Henry d'Esterre Darby

Don't forget to quote and link your source!

He's not asking for avatars though, just the ability for more than one player to fight the ship cooperatively.

The spring would have to be around a capstan to turn the ship. I don't personally think the turning an anchored/sprung ship should be faster than using the rudder while underway.

No ship is going to attempt to row into the wind, most especially in a battle.

The spotting role sounds pretty boring to me.

What is a good way for them to continue to raise capital to keep the servers running and the developers paid then? If not with monthly subscription or purchaseable items?

Maybe it autocorrected from "offal".

Great followup comment on how Premium Tanks in WoT work. They're generally about average for their Tier. You can do really well in them (like you can any tank) if you're good and know how to use them, but you'll still generally be outclassed by someone with similar skills to yours in a fully upgraded tank of the same tier. Premium vehicles are fine, but not if you get sunk and lose it for good. Paying for a ship means it either needs to be really cheap and disposable, or something that you can insure or otherwise keep a large portion of the value if it gets sunk to avoid bad feelings amongst your customers, and it also needs to be slightly inferior to the fully in-game earned version that is similar to it. The micro-transaction model and how it will be designed will depend very heavily on how "durable" ships are throughout usage and battles.

It's also important as one is asking for features to think completely around the feature from a realism and gameplay standpoint. One may not support the other, and what seems like an excellent idea may leave the game open to massive abuse and griefing (I'm not referencing any recent topics here, just making a statement in a general sense). Designing a game is about finding a fun balance and experience for a predefined shared of the market. Pure historical realism doesn't do this, nor does pure arcade foofery. As you come up with an idea, take a moment to think about it, Google a bit and see if previous games have done something similar, and if you can, see how that idea turned out in those games. Sometimes you'd be surprised at what worked and what didn't. Great post OP, +1.

Poor folks. Definitely a fine example of a sprung hull.

Such impertinence Sir!

Privateer had excellent points with regards to rigging and the effects of the loss of the bowsprit on the various masts. In most cases, the bowsprit supports the forestay, which prevents the masts from falling towards the stern. The masts are supported from aft by the backstay, which similarly prevents the masts from falling forward. The stays and shrouds are already under a live load from the force of the wind, as well as the action waves put on the ship. The danger of a sudden deceleration, as when the ship runs aground at speed, or hits another ship at speed, is that the shrouds or stays may be overwhelmed, causing one or more of the masts or booms to go by the board. Ramming another ship fairly hard should introduce a good probability of one or more of the masts or booms to fail or become far more fragile, reducing the sail plan and speed potential of the ship. As mentioned above, two ships that get too close would often result in a crew intent on boarding to lash together the yards they could reach, preventing the ships from separating until the defending crew could cut loose (or enough force was applied to cause the tangled/lashed rigging components to fail). Fallen rigging and sails from any failure of same should also introduce a higher risk of fire on the deck for the period of time it would take to cut away shrouds, sheets, and stays to allow the wreckage to be swept overboard. Related Question: Are there any plans to hamper maneuverability and speed based on drag from masts that have fallen but are still attached by rigging? As suggested, overall hull thickness should play a huge part in how much damage is done by rammer to the rammed. The impact itself would be likely to spring boards in the hull causing additional leaking, even if no "true" penetration (or a lasting hole) is achieved. Edit - Sorry, I know I'm preaching to the converted on a lot of this, but then I know there's likely quite a few forumers that don't understand the function of all those lines attached to the masts. I'll also say I have a basic functional knowledge of this stuff from sailing a 25' Catalina Sloop growing up, but I'm sure my vocabulary is lacking in a number of areas, ESPECIALLY when it comes to the more complex ships, brigs, xebecs, snows, etc.

Understand "I" didn't do that to WoWS, I simply made a similar argument in the name of my personal tastes. You act like it has to be fair in that my tastes get reflected in one game and you get yours in another. I have no problem with realistic sounding names with no historical basis. A name doesn't have to come out of a dusty historical log of named ships of the line to be a great name for a ship. I just personally find a bunch of people who never made it past the mental age of 3 who think HMS I Pooped My Pants is hilarious, to be extremely unoriginal and incredibly detrimental to the enjoyment of games such as this. I also think it's a giant waste of money that could see better use in feature development, new content, and bug fixes to be wasted on a bunch of staff that have to go around policing all the idiots that would abuse such a feature. And it's the internet, there's a lot of those abusers out there.

Lord please no unrestricted ship names. I have zero urge to see the result (HMS WTFBBQURFACELOLOLOL) all over the place.

Agreed. That said, it's possible to port a simplified version to console while leaving the PC version fully functional. The coding is very different as it is.

Best of luck!

The huge advantage to the Aubrey/Maturin series is the usage of correct terms, as well as O'Brien's penchant for pulling his battles out of real world logs of them. Yes, the personal life stuff can get a little annoying if you're just hankering for pure sail on sail action, but at the same time, those personal stories, too, give you a very interesting slice of life from the period which can be extremely interesting. I've read most of them, and I think I'll read them again shortly.

hehe, it's really two different genres when you get down to it. I see them as complimentary more than competition and I plan to play both for entirely different reasons!

USS Constitution's deck. Hope this helps. Generally, the decks weren't painted, as the sailors kept them clean and nice by holystoning them, so you'd expect to see a deck that looks like the one below. The hulls were indeed painted over, and I doubt they taped off the seams to prevent them from getting paint, so I think it would be safe if you were portraying a painted hull to do so with slight "seams" in a teensy bit darker color (to keep the light effect of the planking") than you're painting the hull.

Actions like Boarding, or maneuvering more complicated than sailing side by side at pace with the enemy all require the sails be constantly adjusted. Crew must be available to get into the rigging to make adjustments in order to fight a ship effectively. This, exactly. You can't hit what you can't bring to bear, and you can't bring a ship to bear without adjusting your sails. +1