval era naval architecutre was constantly looking at its ancestors for mathematical inspiration to get the most power out of its oars. Its also worth pointing out that during the high galley period they were also trireme style ships with the core mechanics remaining the same. The benching arrangements of triremes and how they were looked at in the medieval world were actually a major influence in the start of the renaissance, while the birth of modern science and the scientific method of ship design is directly linked to the mathematical principles of rowing quinqueremes, with the first early modern ship using the scientific method being a galleass. Standing rowing is a universal thing that was common place not only in Europe but Asia too, especially in China, Korea and Japan around the same time. Everyone. Compactness of design wasn't something that changed dramatically over the 5000 years of the galley, sailors just rowed in crampt conditions taking this back to olympias its likely inspired by modern misinterpretation spurred on with almost no architectural physical evidence from archaeology due to finding a preserved ship from before around 900 is almost never heard of. If you want to see how standing rowing works physically you are probably best off finding a video of a gondoleir or watching a rowing exercise take place in a japanese martial art, both show quite well the use of body mechanics in rowing and how rowing was from a standing position, with the gondola being designed in a way to train Venetian oarsmen during daily life similarly to the more famous Sunday longbow practise training in medieval England.
  20. Classical oared ships, and to be honest the entire galley period (roughly 4000BC-1571AD) used wind as the primary motor for warships, there are a lot of poor modern interpretations of galley era warfare and seamanship. Oars were used for making port or in battle but rowing was incredibly demanding physically, it wasn't common for an oared ship to row for more than an hour at a time at cruising speed, the much more straining full speed rowing couldn't be kept up more than 15-20 minutes by even the most hardy and experienced benchmen. The large crews of galleys were also necessary to hoist the massive square, and later triangular sails. Its probably also worth pointing out the use of rams is vastly overstated, with missile weapons being the primary weapon of conflict during the period, but also through hand to hand combat taking place frequently in boarding action. The notable rams on the ancient and early medieval era ships were mainly to create a stable fighting platform or sweeping oars, so as disabling the primary fighting engine similarly to de-masting a ship in the age of sail. Punching a large hole in a ship and being caught up in another sinking would put incredible strain on the hull and drag both ships into the water. When it comes to slaves rowing, it depended heavily on the nations states involved, some used slaves some didn't. Taking the most famous of the Greek cities, Sparta used pressed men and slaves, while Athens used citizens, while other nations of the time such as Persia used conscripted men, acting as a kind of middle ground. Fast forwarding to the medieval world, most Christian navies used paid oarsmen, but often supplemented with the use of convicts and conscripts whilst the Ottomans and Berbers used a mix of conscripts and slaves, Venice is probably the best example of a nation that was reluctant to use impressed men for the same reasons as Athens in the ancient world in that they performed much better as citizens, although by the end of the early modern period the Venetian navy did have a small handful of convict rowed galleys. Something that most people aren't aware of is that almost all galleys due to their light construction spent large amounts of time out of the water, being pulled onto beaches or onto slips to maintain and careen, dry out and do various maintenance much more than sailing ships, this is why they spent so much time close to shore, not due to being unstable in open waters. Galleys were perfectly able and did sail in the Atlantic, they were a common sight on the Atlantic coastline in the Ancient and Medieval world, being replaced as trade ships in the mid 1400s. Lastly something else worth pointing out is that oar driven ships were, unlike they are often depicted in film and media rowed standing up rather than sitting down, the benches while a prominent part of galley design were used as resting areas, similarly to hammocks not as a seat to row from. Rowing was an activity that used the entire body, making the most of the powerful core muscle groups and leverage of a standing position as compared to the relatively static and arm heavy seated positions seen in films such as Ben-Hur. Also If anyone has any questions I am more than happy to answer them
  21. A game shouldn't promote the idea of boring journeys, if you are making boredom a feature or theme you are doing something fairly wrong by design. The game needs to be more accesssible for the players who can only spare an hour or two playing at any given time not less, issues like this that make the game more closed off to the everyman gamer punish the whole community because it slowly drives players away, making for an even more empty world with even more boring sailing periods. Ive spent too many periods playing where i sail for an hour and find nothing, no players no worthwhile AI ships nothing worth fighting to then have to sail back to port to log off. The game needs to take into account that not only does putting fees, even token fees has a negative effect on players psychology when it comes to long term playing but something like this will also slowly damage player numbers. Its also important to remember life can and often does change and even the most proactive veteran players can find themselves in different circumstances which force them to be able to dedicate less time to something they enjoy like Naval Action. Please don't make design choices that mean boredom is a feature and the game is any way less accessible to the more casual end of the community its already closed off too much to the everyman.
  22. I miss the old system, sure it had faults but you could basically craft what you wanted in the way you wanted it. Players should be able to craft and sail the ship that suits them most. I'd happily do away with the RNG and just have flat ships so everyone is equal and it becomes more skill based again. The current system that relies too much on giving your ship the best bonuses you can stinks and destroys balance because changing a ships stats up to around 30% is near impossible to balance properly. It would be cool to see some kind of system of diminishing returns going on where it becomes increasingly expensive to create a marginally better ship, and as the more you squeeze out of it the lower the gains but it should be controlled by the crafter, giving a proper sense of quality vs quantity that was there historically. Crafting notes kind of made sense, to make them work better they just needed to be non tradable so you were forced to make them yourself and spend hours on making them, the idea that you can spend more hours on a ship to make it better makes total sense in a MMO world, and if you stagger them by saying something like 0 notes for a basic ship, 2 notes for green, 5 notes for blue, 10 notes for purple and 16 notes for gold it would probably balance fairly well, you'd have access to the ships you wanted. One of the main issues with the game economy right now is its missing equilibriums and consumer surplus, it would benefit the game so much to allow players to make more market lead choices as they do in real life, crafting needs these aspects to be a fulfilling task, rather than what it is at the moment which is just asymmetrical RNG favouring middle of nowhere ports, ports that take you away from the community and make the experience more grind ridden as a whole and therefore the game experience worse, in the hope it promotes RVR, which it doesn't.
  23. The first points you make about rifles being new contradict what you said in the last post, you even contradict yourself a little in the first 2 paragraphs of this post. Elite rifle units have been around as long as rifles so no they weren't a particularly new concept to infantry at all, for the most part the use of rifles as a percentage of army composition didn't even raise a significant amount during the period the game is set either, sure there were more riflemen but there were more everything and considering quite a few major and successful military nations didn't bother using rifles because they were unconvinced of the benefits even for skirmishing it kind of brings home the point and generally the use of rifles in battle is romanticised and blown massively out of proportion because they had rather limited advantages over muskets. Marines sometimes were and sometimes weren't drawn from regular infantry, it depended entirely on how the commissioned officers decided to recruit their men which was an entirely devolved process and they were drilled to be able to act effectively in their roles at sea, sea service muskets weren't less accurate than land patterns, they did however have slightly less stopping power but only when splitting hairs. Marines served all over the ship, they were stationed in the rigging, the fighting tops and all fighting decks, it was important to station marines on the gun decks so as to deal with men climbing through gunports during boarding but also offer some small fire support during gun reloads. Smoothbore weapons aren't wholly inaccurate, no one would call modern battle tanks inaccurate, they almost unanimously carry smooth bore turrets, taking it back to shotguns, you actually see fairly limited accuracy improvement using a slug from a rifled shotgun vs a smoothbore shotgun, the same goes for rifled and non rifled slugs when fired from a smoothbore weapon, taking this back historically when precision engineering was much less refined this difference only becomes more marginal. Rifles only start to get significant advantages over smoothbore with better engineering and the invention of the minie ball, the traditional 18th century system of patching rifled muskets with leather or cloth giving limited advantage over typical smoothbore and generally only useful for light infantry type roles. Ships wouldn't fire guns all at once or many at all really, you simply wouldn't see 20-50 guns firing at once, typically around 2-5 would fire in the opening broadside but then guns would fire as loaded plus the system of ropes and tackle would absorb the vast majority of the recoil, leaving the ship as a stable firing platform, which was essential considering the small angles of roll and heel associated with large ships, especially ships of the line. Marines would learn to move with the ship, waves follow a distinct pattern meaning the ship would too, which for the most part you can account for just like with breathing. The reason officers walked around the ship during combat was because it was their job, they had to lead and command the crew, and for the most part the officers doing the majority of the legwork are the low ranking midshipmen and lieutenants. if you have ever read an account of Nelson Trafalgar the Victorys senior staff all chastised Nelson for his presence on deck and his example proves that it was entirely viable and historical for shooters in the rigging to provide accurate fire onto decks at long ranges, made even more to the point by the fact the French didn't use rifles. Pistols weren't inaccurate at 5ft, sorry but that's just nuts, typical pistol accuracy of the era was 5-8m depending on the design and length of barrel, typical sea service pistols were accurate to around the 6m mark. Duels had a fairly high survival rate from design, they typically agreed 5-10 paces, meaning both combatants would take at least 5 paces so 10 overall, roughly equivalent to 7.5m or 15m at 10 paces at the edge of the accurate range of the pistols. Muskets aren't short range weapons, by no means are they long range but calling them short is just propagating the typical myth of them being short and inaccurate, which they weren't. Aiming wasn't really done, again another myth, presenting is not aiming and this is something that is probably the fault of hollywood and friends, this is something probably better explained with land warfare than sea, you wouldn't aim at someone or something you would present your musket to the face of the enemy fire and reload, you don't aim because it one slows down combat, two tires the combatant and three disrupts unit cohesion. The concept of aiming was so alien to to the typical soldier of the era it was considered barbaric, with the most notable example being Ferguson not shooting Washington in 1777 because aiming at a man in such manner was considered vulgar, its something still seen today with typical soldiers finding it incredibly difficult to aim at another human and typically fire low or high.
×
×
  • Create New...