Tenet

This is an embarrassingly bad argument, using a very obvious false analogy fallacy. In the Arena games you reference you can play multiple vehicles on the same account, and sometimes in the same match, and so the waiting time between destruction and "trying again" is counted in seconds, sometimes a few minutes for queues. In Naval Action the time between destruction and "trying again" for a new player can be hours, or days, depending on their understanding of economy and the ship they lost. So.. GRIND A FEW HOURS... try again. And.... GRIND A FEW HOURS again. And ... GRIND A FEW HOURS again. Here's a sample scenario: One of the most newbie friendly events we have in the game is the shallow zone patrol. To participate you need to buy or make a Surprise - 50 to 100k depending on woods, and you have to tow each one, once per day, to load up the port prior to the event. You also need 32pd Carronades to be competitive, which cost 4400 reals/each at Shroud Cay, which adds another 100K to the price. So for a new player, there will be 150 to 200K + value of a tow (paid in advance) for every "AGAIN" in your narrative. In the OW PvP, the math is far worse, because you will be facing Wasas (or at best Trincs), played by veterans. A clanless player might take a week to gather the money and resources to replace one such ship, and they can lose it in a 15 minute battle before learning anything significant. Then they quit the game. But you don't care, because you can go back to your WT Arena, and keep making bad arguments on the Game-Labs forums to white-knight the developers.

Commentary in English and Russian. Check the chat for text elaborations where necessary. Good luck!

Excuses are like assholes - everyone has one, and they all stink. For some this is just a PZ, for other's it's a "Great Battle". It's all a matter of perspective.

The game never remembers my preferred ordering of chat tabs. This is how I like it. You may like it differently. There should be a way to SAVE the ordering. Simple quality of life change. EDIT: I intended to post this in Suggestions... but somehow it got posted in OW Discussion? Must have wrote it out in the wrong tab. Please move it to Suggestions, thank you.

You can start discussing RvR history again, or go to the thread linked and discuss RvR gameplay improvements.

I just deleted a stack of 500 hull repairs while trying to SPLIT the stack. Somehow managed to click the confirm button while expecting a slider. It happened so fast with my new sensitive mouse that I didn't even realize what was happening. Please make the DELETE confirmation menu RED in color and move the Confirm button to the OPPOSITE (left) side of the dialogue box.

These are all great ideas that should be implemented by order of priority. Role customization is a priority.

Example: You have 1000 Iron Logs in Warehouse. You want to place a contract for 150 reals/log, and want to sell the entire amount. You type the amount as 1000 in the calculator, you will get 150000 + TAX as contract amount shown. If you type the amount as 10000 or 11111, the calculator will properly adjust your max amount to 1000 logs, but the cost calculation will still be 10x the amount, and as result, 10x the Taxes. It will actually ask you to pay 150K in taxes (!). Fortunately from testing, this appears to be just a visual problem, and actual contract seems to be placed correctly. This is a visual bug, but quite alarming when first encountered. Example: Selling 100 salt (max) for 150 reals each, total should be 15K. If you try to add another digit, the amount gets adjusted back to 100, but the price and Tax still displays 10x (!!!) - however it does only collect 1500 reals when placed, adjusting it correctly. Luckily it seems that when I actually clicked Confirm it only subtracted the 1500 tax from my account.

Seems like it was already weekend in Kiev when you asked. Hopefully they will respond on Monday, in the next 12-24 hours.

The enemy captain is fighting you. Translation of his words: "Soon I'll take down your mast, then start boarding you. Are you ready?" "Mother is calling me to eat food. We'll do this video later." What an upstanding fellow, respecting his mother this way! If this is indeed happening near an RvR zone, you are lucky you weren't stranded for longer. It's his right to fight you for 1.5 hours, and if he keeps focusing your masts at range without letting you fire back, that is your pain to suffer. If he tagged you for more than 1.5 hours, maybe you would have a case.

I am not yet actually doing it - but one way could be the "__" length of the bar of the aim. You can compare that length to some feature on the enemy ship, like the distance between masts, and come up with an assessment. To do that, one would first have to test and record the results for popular ships. You could develop a primitive system similarly to the MILS based on just one bar.

False. Someone brought in a discussion about physics, and I said that the physics have to be tested using period conditions, accurate re-enactment, not just a reference to some Mythbusters episode. I linked a video showcasing just such a test. Then the goal posts started to get moved - speaking about the historical goals of capturing ships, instead of the Naval Action game goal of sinking ships faster, going off topic. Read the thread from the start, and stop the spin. We're done here.

You are on a game forum, the topic is about a gameplay question. You two are literally the ones confusing things. Historical references inspire the game-play, they do not control what we do with the historical tools provided. Naval Action is an imaginary world where ships are far more common, and sinking them is far less expensive, and the real value is in the reputation and PvP/RvR results.

Naval Action is a different universe than Naval Warfare on Earth, we are simply using the same tools. The statement "cause less damage" is inaccurate. Double Charge causes a different type of damage, it is a different tool. This is the core of the argument. Do not apply direct correlation between historical goals and Naval Action goals.

I didn't speak about Double Shot. Sure you can use the same charge, and double the weight of the ammo. You are still containing a similar force (though the barrel pressure may increase due to increased resistance). However, Double-Charge literally means double the black powder, and a much higher pressure. If you want to generate splinter damage and kill crew, to force surrender and capture an intact ship, then yes, you would use just enough charge. It would also allow you to fire longer (a real concern with prolonged conflict, and dodgy supply lines). If you want to sink a ship, which is often the goal in naval action, penetrating both sides of the ship with one shot is literally more damage. You are trying to achieve failure to leaks, or structural failure, so you do not care about splinters. Naval Action the game has different economy and priorities from the way Naval Warfare was actually conducted.

I believe that the side of the ship that prevents water from penetrating inside the hull is something substantial. If you aim at the water line, from above, and penetrate two sides of the hull, that ship will have two leaks to repair. Double Charge was probably not as common not because more velocity would be less effective, but because it risked rupturing the guns, and used double the powder (a rare and expensive commodity).

Did Mythbusters perform something like this? Can you try to find the video or Episode Name/Number?

Captain, you should remember that Thickness values decrease proportional to amount of Armor-HP remaining. This means that if some weapon is unable to penetrate at combat distance at the start of a round, it may pick up that ability at a later point. 9pd Long vs 32pd Carro is a choice dependent on the type of battle and rate. At lower rates: 6th and light 5ths, the armor values and ships sizes are such that at typical engagement ranges both guns will penetrate. It's very rare to see situations where people successfully stay at long range in group fights. A faster ship with longs will be able to destroy a slower ship with carronades, by keeping distance. When looking at top decks of 3rd rates and above, the choice is somewhat more difficult because you typically already have Longs on the bottom deck that can reach out at range. Carronades become the preferable choice in scenarios where you want to maximize hull damage in a fight with low number of participants, or where close range is forced. For example - if you fight against AI in a 1v1 Mission, and you want to kill it via destroying one of the sides + core, then Carronades are great. However, in a similar scenario, if you plan to stern rake and board as your victory condition, longs work out better. If you play in group missions, longs also tend to be a safer choice. In PvP, it's either or - typically carronades are used on the top deck because of the devastating potential of chain shot, and saving Double-Charge/Double-Shot for bigger guns.

Please show me the Myth Busters episode about 18th-19th century cannon penetration and damage against ship hulls of various woods. What you probably refer to are tests of Small-Arms Ammo vs. Flesh (ballistic gel or other simulated targets), or some other destruction test that is not directly related. What happens in ships is not obvious: - If a round travels too slowly to penetrate, it may still cause splintering damage to crew and equipment. - If a round travels just fast enough to penetrate the outer hull, it might transfer all energy to the splinters which will cause crew damage and disable guns. - If a round travels faster then that, it may penetrate the hull, and then have enough energy to bounce off from other surfaces, causing further crew damage and destroying more fragile equipment. - If a round travels even faster, it may penetrate the hull, and then penetrate elements of internal structure or weapons, causing massive damage. - If a round travels beyond the capabilities of fleets in early 19th century, or if the target ship has a thin hull, you could have over-penetration where the ball pierces the ship right through, causing leaks and structural damage, but potentially not as much crew and damage. In most of these scenarios, up to the very last, travelling faster resulted in more devastation. At the correct angle, even the last scenario can be deadlier if the ship suffers damage near the water line, with multiple leaks.

1. Why do you think in false correlations? Outlaw Battles would not necessarily affect PvP Missions. Developers could make such kills not count towards PvP missions. 2. Why do you think only pirates should get this mechanic? Another biased correlation. Be more open minded - this mechanic could be introduced to every nation, and it could be implemented without mission exploits. It's not just possible to implement, it's a fairly easy algorithm that appears in part in other aspects of the game. For example: Mission Instance Kills do not count towards Search and Destroy missions.

My take on the topic, and related suggestions. I show in two examples - including a screenshot of latest stats from the API - how DLC ships are fitting the definition of Pay 2 Win in Naval Action. If you have a different definition of P2W, please post the counter argument.

US fleet had slightly higher BR at the start of battle. US brought 2 first rates, Pirates brought 1. The number of second, third and fourth rates balanced out, which produced the nearly equal BR, with a slight US lead. Both teams employed light frigates to fill out the Battle Rating limit. You are a special kind of liar, a liar that posts the screenshot that refutes their own lies in their own post. You think we are all stupid and will read your misleading words instead of the screenshots. Shame. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/348809523454148612/599833469371023360/20190714002053_1.jpg This is before mentioning the # of first rates the Dutch have parked in US lands. The Dutch presence is leading to this conflict. US were fooled into starting a fire in their own back yard, now their house is on fire.

July 8, 2019 This stream will become increasingly less relevant as more crafted Surprises participate, and as people organize more teams because smaller groups get smashed.

WTB Global Trade Chat Channel, Positive Steam Review or Best Offer