LeBoiteux

@ Roche B. : There are other (more constructive) ways to ask why this great feature hasn't (already) been implemented the way it was discussed in that thread.

You had better know what you're talking about before writing nonsense ! Read that post below and the associated thread. Unknown random map has been discussed : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/1534-exploration-gameplay That was neat ideas

Yep. Locating hidden things in a known territory, that was what I was thinking of, when I wrote, in my above post : It has more to do with rewarding ppl sailing in enemy territories than with exploring. But it could be a nice addition.

This exploration gameplay would have been so great !!! Too bad it won't be implemented. An important part of the concept was based on uncharted/unknown territories to explore and thus needed a randomly generated map that would have to be periodically changed once it'd been mapped/discovered. But, eventually, the known Caribbean were chosen as NA set. I don't know whether it's a matter of engine limitations, of game design, of testers' choice or anything else. Time to forget about it... But... wait... we still have the Pacific coast available and unused... Expectations... Dreams... However, I guess that expedition missions in the Caribbean to collect ressources, artefacts or plants, while avoiding enemies, remain a possibility... PS : strictly speaking, the implementation of an Exploration gameplay wasn't a "promise" but just a project open to discussion that has finally created... lasting expectations :

Well... the Pacific Coast already exists on the current map. Strange no to want to use it for anything : for new Content (Exploration, Rookie Zone...) or to have more room to locate existing content (PvE, expansion of the current map...)...

The Pacific part of the map was to be part of the next content patch but its implementation has been delayed : From the last thing I read on the forums, it was to be a PvE only area on PvP servers, a way to make PvE-ers play on PvP shards (and maybe merge PvE-PvP servers). I don't know devs' current idea about it, whether or not that project had been dismissed. It'd be interesting to have Admin's view. Here is a collection of ideas found on NA forums. The Pacific coast could be : a PvE area. Some pure PvEers don't like that option, having the impression of being shut in outside the Caribbean (if the PvE shard was to be closed down someday), a rookie zone for PvP training, an uncharted map with unknown islands for Exploration, an additional part of the current map, both usable for PvP and PvE as at present (with TP between both areas), a 100% pvp area, clan-oriented RvR a la Eve Online : no nations, only clans, a zone for early 18-C ships only (La Renommée, Ingermanland, the Yacht and hopefully more coming), a way to :implement more early 18-C ships said to have uncompetitive armament or sailing qualities compared to early 19-C ships, give those ships another role/gameplay and more uses. For example, mid-18C HMS Cerberus and her 26-28 guns (9-pdr) would be a very decent frigate among other frigates that'd only carry say from 24 to 36 guns (9-pdr). an empty area as it is now. Discuss. More ideas ?

+1. Moreover, missions replaced that feeling of hunting by an grinding objective : you have the feeling that you can / have to quickly grind through ranks. Missions are felt as a grinding mechanism. btw if you want that feeling of hunting to come back, you have to combine it with the feeling of being hunted (AI aggressiveness)

1. non-aggressive bots (ie unable to tag PvEers in OW), not fun, because it makes PvE OW boring, unsurprising, un-suspenseful 2. bots that are not smart enough in combat instances, not fun, because it makes PvE Combats less interesting 3. lack of early 18-C ships, not fun, because their ornament / naval sculpture really shine 4. lack of exploration and non-combat missions atm, not fun, because it's also fun to try and avoid hunters and do other things than combat in OW 5. lack of storms (and fog) (in OW and instances), not fun, because it creates variety. 6. A known OW map, not fun, because too predictable. 7. Fire and leaks aren't deadly enough, not fun, because risk is fun. 8. Speed in instances, 6th-rates and unrated ones seem a bit too fast, frigates a little bit too slow, "not" fun, because... well.. speed matters.

Speaking of the previous period (second half of the 17-C to early 18-C), there were in France hybrid vessels though : "ship-frigates" with lower and upper decks and armed quarterdeck/forecastle and around 30 to 50 guns (8-pdr and 12-pdr),

@ OP : Interesting idea to have older ships in NA. One could have early ships and later ones in NA : - mixed as now - or separated : - on dedicated servers - in separate areas of the map, e. g. older ships in the Pacific area and earlier in the Caribbean - at different times of the RL day/week/month as OP proposes here. It could be with : - time compressed years - or a succession of bigger period of time (decade ? 20 years ? 3 periods : 1700-1750, 1750-1800, 1800-1820 ?) - in combat with a dedicated BR system taking into account the sailing qualities of the ships Within NA timeframe, as time goes by, ships got better sailing qualities, carried more and more guns with bigger and bigger caliber and design became more modern with less naval sculpture. For example, in France : - in early 18-C, a frigate could carry say 24 guns (6-pdr), a corvette 6-16 guns (4-pdr) - in mid 18-C, a frigate could carry 24-36 guns (8-pdr), a corvette 12-18 guns (4-pdr or 6-pdr) - in late 18-C, a frigate could carry 32-44 guns (12-pdr or 18-pdr), a corvette 20-24 guns (6-pdr or 8-pdr) (approximate numbers) The current NA system might leave indeed little places for early (and thus less armed and slower) ships that carried those beautiful naval sculpture as counterpart. For example, I guess that in 1758, when HMS Cerberus was built, she was a very decent frigate with her 28 guns IRL. But in NA, she is easily beaten by an 1793 Corvette/light frigate, HMS Surprise, and could be considered as a kind of NA/1801 Corvette. Separating early and later ships would give HMS Cerberus (that I took as an example) a new dimension and she would certainly be more used. Likewise, La Renommée, with her 32 guns and her speed, could have a totally different role than now if she only fought other mid 18-C frigates that only carried 24-36 guns. Same for the Ingermanland and any early ship that could be implemented in the future. One of the main issues about that is the number of 3D ships that need to be modelled and implemented... But I think that issue deserves some thinking. (I guess devs have already thought of that though)

Indeed. The main differences are : Corvettes were smaller, didn't carry more than 20 guns till 1793 (then up to 24) and always adopted the caliber French frigates didn't use anymore : - in the first half of the 18th-C, frigates carried 4 and 6-pdr guns and corvettes only 4-pdr guns - in the 1760's, frigates carried 8-pdr and corvettes 4 and 6-pdr - in the 1780's, frigates carried 12-pdr (and 18-pdr) and corvettes 6 and 8-pdr The word "Corvette" has been used by the French since early 18-C. British started to use it in the 1830's. (if I ain't mistaken). It might be indeed.

According to French criteria of the time : - The Rattlesnake is indeed a Corvette - La Renommée is a 1747 frigate - The Surprise is the British name of a French ship captured by the British : L'Unité, a Corvette built in 1793 and commissioned with 24 + 6 guns. During the troubled time of the French Revolution (1793-1795), French over-armed their Corvettes. The British added guns and barricades on the forecastle and renamed her. Indeed, with 38 guns, one can consider HMS Surprise as a light frigate. French 12-pdr frigates built in 1793 carried between 32 and 42 guns.

A French Corvette is a three-masted ship, quite similar to a frigate but, at a given time, always smaller and with fewer guns of smaller caliber than a frigate. About "ship sloop" vs "corvette", French only knows two words for 6th-5th Rate 3-masted ships : "Corvette" or "Frigate". Doesn't English use "corvette", "sloop-of-war", "ship-sloop" as approximate synonyms ? The number of guns of 18-C corvettes, their caliber and their size varied a lot during the 18-th C : - In 1740-1745, Blaise Ollivier described a corvette as having a length fo 50-80 ft and between 4 and 16 guns. - P. Morineau wrote in 1750 that a corvette is a 80 feet-length ship with 14 guns. - A regulation from 1765 divided them into two categories : 20 gun corvettes and 12 ones. - In 1767, plans of Corvettes show 12 to 18 guns and a length from 100 to 105 ft. - In 1786, J. -C. de Borda proposed the building of 60 corvettes with 24 guns and 20 corvettes with 20 guns. The NA Surprise is one of those 24-gun corvettes. - In 1801, four kinds of corvettes were built with : 20 guns (6-pdr or 8-pdr), 22 guns and 24 guns. The Diligente with 20 guns and a length of 104 ft was considered as very good. Thus, HMS Cerberus with her 26 guns on her gundeck (+ her guns on the quarterdeck IRL), their caliber (9-pdr), built in 1758, would have been considered in the 1760's as a frigate. But she would have been considered as a Corvette if she had been built in 1801 as frigates had then much more guns. Same for the Renommée that is a frigate as you stated, with her 32 guns, built in 1747 when Corvettes only had between 6 and 16 guns... USS Wasp (1807) looks like an early-19th-C "Corvette". Some testers judge ships with a "1801 mindset". But what I would like to see in NA is varied 18th-C corvettes, especially early ones, such as : - L'Amarante (1747, 12 guns and her naval sculpture) - La Diligente (1801, 20 guns, without quarterdeck / forecastle)

We have two Corvettes (The Rattlesnake and The Surprise). We could have more ! Beside, with her 38 guns and dimensions, 1793 HMS Surprise is far from being representative of all 18-C Corvette whose armament on gundeck vary from 6 to 20 guns, exceptionally 24 in 1793. PS : I talk about real Corvettes of their time, not what can be considered as a Corvette in NA with a ca. 1801 mindset. Plans are known from late 17-th C to early 18-th C, ie in NA timeframe. Example : La Belle (1780). Could be used for transport or as beginners' warships

I hope there will be 17-th century ships someday in an add-on or in NA 2, 3... In current NA, there could be 18-th century luggers, brigantines, barques longues, sloops, ketch, sloops-of-war, corvettes... See for example : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7951-small-vessels-and-the-new-player-experience/

La Diana Corvette 1801-1832 20 caronades, 8 x 30-pdr + 12 x 12-pdr built in Great Britain Source : http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=17040 Unknown Corvette 18 guns, 32-pdr (?) Unknown Frigate 22 guns 1750 Thx to Haratik for his link : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/2756-spanish-armadas-collection-with-plans/?p=302220

Will there be lonely Endymion / Indefatigable bots in OW or (as it is written...) will they only be in fleets ?

"Breast" harbour ? Gimme immediately the GPS coordinates of that port. I'd love to visit it ! btw I do like the Brest harbour paint.

See Surcouf's and Sella22's posts above + Plans available at the Archives of the French Navy : D1 65, n° 28

No obvious usage ? What about PvE, missions, duel rooms, any fair 1v1 and anybody not obsessed by having the bigger...

So the Göta Lejon would have a direct opponent. That's the most important thing, isn't it ? I don't think we only need the more powerful ones of a class (and thus (often) the more modern ones). We need diversity and direct opponents. thx

Doesn't NA 3rd-Rate have that very armament ? I haven't checked it apart from : http://navalaction.wikia.com/wiki/3rd_rate

What will there be in the Pacific ? a PvE area ? a rookie region ? an Exploration zone ? another (part of the) PvP/E map ? something else ? devs don't know yet ? nothing ?

Simple idea (no need to take extreme example) : if a ship beats another one again and again because of her speed, firepower..., she must have a better BR. Statistics, duel rooms (...) might help for that.

If so, that frigate should have a better "BR" than the two-decker. Meaning BR must include several factors : armament, maneuverability, speed...