Bis18marck70
-
Posts
99 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Bis18marck70
-
-
I hope to see something along some of these ideas too.
However, a 'saving your crew' option only really becomes important if your crew earns experience and is hard to replace.
An experience system for the crew would prompt the player to think more about what fights he wants to get himself into and to actually consider them as crucial to his success rather than a mere means to an end. Saving/caring for one's crew should definetly be one of the main concerns a captain has. Considering that the durability system (if it stays implemented [i hope not but we will see] and if the player has spares) already allows players to essentially throw away there ships a couple of times in reckless play, this might at least make such endeavours more costly.
That being said, a lot of thought has to go into such a system and I expect it to take some time - and revisions - until a working balance is found. The overall game has to mature alongside it or even be completed before a more detailed crew management. Make a crew loss/experience system without brushing up the gameplay to alleviate ganking and the harrassment of new players/weaker ships and we will see an increase in the latter as such actions bare less risks and still yield rewards. Make it too slack and the system loses its importance.
-
Thanks for sharing. Good to see that the Daily Mail is at least good for one thing
-
Many an hour shall be spend here
-
2
-
-
Votekick is a tricky feature.
In Archeage (russian servers) it was abused and eventually switched off. Imagine a situation where you as a legitimate player join the battle and then vote kicked out for no reason.
Adding a bot to disconnected player will inspire botting, some players will abuse it. But we will think about this feature, there might be ways to make it work.
Would a bot that doesn't safe damage work/ be feasible? That way they would be useless to the players hoping to damage farm.
Thanks for feedback Admin. Adding a Strike Colours feature would solve the disconnected players and also had fighting players a chance to "give up".
Way to many people give up way to fast and it's no different to disconnecting. Some do it simply because they don't like what team they are on/ map/ because someone didn't do as you told them. I can already see whoel fleets giving up like dominos just because one frigate decided to leave out of spite.
Maybe I am reading your idea wrong?
-
It appears some users bought this game hoping it would be WoT in the age of sail.
Too many it seems.
-
2
-
-
The way you aquire ships now is completely different to how you will in the release version.
Total and complete whip can (and will) happen at any time during the Alpha/ Beta.
o7
-
I somehow doubt we will see that level of detail just due to performance issues and the modeling / animation needed but who knows.
That said I do expect better crew representation than 6 guys doing a repetitive animation.
I would like, in an ideal world, a few marines on bigger ships, a few more gun loaders on visible decks and a few 'sailors' manning rigging, maybe 50 models per 1st / 2nd / 3rd rate and then 40/30/20 etc for smaller ships. Maybe an officer or 2 near the helm?
This seems pretty good. Maybe also add an option in the graphics menu saying: 'Show enhanced crew' or something. If ticked, we see what you proposed, if not, a less intensive/ detailed/ large crew will be displayed.
One thing I did notice is that if these models are anything to go by Game Labs seem to have the crew much larger than they should be. Could cutting size in half increase performance?
That would risk ships being crewed by umpa lumpas. I can't visualize the crew as they are right now without playing, but my guess is that if the current models are too large, they will be made smaller eventually. Smaller models will positively impact performance, but more of them and/or more detailed animations will nullify this.
Gorgeous pictures, btw
-
I think clubhauling was mainly an emergency maneuver, and only done at very slow speeds to ensure the ship made stays when being blown onto a lee shore. To do so at full sail or a high speed would likely cause the cable to part and loss of the anchor.
I guess some people watched PotC.
-
1
-
-
Damn, the OP literally just ran into a wall.
-
3
-
-
Beautiful new screens. Also answers my question on the cannons; 13 on one deck, instead of the previously seen 11.
-
We should separate PvP Light from PvP here.
I think in PvP Light, tags are a must - both enemy and friendly. New players, often struggling to sail their ship, will get confused more easily than the old searats.
In PvP, I could see two options. Either remove them fully so you have to look at the flags (knowing some individuals that have not yet graced this forum, that's going to be a challenge) OR remove the enemy tags to prevent friendly fire but increase the amount of communication each team needs in order to friendly fire.
Once open world hits, it is my opinion that tags should go completely making it necessary to look at the flags and customization of the ship.
-
2
-
-
Thinking about it a bit, never mind the actual ship in real life, I'd say this ship should have a mean punch. 9-pounders in the side, optional carronades (18pds?).
Surprises should be faster by a noticeable margin while being a less well maneuverable vessel. As for the planking, a certain resistance to 6-pouders should be there but above that enemy broadsides should become something a captain fears thus utilizing his maneuverability to the best. It should not be an easy ship to sail, but reward excellence in combat.
At the same times, while this ship should handle well, the Snow/Brig should be able to out maneuver it but remain slower (difference to Brig less noticeable than difference to Snow). That's pretty much standard balancing imo.
-
I hope it is correct
http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/83192.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cerberus_(1758)
Famous for providing the reinforcements during the Battle of Bunker Hill
I am not sure, I don't see guns on the Quarter deck. Are they in front out of perspective? Should be two-a-side (If it's the Cerberus).
Edit: Maybe just not yet modeled in
-
Looks good. Definitely in favour of adding an even more smooth transition between Snow and Surprise.
On what design is this ship centered upon? That would help us determine the ships role a bit more.
What kind of guns do you plan to allowed it to carry? A single deck of 9-pounders would give it quite a lot of punch at the point it sits. Having already more guns than the Snow (by three per side), that might (currently) give it a bit 'too much'.
-
Here is my model, the lighting is suboptimal but her features are obvious. I was 12 when I bought her for €40 after receiving a small token discount by the shops owner (it was in Hamburg) who was astonished a young kid such as me would use up all his pocket money on a ship. The model's quality is obviously in line with the price I payed for it - it's not a custom made piece of art but something that has seen both automated mechanical work as well as a few finishing touches by workers. The most obvious problems with is the nonaligned paint job (not visible here) and the modeling mistake of placing her bumpkin in the middle of the stern rather than offset to port side (something I only noticed after researching the ship). Irregardless, I still love this model.
I have also seen illustrations placing an additional lugsail on the mizzen, but cannot confirm whether that truly was the case.
Looks like an 8 gun ship? Could fit between the Cutter and Brig, perhaps?
This is were the reports get a bit sketchy. Most illustrations depict her as a 8-gun ship similar to the Lynx (ignoring the six swivels). However, there is also evidence that she had eight 2-pouders and two 3-pounders. When captured, the Brits noted 14 guns (8 cannons/ 6 swivels) - it might be that they later added the two 3-pounders but that is speculation on my part. If it is so she would be a 10-gun ship which - gun wise - would place her between the Lynx and the Cutter.
-
Thanks for the nice comments guys. Having this ship in Naval Action would be great, but there's a lot of time for that to happened if ever.
-
I own a model of this ship since I was around 12 years old and recently decided to track down its history. Hope you guys enjoy.
There is also a PDF of this available here: http://www.mediafire.com/view/08ba45nw37cflm7/Le_Coureur.pdf
Le Coureur – Privateer Lugger
Built: Dunkirk
Shipyard: Jaques & Daniel Denys
Laid down: December 1775
Launched: Mai 1776
Commissioned: August 1776
Nation: FrancePurpose: Privateering operations versus British merchantmen in the English Channel.
Design specifications & features:
For it to succeed in its intended role, Le Coureur (the runner) was built for speed. Rigged as a Lugger, the ship was to be fast, maneuverable and responsive. A notable feature of Le Coureur however was the addition of a mizzen mast, set far aft raking out of the water. This required the addition of a long bumpkin sticking out of the stern of the ship. Her long bowsprit carried the jibsheet, while the fore and main mast both held two top lugsails as well as two large lugsails. Her mizzen carried an additional lugsail. This design provided Le Coureur maximum speed and excellent maneuverability. Outrunning most vessels in almost any scenario, her only weakness was running before the wind where most conventional square rigged ships would outpace her.
Her gundeck had a length of 60’0” (21.4m) while the keel measured 56’6” (18.3m). Her breadth was 20’4” (6.6m) and depth of hold sat at 11’0” (3.5m). Her height was 96’0” (35m)
Crew & Armament:
In order to work the unconventional big sail area and man all the guns, the ship was crewed by a combined force of 50 men. She was put under the command of Enseigne (Enseigne des vaisseau –Ensign) de Rosily.
Taking into consideration her intended role, Le Coureur was armed with eight 2-pounders, four aside. An additional two 3-pounders were installed as well as six swivels. Unsurprisingly for a ship her class, she had not bow chasers or stern cannons. Her broadside weight was 12.5 French livre (13.4lb/6.1kg).
Operational History:
Commanded by de Rosily, Le Coureur set sail from Brest on the 15th of June 1778, two and a half years after having been laid down. She accompanied the frigate Belle Poule and Licorne as well as the corvette Hirondelle. Two days later, her fate as a French ship was sealed. Although no official declaration of war had been given up to this point, the small French fleet feel victim to a British force. Spotting the French fleet, a larger and more heavily armed British fleet – twenty sail of the line, four frigates and three unrated ships - under the command of Admiral Keppel gave chase. Catching the French ships, the British frigates captured Licorne. During the action, Belle Poule was damaged but managed to escape the fight and capture. The fate of the Hirondelle is unknown but a ship fitting its description remained in French service until 1983.
Largely ignored by the larger British ships, Le Coureur was ordered to strike its colours after the French fleet was shattered. Refusing to give up she became the target of the British fleet and tangled with the British cutter HMS Alert. Exchanging cannon, musket and pistol fire, both ships became locked in a ninety minute long close quarter engagement. Accurate cannon fire from Le Coureur damaged Alert above and on the water line, as well as doing substantial damage to the cutters rigging. She wounded four British sailors and presumably killed an additional four. The damage to Le Coureur itself is unknown although it can be assumed that it was heavy enough to force de Rosily to finally strike his colours. Becoming Alert’s prize, Le Coureur lost five men and had seven wounded. Although losing his ship, de Rosily’s action against the British fleet and Alert earned him the Croix-Saint Louis.
Fate:
Renamed Coureur by the British, she was in service for the Royal Navy until 1780. Potentially up armed and receiving an unconfirmed two additional guns, she was lost to the Americans off Newfoundland. Other sources state she was retaken by France in 1782.
Illustrations:
Sources:
Clowes, William, The Royal Navy: a history from the earliest times to the present, Vol. IV, London: Sampson Low, Marston and Company, 1899, pp. 13, 15, 111 and 114, available online at: https://ia600506.us.archive.org/8/items/royalnavy04clow/royalnavy04clow.pdf (12.01.2015),
Nauticalia, Le Coureur, Accompanying leaflet in 7482 Le Coureur Lugger Display Model - 54 cm length, Shepperton-on-Thames: Nauticalia Ltd, 2001,
Alert vs. Le Coureur: http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_battle&id=519 (12.01.2015),
Additional information found at: http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=19238 (12.01.2015),
Hirondelle in French service: http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=ships_search (12.01.2015),
Hirondelle 1762: http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=15638 (12.01.2015),
Illustrations:
Boudriot, Jean and Berti, Hubert, Le Coureur – Lougre 1776 Du constructeur Denys- Monographie Au 1/42, pp. 39, available online at: http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/50-monographie-du-coureur-lougre-1776.html , (12.01.2015),
http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/3438-ships-chimneys/?p=140848, Prior source unknown, assumed ibit. to previous, (21.01.2015).
-
7
-
-
As a hardcore history fan, i would love it even more if that was the only way to communicate while in battle...
Impossible simply because the game can't control out of game communication via TS, Skype or even sitting next to each other.
This would be a novelty feature, nice to have but adding little of actual value. The development team can keep such an idea in mind but in my opinion, introduction should come way after official launch.
-
1. Will the game retain my progress when it goes out of alpha? Beta?
Yes, wipes will happen since the game is currently in Alpha. Even if they don't - in the traditional sense - once open world hits we'll have to acquire new ships by trading, building, capturing etc. Having a Victory by the end of the Alpha will by no means allow you to immediately have one when open world hits.
-
Nothing new here, just the obvious choices
-
4
-
-
More than four letters required won't fix the problem.
Of course not; I am stating that a (potential) max cap on the amount of letters (say 20) due to placement issues on the ship won't stop people from naming their ship in an eloquent way.
-
On that note though, its a game, so as long as its not offensive then let it go. How often are you gonna be looking at the name during a fight anyways?
^Quoted for reference purposes
what if there was a huge register of 1000s of ship names. Some "less cool" names would be allowed to be used up 3-4 times but the "cool" ones there could only be one ship named that way?
A register is actually quite a neat idea in my opinion but putting a cap on names would be somewhat restrictive. Who gets to call his ship Tigre, Redoutable etc and why? The first guy to get that ship? Ai (if any?) - so no players? Skill-based - i.e. best combat record? < How to measure that? Point is, people want to name their ship without restriction - at least for I would make that guess. Since this game is - currently - played by a people with an avid interest in naval warfare in the age of sail, ship names will probably stay 'SFW'. In the future? Who can say. Like Johny Reb said, there will certainly be a cap on the amount of letters a name can have but we must also be aware that it only takes four letters to write 'F...lip' or 'C...lub'.
Now I can see someone raising objection to the fact that at some point the 'Excellent' is fighting the 'Excellent' but then I'd very much subscribe to Johny Reb's post. How often are we going to look at the name anyway? And if we are, it's usually just before a rake that will send the bugger to kingdom come. In a way, beating a ship with the same name kind of sounds to me like one earned oneself that name and it would make victory all the sweeter.
-
1
-
Abandoned ship - Save the crew
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
I would say that crew loss has to be painful.
If you come out of battle, the captain should have to anaylze the damage taken (to his ship and his crew) and weigh his options. Staying out at sea might yield further rewards, but going back home allows him to stock up and replenish. It might be harsh if you would like to sail from one part of the world to the other and two hours into the trip need to seek out the nearest port, but hey, that will be part of the challenge of the game. If you don't wish to get into a fight and have dead crew, plan accordingly and do your best to run away from trouble.
I am fine with having little trouble finding crew in ports - pressing, heaving drunks on to ones ship, stealing them from other boats, etc - there are so many sources of manpower that finding a few guys to join the crew is not hard. That being said, it would be nice to place meaning behind crew hiring i.e. a reduction in the crews average experience depending on how many new guys are on board etc. I don't know if you guys plan that, but refilling should be more about a mere press of a button.