Licinio Chiavari
-
Posts
1,457 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Licinio Chiavari
-
-
52 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said:
Marines got a HUGE nerf.
When and what?
-
42 minutes ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:
That would still mostly result in seal-clubbing though, which should not qualify as "PVP". When they get rid of PVP marks people may feel less like sailing into dangerous areas is just giving their enemies free marks.
Yes it could. Still having some chances going 1v2 (that now often they do not have at all even 1v3) will allow them try.
At the moment even 10 PVEers can be farmed by a single good Wasa. Very demoralizing for everyone. And I'd underline that not all people (the "casuals") have sometimes the time and thus the resources to continously replace (and well fit) lost ships; the ship quality gap, upgrades/books overstacking (and in the hand of hardcores) widen more and more the gap.
Also rebalancing ships, trying to give each one something good over similar sized ones, will help a) seeing not always the same ships [now as you see an Essex you know he's an easy prey for example] b) giving each ship a chance against a comparable size and category ship.
-
Even if I'm not a good PVPer, may be I have some clues.
I do agree that seeing 3 Indef in the greenzone not even trying to attack me alone on Endy... well: it hurts.
This is the problem of GreenZones and, as stated above, too much economy being able to run with resources around capitol. So not forcing people to move out. And personally (even if USA) I'm well against greenzones.
On the other side PVP marks, especially making Wasa (still by far one of the best ship around - BR up made only her less viable in PBs, not in PVP) only by them give an extra edge that PVPer doesnt need.
Cosmetics for sure (the bragging off in all games), some "better" ups are fine (Navy Hull and Structure, still the latter put again the issue of too much thickness on 1st rates - another problem) are fine too: you PVE, you get Gazelle (need it back to 2%, now is total crap); you PVP, you got NHR. But again not the "super ship".
Moreover PVP marks prices should be a bit balanced. 150 PVP marks are not a lot for full time PVPer, but looking at the Leaderboard, those over 40-50/day are almost the same 20ish names.
I have to underline that IMHO another reason "carebears" do not leave greenzones due to some mechanics I already pointed:
A good PVP ship is usually far faster than anything they can field... so the PVPer on a 5th can simply turn around if facing bad odds. If the PVPer is on a Wasa, he can easily kite taggers and kill them well before the "main fleet" can harm him (seen too many times on US coast).
This enormous superiority of fast Wasas (and Bellonas) comes by the absence of any limit to bonus stacks. For this reason I repeated: we need a "hull max speed": no matter what you use, you cant go faster than X, and I'm not referring to 15.5 speed cap, but a ship speed cap equal to base + X%. The better ups/book you got, simply you'll be able to cap speed with a not super light built.
Another enormous superiority of PVPer, on Wasa/Bellonas, comes out by demasting. Being soo easy they can simply demast in a couple broadsides, then keeping kiting or even turning, sinking the tagger and restart kiting. And "infinite" battle repairs complete the "cake" allowing skilled PVPer to soak a prolonged battle.
You should understand that the "carebear" so quoted, the 10th time he sees the enemy easily avoid combat or being able to kite and kill 1 by 1 a far bigger fleet will end =
1) avoiding an aggressive enemy (seeing in him a "PVPer") so automatically "superior"
2) engage only with enormous number superiority (last times US unofficial "doctrine" to handle an heavy raider was AT LEAST 5 ships to 1: two fast and light taggers, a secondary heavier tagger and minumum two heavier ships!).
3) in the free time avoid risks = STAY IN THE GREEN ZONE also because there's not need to exit
So I do repeat: we need some mechanics corrected that, aside being unreal, are hampering not-PVPers to try it because the chances are totally against them in almost any condition.
With the side effect that carebears continue to be carebears without any PVP experience, and PVPers get better and better both experience and gear wise.
-
1 hour ago, Malachi said:
You´re right about our laser-guided gunnery, but provisions wouldn´t be a 'good' limit and would add nothing the actual gameplay, in my opinion.
I already stated that demasting has to be nerfed to make it a bit closer to reality. Up now I saw replies from Devs/Admins making me thinking there is no commitment on this.
Aside being totally weird - granted a lot of captains, even those good at demasting, are saying our laser guided cannons are out of reality - I'm looking to alternatives to add realism and gama balance, making the kiting+demasting metagame (utter crap IMO) more difficult.
Slowing ships down - requiring raiders to load more stuff - as in this post is a small step.
Reworking speed/wood relation is another solution (here:
) is another. In my above idea, the concept is making fir ships even less good.
At the moment between the 2 extremes (LO/WO and fir/fir) we are talking about 20% speed difference that's simply enormous... granted that the real difference on total displacement should be less relevant.
Still the simplest remain, IMO, as posted on last Hotfix thread: add mast HP bar then double or more maximum HP, then make sail damage reducing mast Max HP.
Example. Now mast hp is 200. New max mast HP is 400 x sail condition. If Sail are at 70% mast HP will be 280...because the more rigs (and so shrouds and stays) are damaged, the more unstable the mast will be.
Extra: add mast damage upon collisions and a Damage over Time on mast HP during backward movement (extra dangerous stress). The higher the backward speed, the higher the Damage over Time.
-
Seriously... IMO we'd need to be able to create "rooms", open for all or only for invite or even solo.
I want to test a different ship loadout and try her (for speed, handling). Now I have to sail and look for a trader. No sense.
Or may be we want to do some formation/sailing practice. Again, atm we have to sail and look for an AI.
On this fleet practice, being nice concept, doesnt solve these problems.
-
36 minutes ago, Malachi said:
What would be the 'greater depth' that provisions would add to the game?
Logistics.
Operating limits.
The more afar from bases you move, the more loaded you'll be so the slower.
As I stated elsewhere, as my proposals have to be seen as a whole, one hull, one rig and one crew repairs per battle. OW repairs on cooldown (no cooldown only in draughts); so usually less reps on board than now.
Or some players want only to sail without limits and show how good they are destroying 1 mast with first broadside at over 200mt, that's typically highly realistic?
-
59 minutes ago, admin said:
there was a debate some time ago (maybe 1.5 years :))
Long range frigates were usually supplied for 6 months at sea, average days at sea currently do not exceed 20 days. It was decided against using provisions as consumable as a result.First, thanks for reply: I didnt remember. I know real provisions and range... Still our ships have a far more busy life, and I still think some real issues operating afar from friendly bases should be in place. Thanks again
-
Drop provisions as material for ship building.
Make them may be cheaper to produce.
They should be consumables.
1 provision allow 1 crew to survive 1/3/7 days at sea (to be balanced).
A ship out of provisions will take crew damage (approx 20%?) every day at sea without.
This would give something useful and surely needed to produce for new players/low in crafting.
At the same time, will make operations afar from friendly ports more difficult ti do (as should be) and again, the more crew you bring (also with extra hammocks), the heavier the loadout if ship... And granted my other post (and actual game mechanics) the ship slower.
-
6
-
-
I'd propose a different approuch to ships' speeds related to the wood built choosen.
1. Give every ship a Maximum Speed, based on real datas, hull shape and length (and game balance);
2. Give every wood used for frame and planking a weight based on specific gravity. The stronger the wood, as reality, (oaks) the heavier.
The heavier frame and planking, the heavier the ship, with speed loss as today depending on hold/guns loadout so ship total weight.
Speed mods/books will vive a speed bonus up to the ship maximum speed.
IMHO, a more real solution (live oak is not slower than fir: it's heavier - almost two times more); well balanced could make heavier build a bit more viable in PVP, meanwhile setting ships' maximum speed will put a limit to speeds: no matter the wood, the loadout, the mods, every hull will respect max hull speed.
-
32 minutes ago, rediii said:
#.
Thats actually wrong. Just load chain and you will win every engagement against less enemys.
The best player cant do anything with 50% sails.
Yes and nay.
Thats true if the pro is not equipped with laser guided balls and demasts 3 ships with 6 broadsides, so in less than 10 mins, manouvering included.
Or if, thanks to overstacking bonus that only he could reasonably have, he can kite and keep repairing 30+% every 10 mins.
The proper balancing IMO should be:
Great odds (4+v1) > skill & Gear > skill > small odds (2 or 3v1) > Gear
-
1 hour ago, Otto Kohl said:
How I love to read carebears crying because they can't win 5v1. Just stop carebearing pve, learn how to play smart and you won't be smashed that easy again. You all make so stupid mistakes all the time you don't even realize.
Its not because of upgrades you get smashed. It's because you don't know how to sail, how to keep wind advantage, how to aim and how to shoot. You don't know wood type characteristics, your ship sailing profiles, mast thickness and gun penetration tables. Your "skill" gained in pve is worthless in pvp. Until you realize that you will be smashed in every engagement.
This is true. PVE experience is almost worthless in PVP if missing good understanding of game mechanics.
I thought being medium/decent... But after seeing some captains I noticed that the level even in basic sail handling is sometimes terrible.
Still...
1. Even the most pro gamer what that all could stand a chance to enjoy the game. Too people angry are less players. Less players kill games.
2. All successful games are rewarding skill and dedication still they help to reduce the gap between skill / farming different levels. Example are 'what's super rare today, only for the best, in one year will be almost common for all'. Even in competitive fantasy games, the difference of skill/gear are more easily equalled with numbers than here. THIS IS AN ISSUE.
3. There's a lot discussions about realism. Still some mechanics widening the gap between casuals and pros are NOT REALISTIC. As usual I am mainly referring to demasting and repairs.
-
1 hour ago, Hethwill said:
It is a multi player game. A team starts with 2. Not 1.
Although the game provides enough room for solo play and to be able to emulate battles such as 1 to 5 from history. Rare, extremely rare, both in history and in game.
Thats the problem. In game a well geared Wasa, with a veteran, can kite and easily demast 5-6 even bigger ships and then sink them one by one.
This because stacking bonuses allow ludicrous speeds (to kite), demast is too easy if trained and geared for it and "infinite" repairs allow to soak a prolonged battle against terrible odds (on paper).
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, admin said:
We know and made everything so you can win if you are outnumbered. we dont want you to fit for running away (thats what i meant by lightly built ships).
Why? Skill should matter and would matter 1v2 1v3... And speed was in all history the main defense of raiders.
Still nothing should allow a Wasa or a Bellona outrunning fast frigates and/or win against a big squadron.
Personal skill should matter but far bigger force should win.
On the contrary, aside utter un-realism, what we think a new/casual player is expected to do?
Only pve farming / trading for a couple years?
Sailing only to be farmed for PVP marks?
What can casual/newer players realistically do PVP wise now?
1v1, no. Fine but if even banding together they can be farmed how we can suppose to keep them enjoyed?
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, maturin said:
Yeah, even if shot ricocheted off a mast, it would do so by taking a chunk out of the side. Ships regularly reported shot stuck in their masts.
Again. A chunk out would not demast you. Moreover the problem are laser guided balla: too easy aiming at masts with some practice. The Surprise of the movie (in a movie) purposely demasted the French... Please Remember even in a movie what the crew had to do to try, at very low Speed, point blank, no waves on a surprised enemy.
Speaking about wood types, some needs different bonus to make dense. Sure.
Still the biggest issue is the stackable bonuses allowing two deckers flying at ludicrous speeds.
IMHO there should not be an hard speed cap (15.5).
On the contrary, granted ship base Speed = X, her cap Speed should be a percentage cap. No matter how many mods, fir or books, if base speed is 12.00 your max speed is 13.2 (with 10% cap) or 13.5 (with cap at 13% even too much imo). The better books or mods simply will allow to speed cap more loaded or with stronger woods.
May be this way no more SoLs raiding being quite weird...
-
Good day.
Foreword: english is not my motherlanguage. I have some experience of the game in last like 2 years. Sorry quite long post.
A general note.
We like to stay close to realism, like notes about length to beam ratios to determine the turning rate (referring to previous Admin post on Constitution). Still this is a simulation GAME.
If we’d like a Simulation (period) we should have square rigged ships unable to close wind more than a few degrees over beam reach. The speed loss beyond the closest haul should not be a % every X degrees closing more. Beyond the closest point the ship will stop (starting to leeway a lot).
If you get a sailing boat you can close wind up to 40-45°. As you try to close a bit more, you’ll noticeably lose speed. Closing some more degrees will not slow more the boat. The boat will stop. Try to be sure.
If you’d like a SIMULATION, making a tack would require MINUTES, even 10 or more on very big and clumpsy ships. Turning a yard again: minutes, not seconds. Again try to be sure.
Clearly with these premises the game will be almost unplayable and surely not enjoyable.
What devs, as concept, did is great mixing realism and game. Still now I think we are out of target.
Ships.
Aside the problem with “random” BRs (Wasa and Constitution the same??) the problem is the balancing. And the proof is the use of almost the same ships in all PVP. So throwing away a lot of ships we have chance to sail.
Every sub-group of ships (6th rates, light 5th, heavier 5th, 4th…) should be balanced, with always pro and cons choosing one.
1st rates are quite balanced... and NOT BY CHANCE all more or less used in battle: Santissima has the heaviest side, Ocean slight more HP and crew, Victory smaller but nimbler. THIS is balance approx and they got too different BRs.
The utmost example of not balanced is Wasa and Constitution (and Agamennon too).
Same BR, the Wasa has almost 2 times the gunnery, she’s sturdier (losing a tiny bit of thickness), far more nimble. Wasa lost only 0.3 kts top speed. Same sailing profile.
Over the Agamennon, the Wasa is vastly superior in any respect aside top downwind speed. No comment.
Aside the most blind and utmost love - why someone should sail a Constitution and not a Wasa?
The problem is even worst being the Wasa on PVP market only: the better I’m, the more I can use the Wasa… with her I can beat a lot of inferior ships (with a bit crappier captains) and I keep getting PVP marks to get another. The losing side keeps being unable to get a Wasa to counter.
Around “heavier” 5th rate what do you meet in PVP? Endymions and Trincos. They are balanced each other with pros and cons… but superior to other ships. Who ever use frigs or Essex in PVP anymore (aside as targets)? Devs added the nice idea of LGV refit… and now AFAIK is broken.
3rd rate: we miss a third choise… and in the end it’s only one: the Bellona. Period. Something to be addressed for sure in the future.
I read some proposal, some reasonable, some less… still the way is clear:
Correct BRs.
Nerf Wasa and may be move her to 3rd rates: you got 2 decks of 32 / 24 pd: you have to be slower. And probably with worst turning rate, and worst acceleration.
In case of moving her to 3rd rate: Give her 600 crew may be.
Buff Agamennon: no sense really to use her atm. Crappy handling, awful sailing by beam reach, light broadside etc… we know.
Buff Constitution. She has to outmanouver a Wasa (almost a 3rd rate). Period.
And in the end, balance wise, she has to be able to easily run Agamennon/Ingermanland. Keeping into account the length to beam ratio etc… surely Connie pro will not be turning, still has to be faster and with less leeway (deep keel and lower deck - so less wind force on structure) in respect of other 4th rates.
She could outmanouver 3rd rates… she could withstand a side to side with Agamennon/Inger but not for long periods.
We can keep historical thickness, still we can buff Aga/Inger HP to make a prolonged side to side not a good (as realistic) good idea for a Connie granted adversary heavier broadside.
I love Endymion as she is now… still may be too OP. No real cons aside an only not exceptional turning. I’d (a pain for me) try to slightly reduce it a bit: She’ll be still able to tag or run… but going bad if trying a brawl.
Ideas are a lot… and for now on this topic I’ll stop.
Mechanics.
First and foremost demasting. Almost to be cancelled. It has to become as historical, more a random (very seldom) chance. Nothing you can aim for.
Realistic wise… aside stacking precision-penetration, the error IMO is physics.
Try to calc the maximum error in degrees a ball fired to a cylinder with a diameter of 1mt at 100 mt to have the ball delivering a good percentage of its kinetic energy. A ball hitting at 45° (so reducing the room for a good shot to almost half) respect exact center of the cylinder will deliver very small fraction of its energy.
Granted a 1mt wide mast and a 30cm ball a decent point of impact is less than 30-40cm on that mast. Anything hitting the mast not almost exactly in the center will bounce off. We are talking about 0.25° arc. A quarter than a single degree firing at 100mt.
Please. Imagine being able to aim a shot with such precision EVEN IN A GAME with a 1800 gun on a moving ship at sea to another moving ship at sea.
All the above without taking into account that a ball piercing a mast (with above precision!) and remaining inside (very difficult to pass by leaving a hole) will slightly reduce the mast ability to stay up… because masts stays up thanks to stayropes mainly.
Demasting should happen by very weird chance (two or more very well placed hits in the almost same spot of the mast itself) but with an higher and higher chance the more sails total damage the ship got: because sail damage means also stayropes damaged more and more so in this case a more unstable mast.
That said, on repairs.
Get back to 1 rep/ battle. It’s simply funny seeing ships repairing her sails (in combat!) from 60-70% to full up to 10 times in 1h30’ battle.
One hull repair (with a kit on board) per battle, one for sails (meaning changing the holed sails) and no repairs (in combat) for eventual (utmost rare) lost masts.
And 1 crew recovery per battle.
Outside battle, if some extra kits on board, someone can repair but on a cooldown (10min? more?): simply ridicolous seeing ppl exiting the battle badly crippled and attacking him again fulled.
If on draght, a ship should be able to use repair kits without cooldown like the Surprise in the movie to be clear. So hidden in a small bay to repair will have some sense.
Even if I'm often boarding, I'd say: make impossible to refull crew at sea with total crew available. Simply recover 50% for example at the end of the battle (recovered wounded and shocked/panicked).
This will give more sense to operating close or not to a base - as historical and realistic - with a great edge being close to a friendly port and an huge problem being very afar.
This will end the kiting/demast crap game at the moment where a single expert can win even 1v5 1v10.
You can be the best captain, on the best ship with best crew… still against such odds of similar sized ships you can only run or die: matter only of time and how many will you sink… still you’ll die.
And this will partly solve the widening gap between newer players, or more casual, missing cash, good, books to have super ships, facing Star Destroyers lead by Adm.Togo.
If you’re good on a good ship you should beat 2-3 inferior enemies… but over some ratios, you’ll die.
Finally: PVP marks. Reduce necessity for them to be less subpar over experts. Only small extra bonuses and paints or flags.
You are a veteran and a good one? You dont need to have super bonuses other will spend months to farm nor you dont need to be able to super gear your ship to beat less expert: you are better.
And do not cry “I spent 1 year farming”. In all successful games, something extremely rare today becomes usually common in one year worth of patches. Use new patches to add new small perks so vets will keep a slight edge still with high costs to farm/buy.
BECAUSE THIS ALLOW THE GAME TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN NEW PLAYERS.
I’ll stop for now: noticed the dimension of post. My apologizes
-
10
-
Boarding advisory 2/2/2018
in News Announcements & Important discussions
Posted
A problem was surely pirates rarely sailing anything bigger than a schooner...