GrubbyZebra

nm. misread.

@admin , literally everyone complains about this. Enforce the join timer for PB's so people stop this BS move of hiding in battles so they can't be screened from PB's. You say you want PvP, this is literally allowing the opposite of PvP. Fix it already!

did you defensively tag them as well?

definitely a collider issue on the inger.

Increase the circle and give us a "loot wreck/capture prize" button that launches a boat's crew or 2 (simulated by a reduction in crew and a timer), then the loot/capture popup.

I was worried about "equipping" stores being tedious as well. Maybe, instead of having it be something equipped each trip, it works like provisions and is something that is part of the crafting resources required to build the ship? It means custom load-outs would not be possible (but also would negate needing to redo the double shot/double charge perk, although I don't really like those being perks), but makes it significantly simpler to deal with routinely. As for quantities, I've seen mention that HMS Victory carried 27 tonnes of ammunition (I assume this is just shot), which works out to about 30 shots per gun (less for the 2 68 pd carronades). I've also heard 40 shots per gun in various non-sourced accounts as well. Something in this neighborhood might not be unreasonable in the game either (of course, double shot must deduct from this number and not a separate reserve). Chain and grape would obviously be more restricted (maybe 10 per gun)? Would sort of be nice to see a similar implementation to the other stores as well (repairs), but I also like the "gas tank" approach you mention. Comparing the two are kind of a wash to me from a usage PoV, but the latter is preferred from a trader/crafting PoV (as it means more trade volume). I really like the idea for implementing the special gunpowders. Much less cumbersome than what I had proposed, and fits better with their "special" nature and the marks economy that exists in game. As for selecting guns decks and loads, absolutely. This should have been in game long ago.

Just like cannons are assigned to slots on the ship in set numbers, so should gunpowder; round, grape, and chain shot; and repairs. Add another set of slots for "ships stores" and have gunner's stores, carpenter's stores, boatswain's stores, and Surgeon's Stores. Gunner's stores (4 slots): gunpowder (all crafted consumables: regular, basic weighted, almeria, guacata, almeria superior, or guacata superior) round shot chain shot grape shot Carpenter's Stores (1 slot): Hull Repairs Boatswain's Stores (1 slot): Rig Repairs Surgeon's Stores (1 slot): Rum So just like we assign repairs currently, the gunner's stores would also be assigned. Having them in slots (and not the hold) would allow them to be transported using tow permits (like cannons can be now). The gunpowder slot makes Sulphur and Saltpeter mines relevant again, and also does away with the gunpowder permanent upgrades by making them just another commodity. The Gunner's stores put limits on gunpowder and ammunition would drastically reduce the demast/desail meta as it would become impractical to waste all your ammunition on ship masts. Limited ammunition also makes limiting repair effectiveness to more believable levels less unbalancing (since it no longer becomes simply a game of exhaust the other person's repair capacity and then you win). Having limited shot also means double shot/double charge could be removed as a perk (in other words, always available), providing more control to the captain and also provides more variability in battle.

Just move to the pvp server.

The speed in the instance itself is 1x. It would be blind luck to spawn in to the middle of the fighting.

What? First, I know OW battles won't work. I am not asking for them. I just prefer them to instanced battles in OW games. Second, where did all this talk of spawning inside land come from? It doesn't even make sense.

I watch the danes do it daily outside willemstad. I watch players doing it around aves and la mona and the small islands in the east. You can act incredulous if you wish, but it doesn't mean players don't use these tactics.

I'm not proposing an unlimited number, just rather a change to how the limit is determined. However, understanding there is a practical limit to what the devs are willing to pay for backend-wise, perhaps a per-ship type limit could also be implemented (like no more than 15 or 20 of a give ship type).

Change the shipbuilding system to include a slot for each upgrade type. I.e. Shipbuilder selects frame and planking wood type, mast type (rig refit module), structural mods (any module that increases HP or crew capacity), and hull treatment (speed/turning mods). One slot for each (maybe 2 for structure) would eliminate stacking, and have thickness solely determined by planking wood choice. If you have an existing ship and want to have the upgrades changed, then a shipyard must be used to "refit" the ship at a cost of gold and/or materials and labor hours. Knowledge books (or officers like in NA:L) should be available to the end user to increase things like ship handling proficiency (yard turning, sail setting speed, rudder half time, gunnery accuracy, reload time, boarding, etc). Also, all upgrades and materials to make ships/upgrades should be craftable/mineable.

Here is an idea to change the BR system. Instead of having an arbitrary BR assigned to each ship type, and then derating it solely based on % of max crew, make it dynamic based on a combination of HP, Crew, and broadside weight. Example: (HP(1 side + bow + stern+hull)/100+(Crew+broadside weight)/10 This would make most BR's increase, but would have the number better correlate to the capabilities of a given ship. It kills me to see unarmed ships having BR's of 200 because they are full of crew, and the armed ship of the same type having the same BR. Just breaks some of the immersion in my head. Also it would correlate BR more meaningfully to ship defensive and offensive capability.

Instead of the dock being a set number of spaces, make it a set BR. You can have an unlimited number of ships as long as you stay under the BR cap for your dock level. So using the above formula, for example, a max dock could be limited to 3500 BR under the current system. This would allow 5 1st rates and little else, or 350 trader's lynxs, or a reasonable mix of ships of different classes (including an SoL or 2). Such a limitation would allow players to build out their dock to best fit their play style without restricting any particular ship to them, but still limit the presence of SoLs in the game (which is the apparent goal of the VM for SoL system introduced by the developers). You could even go one step further (an idea stolen from a FB game I used to play) and charge a nominal maintenance fee on each ship (this is to discourage the 350 trader's lynxes arrangement mainly). For reference I did the calc on my 20 ships in dock and I would have about 215 BR free to add more ships.

It is a game, after all. Take away the f11 coords dramatically reduces the effectiveness of calling for reinforcements from half a map away.

Never said it was an original idea. Most of the objections raised in that thread deal with people TPing in, which I think I've addressed in this one. As for the "we had it before" argument, again I see it stated, but not supported. Also, some of the problems with the short timer and invisible battles are also mentioned there by people against the idea here, which I find interesting.

You do know there are games that do this, right? And they have no problem whatsoever? Because some things, like cannon ball trajectories and ship locations can be calculated client-side and then sent to the server for rebroadcast.

You fight them in OW! It's not a hard concept.

Feel free to post some links. The forum search feature sucks unless you know exactly what combination of words you are looking for. I'm not reading 1000+ pages of search results looking for the 5 threads from the past 2 years of discussions that deal with this topic. This forum is for suggestions, I made one, and have amended it through the course of discussion. If you want to make the argument of "we tried it and it didn't work" then feel free to post links supporting that argument.

That is a possible outcome, but is it not better to actually have that not be a forgone conclusion?

Honestly, I'd be most happy if instanced battles went away entirely. There is no reason for them in a persistent, open world sandbox.

Literally all of this happens under the current system, except the big battles. Therefore, the premise that it happened before and using that to conclude the current system is better is flawed logic.

Like it already is? Because you were out sailing with a group, and the guy upwind got attacked and now it's taken you 5 minutes to beat upwind to him and can no longer join the battle? Because it is not designed for people to sail across the map, it is designed for people that are in the same geographical area and would be a way to encourage PvP. This goes back to the realism argument, irl a line of 4 or 5 ships could control a hundred miles of ocean. There is no correlating mechanic in game. Furthermore, in the game, your 10 people would have to choose between fighting 1v who knows how many to control that very large area, or reinforce each other and control less (um, thinking about it in that light makes it wholly indifferent to the game now and the change would actually favor the defender) No, you had something that was similar and instead of being adjusted to fix its shortcomings it was removed entirely, which not only wasn't a fix, resulted in a larger negative to overall gameplay.

This already happens, and frequently. So I don't see the continuation of it being a reason not to make a change.