Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Poyraz last won the day on August 23 2014

Poyraz had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

129 Excellent

About Poyraz

  • Rank
    Able seaman

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

809 profile views
  1. Good to see some tweaking after so many years, however, it is in the unexpected direction... https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/311310/view/3005581668786510905
  2. This will be somehow offtopic, but It is just a coarse concept model. You can increase and adjust the target values accordingly. According to your assumption, the points are gained via PvP. Lets think even if so, and the defender won't show up on open sea to counter the attackers, then this means no points for zerg attacker to reach the extra 200% or higher targets. There is allways the final PB opportunity.
  3. This sounds more or less like the unrest concept in PotBS, which worked OK besides the lottery system to join the final battle. Stage 1: Constructing the assault project / Building assault fleet / Build up of unrest in PotBS Attacker tries to rise the unrest point, defender tries to decrease it like in PotBS with activities around the port in open sea as well as in instances around the port. If the attacker reaches a definite amount of unrest, than there will be a PB scheduled 48 hours later. (24 hours would be more responsive though) I would like to add, that if the attacker goes
  4. I have seen 1 - 2 similar posts, but completely missed this thread. Both has the same time & location factor for joining open sea instances, which is mandatory in my opinion.
  5. This might be the most modified game mechanic until now and I would like to share some more ideas here. I have seen in different threads similar ideas, and here is my total RoE package for a robust, fun and sustainable PvP environment on the open sea. The Concept: The main difference here for the initiation of OS engagements is, that the location is not only factor for determining the allocation of ships in the instance, but also the time itself. So, basically after the OS attacking, the instance is created. And any ship, outside this first initiation circle, would be joining to the i
  6. For the sake of simplicity, I would go with a circle If you would go for more realistic turn route, I would say it would look like more like a spiral shape instead of an ellipse, due to the variying speeds.
  7. Turn Rate: Describing the turning maneuver is quite complex, including also drift in real life and turning around pivot point instead of weight or geometrical cenre. Considering, ships in NA would perform a regular and circular turn maneuver, the turn rate would be defined by the linear speed and characteristic turn radius as in the following formula. ω = V / R The linear speed part V, varries according the ships maximum speed, set sail amount, hull resisstance, etc. The turning radius R is the distance gained during the turning maneuver of the ship. However, it is mostly unique f
  8. Condisering the hydrodynamics (hull underwater) and ignoring the aerodynamisc (sails); If the interaction between water and ship hull would be constant, the turning radius would be same both for slow and high speed levels. At slower speed the ship would cover the same route but in longer times, which means slower turn rates. (degree/second). At higher speeds the ship would cover the same circle in shorter time, which would lead to higher turn rates. That is because turn rates describes the covered angle in a definite amount of time. However, in reality it is much more complex. While th
  9. You are right, there are so many parameters that even nowadays turning behaviors are defined after real sea trials. (Unfortunately no chance to sail Santisima or Victory today, but their replicas might give some insight) For instance, the rudder is only a trigger and has the duty to initiate the turning in a turning maneuver. After that the hull at bow below waterline acts as a huge shovel itself and rotates the ship's huge mass. The rudder ratio and hull shape are just two of many parameters in turning which are also mentioned here. Although the simulation is complex, one might say that t
  10. It has been done before. Have you ever played PotBS? All the time, it has been linear and angular acceleration, which were giving the characteristic and unique sailing profile to every single ship, not the linear or angular speed limits. If you make games with speed as control parameter and input, you will end up in arcade games. If you make games with acceleration (aka force) as control parameter input, you will end up in simulation games which are closer to real life pyhsics. I am not just making some random number crunching. As I said, it was done before, compare trying
  11. The main idea here is to modify the behavior of ships during the turning maneuver, so that the turning would be simulated more realistic and intense like in real life, which would also bring much more variety and another dimension into the sailing, specifically in turning maneuvers. Turning Acceleration vs Linear Acceleration Currently ingame, the maximum turning speed of different ships vary according to the ships features and different sizes. The turn speed variance makes different ships feel like turning faster or slower. A Santisima is turning slower than a Cutter, which makes sense.
  12. This would just not work. With a 5 dura frigate, even if you won't salvage it, you would dublicate this permanent upgrade 5 times into the game world.
  13. Poyraz


  • Create New...