Crankey

Result Aye, apologies for rushing my post, I should have listed Papal state, Venice, Sicily etc and of course the Ottoman Empire

French or British - British or French ....... What about some different national flags on our test fleets please. Spain. Turkey. Russia. Sweden. Denmark. Dutch. America. Italy. and more. Would be nice to see some new flags to wet our appetite during test battles.

You can't directly compare this to EVE. In EVE the blockading ships sat at correct range immobile for the most part and guns already trained on the unknowing ship or fleet coming through a gate. Both the coastal area and the general shipping area should give all shipping a chance to intercept or avoid. A blockade is for instance a 'gate camp', a man of war or letter of marque hoping to snatch a merchantment will 'gate camp'. You have to leave in the game some opportunity for this to occur. What will be perhaps more important than the gate camp situation is how convoys will be introduced. in times of war solo merchantmen were at great risk of interdiction if they did not avail themselves of the slower yet protected convoy system.

I understand what you are saying, and the 'general shipping' areas would do the very same thing as the potbs system. I think you forget that we are expecting NA to be Global, not just set in the caribbean so the map is fantastically larger. It makes sense to me to tie in area of operations and travel to coincide with this. The trade routes would fling you out at a random point on the edge of these general shipping areas and their size could be designed to coincide with the Devs choice of balance, to avoid/interdict.

I have a suggestion for how we deal with long voyages and local areas of operation (PVP/PVE opportunities) As it would be quite impossible to utilise real time for sailing around the world, we obviously need a workaround that is both usable and believable. Obviously I can't do this in just a couple of sentences so bear with me pls I propose that we have a system based on 18th and 19th century trade routes and Port/harbour locations. I propose that your ship is in 1 of 5 states/situations. In Harbour - You are docked and going about your business in the town. In Harbour approach area - interception possible In General shipping area - Blockading & interception possible In Deep sea voyage - Travel only, possible random 'events'. In Battle - Shooting stuff For simplicity assume in most cases, the harbour approach is last 2 miles radius around harbour, general coastal is a band up to 20 miles from the coast. Deep sea voyage is your time compacter to allow crossing of oceans. Harbour approach is always from the deck General shipping is on map but accelerated speed, interceptions drop into deck combat mode. Deep sea voyage is a short period of time where your ship is a dot on a world map moving of its own accord along a pre determined trade route once a route is selected and exits into a general shipping area. Possible random events such as losing topmast in a sudden squall, picking up survivors from open boat(reward/mission), Logging location of unknown island or wreck (Possible mission opportunity etc etc) Before I get shouted at for not being able to interdict those juicy merchantment, or intercept that enemy fleet during deep sea voyage. There were historically very few deap sea encounters for the simplest reason, No Radar, No Satallites. However you could work out a probable destination for your targets and would attempt to put your ships in the way e.g. a favoured frigate captain or a pirate would patrol/cruise a given area of sea because it was a natural location for your target ships to travel through. A fleet would do the same thing to intercept another fleet. This area is your general shipping area. So, where historically possible, each deep sea voyage would start outside general shipping area, and finish outside target general shipping area with additions of known or probable bottleneck areas having additional 'general shipping' feature where you drop back to ship on a map, sail safely through and then continue deep sea voyage. So you 'sail' out of harbour, you mini map through general shipping, you reach and enter deep sea voyage, you 'puddle hop' your deep sea voyage through any additional general shipping areas that could be considered bottleneck areas good for interception, then at your final destination, you reverse the order, dropping into general shipping area, sail last 2 miles to harbour and with luck you safely enter harbour and do your 'thing' Obviously the devs will decide how many harbours/ports will be in game, and it is possible that more than 1 port will exist within the same general shipping area. depending on proximity and importance to the game. I also propose that there is a method of slowing down deep sea travel speed for each additional deep sea voyage within a certain timeframe, this would prevent someone for instance making 10 trips to jamaicas and back to England in a half hour gaming period. Perhaps a greater penalty if you enter harbour for trade or repairs. Something to think on. No pretty pictures I'm sure you guys can picture this yourself.

i agree with Zakota on this purely for some nice to look at compass. I do see your point Maturin but we should be using a compass point system for that feelgood factor, their is nothing at all wrong with placing degrees on the image too for practical reasons for that 25 degrees you mention. It is of course easier to say hdg 25 degrees rather than North by NE and a 1/4 east which I believe is about as accurate as the compass point system can come.

CAUTION............................. I am all for making the game more authentic and also 'prettier', but we have to remember that gameplay has been quickened up (See firing table below and Wiki statement. Our guns 18 pdr for instance are firing just over 5 times every 5 minutes, which is almost double the rate of a decently trained British crew in reality), therefore game smoke dispersing should also be quickened up. If it masks and therefore makes targetting more difficult, then everyone should be forced to see it which will have performance issues for all but the mega bucks gfx cards. If the smoke sits lower in the water or is more opaque, then it could be an optional setting for the individual player to choose. (Wiki Quote) A typical broadside of a Royal Navy ship of the late 18th century could be fired 2-3 times in approximately 5 minutes, depending on the training of the crew, a well trained one being essential to the simple yet detailed process of preparing to fire. Naval action reloads ammunition (Regardless of type) to the following timing (Yes I was that sad and sat with my stop watch mode running on my phone so allow a half second variation to the truth, for hand eye co-ordination to kick in). These were also taken from Santissima, Though I checked against other vessels and they seemed to concurr by cannon type rather than deck and vessel class. Reload Deck Weight Type 00:49 1 24 Carronade 00:58 2 18 Cannon 01:13 3 32 Cannon 01:18 4 42 Cannon

I would like to think our suggestions will Fill the gaps of ship types not currently present in the test. Whilst I would love to see every variety of ship in game, I think we have to take into account that the Devs have limited time in order to achieve each model. While we have only a combat testing system I don't see the urgency for the devs to work on En-Flute or cargo vessels at all, aside from placing them on a list of future projects. Yes we need merchantmen in the end game, but unless they produce a specific convoy/commerce raider scenario I don't really see the urgency. We are missing a 2nd and 4th Rate. We are missing the elegant 22 gun sloops. We are missing Galleys and sailing ships with oar capability. (Gunboats, Brigs, Sloops, Frigates, Galleys) We are missing Fore and aft rigged Frigates (Cacafuego. Apologies if my memory lends an incorrect spelling) So I don't really have a preference on a particular named vessel, but would urge players to support 'Filling the gaps' as far as Ship Class missing from the game is concerned

Its not all about combat.... Its often all about the other cool stuff you can choose to ignore or bury yourself in... I have several accounts on Eve, although last few months I've taken a Hiatus giving my wormhole ships to the Corp and moving my pilot back to the land of nod. I have the Santissima to sail after all... Ok, Good and bad. Bad first, character ability/training/experience/progression is WAY TOO SLOW in EVE. The main reason i have mutliple accounts is so that I can 'cheat' the real time training cycles and have 4 characters all good at 1 aspect, rather than 1 character who is mediocre at 4. Good, THE REST. Its such a good game for me, you can immerse yourself in so many different aspects of the game. A seeded economy and then 100% player economy. Crafting - EVERYTHING. The larger the item the longer the build time, though I think we would have to condense the building of a SOL to a usable timescale, but I am still thinking number of weeks, rather than hours or days for a first rate. Manufacturing, Raw materials, trade hubs, offfline player 'shops' to place orders with a player or purchase his goods even when he's offline Player controlled industrial buildings etc Player controlled outposts. (Though I am not in favour of a player or faction "Owning" a major town or city, merely perhaps co-ordinating it somewhat whilst temporarily in control) Max ship size areas (Wormholes = Shallow seas) I could go on, I think NA have battle mechanics very close to a usable system. EVE doesn't have controlled strength of combatants in fixed battles unless you count tournaments. I think important realm vs realm attacks in NA should have some 'form'. POTBS had their Port battles, WOT's have their normal clan war battles etc etc. I don't have a suggestion for this but would like to see a lot of flexibility in what ships players can command. I don't want to see solo players or smaller 'clans' being bullied out of using their preferred ships by larger clans with louder voices. "You guys bring the Frigs, we already have the 10 1st rates we need...."

I would like to see this feature added in some manner. As higher post suggests we don't know what economy will bring into the game that will effect repairs. for the moment 3 repairs is a usable system which allows us some repair benefit and keeps us in battle longer to report bugs, however a depth and finality of the 3x and you are out system, is too simple for such a grand game. I believe we have to have a few extra crew management features, which could be led by an officer recruited perhaps for particular skills. All conjecture until we see what the Devs have in mind. Strike All officers and hands stop fighting the ship in order to save her from sinking. Enemy boarding is auto capture. Not fired upon for 15 minutes allows withdrawal from fight or return to combat. Survival Mode Fighting and sailing qualities are much reduced due to manpower shifting to repairing ship Repair Crew A standard predetermined group of warrent officers (Carpenter etc) with some crew helpers repair slowly all damaged areas of the ship throughout the game not needing orders. Progress is slow perhaps improving when not under fire for longer periods. There may be a limit that these will be effective, say 75% maximum without other options being used (repair materials etc) Anyway all just fluff but certainly a more robust and detailed system of repair would be nice to see in end game.

Perhaps the quantity of crew carrying out various activities, will be an option setting for each captain to control locally on their own PC/System. Those with cutting edge high end systems can have everything, whilst those with lesser capability find settings that allow a smooth game with fewer options turned on. i would like to see the option below or similar in your setup options, so that you can stylise suitable for your own PC capability. (I would like this also for other GFX options such as Sail quality/animation, Cannon recoil & Crew reacting, gunports, damaged ship animation etc etc. let the players worry about the level of detail they choose ) Own Ship YES/NO Gun crew visible 1%----------------------100% Sail crew visible 1%----------------------100% Officers visible 1%----------------------100% Repair Crew visible 1%-------------------100% Other ships within 100 yards YES/NO Gun crew visible 1%----------------------100% Sail crew visible 1%----------------------100% Officers visible 1%----------------------100% Repair Crew visible 1%-------------------100% Other Ships within 400 yards YES/NO Gun crew visible 1%----------------------100% Sail crew visible 1%----------------------100% Officers visible 1%----------------------100% Repair Crew visible 1%-------------------100% Imagine a slider somewhere on the lines above, could also be in fractions say 1/4 1/2 3/4 full etc, whats important to me is that the choice is available.

I am definitely in favour of crew and officer options for both recruitment and training, it will add a level of detail and give slight rewards to those who spend their time investing in training and optional recruitment endeavers. If we have a 'Fame' attribute gained through in game endeavers, this may also reflect on our success at attracting more experienced officers and crew to our cause.

I understand and concurr with what you are saying, but I think perhaps you are thinking too literal. We are also headed off topic a tad. Flips comment above that grape in upper deck and bronze in lower deck, was particular to the potbs game. For this game it would read grape upper deck, ball lower deck.

In this particular game (POTBS) you had a variety of cannon shot type. Bronze considered the most effective, to Iron and even stone(Not unheard of historically though far rarer than iron)

Nope, On this one I have to disagree. Chain or grape upper, Ball or double-shot lower. You need to out manouvre your opponent, hence chain, you need to cripple his ability to repair his vessel, hence grape to cripple his crew and ball to create damage that will take him out of the fight. I would be very prepared to have the option to micro manage my gun decks individually, I already do this by 'X' out broadsides in order not to waste whole decks against targets that don't warrent all of my broadside weight. So from my viewpoint, allow the option and let those who wish to use varied shot do so...

Vast amounts of funding and manpower were invested in the British fleet in order to prevent the French and indeed all other nations combined of ever having supremacy. Add to that the British policy of seek and destroy or blockade, and you can also see why more often than not the experience of the British ships gave them even more advantage. That is not to say that France never had her victories, merely not sufficient to gain supremacy indeed a long way from it. http://www.napoleonguide.com/navyind.htm

For square rigged ships yes, but not for other sail configurations (Eg a cutters fore/aft setup)

Form Line (Column).... Astern, Ahead of ship "Named" Form Abreast.... To Port(Left), To Starboard(Right) of Ship "Named" Form Line of Bearing..... To "Compass point" of ship "Named" (eg Sailing North but in a line from NW to SE with ship "Named" NW position) Column .... Open order (Sailing in column but less discipline to placement. eg in poor weather to avoid over-working ship & crew in keeping station) Turn in succession (One at a time at the same place the first ship turned once reached) to heading "Number" degrees (Would actually use Compass sailing points NNE etc) Turn together..... "Heading" (All Ships turn simultaneously to new heading, ) (Happy to stand corrected on my terminology "together") Reform.... select formation and new commands Tack... To tack through the eye of the wind and form a new course with wind coming from other side of your bow Wear... Turning without tacking (Not going through the eye of the wind) Jybe... To turn bringing the wind from one side of your beam / quarter across your stern to the other. (This is when you duck to avoid being hit by the sail boom) Hope this helps A modern but still applicable reference in particular pages 30 - 34 for formations. http://nato.radioscanner.ru/files/article66/1000.pdf

I came across this website while making some general searching and thought it was well worth posting here, Amongst others you can find data on National Strength lists Cannon Range 32 & 18 pdr Order of Battles, Trafalgar Nile etc An awful lot more useful and interesting information too. Well worth a read for the discerning historian and enthusiast http://www.napoleonguide.com/navyind.htm Enjoy.

needed and historically true.

This. Sorry to say, it's no good asking for a historically accurate vessel if it is so greatly flawed in design it was unusable in most weather conditions. Its basically a floating harbour battery. Remember that for game purposes I expect the game developers won't restrict you to a specific Nations ship list. We have no idea really how realm vs realm is going to be achieved as yet.

I would like to have the 'gaps' in Rated ships filled, to give everyone the chance of commanding and getting used to their handling. That or something 'Quirky' Already quite a few votes for the Danish 2nd rate Christian Vll, So I would like to start the vote on either a 2 decker 4th Rate or something completely different. a 'Galley !' My argument... While Swedish troops were being deployed at the Russian border, near Villmanstrand (Finnish: Lappeenranta) and Frederikshamn (Finnish: Hamina), Swedish naval forces consisting of 10 ships of the line and 4 frigates under Admiral Tomas von Rajalin and 20 galley strong rowing fleet under Admiral Abraham Falkengren moved on 20 May 1741 to the islands near the border. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Swedish_War_%281741%E2%80%9343%29

I would like to see examples of both well known and infrequently seen ships of all styles and rates. There are bound to be some similarities between the games but I'm hoping that NA will be a more 'adult' and historically accurate game. Don't forget that the ships could have a long life so there is scope for several decades of ship design to be present. I think the shipwrights working on the game have proved their skill, The combat and sailing models are coming along nicely. All we have to hope for now is that the rest of the game will be as good as the small proportion we've already tested.

A valid point, but remember some ships were so prone to take on water pumping was almost a 24/7 operation. It was also good practice for ships going into battle to pump out all of its bilge water to give carpenter an empty hull in order to better judge new leaks and make the ship more manouvrable. When did they finish pumping this water out ? I think it would be a nice touch to add this, but as mentioned in posts higher up, perhaps not an urgent use of developer time whilst so many more mechanics are being worked on.

This... atm its simple match after match with ship progression. There is no realm mechanics or dockside detail. Decide if you'd prefer more content before you throw your cash its way, but lots of youtube out there now for you to keep up with and make a judgement.