Licinio Chiavari

August 4, 2018

1 minute ago, Banished Privateer said:

To make it clear, ships should be removed entirely from RvR, not just shallow PBs. Unless... The devs balance them, fix the bugs and change BR. Then we can discuss.

Exactly what I said.

I'd move Requin back to 5th rates (allowing shallow water as Hercules now - minimum realism), ban Hercules from shallow waters altogether.

This way shallow PBs only for Rattle/Niagara melee.

Then buff Mortar Brig BR to 200+.

Then set a minimum (200+) BR to join deep PBs. Mortar could join, and deep PBs will be back SoL battles and not kiting crap battles.

Simpler and politically less a suicide than nerfing them both altogether: devs would risk to never sell again a DLC.

Moving Requin to 5th would be anyway a (slight) nerf. Making her a bit frailer and nerfing a bit Hercules could solve quite a lot of problems... IF the real balance issue (overpowered perms/books and overstacking stats with them and with wood+trim) will be solved.

August 4, 2018

38 minutes ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

Requins should be removed from shallow port battles

Agreed.

Personally I'd remove both Requin and Hercules from PBs... And stop kite battles: big linea erasing each other in deep ports.

August 4, 2018

Personally I am strongly in favour of an Alliance with Poland... An actual, serious and honest one.

Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth got my outmost sympathy.

August 1, 2018

14 hours ago, Liq said:

Watch this, if you didnt think the ship was broken / bugged, it should hopefully change your mind

Why didnt you simply fire to hull and sink her?

She was dead. I hope mast sniping to be made impossible against any ship.

That requin requires a fix, true.

Still the main problem in game is wood/trim/perms stacking and stats (in Requin case the elite refit).

July 25, 2018

Using a Hercules as a boarder is simply counter-intuitive: she's nicely fast, extremely nimble, well armed and with limited crew. Definately a gun brawler.

Thanks Z4ys for clarification on FireDeckGuns order not working: almost never noticed.

July 25, 2018

Honestly I'd solve the problem of DLC and PB (both shallow and deep) simply moving back Requin to 5th rates (but able to enter shallow water - a bit of realism) and avoiding Hercules to enter shallow waters at all). This will slight nerf her top.

Then changing Mortar Brig BR up to frigate level.

Then setting a minimum ship BR to enter deep PBs higher than both Hercules and Requin.

This way:

- No DLC in PBs (Requin/Herc banner from shallows being 5th and too low BR for deeps).

- Shallow PBs back territory of Niagara/Rattle melee.

- Deep PBs back mainly a SoL heavy battle with no small ship capping/kiting crap with at most a single 5th rate to disturb and kill the eventual mortar.

July 25, 2018

I will not point out (AGAIN) that Requin (and Hercules) issues come out first from upgrade system (making them totally OP).

This time I will point out the second part of the problem of OW ganking: PVP reward system.

One hour 1v1 battle with a skilled and geared enemy: if I do not sink him, I'll get NOTHING.
Five minutes tag+zoom+boarding+sink against a trader brig: 5 PVP marks.

Isnt this inviting to lurk around on a fast ship (and xebec is perfect at this) fast killing any "soft" target around and avoid any equal battle?

July 24, 2018

AIs try to board only if they have 1 crew more.

That said.
Determined Defender should be cancelled or totally reworked. Period.

Even 2 ships that WANT to board each other are unable to... that's pretty weird. And it's a non-sense.

Surely people needs to have an idea of what Boarding is (adding to tutorial would be good); everybody needs to know how to calc boarding melee/FP values... not learning only by try-fail-retry way. And this aside that boarding mini-game needs an overhaul.

Determined Defender should simply make pulling timer longer giving more chances to defender to break the boarding before it starts.

July 24, 2018

Sincerely I think the problem is not "DLC or not DLC ship".

The problem are Hercules and Requin. We would get the same balancing issues even if crafted (especially being pretty small ships so requiring not a lot of materials).

This leads us to (may be) see the real problems.

Herc, without any mod is in the end a nimble Surprise, smaller, better armed. Is she good? yes. Totally unbeatable? no.
Requin, without any mod is in the end a Prince with double crew and crappier downwind profile. Useful raider? yes. Uncounterable? no.
The problem is how fast could be the Hercules with all good mods... and how nimble with still quite a punch (especially with poods).
The problem is how fast in any direction could be Requin with Elite Pirate Refit.

This ends up being AGAIN a problem of Perms/Books balancing. A problem that widen more and more the gap between Vet/Richer players and Newbie/Poorer ones.

It's all here.

We need more pro/cons for each ship (example: why in the hell should I use a Connie? aside utter love... she turns less, she's slower and less armed than an Agamennon) in each rate/subrate (I consider the 5th rate class dividible in 2 subrates: smaller - like Herc, Surp, Reno - and bigger frigates - like Trinco, Endy, Indef).

Why using a 3rd rate when Bellona is better in almost any respect? Why using a Victory in place of Ocean? why using an Essex? etc...

That a DLC ship could be slight better (or more specialized) than same rank ships, it is good (and marketing).

WE NEED TO GET ALL PERMS/BOOKS UTTERLY REBALANCED AND BANNING OVERSTACKING.

To give an example: like only 1 rig refit (Boven, Spanish, French, Brit, Pirate) on a ship, the same should go for pure speed one.
Therefore only one between: Naval Clock, Copper, NHR and Gazelle.
Then get back Gazelle bow to +2%.

So on a ship you'll be able to put ONE.

Those still having one, will put Naval Clock (+4% +small bonus);
The richer will put Copper (+3% +small bonus);
The PVPer/mid rich will put NHR (+2.5% no bonus);
The poorer will put Gazelle (+2 small malus).

We could keep Crooked and Cotton aside... being speed bonus... but paid with malus (even bigger).

And going the same way on all perms.

And then rebalance books... or we get superbooks nerfed or we get them more easily obtainable.

AoSH gives an enormous edge... it costs, if found on market, 200 PVP marks. Majority of players would never see this amount in a year. Pros/Vets could farm them in like a week. Again: we are giving more and more edge to rich/vet/hardcore over poor/new/casual.

A new player could be really good... but he simply has no hope on a decent 3/5 without supercostly perms nor superbooks against the same ship 5/5 with them.
He'll lose badly even clearly seeing the enemy not so good... and he'll ragequit.

July 23, 2018

3 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

I keep telling folks to just take out that front mast. I done it a few times and it pretty much puts them dead in the water.

Honestly, being Requin fast and manouvering, it's not that easy hitting masts (aside the crappiness - realism wise - of aiming at masts...)

July 23, 2018

54 minutes ago, MassimoSud said:

I know you're a Requin specialist, but you're wrong, if I hit the requin sails with a chain less than 250 meters I expect to cause damage (let s say at least 1%?) as for other ships. Instead, the chains often pass through without causing any damage. Try to sail other ships every now and then, it's more fun! 😉

Thanks for "Specialist" title.

That said, as @z4ys pointed there are issues with spankers but the biggest (to work her sails) problem is that requin captain can usually protect effectively them (surely more than on square rigged ships in majority of situations) either fastly reducing sail or turning the yards.

That said.

That requin needs a rebalance is true.

But it is more a Perm/Books problem (of the whole game ATM, putting aside the 'infinite' reps) than specifically a requin one.

July 22, 2018

4 hours ago, MassimoSud said:

Hercules rigging works good, Le Requin rigging is bugged! Some times you hit sails and you deal no damage.

Wrong.

Requin sails are extremely frail: dropped even from 100% to 23% in a SINGLE (damn well placed, surely) chains broadside.

I do not think nothing possible against any other ship.

July 20, 2018

Making a follow-up of my post, I would go on saying I become a border more by necessity than choise.

Please follow the reasoning:

I want to raid enemy waters.

I (especially in the past) sail alone.

So I need a fast ship to be able to avoid groups.

I am not rich so I cant afford a super modded ship and I miss all fancy books. So to get a very fast ship I need her light/super light built.

If I sail a superlight ship even a same sized enemy is dangerous in a gunnery battle.

Conclusion: I need to gear as a boarder: It is very intensive number-wise (a barely decent boarding set up requires 3 books being 4/5 books the correct one) but not money intensive.

On the contrary the perfect gunny raider is very money intensive (expensive woods, expensive speed perms, AoSH almost a must).

So I become a boarder.

In the end, is it a choise being me crappy gunner? Or it's simply a logical choise granted (AGAIN) the enormous potential of super costly mods overstacking that I simply cant afford??

PS: the problem about boarding is that simply 90+% of players (newbie and vet alike) have simply not a clue about it.

Zero clues created and worsened by total lack of proper infomation ingame/forums.

Howis calculated melee strenght? How is it modified by different height? How is it finally modified in relation with enemy action? How's calculated firepower? How is modified by books? Etc etc etc...

July 20, 2018

9 minutes ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

I was in a Herc and I've just had my first instance of chain, ram, chain, repair, retag.

It was fun (not)

Because the guys failed to board me by ramming me the moment the battle started he decided to just chain me down so I did a repair and then proceeded to keep retagging in OW hoping I'd run out of repairs so he could ram and board me.

Something should be done to stop this damned rageboarding, I managed to prevent it with my magic but less experienced players are likely to just get rageboarded with no means of the game mechanics preventing it.

My suggestion would be to make the bowsprit of the Requin really fragile so it breaks to all ships and if it loses it then boarding prep goes to zero along with a crew shock.

Historically seldom ships got sunk. Or they surrendered (almost a no-sense in a game), or got boarded and thus again captured. So boarding is even too underrepresented in game.

So boarding was, should be in game, and is in game a fine mechanic to be used. Please: use properly "boarding" and not rage-boarding. There's no rage or emergency last ditch option in Requin aiming to board as soon as possible an enemy. Honestly: sailing a Requin should I try a side to side gunnery duel with a frigate? definately NO.

That boarding "minigame" in NA needs a redesign to make it more interesting and/or balanced is a plain truth. BUT keeping in mind that a more trained and geared (marines/books/muskets) crew can beat a less trained/geared one... is plain normal... as that a bigger crew should beat (usually) a smaller one.

July 18, 2018

On 7/9/2018 at 6:24 PM, CeltiberoClearco said:

Do you remember when the PBs were solved without hitting cannon fire?
When we were loaded with boarding upgrades on our liner ships and it was all about approaching and boarding?

NAVAL ACTION BOARDING I think we call it.

Well, from an historical perspective, it was way more realistic than bulkload of ships sinking... Or masts being sniped @200+ mt.

July 15, 2018

14 minutes ago, Ink said:

Most likely on Monday

Thanks a lot!

July 15, 2018

On 7/11/2018 at 4:00 PM, Ink said:

Once the logs are checked, I will contact you

Good day,

excuse me: any news from your side?

Thanks in advance.

July 11, 2018

Thanks a lot. Much appreciated.

Best regards.

July 11, 2018

Good day.

on last Sunday EU evening my VIXIT clan mates capped a Bucetaure (teak/wo very fast with kiritimati masts) N of Placentia. I joined them after battle and we berthed in Placentia to resupply and to decide what to do with the ship.

It has been decided to give me the ship to move her later elsewhere.

Cabeza de Perro (capper/owner at the moment of the ship) was unable to trade me the ship in port probably due to missing OP there. Still he was able to put the ship for selling for 1 (one) gold to let me buy her.

I bought the ship. Cabeza de Perro got the confirmation message (ship sold to Licinio Chiavari for 1 gold), but I didnt get the ship.

I wrote a ticket immediately while in game. I didnt receive yet a reply. If needed we have a video of the minutes (from Cabeza's perspective).

Is it possible to have you look at this is issue and solve it.

Thanks in advance.

February 21, 2018

19 minutes ago, vazco said:

Apart from sail upgrades and planking for 6th rates, which are OP, all other upgrades and books are already balanced by the last patch. There's no point in limiting customization options for people. If someone wants his ship to behave in a certain way - let him increase the customization and make more varied battles.

You don't need mods to compete, they are more or less irrelevant now - after last changes: changing wind, thickness, mast buffs etc. We just had a fight in 2 store-bought ships (Lynx and Snow) with no upgrades and skill knowledges, against 3 crafted snows with upgrades.The result was that two snows sunk, and a third one died in an explosion which killed everyone in a battle and created a draw. An enemy clan had an organization, mods and skill knowledge, 2.5x more guns and HP, yet they didn't win.

Skill is what you need, not mods. Right now I don't know of any OP mod (apart from those that I mentioned).

True. Still skill is built doing PVP.

And why should casual player engage in even PVP 100% getting sunk by superior gear AND skill every time... and 90% times learning nothing being ganked too?

And why should a casual not rich player should risk a ship (especially a modded one) if replacing losses is a pain?

So why the casual/new player should engage in PVP losing time and resources gaining nothing 99.9% the time?

So, conclusion, how casual/new player can skill up?

February 7, 2018

On 5/2/2018 at 2:52 AM, HachiRoku said:

If you need a mod or 1 out of the 6 mast mods in the case of naval action to be competitive in pvp I would argue something is broken.

People will complain about demasting being either impossible or to easy. If its possible it automatically becomes to easy!

First of all I want to say that Kiritimati masts and Elite french rig are just a troll. Its a one sided fight if the person that is using them is a good dismaster. A one sided fight not competitive gaming.

I sail an Elite British Rig refit teak teak trinco with copper plating and navy hull. I love that ship and don't want to take Brit rig off for shit mast mods.  @Moscalb sails a Kiritimati teak fir trinco with poods. Now everyone knows if I were to 1v1 him how that fight would end. It is a 100% one sided fight. I could fire 100 shots of 18 charged into his masts and do nothing. He would fire 7 and it would be gg. So I will not duel him and he doesn't blame me We had Connie duel. I put mast mod on and beat him. Does that make me better? No because 1 mod made me win and by them time he knew I had the mod it was to late. I don't like that. I will never know who is better like this. I don't like to duel with no way to demast either. Any option MUST be available in battles!

Most mast mods make dismasting impossible because they increase thickness so even with 1000 hits to bottom section will not dismast anything. This is a major issue because we cannot know if we are even penning masts and not penning a mast is an issue by itself.

Currently it is 7 hits to bottom sections, 4 hits to mid sections and 2 hits to top sections with longs and 1 hit to tops with poods because someone thought that would be a great idea for some reason.

The base HP of masts should be increased to 8 hits to bottom sections, 6 hits to mid sections and 4 hits to top sections and things would be a lot better. That doesn't sound like much but In practice that will work! I believe it is worth a try @admin because mast mods are just getting out of control and its trolling and not fun anymore. The thickness as it is, is really good at the moment and all mast mods should ONLY be HP increases and NOT thickness. Kiritimati masts are the strongest mod in game. If that mod gave you a 40% HP buff and NO thinkness buff you would still take 11 hits to bottom, 8 to mids, and 6 to tops! That might not sound like a lot but believe me it is ALOT and maybe still even a troll even if you're penning because there is a trick I will explain below to people that don't know!

If you have a mod like Kiritimati and someone needs 11 hits to kill your bottom section you will rule the sea. If you pop you your repair after 10 hits , your mast hp come back and someone will need a total of 22 hits to kill 1 of your masts.  What do you think you could do to him in this time?

This is the trinck for people that don't know. If your mast needs 7 hits to be dismasted. If you count the hits, You should repair sails after 5 hits or 6 max. Even if you're at 99% sail. Your mast hp always goes to 100% after rig rep. If you loose mast and repair rig you never get the full mast back but repairing early can buy time and save your ass.

@TommyShelby DON'T OVERREACT!

HachiRoku pointed again something already pointed. This time the issue is called by a very good "demaster".

If even a skilled player point out the problem, aside people with a clue and less skilled... THIS MEANS THERE'S A PROBLEM.

Yes, mast mods are a must if facing skilled players... not a single ship I used on "Coast Defense" on US coast sails without French Rig and Winged Out Ballast. Still this means I have to drop 1 perm and 1 book to hope to not lose masts at first couple broadsides.

Moreover, missing super OP books (it requires a bulkload of farming) and great amounts of golds (for Copper for example), I will have to make super light ships to be able to catch on heavier and damn fast too ships. So if I'll be able to save (may be) my masts... I'll end losing my side armor. To this point is not a matter of skill... it's simply giving more and more edge to veterans over casuals/new players. How we think NA will be able to grow (or at least stay alive) if casuals/new players cant do PVP even outnumbering enemy?

From my perspective, as stated elsewhere is a problem of balance and realism.

1) no way a rolling ship with 1800 guns will ever even think to "aim" (lol) to masts running at full speed at 100+ meters.

2) in majority of situation the really required precision (a couple feet out 100-200+ yards meaning something like a quarter of a single degree) was totally and simply out reality.

3) as someone likes to underline, 1800 ships lost masts... yes. Due to prolonged battles and usually after heavy rig damage (so stays and shrouds) and very often due in the end for a "trauma" (like a collision after shrouds damages - again).

On this I can quote also Wikipedia (usually called to confirm own theories... so I use it too)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_ship_tactics

<< [omissis] The chance that a ship would be dismasted and stopped before reaching the enemy's line was small.[omissis] >>

And Trafalgar battle only CONFIRMS this.

Please remember that with light breeze British Fleet closed in to French/Spanish one letting them firing bow rakes all the time. I'd underline the well famed "LIGHT" breeze... so we can imagine ship "running" at 4-5 kts if ever so high.

Another quote:

<< Nelson knew he had every chance of getting through the real danger zone of a depth of 600 to 700 yards in 12 to 15 minutes (due to the sluggish wind) without crippling damage. He knew that only perhaps two or three ships would be able to fire at him twice, or at most three times, during these critical minutes >>

Does someone think that in this damn loved game... any ship could receive 2-3 bow rakes from 2-3 ships without losing at least a single masts if the shooter are good at demasting. And I say 2-3 rakes from 2-3 ships granted French/Spanish reloading. In this game in 10 minutes a ship fire even more than 10 times.

We all know the reality in this game.

Again people dares saying Victory got demasted. I have to point out AGAIN that the foretopsail of Victory, still preserved, HAD OVER 90 HOLES... and Victory lost her masts after a collision too.

So again: nothing in NA about demasting has to do with reality. Nothing.

And I'd repeat. I do agree that playability has to take precedence over realism (NA will not get a lot of players with tacking would require 10-15 minutes as in truth).

BUT DEMASTING META IS NOT REAL NOR USEFUL TO MAKE GAME MORE ENJOYABLE.

As stated in other topic... I consider buffing by 100% up to over 150% masts HP as bare minimum to make this game more balanced (and real). I still agree that making the new heavily buffed mast HP a function of sail damage too so if sails (and so stays and shrouds) are at 60%, Mast HP should be reduced of the same amount, could be even more advisable.

Thanks for reading.

February 5, 2018

57 minutes ago, admin said:

Waterline length is an in game waterline length. It not a traditional waterline for 2 reasons.

The table waterline is the in game waterline. We are interested in the in game hull speed and thus measure the in game waterline (how ship would sail and turn with this waterline)

The real waterline could shift up and down depending on the cargo and you would get different measurements.

The game lengths will always and proper because (despite what some captains say)

All ship's dimensions are as correct and proper as the blueprint used to build the ship. If multiple blueprints with different measurements exist, we are not making the judgement calls. We pick the BP that helps the artist the most. Using multiple blueprints to make a ship usually causes problems with final inspections and usually cause artists heads to roll (for example ports are all different on all blueprints and lines are mostly different too), so artists use ONE and ONE ONLY blueprint.

Still not a word on topic :angry:

February 5, 2018

56 minutes ago, Fluffy Fishy said:

Constitution should probably not be changed much from its current state of the game her current sailing model seems very fair to her true design, Constitution shouldn't receive a magic boost to turning because her design just doesn't really allow for that. If we are going to balance her she shouldn't stand out against the sailing model as a giant red herring that gets a big boost because people want her to be artificially good. Interesting mention for the Bucentaure earlier in the original post too, mainly because she is more nerfed in the game in reality than constitution is, with her waterline length in game stats being quite dramatically cruel, giving her a much longer hull than what was historical, where as Constitution receives a nice little buff to her historical values already, where she is 1.5m shorter than she should be at the water. Please do not underestimate the sheer size of Constitution to ships of the era, where she is longer than a lot of 1st rates, with a hull dimensions and draft similar to a heavier end 3rd rate.

If you are going to buff constitution the best thing to do is extend what she is good at slightly, make her a little faster and a fair bit tougher, leaving her with a significant structure boost putting her in similar placement to some of the 3rd rates. This would make her a pretty good ship for duking things out in a straight line, but quite vulnerable on the turn, further enhanced by her heavy broadside. She should be able to pick her fights and play cat and mouse to utilise her heavy broadside and make the most of her decent speed and strong structure. Giving her the ability to out smaller profile ships like 3rd rates and even the 2nd rates seems a bit silly, because right now the reality is she is the 4th longest ship in the game.

For some extra reference on turning here is the table that has been floated around on these forums a few times.

Much appreciated reply... and nice re-post of this table.

My proposal wanted to be, as stated elsewhere, not historical or engineering wise sound, still game wise acceptable.

Turn rate in this game, respect of true 1800 combat, is far more important, granted that in truth during the completion of a tack (that could last over 10 minutes) a ship was able to fire 5-10 times. Ingame the time ratio between firing and turning is far different... The good part we got a faster paced combat, a more manouvering combat (90% of age of sails, aside getting the upper hand, were side to side to the death...) the "bad" in this case is that manouvrability has a different weight making a ship good or bad.

Fluffy's idea is good. Still this should mean, IF we/devs want to give Constitution a role, may be a slight buff to toughness but more importantly a bigger buff to speed, setting Connie on par with fast frigates... on the contrary, my target range of 12-12.1 kts with the same turnrate will not solve the issue.

Admin/Ink opinions? should we stop using Constitution altogether? have we an hope?

February 5, 2018

1 hour ago, Thonys said:

" Move her speed to 12.00-12.10 (making her on par with slowest frigate - Indefetigable); "

it should go faster .......the landing boats are not fitted to the vessel " 13.5 knots lol

besides that i don,t like the compromise you make with the other vessels in the game it does not do right to the vessel

I know. Still...

a.) asking a LO/WO Connie "flying" @13 kts will make her SUPER op granted how woods works ingame. So not a good idea (not going to happen ever... and rightfully).

b.) making her faster than other frigates... I think would call for subsequent nerf.

c.) my solution is not aimed to make her justice thinking what she was (and is). My solution is making her a viable ship in this game gtanted the usual "rock/scissor/paper" scheme.

With datas at the moment... as you rightfully stated, it's only filling computer cache having no role, no ups, no pros... only the outmost and blindest love makes some captains still using her.

I'd like to know Devs opinion on this regard... if they think she has a meaning as a ship in this game in this moment (and we can say the same for the Frigate or the Essex honestly... still, with so many different 5th rate options, this is less an issue game wise and a far less issue "flavour" wise).

February 5, 2018

The super heavy frigate Constitution is at the moment plain broken.

Turn rate is 2.37 (almost on par with a Bucetaure - 2nd rate! - being at 2.33) and inferior to all 3rd rates (Wasa Bellona and 3rd being at 3.06 2.79 and 2.79)... not talking about 4th rates (Wappen Agamennon and Inger being at 3.60 and 3.04). So, having a far lower broadside there is not reason using her in place of 3-4 rates turnrate wise.

Speed wise she sits at 11.69 with all frigates (5th rates) being between 12.66/7 - Cerberus/Renomee and 12.01 of Indefetigable). So again: no sense using her in place of a standard frigate speed wise.

I'd propose to:

Move her speed to 12.00-12.10 (making her on par with slowest frigate - Indefetigable);

Move her turn rate to 3.00 (making her superior or on par with 3rd rates and slightly inferior to 4th rates).

This way she could try to keep a brawl battle on 3rd rates, get outturned by 4th and 5th rates, be faster than 4th rates, slower and less nimble than 5th, still being well more tough.

Making a scheme =

Speed: 5th rates > Constitution > 4th/3rd rates => she cant outrun frigates but can outrun bigger ships

Turn: 5th rates > 4th rates > Constitution > 3rd rates => she cant outturn same rate or smaller ships, still she can outturn full SoLs

Toughness: 3rd rates > Constitution > 4th rates > 5th rates => she can outlast 4th rates but not 3rd rates

Broadside: 3rd rates > 4th rates > Constitution > 5th rates => she hits harder than other frigs but not 3rd/4th rates

I challenge anyone saying such a ship would be OP. I'd say she'll be a nice mid range (not shining nor crappy) in all categories.

I'd like Devs opinion on this rebalacing of a nerfed to death ship.

Regads.

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Gallery

Downloads

Events

Posts posted by Licinio Chiavari