akd

Well sure, but other things equal, length did matter as long as it was under the threshold for black powder efficiency. There 8 foot 24pdrs, as evidenced by Constitution. 8 feet for medium and 9.5 feet for long is reasonable, and worthy of some performance difference. 32s are definitely a grey area, but we don't know if the devs have already incorporated late period "medium" 32s. If 32 long is 9.5-10 feet and medium is some sort of late period intermediate pattern gun, then again that is reasonable. I have not seen two different types of 42s in game. Since we know the dimensions of ships, it should be possible to determine the actual length of gun models in game.

Without knowing this, we can't say anything is really wrong, other than that the MV increase may be somewhat exaggerated. If in-game "standard" (i.e. Medium) 18pdr is 8 feet long and long 18pdr is 9.5 feet long, then that is as it should be for the Napoleonic era. Foot and half of length well within the threshold for black powder efficiency would not be meaningless for MV.

Default assignment of Left ALT to "move camera while aiming" does not work. Assigning another key to this function works. Left ALT can also not be assigned to any other function.

You've put yourself in a situation where you have 5 ships shooting at you and you think you should be able to magically recover from this?

Who says wind speed changes have to include calm wind? You could have changes in the upper register that simply require modification of sails to maintain max speeds, or maintain max speed without sail damage. Perhaps also some slower winds, but still enough to keep ships at 50%+ of max speed with all sails set (but these could be artificially rare, say only 25% of time). Add in audio effects to help cue players to changes and variable wave conditions (not necessarily synched perfectly to wind speed at all times) and you have some awesome depth and variety.

A 23 caliber (lower end of your threshold) length 24-pounder would be 11ft long! Look at the ballistics link above ( A standard (i.e. long) 24 pounder (9.6ft) was about 20 calibers in length. So for at least some guns we have short, medium, and long guns that are all within the limit for black powder m/v. The 24-pounder at the end of the 18th C. conforms fairly well to a 4-tier system if we are careful with the use of the word "standard." 24-pdr Carronade (4ft) 24-pdr Short (6.5-7.5ft) 24-pdr Medium (8ft) 24-pdr Long / Standard (9-9.5ft) Yes, the weight and m/v differences would be marginal tier to tier, but I don't think there is anything wrong with marginal differences in a customization scheme for a game where the focus is on player skill and customization choices are about small percentage improvements / penalties. For the 32-pounder and 42-pounder guns, however, you are correct. For our period, there were only long guns of about 16-18 calibers in length, which were the "standard" guns. Shorter 32-pounders are really a creature of the post-1820 period.

I think the 8ft 18lb (38cwt) was used on some frigates (e.g. Constellation and Macedonian according to this). There was also a 9ft 6inch 18pdr.EDIT: in fact the 8ft 18pdr had become the establishment on all British 18pdr frigates by 1800 (some as early as 1782). Source: Frigates of the Napoleonic Wars Likewise, there were "standard" 9ft, 9ft 6inch, and 10ft 24 pounders, and of course later on the "short-to-medium" 24 pounder guns which had some importance, e.g. 8ft 24pdrs used on some British and American frigates, and 6ft 6in Gover 24 pounders that apparently saw widespread use on merchantmen due to the lower manning requirements of the short guns. I hadn't really looked if that was the case in game, but if so, then that is definitely not the correct model for long guns of this period. That is way too long for the ships in game and anachronistic for mid- to late-18th C. and later. Well, that depends on what time, caliber and terminology we pick. I was kinda of assuming that, for example, 8ft, 9ft and 9ft6in 18lb would generally fit into the scheme of "short, medium (standard in this case) and long." You are right, however, that for the larger guns it is generally "long" and "a little more long".

That is an amazing link. Everything you need for round shot ballistics (except terminal). Incredible detail on the Armstrong (Armstrong-Frederick) pattern guns as well. Devs please bookmark if you have not already visited. That is oversimplified, I think. For example, around mid-18 C. there were 5 different lengths of 9lb cannon. "Standard" length on a 28-gun 6th rate was 7 ft., while at the same time "standard" length on an 80-gun 3rd rate's upper deck was 9 ft. By 1782 there were 2 additional lengths, including a 9.5 ft. cannon. The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War, 1600-1815

I think it is just somewhat confusing because the "standard" (most widely used) versions of some guns were sometimes the longest versions. What is called "standard" above for these guns would be the mid-length experimental guns, which were not standard (widely used) in service, at least until very late in the era. It would probably be better to say: Carronade / Howitzer Short Medium Long

There is no fixed year in the game. It represents an "era."

Yeah, that would be a pretty good compromise solution for making crew loss meaningful, especially if combined with better boarding mechanics. In battle crew loss leads to degradation of crew experience (which itself would only provide marginal bonuses to certain stats and possibly morale if incorporated), but at the same time crew experience would be fairly easy to earn (you could have a trained-up crew after only a few battles). Total loss of your ship in battle (sinking, blowing up) could then take things to a step further and come with a chance to lose officers (who would have more long-term experience earning potential and special skills). This would greatly up the risk factor for fighting to the death, provide a good and logical motive for honorable surrender, and avoid the issue where a person in a ship with only one durability point remaining might treat it as a suicide vehicle if they think they are going to lose (since the physical ship itself will be lost regardless).

There needs to be a way to make crew loss meaningful if the devs want to capture some of the spirit of battle of the day (honorable surrender, meaningful sacrifice, etc.). Crew shouldn't just be a recharging energy bar with captains only concerned about the physical state of their ship. Also, the concern that crew loss will limit ability to stay continuously in combat may be misplaced. This only applies to winners, as losers will be returned to port to refit and replenish crew regardless. There probably should be a logistical limit on operations to force players to make careful choices about when and where to attack. Along with some interesting replenishment mechanics (pressing sailors out of national ships, etc) and more realistic loss ratios, it would certainly add an additional layer of strategy to the game.

Navigating with Google Maps is just no fun. Here are some glorious period maps of the Caribbean with flavor that makes things a bit more interesting: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/1732_Herman_Moll_Map_of_the_West_Indies,_Florida,_Mexico,_and_the_Caribbean_-_Geographicus_-_WestIndies-moll-1720.jpg I love all the annotations on this 1720 map, with helpful tips for English sea captains. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/1818_Pinkerton_Map_of_the_West_Indies,_Antilles,_and_Caribbean_Sea_-_Geographicus_-_WestIndies2-pinkerton-1818.jpg A hundred years later (1818) and you have a more accurate, easier to read map. (edit: thread merged, already posted above) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/1799_Clement_Cruttwell_Map_of_West_Indies_-_Geographicus_-_WestIndies-cruttwell-1799.jpg Nice and clear map from 1790, but fewer towns labelled. https://networks.h-net.org/system/files/contributed-files/map-west-indies-and-mexican-gulph_0.jpeg This 1806 map is huge and would be easy to add additional annotations to.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/05/01/the-flare-path-may-day-mayday/ Nick says Antietam is next.

Plans are obviously not the same ship.

Brilliant!

I prefer my camera at deck height personally. I think it actually enhances situational awareness once you are used to it. However, it does have some problems in the storm instances with smaller ships. Sometimes your ship dips low and it messes with your ability to look around. However, the only thing that really bothers me is the raised bow chaser aiming view. Guns should be aimed from the same relative height (i.e. distance between upper most gun and camera).

You are far too sensitive to whining. People just want a cutter with a brig's armament and will whine and whine and whine until they get it. I like the Brig. I think she serves her role and form well. However, perhaps she could be allowed to carry larger carronades (probably max 24pdr) on her broadside and small long guns (4pd max?) in the chase ports? AFAIK, a 24lb carronade weighed around the same as a 6lb cannon, took up less space and required the same (or maybe even less) crew. I think the schooners should be allowed to overarm with 6pdrs, but this circles back to the point that the penalty for overarming should be more than just the effects of the incremental increase in the ship's overall weight.

The Trafalgar option in the menu has nothing to do with the historical battle. It is just a death match option that allows for larger fleet battles. I don't know if devs have any plans to recreate historical battles. I think they are focused on open world implementation, but you could certainly imagine a distant future where there might be such special events.

The problem is that the "mechanics" that make the slave trade distinct from the trade of other goods are reprehensible behaviors that we really don't want players to simulate in the game, e.g. slaves dying during a slow passage, torture and brutality to prevent uprising, etc. Without simulating the horrible human aspects of the slave trade, "slaves" are just another cargo. Game Labs doesn't have to be beholden to the social and political realities of the era they draw ships (technology) from. They can present an alternate reality in which all nations have the opportunity to be great naval powers and in which the slave trade has already been universally banned.

I think devs should stay away from this. Plenty of other things to trade.

Yes, pirates would capture merchant ships and convert them into improvised warships. This did not make them better or different than warships, save possibly being less capable since not originally built to that purpose. There is nothing that could be done to a ship to make it carry more cargo, more guns and more men. You would have to give up some of one to increase another. If a pirate or privateer wants to carry more men to be able to overwhelm merchants and crew prizes, that would come at the expense of cargo space. Likewise, more guns = less cargo.

Hmm...may have to change vote again. Any chance a plain Indiaman version of Bonhomme Richard might also be made (if selected)?

Yup, the name lapsed between 1660 to 1806. No such vessel existed at all in that period.

The irony is that the true average pirate vessel throughout the ages is a small coastal craft of some sort packed full of desperate people attempting to overwhelm unwary or unable to resist merchants.