Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Cecil Selous

Members
  • Content Count

    513
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Cecil Selous last won the day on November 23 2018

Cecil Selous had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

631 Excellent

1 Follower

About Cecil Selous

  • Rank
    Lieutenant

Recent Profile Visitors

1,966 profile views
  1. Which is totally fine regarding damage to cannons and crew. Doesn't really make sense in terms of structure damage though. What do we consider structure? Frames, beams, carlings, knees ...? So I agree, that the damage to the structure due to stern raking is too much atm.
  2. could be countered with proper ransom and abandon ship mechanics. A lot of these are in UA: Age of Sail. So at least the devs already thought about it
  3. I always liked the idea to completely turn away from HP and health bars in general and just take accurate penetration and thickness values. combine it with a more sophisticated and complex hitbox system (crew, cannons, structural elements, masts, yards, shrouds, spars ...), more actual sailing, throw less accurate cannons (affected by roll, pitch etc etc) in the mix and it all comes down to proper positioning and sail handling while also leveling the playing field a bit. But I also agree, that it is too late to implement or test this in naval action without completely changing everything and thus maybe doing more harm then good. But as you always hint at next games. Making suggestions and giving you ideas to think about in the future isn't a bad thing I agree too. Tell us about your ideas without making it a definite decision. Just a view into your minds where a healthy discussion could develop. Like: we had this idea .... tell us what you think etc. I know you do that already but we often had a situation, where you already made the decision to implement things and discussed it afterwards. Of course that's your right as the developer. This is your baby and you have a certain vision how this game should be. I still would like to read more about some of your ideas. whether they are good or not
  4. I was a victim of this yesterday. Coming back after a few months hiatus and already losing the desire to play again. It was an engagement between my Rätt and an american Wasa. I sailed undercrewed but just thought, well let's try it and maybe have some fun. At least i gain experience. I already was a bit suspicious when from his first volley of his bow chasers from roughly 400 meters, 3 connected with my masts. But what followed after i got in close wasn't really fun. He single shotted his first two broadsides with the result, that his first took my foremast and the second took my mainmast. Well awesome. losing 2 masts in the first 2 minutes of the engagement. So I fired one last broadside into his side and surrendered (my first went into his rigging which resulted in a rigging shock, during which he cut my foremast). I don't even know what I could have done different. Don't get me wrong. I admire his skill and don't want to talk bad about him or his victory. He learned and practiced what he did so he earned it. Fair enough. It simply wasn't fun. I despise the mechanics around it. It shouldn't be possible to obtain this skill. My main gripe with the game: accuracy. I don't agree with the analogy of William Death, that I shouldn't think of it as sniping but more of skilled gun captains aiming for the rigging (on an up and down moving ship that makes 7-8 knots with full sails and during a turn ). How can I accept that, when It is possible to adjust my horizontal and vertical aiming on the fly and even open fire any second during my traverse of the cannons? Why do we still accept, that our shots land where we were aiming at the moment we clicked and aren't influenced by the moving of the ship during the broadside. How is it an achiveable gameplay goal, that some can snipe masts from 150 or more meters? The masts should be tiny hitboxes from longer ranges but it seems that somehow balls always connect with them constantly as if they are guided in. Most of my unaimed and rushed stern or bow chaser snapshots (with chain) connect with a mast. Is there maybe something wrong with the hitboxes? Are they too big? I don't know cause if you follow a ball on his trajectory it always hits dead center. Here I am, making a post about a recent loss and apparently whine about it. But my main concern is with the game. I am all for linking mast strength/integrity to rigging damage (and wind force plus sail area) with suitable damage number adjustments, that are definitely needed then. I am even for giving the shrouds their own hitboxes and HP. But this sniping and accuracy has to go
  5. I like the delivery missions and they should be kept in the game but also those ideas above are quite interesting. Give clans the option to create delivery/cargo missions in their ports. I assume there are a lot of players that really like to trade or sail cargo from port to port. Give them something that they can do for you/your clan/nation while also earning something in the process. There are a few critical points though, which should be addressed. like others said, common trade and mid to long range hauls with common trade goods should be more lucrative the one who takes a delivery mission must pay some sort of security in advance goods that a clan wants to be transported are packed together into a package which is for no use to the player who delivers it. It is unpacked at the destination. the reward is paid by the one who wants his goods delivered (preventing earning money with own alts from your own delivery missions) reward can be anything, chosen by the clan (upgrades, notes, reals, doubloons whatever) goods that get delivered can be insured too abuse by the enemy or hostile alts must be prevented if a player doesn't deliver in time --> no security deposit back + financial penalty (difficult to implement. what happens when he gets sunk or captured. Was it deliberate or real enemy action, how to distinguish between those?) the clan must approve the one who wants to deliver the cargo successful traders gain a score that resembles their reliability/trustworthiness maybe the trader has to open an office in the port to further improve relations with the clan/owner of the port, which also must be approved by the port owner. This way clans can outsource their annoying common trades from port to port (daily stone, coal or iron deliveries or even finally find a real use for trade goods --> making people happy in your port/county and thus make it harder to gain hostility for the enemy (too much dreaming I guess )) and some players can make a trader career or even built real trading companies --> If NPCs could do that too would be great but well, maybe later ... Also more people on OW with cargo that can really matter in RVR
  6. It's not the penetration. It is the bonkers idea that 40 balls (of varying sizes) that penetrate the hull is somehow enough to possibly absolutely destroy a ship. Not even mentioning that single shooting into an enemy that decided to bow tank immediately decreases structure and if he is unlucky even by a very big amount. In the video that Liq posted, Reverse managed to get 17 shots penetrating the hull. With that he killed (or as some like to say disabled) 4 crew members and no cannons. But the ship is almost done. 17 small iron balls!!!! I wonder what the rest of the crew is thinking. They must be absolutely perplexed what is suddenly happening to their ship. Who build this ship?, why did I join the navy?, this is ridiculous... The emphasis in the damage model is imho on the wrong variable, the artificial hull HP pool (structure too). At least the way it works now is way off and absolutely not historical despite everyone using this term frequently.
  7. How about bringing back some very rare reports that NPC traders can carry, that give a hint to a port with rare woods? Just a hint to make it not too easy.
  8. Boarding AI is the same as it was before. At least on the testbed it was like that. Yes Ai knows exactly what you choose but If you know which action the AI usually chooses against a given action by you, you can easily bait the AI. Then just change your action accordingly in the last second and you are fine. For example use attack right at the beginning, AI will choose defend and then you change your action to musket fire or deck guns and kill a lot of crew. AI will usually choose fire grenades in the next move were you can use attack at the last 1 to 2 seconds. Granted you always have enough prep of course. It is also very predictable that the AI uses fire deck guns every time it is off cooldown, except you interfere with an early command by yourself. Is the system great? No not at all and I also would like something much different but it isn't unpredictable or luck after you get the hang of it. But I agree, until then new players will probably become desperate at the beginning with reading all the numbers and not understanding what they mean and without knowing the AI behavior or seeing what the AI chooses and why it does it. How it works is not really transparent for the starter I can imagine.
  9. So if I bounce my shots or they just partially penetrate, it should transfer the most of the kinetic energy into the hull and to overall structure. At least more than penetrating shots that continue flying. scnr.
  10. I can understand the idea behind it but the problem is, that it is happening so ridiculously fast. 40 holes (or a even bit less than that) in you hull can mean a total disintegration of your ship and a loss of structural integrity. I am talking here about heavy frigate against light frigate. This is just so artificial and random. I like your wind example. Why not introducing this in the future? Varying wind strengths and the need to adjust your sails to that or risk losing a mast section. This would give depth to gameplay. We also need hitboxes for the shrouds And why did captains surrender that fast? The obvious reason of course is if the enemy is just superior. Like SOL against normal frigate. So if you find yourself in that situation without a possibility to escape and no real chance of winning or doing anything significant you surrender to avoid meaningless loss of life. If you are massively losing the gun battle you surrender for pretty much the same reasons. One batters the other into submission. Now with the new dmg model this should be represented in NA. But in a totally different way. By completely destroying ships in a few broadsides. And I just think that this is false and the wrong way. A few players in this thread already presented ideas of how crew and avoiding casualties should be the main thing to care about. A SOL will still always have the upper hand when it comes to that. While I mostly agree with the rest of your post, I can't get behind this. It equals consensual mass suicide of up to a few hundred men. Shouldn't be a thing. You say it yourself and yet the most prominent reason to lose after 1 to 3 broadsides in the testbed isn't that. I will wait for changes and I appreciate that we get the possibility to test all of this but can we stop talking about real and authentic as long as HP bars determine damage done and the mere number of cannonballs that enter your ship decide about loss of structural integrity. HP may be necessary to simulate damage it in a satisfying way without introducing a potentially extreme performance heavy more sophisticated damage/hitbox model. But then it has to be tweaked and tuned because right now it is just too much.
  11. Since you asked I will explain my thoughts behind my posts (that mental is meant in a totalyl harmless way I assume ). Of course it is just my opinion and I can't prove them with any studies, hard numbers and just approach this by my logic and general knowledge. This table shows the diameters of the cannonballs we use (I took them from this website https://www.arc.id.au/Cannonballs.html). Most of us also now the various videos on youtube about modern tests of naval cannons. For example the experiment with the part of a Niagara hull that gets shot by 12 lb, 24 lb and 32 lb carronades and the Test of the 24 lb long gun of the Vasa. They show what kind of damage is done to the hull and more importantly what happens after penetration inside the ship. The link to the Niagara video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGM6AlwjGS0 Those balls don't explode. They make holes at varying sizes mostly depending on velocity at time of the impact. Some are remarkable clean, some break out larger parts. All in all the important is what happens at the exit hole and what and where they hit. One broadside of a Victory (no carronades) shoots 16 x 42 lb, 15 x 24 lb and 22 x 12 lb cannon balls. At the moment one broadside of a Victory to the hull above water is enough to sink small frigates and sometimes also the medium ones if the majority of the shots connect. And that for me is simply not comprehensible. That's where I asked what kind of damage is done by those 53 solid cannonballs of different size that causes a fairly big wooden sail ship to be totally destroyed and sink without even a chance. That is where I asked the question of what we understand as Hull HP and cannonball damage and how they should relate to each other. That's also the point where I questioned the use of the term "historical" and "realistic" because they are thrown around here? Usually the example of the frigate La Sérieuse comes into play at this point to validate the current gameplay on the testbed. And then I simply said that we don't know in detail what happend to her. At least I don't. I couldn't find a really detailed source and have no book about the battle of the Nile to search for more. Maybe someone could help out here. The best I could find is that the frigate was heavily damaged, disabled and driftend onto a shoal. Then the next day it was scuttled by the french to avoid capture by the british. It is also highly questionable if we should take this particular example as the norm. A broadside of a first rate to a frigate is devastating and it should be. I totally agree with that. It is devastating because it is simply a huge amount of metal that enters the ship all at once with all the resulting consequences to the crew, cannons, everything that has anything to do with the rigging, modules etc but not in a way that immediately completely negates the ability of the ship to float and hold itself together. I said that I think this is a step into the right direction and I appreciate that we can test this on the testbed. But it needs a lot of tuning. Just two examples. Excuse the horrifying graphic settings This is what just three Trincomalee broadsides (32 lb carronades and 18 lb longs) do to a Cerberus, a light 5th rate. And this happens to a snow after 25 hull hits from a Trinc (full 32 lb carronade loadout) 2 and a half minutes into the battle. Nothing left and completely dismasted. Sure. Big frigate against a smaller frigate and a small 6th rate. But seriously guys. This is way over the top. And? Don't we have bad or new players? They should suffer extremely for being just that? Besides this doesn't only relate to first rate vs frigate. As the pictures above show. Like mentioned above. Those ships can be 2 - 3 shotted atm by ships in their own class.
  12. Exaggerate? Did you test it? If you can get a good tag (or a good position when you get tagged) and the poor guy lies right next to you, he is done before he can raise his sails. In a bigger battle it is also not far fetched, that you get the opportunity to deliver a perfect broadside. For the smaller frigates you don't even need to hit with every cannon. This may have the positive effect, that lone or a just a small number of frigates don't tag SOLs from now on but still I don't like it. I needed 5 broadsides to sink stupid AI Surprise, L'Hermione and an Indefatigable. Imho a first rate should never sink a 5th rate with one broadside despite all La serieuse dreams. I am fine with the penetration though.
  13. I want to ask something since we kind of loosely throw the words historical and realistic around here. What exactly is HP for you? What does it mean? What does it represent regarding the damage that a ship can take and the damage that is done by cannon balls. What kind of damage is done by a broadside, that immediately sinks another ship? Also again: How does the weight of the solid shot exactly translate into damage. How can those parameters be tweaked to still get the general characteristics we have now on the testbed but with a better feeling without oneshotting frigates or in general ships, that are two classes below your ship. I still think the relation between HP and damage is not quite there yet.
×
×
  • Create New...