Tonnerre de Brest
-
Posts
78 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Tonnerre de Brest
-
-
On 1/9/2017 at 4:40 PM, Kiithnaras said:
I suppose there's also some subtext that ship masts are waaaay too thick >_>
Not thick but really hard to hit intentionally while shooter and target are both in motion (and rolling as well) .
Not being a programmer I don't know how this is modeled but the target to hit while aiming at the mast for guide from a distance is the base of the shrouds.
It is a wider target than the mast, especially on a large ship, and easier to hit and also it is a much softer target that can get significant damage from even small ordinance like a 6 pounders. Once damaged it is hard to balance the huge pressure from the sails and the ship must be handle gently. If one side of the shrouds lets go, the rig falls from the pressure of shrouds on the other side of the boat where full tension is still pulling.
I think that loosing a rig was happening more often than not because of that and not from direct hit(s) on the mast itself.
-
I like the idea of one dura ships, however at this time I think they're sinking way to easy. I would want mechanics that allow these ships to survive even when the outcome is dire just like they actually did in real life. Also everyone would avoid sinking them most of the time, on one side to save their own skin and on the other to preserve the prize. I like the idea that ships stay alive after battles are lost and can be re-captured later in a future encounter.
Recently someone presented to me a ship I had lost and they had captured it back from my opponent. It only happens after boarding and never any other way. I think there should be other way to cap a ship.
This is an excerpt of a post I made in another area of the forum that addresses that issue:
>>
I again take inspiration from real world for guidance. I don't think that captains would let ships sink so easily whether on the defending or attacking side. The loss of life alone, including their own would be enough incentive for the losing captain to make an effort toward the survival of the ship.For the winner, the prize is one of the incentives for getting in the fight. The ship can be taken and added to your own war effort, the crew taken as press gang, etc...Also I don't think that wooden ships sank that easily as they do in the game. I understand that we need to have a clear "win" or "loose" status for game play clarity. However this create a loss of opportunity in other areas.Once the majority of the crew has been dedicated to keeping the boat afloat and can no longer fight... Once the pumps can't overcome the water coming in and repair kits have been used... Once the main mast is down after repair kit has been used... (insert more instances of unrecoverable loss here) I would think it's time to cry uncle and maybe, once this level of damage is achieved (when water line is high enough that cannons are inoperable for instance but boat is still afloat?), the white flag should come up automatically in the game, declaring a "stranded status" as the damaged ship is no longer maneuverable, no longer in the fight, and is not as much to be boarded as it is to be rescued.At this point the winning side would have a certain time limit to board the ship before it sinks, assign crew to it, use repair kits of its own to prevent it from sinking, etc... If they fail to get to the stranded boat in time, it is doomed and sinks with all hands. The losing captains loses boat, crew and officer.If they get to it in time, on the losing side, part of automating this end game process gives the vanquished captain the choice to surrender this one durability boat as well as surrender his crew to replace the lost crew of the winning captain in exchange for keeping the life of his officer. If he refuses he basically refuses to be rescued and sinks with all hands, looses the boat, crew and one officer's life.So choices, are surrender and you keep your officer's life or sink and loose all but deny the winner from taking the boat and crew. This is not a boarding battle, it is essentially a rescue.>>Anyway this is the full post if you want to read the whole thing (it's a bit long) http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/16836-upgrades-one-durability-ships-battle-end-game-alternatives/ -
I have crafted an Indiaman specifically for capping traders. Once properly fitted with all boarding and enhanced maneuvering/speed upgrades it is a capable boarding ship and certainly can own its own in a fight against a 5th rate (depending on the skills of the other captain of course.)
The funny thing is if I'm going against an npc they try to chain shot me because I'm a trader for them to chase and board and they seem very confused that I'm the one attacking/boarding.
-
Maybe I have been playing the wrong games(?) but but I have never seen a BETA look as good and polished as this ALPHA.Please devs don't listen to complaints from impatient gamers, take time to polish this game to your already high standards.Personally I'd rather wait as long as it take and play a stable, beautifully finished game. NA is well worth the wait.
-
6
-
-
I believe 1 duration ships would cripple pvp for most casual players.
Mrdoomed makes a good point on casual play. I too am a casual player but I think I have a more swashbuckling demeanor, (mad) and take risks, I would sumise he does to.
The larger clans and higher ranks may be able to sustain a couple of ship losses a night but the casual player would not.
You here them on TS discussing the 15 Santis they have on stock. No problem for them.
Also surrendering would be non existent and port huggers would become the biggest clan in the game.
I enjoy crafting, travel, trade etc but pvp combat is the most appealing feature for most players.
Who but the richest could afford to lose mods on a 1 duration ship and if mods were ring fenced then super mod players would decimate newbies and casuals. A balance is what is needed and we have that now.
If you make all ships 1 dura you will put too much fear of loss into the players, many of whom live in the green zone now. This would devestate pvp and player base numbers.
Also I often fight larger AI fleets where I am outnumbered or try crazy, daring things, like ram vicous's Bellona with my frigate and then stick to it like a limpet in order to allow team mates escape. (That was fun). Would I try that with a 1 duration modded ship?
(Probably).
But most would not. We need more incentives for people to come out of ports not less.
Loss of ships from capture is one thing, sinking of ships is another. When a ship is captured it can always be captured again at a later time. When it sinks.... it's gone. I think ships sink way too easily in this game and there should be more chances for ships to survive battles. I posted about this very subject just a while ago.
Winner or losers, captains would not let ship sink. It was a loss for all without even talking about loss of lives. There should be alternative end game for disabled boats that have not been boarded and are about to sink. Check out my post here: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/16836-upgrades-one-durability-ships-battle-end-game-alternatives/
-T
-
Here are some suggestions that in my opinion could improve game play in some areas. At least, if technically possible some of these should be tested/assessed.SHIP NON-PERMANENT UPGRADES_______________________________The easy way to address the non permanent upgrades would be to look at reality. If I have 2 ships, I most likely will have a set a amenities in each and they will not appear at the docks magically for availability in an upgrade window before I set sail. It's a convenience that is not possible in the real world unless the ships are moored next to each other. You can't just move all upgrades out of a boat in one place, teleport 400 miles away and voila! all the upgrades are still here ready to be used in another boat.Granted the teleportation is needed to help game play otherwise we would all get old and senile traveling for days between areas on the map. (reduce the map so everything can happen in real time?).In short, make the non permanent upgrade that are in one boat, only transferable to another boat in the same port. If you want to move them to another port they have to travel by boat in the hold or be sent by delivery system in free towns.BATTLES WITH ONE DURABILITY SHIPS_________________________________The ideas below pertain only to battle end game and not to boarding mechanics.At this time boarding is the only way to capture a ship in PVP. I would propose an additional way to capture a ship during battle:I again take inspiration from real world for guidance. I don't think that captains would let ships sink so easily whether on the defending or attacking side. The loss of life alone, including their own would be enough incentive for the losing captain to make an effort toward the survival of the ship.For the winner, the prize is one of the incentives for getting in the fight. The ship can be taken and added to your own war effort, the crew taken as press gang, etc...Also I don't think that wooden ships sank that easily as they do in the game. I understand that we need to have a clear "win" or "loose" status for game play clarity. However this create a loss of opportunity in other areas.Once the majority of the crew has been dedicated to keeping the boat afloat and can no longer fight... Once the pumps can't overcome the water coming in and repair kits have been used... Once the main mast is down after repair kit has been used... (insert more instances of unrecoverable loss here) I would think it's time to cry uncle and maybe, once this level of damage is achieved (when water line is high enough that cannons are inoperable for instance but boat is still afloat?), the white flag should come up automatically in the game, declaring a "stranded status" as the damaged ship is no longer maneuverable, no longer in the fight, and is not as much to be boarded as it is to be rescued.At this point the winning side would have a certain time limit to board the ship before it sinks, assign crew to it, use repair kits of its own to prevent it from sinking, etc... If they fail to get to the stranded boat in time, it is doomed and sinks with all hands. The losing captains loses boat, crew and officer.If they get to it in time, on the losing side, part of automating this end game process gives the vanquished captain the choice to surrender this one durability boat as well as surrender his crew to replace the lost crew of the winning captain in exchange for keeping the life of his officer. If he refuses he basically refuses to be rescued and sinks with all hands, looses the boat, crew and one officer's life.So choices, are surrender and you keep your officer's life or sink and loose all but deny the winner from taking the boat and crew. This is not a boarding battle, it is essentially a rescue.This potentially would make ships themselves stay longer in the game and change hands in a more diversified way as battles go on.Ship would still sink regularly when they are not salvaged in time or when captains refuse to surrender.You might loose you ship and capture it back at a later date which is an incentive to not let it sink in the first place. Some ships might become famous for having been captured many times and survive many battles which brings up the next topic:SHIP PAINT AND CUSTOM NAME__________________________Once ships have more chances to survive battles and becoming famous it would be nice to give them personality by allowing custom ship names that stay with the boat once christened as well as making custom paint readily available at ports to give them distinctive character.Paint is not something special in the world of ships. Maybe gold leafing or special custom figureheads could be rare items but not paint. Making "rare" ships has also the unwelcome side effect of captains avoiding combat to preserve the custom paint of their "special" ship. This behavior alone degrades the quality of PVP on the server.DEALING WITH CAPTURED SHIPS___________________________As much as I like to teleport a captured ship it should not be possible to cross the entire map at the click of a button.You capture a ship, you deal with it.When a ship is captured, the victorious captain must assign crew to it after emergency repairs have allowed the ship to stay afloat, then it can be added to the FLEET and sailed back by the regular open world sea ways. If the captain already has a full fleet (2 slots as of now) provision should be made in the game mechanics for towing the captured ship without fully crewing it and of course taxing the open world speed accordingly.There should also be an option in the event of multiple ships captured, to allow the victorious captain to either to pass the control of the captured ship to a clan's mate or group mate.__________________________________________Thanks for reading this far, please critique, comment, improve etc...-T
-
1
-
-
You couldn't have explained this better Ann. Hard core players will always have the next 1 dura ship and set of mods to pvp with. They're casual opponents will not. All 1 dura ship limits will do is create a solid control of the seas to hard core players who will slowly see less and less pvp while blaming it on something else. We want casual players to PVP and we want them to be able to immediately get back out there once sunk.
I must admit that my willingness to take a chance in fight with unfavorable odds has gone up with rank and more so with the ability to craft high quality ships.
When I was not in a position to replace a lost ship I was must less willing to take a chance and therefore was missing out on some great action.
I think that real expertise comes faster if one is not afraid to loose, as lessons learned through defeat or failure are vividly felt and retained in contrast to the ones learned through success or luck.
I think for folk who don't pvp a lot, the lesson to learn is that no matter how bad it looks, you can always get another ship later and what you think is a great ship now, you'll be looking at it as junk later when you move up in rank and skill.
For me, I'm having more fun not being too attached to the ship. I think it is a good mind set when to go into battle so you can pay attention to just the fight.
-
3
-
-
That is a noble thing to do ( you filthy pirate) but its a shame that you know as well as me and everyone else that its going to happen and are making preparations to combat it.
Im afraid all this is doing is pushing all the minnows together for scumbags to feast on.
Ah well it is what it is and wont affect me other than possible long term effects on new people. Ill still continue my lust for treasure elsewhere.
The scumbags you're referring to know enough to kill easy preys but not enough to be able to stand their own against seasoned captains.
They probably need as much help as the newbies to feel up to face a real fight.
I think the BR system in place for the rookie area will help a bit level the field.
Even if the seal clubbers have an advantage as far as know how over new players, they at least will not have an advantage with ships and weapons within the confines of the Rookie Region.
I think experienced captains will have a real opportunity to show sportsmanship to our community as a whole. It makes a big difference when you're new and you see that high level players are welcoming you and help you grow with the game.
-
4
-
-
Heh. AWS cant handle combat of games like World of tanks or ours.
We have no plans to send young players to separate servers .
Rookie players will experience the most fun part of the game right from the start now. No point to wait or gate them from the cutter brawls against other rookies.. They will pvp against each other and against veterans. If they dont like captain vs captain combat they most likely will not like anything else.
it's also nice for more seasoned captains to take on new recruits and help them rise through the ranks as we've been doing. If we isolate different level players it's harder for the newbies to get to next level.
-
3
-
-
if they made them more common and not so rare or have replacement system for none craftable mods than yes there shouldn't be a reason to worry about your one dura ship and mods getting sunk. Though it's more the cost as many folks don't PvP and do ECON to make tons of money cause they are causal players so that one ship they loose might of been there only ship too. While not something guys like us have problems with, but we aren't the average casual players either.
As for Skill vs Skill. I'm sorry no amounts of mods or Exceptional ships is going to make up for skill. Some folks are just bad no matter what. It's why we keep getting called OP and Hackers. Even in real life a great Captain could make a crappy ship out perform with a good crew vs a Great ship with a crappy crew and bad Captain. Just look at the long list of history of underdogs winning when way out gun and shipped. Tends to happen when you give Captains ships based on who they kissed arse they most with or how deep there pockets are. Just cause they where some rich nobles son didn't mean they where a good Captain. So to be honest ships need to have a wide variation and the true skill no matter what is what the Captain makes of the current ship he is in.
I would add that everyone is in a shark frenzy for new ships and keep changing at every battle.
I find that if you know one ship really well and equipped with a specific set of weapons and you stick to it for a while to get really proficient with it, you'll have more success than trying to adapt to a new situation with a new set of cannons setup on a new firing platform at each battle.
Captains who have been in the game a long time might be ok doing this but if you're a beginner to intermediate player it really will make a difference.
-
1
-
-
What's to stop someone from using an alt in another nation to surrender a 1st rate again and again to build up hostility in favour of their main?
Ethics? morality? ideals? pride?
It all depends on folks being interested in playing this game because they actually want to sail and fight with these great warships and uphold the virtues associated with captaining them.
If someone wants to bug the whole thing by bypassing the fun part of the game (sailing, battles, etc....) just to be able to "win" whatever they think that means... I don't think you'll be able to avoid these situations. I suppose It's for the rest of the community to ban these behaviors when witnessed.
Some folk don't get that the winners in this game are the people who are having fun playing it and not defeating the systems of it.
Aren't we doing this just for the fun after all?
-
3
-
-
?
What is the problem with those 2 quotes? As far as i understand this new mechanic, one side needs to constantly rise the hostility lvl by sinking enemy ships(for example), depends which side has more BR kills.So if each side lose 5 SOLs there is no rise and no decrease of the level.If nothing happens whole day,hostility lvl drops.If "attacker" sinks 10 "defenders",and lose 5,having better BR ratio,hostility is rising.Am i wrong?
I guess what I don't know is what mechanism triggers the door to open the port battle.
Maybe my issue is with "hostility level" label. I doesn't illustrate the dynamics of what is supposed to happen.
Maybe it should be referred as defense status or border protection or something that shows that when defenders fail to keep the area under control or clear of enemies it opens the passage for foes to enter the port and fight over it.
If a gang of 25 1st rate show up at the border I would hardly call that low hostility level just because I was able to repel them.
-
I tend to agree with this view as well. Remember the spark that allegedly started WW1 ? Each incident, no matter how trivial, is escalated in the minds of citizens of countries who are at some hostility level. It doesn't matter if it a minor assassination or the sinking of the Lusitania, every engagement no matter how small causes an uproar. I also feel like hostility levels should accumulate based moreso on quantities of incidents rather than BR or some similar measure. Just my opinion, but it certainly may play out differently in a video game.
Yes, and also hostility is not an end in itself, in this case, it is a precursor to the possibility of a port battle and potential capture.
-
Hostility drops every day by a certain amount - so if attacking nation does nothing the region will eventually become peaceful
-Yes, that makes sense, if there is no war, then it is peace.
If both sides in a battle lose 5 sols the effect on hostility will be somewhat neutral
-No, that does not make sense. It would be like saying that there is no hostility between Palestine and Israel because nobody is actually winning. As long as there are battles in one area, hostility is building. Even if nobody is a clear winner, a certain level of aggression is present and in my opinion there should be no drop of hostility in the scale until people stop shooting.
-
4
-
-
disregard--duplicate off topic content (btw is there a way to delete such post altogether?)
-
I could be wrong but I would think that passing over protocol, if a crew was decimated during a battle, a responsible captain would ask the marines to step up and help sail the ship instead of sitting around like potato sacks while they're being either under attack or stranded at sea.
It would be nice to have a mechanic in the game to allow for that eventuality.
-
I'm sorry you would have to be idiots to not do any fighting or port battles without team speak. You don't need it for 1 vs 1 but even back in those days they had signal flags and such for fleet movements. I just don't have time to type it in game, "Hay Doom go over here cause we got this guy." Though if we where in a fight I would have to do that with you, but if I was in one with clan mates we just oranize it by voice. Though I think he's meaning it's a disadvantage against the solo player cause we can call for help and get folks to show up even faster than say in National where there is spies that can tell when your doing things.
I play IL2 online and they have different arenas for different levels of realism. Imagine a NA full realism arena where you have to look through the spyglass to read flags from the flagship or clan leader and refer to a flag signal code book to figure out what your next move is supposed to be! It sure would be a different game.
-
1
-
-
These are great!!!
-
-
Well, what if you're making it a gamble system instead. Pirates used to give ultimatums to avoid combat but still get loot.
With such a perk you might be giving the choice:
Give up the loot and ship but you keep officer and crew alive with no loss
or
Fight with no option to surrender. If you get boarded same rules as usual apply.
-
Hello, this morning I came up with the brilliant idea...
READ THE WHOLE THING TO GET THE IDEA
At the current state of the game when we're sailing in Open World we can see ranks of every captain. What I suggest is to limit the "Rank visibility" so that we only can see ranks of captains in our nation.
Why?
In Open World:
1.Because it would make a lot of sense. In navy you can more or less determine the rank of friendly captains. But how can you determine ranks of hostile captains?
Short answer is, you can't. You're not a spy + enemy navy is not giving away ranks of their captains just like that.
2.It's more realistic comparing to what we have now.
3.This brings the element of a doubt and element of surprise. For example:
You see an enemy Constitution on the horizon and you think two things:
a)there is no way he is sailing this thing fully crewed, you take your mates and attack the fellow. What can happen?
-boom, you're right and you sink that bastard
-holly cow, he is fully crewed and he sends you and your buddies to the devil
b)damn, if he's sailing this thing on our waters he must be confident enough and he must be fully crewed. What can happen?
-you run as fast as you can
-some of your friends tags him, you get into battle and it turns out he's sailing that ship with 50% crew. You outmanouver him and fire 10 broadsides to his 1 which means he's dead
On the other hand imagine YOU are sailing the Constitution and you see an enemy or a bunch of enemies on the horizon. What can happen?
a)you are fully crewed but they don't know it. What can happen?
-they run like flies due to your Fear Factor
-they think you're undercrewed and they attack. And then the fun begins...
b)you are undercrewed but you think your Fear Factor will do the job. What can happen?
-they run like flies due to your Fear Factor
-they think you're undercrewed and they attack. Turns out they were right and you're literally torn to pieces
In Battle Mode:
1.This whole thing leads us to one great feature we ALL want you to implement - THE SPYGLASS -
2.Imagine how many good things this would bring. The only way you could determine enemy rank, number of crewmembers, number of working cannons could be only possible through spyglass.
We could exclude the armor and rigging status, pump status, rudder status or magazine status so that is stays visible all the time (it would be hard to determine those things with the spyglass).
3.By opening the map in Battle Mode and clicking the enemy ship silhouette you could only see:
a)Armor
b)Percentage of sails (85% Sails etc.)
c)Type of ship (Cerberus etc.)
d)Shocks
e)Pump, Rudder, Magazine status
THE SPYGLASS should have limited realistic range (obviously) and it should be some kind of mechanism, for example:
(the loading circle would appear with the message "Gathering information" - similar to the one when you Capture a ship, but you could move the camera and your ship to track the enemy with your spyglass)
a)If you want to determine the Rank of the Enemy Captain you should SCAN that ship with the spyglass for let's say 60 seconds
b)If you want to determine the more or less accurate amount of crew on enemy ship you should SCAN that ship with the spyglass for let's say 90 seconds
c)If you want to determine the type of cannons on the enemy ship you should SCAN that ship for let's say 45 seconds
d)If you want to determine the amount of working cannons you should scan that ship for let's say 120 seconds
(time of each scan is just an example, it would have to take further tweaking once you would like to implement the Spyglass mechanism)
So whay do guys think?
I know it would make the game even harder, but "spotting mechanism" is at the moment ridiculous.
Too many information about the enemy is within arm's reach.
The current state limits the PvP capabilities by a large margin.
EDIT: Almost forgot - by using the spyglass in battles you could also implement a thing called "Captain's Log" or "Captain' Journal" in which every player would have the database about players he had encountered.
The database would be updated after the battle ends with the information you gathered by scanning each captains ship.
The database would (of course) be one time registration. Which means that to get the latest info about the captains you've encountered you would have to encounter them again.
The information you store in your Captain's Log would be: Captain's name, ship, rank (or whatever information you think will be suitable)
The spy glass is at the present a missed opportunity for sure.
There is barely a difference whether in spy glass mode versus regular view.
I posted a while ago on the subject (http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/16072-open-world-ships-telescope/#entry303030) not as complete as your suggestions but a similar idea of making a more realistic analogy of the real world in the game by at least having a different view or viewing enhanced information when in the spy glass mode.
-
Great boats, based on c
The cutter is perfectly seaworthy. Designs like the cutter were perfected in Bermuda, which happens to be located in the middle of the Atlantic.
Similar to channel cutters. Great boats.
-
I welcome questions and offer help to any (non-enemy) newcomers I can.
Sadly, many do not either see or respond to PM "salutes" ...
... and there are those percent who don't have patience to learn about the game's trading economics, the details of battle and the characteristics of the various ships.
So, newcomers ... reply to that friendly "Private Message" ... "O7" is a hand salute, not a puzzle. Ask for help and be ready to spend time learning this complex and deep system that they call a "game."
~ HK ~
I must say that quite often I don't see private messages until much later when it actually doesn't matter anymore.
I'm already monitoring clan chat, nation chat, group chat, global chat, trader chat, allied nation chat if any, the chat window would have to be covering my whole screen in order to see all of them and see which chat is blinking.
It would be a nice addition to be able to turn on or off an audible prompt when new messages show up.
-
I like ShipPat's idea.
In a ship where you have more than a few crews, you always have at least one lookout.
I have raised that question before that the lookout being somewhere up the mast might see ships before they're in view on deck.
At least in the British Navy, any sighting of a sail in the horizon would trigger a full readiness for battle, and stay ready for battle until the ships had identified themselves using pass codes of the day with flag signals.
Having at least an alarm sounding when there is proximity of sail might add some realism to the game.
When near shore however there is a lot more traffic and you might want to be able to control manually the alarms that might become annoyingly repetitive.
Cannon Penetration Overhaul
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
I can see how it makes sense, more data to crunch in real time equal more lag for slower connections or nodes that are far away.
Still I'm impressed at how well it play even with all the shortcomings that people complain about. Even playing on EU server from the USA is fine. (I'm on fiber though that might help a bit too)