Brigand
-
Posts
864 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Brigand
-
-
Towns forms and colors research. Provide feedback if you think some of the forms are wrong. Germany is just for analysis - it will not be present in the prototype.
The Dutch colors and, more importantly, building shapes need to be different:
references: klokgevel, dom toren Utrecht.
~Brigand
-
3
-
-
Spanish feet are a nuisance as they 'spread' considerably. (279mm (most commonly used) to 566mm), and their local poundages have similar variations.
Tell me about it, in the Dutch republic they used different feet in different cities, so far I've encountered 6 different sizes and one reference to miscalculations (in the 17th century) as a result of the difference in length between the Amsterdam foot and the Rijnlandsh foot.
Maybe some Spanish forum member has better access to historic sources and can come up with a more definite answer on the weight of a Spanish pound in grams in the 18th century?
~Brigand
-
If it sells good , why not?
If making money is to be the best argument in game development, quality and gameplay experience suffer. So far, Game Labs has shown (by closing the pre-orders) that they care about the gameplay experience first and money second.
There are plenty of whaling ships out there that fit right into the presented time line. Although I don't really see why we would need one, because whaling has been mentioned to be a 'maybe somewhere in the future, but don't hold your breath' feature.
~Brigand
-
1
-
-
The best information we have on the time frame is:
We definitely stop at 1820 mark yes. +-5 years.
Initial model line up range from 1680 till 1820.
Going earlier than that might make line battles look strange (with old galleons alongside modern 2nd rates)In the Player selected ship 2015 - Suggestions-thread, @admin mentioned: 1600-1830 hard limit, 1690-1790 preferred. Where many feel that 1830 is stretching it.
In other words, this ship is outside the time line by a fair margin.~Brigand
-
1
-
-
Not sure that the Spanish lb is the same as avoirdupois. I have two different regional weights given, but the one associated with gunnery appears to be the heavier.
Again, not necessarily the ratio of lb to lb, but the reported high gauge size of a nominal 24 poundage weapon.
1.12 avoirdupios = 1 Spanish.
(The relative value of a nominal pound being apparently 1.079, as with French practice, and also a higher gauge) - This broadly makes sense given their tendency to cooperate in Allied fleets for much of their history against the protestant countries of northern Europe.
If you are sure about it, I could easily change it. How many grams would a Spanish pound be?
~Brigand
-
USS Essex (1799) added to the list.
Could you add date of disposal and fate? It would complete the list.
And great job on the list.I could, but right now I don't have time to research the fate of each ship in the list.
Cheers,
Brigand
-
I've updated the title of this topic and added 'swifvel-guns' into the second-last poll option, just to avoid confusion.
Cheers,
Brigand
-
Please forgive me for dropping in on the French section of the forums with an English post.
Some time ago, I posted a topic in the shipyards section about an indiaman 'prince of wales' (1740). However, there seems to have been no ship by this name at the time. Looking at her again today, her paint scheme reminded me of the colours used in France.
(more images)Does anyone here know if this was by any chance a French ship, which was been decorated with an English name on her stern (by the model maker)?
I would love to find some plans for her.
Cordialement,
Brigand
-
Since this thread describes four frigates, all going by the name of HMS Surprise (two of which happen to have also been known L'Unite/Unite), I think it would be most helpfull if, for the purpose of this thread, people would state which HMS Surprise they are talking about (preferably by naming a year).
From what I can make up, @HMS Scatter is talking about 'L'Unite (1794) -> HMS Surprise' and maybe also about
'Fifth Rate Gracieuse (1787) -> Unite -> HMS Unite' ?
And @Lieste seems to be talking about 'L'Unite (1794) -> HMS Surprise' ?
~Brigand
-
(...)
My concern is that as you begin to loose the match there will be no turning it around as the negative morale compounds and could practically be impossible to turn a fight. I think I would be less opposed to it if the morale always returned to its starting point. To illustrate: call the starting point 0, when you do something impressive your crew morale jumps up and buffs your performance based on what focus your in but after a certain amount of time, say, 10 seconds, it returns to its 0 line. When you do something bad like miss a broadside, the opposite happens but also returns to 0 after a number of seconds. This way, morale shadows the fluctuations that would obviously be occurring in a well disciplined crew.
(...)I've added a new paragraph clarifying my intentions for how morale should work. Moral is separate from winning or loosing a battle. What you describe with morale returning to its starting point is not far off from what I intend. Only I would not have it automatically return, instead I would let the event swing it around.
Also, morale should not be influenced by morale. In other words, a low morale score should not increase the chances that morale will stay low. Or, in immersive terms: a crew with low morale has low expections, so exceeding those expectations is easier than if they had a high morale score.
~Brigand
-
A brig can operate in open sea for example the HMS Beagle was a "research vessel" a modified "brig" with a ridiculously shallow draft, because they needed that for exploring or isn't it?
A brig is a type of sailing rig. It says little about the size or sea worthiness of a vessel. Some brigs were large, some brigs were small, some had a very shallow draft. Some were build for use on lakes, some were used on the open ocean.
The USS Brig Eagle was clearly not build for the open ocean.
~Brigand
-
My work in the real world is inside the Naval Building industry. Hence, my advice for the suitable software for ship's hull modeling is "Rhinoceros" combined with AutoCad(payed) or Draftsight(free).
With both softwares, profesional quality accurate hull models can be obtained.
Somebody mentioned DelftShip somewhere earlier. Do you have any professional command on that? How does it compare to Draftsight?
~Brigand
-
besides immediate applications during boarding combat there are other uses for morale
here are the directions/example for thought to streamline the discussion
1. morale can be used for realistic skills - for example certain fleet commander orders, or special orders for the crew requiring extra performance giving short term bonuses under whip
2. morale can to a certain extent influence overall performance for the crew. Over time at sea morale degrades, so on the long journey or fleet duty away from your home port your ship will be a bit less effective
3. high base morale caused by experience or your renown can allow for certain heroic feats like boarding a 300men xebec with only 140 experienced crew and winning.
4. what else? all ideas are welcome.
but yes. ship will not surrender because of morale - we think its ultimately a captain decision
and
We will never take control away from the player. There were cases when crew revolted in RL but we are not sure it is useful in the gameplay environment.
Right now, if your ship sinks, control is taken away from the player. Taking away control from the player in case of really bad morale (crew surrender) is no different: it will only result in an alternate win condition; alternate win conditions are good.
Loose conditions should be: 1. your ship sinks, or 2. your crew surrenders.
- A sunken ship will result in the ship being lost for gameplay purposes,
- Crew surrender will allow for an easy capture by the enemy.
- If the enemy does not capture the ship, the player could maybe regain control of his crew and try to escape (more gameplay options == good).
However, morale is only part of the story. In point 3 of the first quote, you mention: "high base morale". Let's call this 'base morale' loyalty.
So, we have both the slowly changing loyalty and the quickly reacting morale as the building blocks of our crew attitude system.
Loyalty acts like a buffer: it defines the maximum and minimum effects of moral, in both positive and the negative extremes.
If the crew's loyalty is very high, they will have faith in the captain, they will be more disciplined and fight ferociously. If things go well, the captain gets all the credits for it. If things go bad, they will be blamed on external factors (the enemy, the bad weather, etc.), they may be disgruntled, but at least they think the captain is not to blame. Most important of all, they will not surrender the ship in any case: they will stand with the captain till the end.
If the crew's loyalty is very low, they don't have any faith in the captain, discipline is low and they would rather kick the captain overboard than safe his sorry ass, in a battle they think cannot be won. If things go exceptionally well, they will be happy, despite the captain. If thing go bad, the captain takes the full blame. If pressed for service after being captured, a high percentage of the crew will be willing to join the victors.
If the crew's loyalty is Ok, you can expect your crew to do their duty, if things go well (high morale), they will shine, if things go bad (low morale) they will be more likely to give in.
Building loyalty:
Changes in loyalty take time. Basically, continued high moral increases loyalty and continued low morale decreases loyalty.
Loyalty can be increased by continues success with the same crew. Building up loyalty can, for example, be done by winning a fight, feeding your crew well, giving them their regular shot of rum and providing them with a fare share of loot often enough. Loyalty will decrease if you threat your crew bad, constantly loose fights or don't pay them their wages.
For gameplay simplicity, loyalty could maybe only change after a fight has ended or while in the open world; during combat, some may prefer loyalty to be a given constant.
As a side effect, keeping (a portion) of your highly loyal crew after a fight gone bad, could be a good motivator for a player to surrender his ship, instead of fighting to the dead: starting out with a new undisciplined crew would be quite a setback.
Morale is the short term swing of confidence of the crew. There are 3 separate cases where morale plays its role:
-
In ship to ship combat:
High morale will result in better performance, low morale will result in worse performance. Rock bottom low morale combined with a low loyalty and a badly damaged ship may result in crew surrender.
-
In boarding actions:
In boarding, morale makes all the difference. A crew who think they will win will fight better, kick harder and just outperform a low morale crew. A crew who doesn't believe winning is possible, will much sooner give up. Low morale will cause crew members to be more easily defeated, albeit, with lower fatality numbers.
-
In the Open World:
High morale will give you a slightly better performance, low morale a slightly worse performance. Rock bottom low morale in combination with rock bottom low loyalty should result in a mutiny. Low morale combined with low loyalty would highly increase the chances of desertion when laying in a harbour, etc, etc.
The negative effect of low moral could partly be mitigated by good officers, who keep a proper discipline, even when the spirits are low.
Morale changers:
Morale is influenced by many external factors. Morale typically goes up if good things happen, goes up a lot if those good things are exceptional and go down when bad things happen.
Let's say our snow is engaged by an enemy HMS Surprise: Initially, our crew is neutral, loyalty is quite ok. On our first broadside is fired from a long range, but happens to take down the fore top mast: morale of my crew rises spectacularly (cheers all around), while the moral of the crew aboard the HMS Surprise, drops a bit (but they are, of course, still quite confident they can win from snow). Somewhere next, the HMS Surprise at close blasts away at our snow with its carronades loaded with grape. As by a miracle, only two members of our crew get hit and crew feels that the lady of luck must be smiling upon them (morale goes up): they load the cannons with renewed energy and I get to fire a return broadside I might otherwise not have been able to bring to bear, etc, etc.
Morale would take a hit if a ship is raked fore and aft and the blood spews out of the gutters (people don't like seeing their mates dyeing all around them). Morale rises if the crew thinks they win, or if they are fighting unexpectedly good against a superior enemy.
Loosing against a smaller enemy would cause morale to take a bigger hit than loosing against a superior ship.
As such, a good morale system can make battles far more interesting, maybe even more so in an uneven match-up. A well designed morale system would give a strong motivation to surrender to the captain, may even cause a mutiny if a captain doesn't care about their well-being for prolonged periods of time and would provide the motivation to higher good officers and train your crew to the highest levels of discipline and competence.
The major changes to morale should not come as a result of winning or loosing the battle. Instead, the major changes to morale should be the result of how succesfull you are at beating the odds: if you fight better than expected against a superiour enemy, morale should be high (on the flip-side: if you fight badly against a weaker enemy, morale should be low).
Also, morale should not be influenced by morale. In other words, a low morale score should not increase the chances that morale will stay low or vise versa.
I could write a lot more about morale and how it could be tied into the intricates of the game, but I think my wall of text is large enough by now, so I'm going to leave my suggestion at this (for now).
Cheers,
Brigand
-
2
-
Updated title.
~Brigand
-
Does this positive side mean that only people who 100% agree with your cleansing of the internet can post, and that the people who are at 95% or below aren't allowed to comment? In any case I'd like to express concerns over this, (...)
@admin made a relevant post to this:
I just want to clarify after Darby
The rules allows cursing. Sea is not a nursery home.
We already said that
- f******g weather - ok
- **** you - prohibited
ps cursing was an offense in the royal navy punishable by lashes.. I am not sure if it was strictly enforced and not sure people brought it up often. We take the same position - if you bring it up we take action.
ps2 report player and ignore function is already in testing and will be rolled out with the open world.
Hope this gives a bit of guidance,
~Brigand
-
Nice to see some more merchant vessels being added to the list.
+1 for your nice and detailed method of presenting ships!
~Brigand
-
2
-
-
Titans aren't everywhere, they are only brought out for major battles, and if someone brings them out without escort, easily killed by scores of smaller ships.
United States Class (Constitution) was supposedly faster than the Leda class frigates IRL correct? and isn't in the game. Leander took part in the War of 1812 if I remember right, I just think it should be in game.
All ships have strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons.
I'm not sure how it is by now, but cap-ship proliferation was (two year ago?) a serious problem. The number of supercaps alliances were able to field was used as a deterrent. It made sure big alliances stayed on top while smaller alliances were crushed. After you have build your 50th titan, they are not so precious any more and you can start having fun with the next batch, they did.
To illustrate the issue:
I like small ships (you my have noticed that I like small ships here, I liked small ship in EVE Online as well) and I like scouting. So, fleet commanders liked sending me out there in my 'big bad' dual prop Taranis interceptor.
On some Friday, I was scouting ahead for a fleet which may or may not turn out big enough to jump in enemy null-sec for an fight that evening. I gate in, system after system. racing to my strategically pre-placed gate bookmarks until I get noticed by some drakes (no problem) and I jump the next gate.
In the next system, I run into 2 supercaps (two Nyxes and a Revelation), waiting for me. These guys are bored and start chasing me. They predict my route or get intel on me and jump after (or ahead) of me. After 10? minutes or so of frantic racing and jumping (another revelation and a machariel had by now joined in)., I'm tackled and webbed after getting caught in a bubble resulting in me riding the clone express back home.
In other words, some guys choose to chase (one of) the smallest ship in the game with some of the very biggest ones.
So, will the most outrageous cost make sure people don't use the biggest ships all the time? In the beginning: sure, after a while? After a while, they are just expensive toys, used to trash boredom on whatever they come across.
~Brigand
-
I don't really believe it would be a good idea to shoot a side facing cannon mounted as shown in the OP. I thought cannons in small boats where invariably solidly attached to the hull/deck and front facing.
I can only imagine a vessel like this would capsize by the recoil of the cannon.
But, maybe there is good facts backing up the image?
~Brigand
-
This seems a nice solution:
Edit:
You could inegrate the loading indicator into it:
~Brigand
-
3
-
-
The hulls of many dane-norwegian ships where a bit more "bulky" or wide.
meant to keep it very stable and would not heel over as much as other ships when under full sail,
designed for operating in shallower waters, witch there is a lot of the in Baltic Sea.
And could be fun to have ingame as a variant to the british and frence witch sailed more north atlantic ocean
In this case I was referring to height above the water line. In other words: the Fridericus Quintus has more bulk above the waterline.
Also, I'm not advocating against her, or at least no more than I'm advocating against anything with more than, say, 48 guns. But that is just me, I like the small ships.
~Brigand
-
(...)
They are incredible similar, and only 14 cannons in difference.
The only think that different is that these ships are made in a very baroque¨ish style, too show of for other kings as a symble of power and wealth.
So im pretty sure they would easy hold up agienst ship form the napolic era
I think they are not all that similar. Sure, they are both three deckers and if you only look at the gun count, the difference isn't all that large.
The hull of the Fridericus Quintus is a bit more bulky, something which would influence her ability to sail close to the wind, but I don't think the difference is pronounced enough to make a huge difference.
The sail plans however are a world apart: the most obvious difference is the lateen on the Fridericus Quintus for which the HMS Victory as a (gaff) spanker. Next come the size of the sail, the victory has smaller sail, which enable easier handling and finer control of the amount of canvas set. The total sail area for the HMS Victory is larger and altogether more modern. It thin that all the differences combined, I would definitely say they are not all that comparable. But then again, I don't see a need for them to be comparable either.
~Brigand
-
The best information we have on the time frame is:
We definitely stop at 1820 mark yes. +-5 years.
Initial model line up range from 1680 till 1820.
Going earlier than that might make line battles look strange (with old galleons alongside modern 2nd rates)
In the Player selected ship 2015 - Suggestions-thread, @admin mentioned: 1600-1830 hard limit, 1690-1790 preferred. But many feel that 1830 is stretching it.
Ships currently confirmed to be in the game range from 1715 (Ингерманланд/Ingermanland) to 1820 (Меркурий/Mercury).
Hope this helps,
~Brigand
-
Well, we have this:
But it could do with an update.
~Brigand
-
The sail plan for ships of these times are not very imaginative. This is actually a good thing when it comes to figuring out what sail plan was used. The below image give a good representation of what you could realistically expect for a ship of the size and date you posted plans for:
(minus the topgallant spar on the mizzen)
~Brigand
-
2
-
HMS Marlborough, 1855
in Ships of the line
Posted
Outside time frame, by a fair margin.
(closing topic)
~Brigand