DeRuyter
-
Posts
1,532 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by DeRuyter
-
-
3 hours ago, Armbed General said:
Finally, at least they indeed working on something, other than Ultimate Admiral.
From the look of it, looks like America wars of independence
And hopefully, it will include campaign mode this time
Makes sense because they could use the land combat part of UA for faster development of a larger scale AWI campaign game. Frankly UA was a development of UG essentially using the same basic game engine. I am still holding out hope for a UG Napoleonic Wars though!
-
2
-
-
On 5/28/2020 at 12:33 PM, Busterbloodvessel said:
By jove I think you're right. The main looks identical though to me but in the photo you can see the yards of the main behind the foremast.
Well done.
Your prize is a basic cutter, normally $50.
Buster (Mainly)
The double forestay gave it away. 🙂
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Jan van Santen said:
Never understood the speed thing anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Endymion_(1797)#Citations
Apart from this, Endymion was known as the fastest sailing-ship in the Royal Navy during the Age of Sail, logging 14.4 knots (26.7 km/h) sailing large, and nearly 11.0 knots (20.4 km/h) close-hauled.[2]
Oak afaik. Some of her later sister ships were softwood built..("fir" actually pitch pine)
Would be interesting to have their speed figures.
The type of wood didn't effect speed nearly as much as it does in game. Also keep in mind that Endymion was armed with an 18 lb main battery when she logged this speed.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Busterbloodvessel said:
Guess
Foremast.
-
Answer is in the title: UA: Dreadnoughts. Can't really have a game about the development and superiority of the battleship after its' demise as a weapon system.
-
On 3/30/2020 at 11:20 AM, admin said:
- Closed hauled speeds are there for the reason - not sure if it is needed for the Game. I want it to be more realistic, but i know many will not want it. I vividly remember the slow turning and slower sailing experiment (we were bombarded by negativity).
- Leeway is already reduced with increasing speed (up to almost 3x difference). Same with yard power.. Yard power is also reduced with speed (because of keel resistance due to speed)
- Acceleration deceleration too high AGREE
- Yard turn speed are too high - not sure.. What is your reference point with game speeds faster? For example we can provide the reference point for reloads. What is your reference point for yards? Lets say 90 men per mast for rigging work on a first rate - how fast they can turn the yards? We can even try to count the pulls for braces, how much distance (degrees) per pull (maybe captstain turns?) if we find a modern reference point for yard turning using braces we can fix it. it will require more planning (and allow to add more uniqueness for ships)
- Depower is removing jibs. Well. You can just untie the ropes (make it go free) and depower the jib instantly. For spanker its slower of course (agree but only for spanker). But you can depower jibs and staysails almost instantly with the right rig
- Fore aft sails - its a visual and animation issue, adding new positions is very expensive fps wise and increase amount of animations - so its purely visual.
- Tack through the wind - Actually DISAGREE - in several 1700-1800 books on seamanship there are references that point that the skilled captain could tack without sternway. and sometimes even without negative speed. (especially heavy ship who were still decelerating on energy itself). But it only was possible with skilled crew who could remove wind from sails to avoid negative force. Whats lacking is the failed tack, we have it in game - but to make it work it we have to remove 1. (closed haul speed too high) then negative force of incorrectly placed yards will push you back .
Admin beat me to the issue with the jibs. You simply release the jib sheet. The command might be something like "ease the sheet or let fly jib sheets" Stays'l a bit harder but the same thing basically. It is an animation issue.
Close hauled speeds are not necessarily off, some frigates could make 10 knts close hauled (13 knts sailing large or off the wind).
The biggest issue related to that is the angle to the wind, meaning that no square rigged ship could sail closer than 65-70 degrees to the wind while a fore and aft ship can sail about 45 degrees. In game we have ships making headway at 20 degrees and keeping good speed at 35 degrees. One reason that ships seem too maneuverable and makes it easy to stern camp is this point. But the angles are relaxed for game play so other factors need to be adjusted to compensate. I can hear the cursing if players ships slowed to a stop and started drifting backwards at 40-50 degrees off the wind.
-
On 1/15/2020 at 1:19 AM, Sea Archer said:
To add more ships diversity to the game, please add real water depth and ships draft.
Give the small ship a purpose, as well as the medium frigates.
Real water depth in portbattles would increase the ships diversity, too. So other ships than L'Oceans and Christians would be used.
I agree. Looks like draft may be added in the Sea Legends game though.
-
2 hours ago, Snoopy said:
As long as the unrealistic camera shake from KCD is out, i'm in
May not be unrealistic if your ship is pounding upwind through a gale!
-
3
-
-
44 minutes ago, admin said:
- Yes.. Its already in prototype, if you have too much sail in strong wind your masts will get stressed and eventually break. Ramming, damage from hitting rocks at high speed, etc)
- Navigation is a skill and player can have it all to himself or hire an officer with high navigation skills to help him determine position (some mistakes will happen)
- Most UI will be physical, for example barometer will be a physical device, that player have to watch from time to time to see if wind is going to change (officers with good Wind Reading will also give hints if they know something is going to happen)
- As above, all instruments will be physical, but for those who are not into hardcore realism can open panels with all necessary data (like in NA).
- You can travel real time. The world is build around you.
- Kingdom come deliverance. Very good single player game from europe.
I was never really an RPG player until KCD. A historical RPG based on realism where you start unskilled, ok I will try it. Now it is taking most of my playing time!
So a single player RPG like experience set in the age of sail and bringing in realism elements left out of NA because of MMO element, count me in!
-
3
-
32 minutes ago, Earl of Grey said:
No its NA Legends 2
Actually they are starting with single player so maybe NA PVE 2
The game will start with the single player experience built around low risk smuggling, hauling and privateering in the North Sea and Mediterranean. Then we will add social common areas like taverns with historical games, drinking, singing and chatting with other Captains. After this is done Naval careers and Pirate life will be implemented. These careers will have integrated multiplayer components.
Lots of features I have been asking for in NA for 5 years lol. I am signed up... 👍
Seamanship
Realistic 18th Century Sailing (even eddy making)
Individual sail control
Ballast and cargo placement
Closing gunports in rough weather
Proper roll, pitch and yaw
Wind shadows and leeway
Anchors
Water and Wind
Variable wind
Variable wave length
Wind gusts and gales
Realistic variable weather
Currents and tides
Trade winds
Proper storms
-
2
-
-
On 1/13/2020 at 7:56 AM, MishaTX said:
I did. Talked me into it, thanks a million. My family may never see me again 😉
Yes, I'm having a blast on the PvE server right now while learning how to fight my ship properly. Only beef is I wish the AI would react to me in some way, much like the AI does in, say, E:D. It feels a bit surreal for me to go snatch a Spanish NPC trader, only to pass by a Spanish NPC fleet minutes later without as much as a frown in my general direction. Or sailing straight through pirate territory with two trade ships full of goods without worries.
Enough OT from me. Also still loving UA:AoS. As I said, I may never see my family again.
Aggressive AI was in the game at one point and is again to a limited extent on the War server. Previously the aggressive AI would interfere with pvp port battles on the War server and it was removed. Lots of people on the PVE (Peace server) have voiced concerns about aggressive AI because they would rather only engage when they want to and other reasons. Lots of stuff on the NA forum about aggressive AI.
-
On 1/11/2020 at 1:50 PM, akd said:
Except Nelson was absolutely not fighting for independence.
“By Land, By Sea” is a good subtitle for Ultimate Admiral, and “Admiral” is good family name for the first tactical game to even attempt to properly depict the interrelated nature of land and sea operations.
If anything, the game still somewhat trivializes the difficulty of command in this area. Way too easy to sail ships right up to the coast and disgorge troops under the guns of a fort.
Battles that are land only are fine as well as long as there is a direct connection to the sea campaign and they are not just stuck in as filler.
Cutting out expeditions using small boats to capture anchored ships would be great as well. Very prevalent along the US coast when a smaller ships hid up a river where larger ships of the line or even frigates could not go.
-
On 1/4/2020 at 5:31 AM, Raekur said:
The one other aspect of the move from 4th to 3rd rate was that it then placed the Constitution as a ship that was unable to defeat any other ship of its rate. With a damage output of only 2823 it is nearly half of any other 3rd rate ship. The next lowest is the 3rd rate with a damage output of 4169. In any battle (not counting skill of their perspective captains) it would be nearly impossible for the Constitution to defeat the 3rd rate. While some may argue that with certain upgrades and captain skill the Constitution would win, those factors can be applied equally to either ship and for this reason they are not considered in the comparison.
The Constitution was originally in the game as a 4th rate and fit into that category quite nicely. The Constitution required more skill than other 4th rates to be truly effective. This is what balanced it verses other 4th rates. Once it was moved to being a 3rd rate it seemed that very few people would waste time on it due to one it requiring a hard to find permit and second that since it is the weakest 3rd rate it makes it difficult to train up unless you go after 4th rate targets and deal with them being more maneuverable.
On 1/7/2020 at 8:56 AM, van Veen said:Connie was good as a 4th rate. She is terribly useless as a 3rd rate. She was never built as a line ship, but as a heavy frigate, to outrun anything that outguns her, but outgun anything that outruns her. There was a gap between the frigates and the line ships in terms of speed and gun power that she filled very well. This was the reason for her success. British reacted to this new "super frigate" with line ships converted into 4th rate frigates (razee, e.g. Indefatigable) and building new Endymion class ships, which were the only 24pd frigate they had at that time.
Connie should be a 4th rate, HP need to be nerfed to be on par with other 4th rates. Then she could shine in the frigate patrol zone and in PVP again.
BTW, also Endymion was later re-classified as a fourth rate.
This ^^. Here are your answers. Not sure if the OP was aware that the Connie was originally in game as a 4th rate. Technically IRL a heavy frigate or 5th rate as built. Lots of unintended consequences by the changing to 3rd rate in game.
-
One of the last remaining survivors of the USS Arizona sinking passed away earlier this year. A diver will take his remains down to the ship to be with his crewmates in a ceremony tomorrow, December 7th at sunset.
RIP o7
-
3
-
-
Link to an article with some photos of the SMS Scharnhorst wreck.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50670743
-
2
-
-
On 11/18/2019 at 12:09 PM, DeRuyter said:
Your statement above was that artillery "was never called company". My references clearly showed that this was not correct at least during the AWI and Napoleonic wars and this game is set during that period.
Sure a unit of guns can be and is generally referred to as a "battery" but in some cases was called an artillery company. Breaking it down further you see references to a "section" of guns or in the case of cavalry a "troop".
On 11/30/2019 at 6:05 AM, JaM said:you are mistaking battlefield unit with organisation... Artillery unit on the battlefield was called Battery... it could be named Regiment, Company, whatever, that was just organisational name... but on the battlefield, artillery pieces were always deployed into Batteries..... Battery was the lowest tactical battlefield unit of Artillery. Same way as Battalion was the lowest tactical unit of Infantry and Squadron was the lowest tactical unit of Cavalry.. Of course Battalion was composed of companies, but these were not operating on battlefield on their own, but always as part of Battalion.. same thing with Cavalry and Artillery.
Anyway its true British had a bit different naming in 18.century, but eventually adopted European convention. For some reason they were using "Brigade" as a lowest artillery tactical unit. Anyway for everybody else (Spanish, French and later Americans) Battery was the name of lowest tactical unit on the battlefield.
Man you must be a "Red Leg". I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I'll just leave my earlier quote for context. Maybe instead of just repeating the same line over and over you can show me some reference from the AWI supporting your point for the game's time period. I am well aware that a unit of guns was often referred to as a battery in particular in a fortification or field works. So the question is in the 18th century was the term battery used colloquially when referring to an artillery company in the field. One could also include horse artillery which I have seen in numerous sources referred to as a troop.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:
Just wondering why they chose the title 'Armada' for this, as this leads to wrong associations.
Obviously it is the movie about Dutch Admiral De Ruyter, while 'Armada' would make you think of the Spanish Armada attempting to invade England in the previous century.
Exactly. In the English release it was titled: "Admiral". Great movie BTW!
-
On 11/19/2019 at 7:28 AM, Cairo1 said:
Something like this actually did happen during WWII this is called Kedging, The seapalne tender Akitsushima Kedged in combat to avoid several diver bombs and lived to see another day.
It was a semi common practice for maneuvering in the days of sail, in fact the USS Constitution kedged during the war of 1812 while fighting an English squadron.
I am not saying this is something i want to see in game, its just neat.
Maybe I am missing something because this thread is about stopping and reversing engines. Kedging is using your anchors and windlass to move the ship generally forward. Was it done if you still had engine power? In the age of sail it was used to maneuver in a tight space like a harbor or river, or as in the case of the Constitution move forward while there was no wind. Keeping in mind this was done whilst attempting to escape and not in the middle of battle.
-
On 11/18/2019 at 1:19 PM, LeBoiteux said:
the wink was more about showing you I wasn't the only one using a classification based on pdr than my actual asking you to take the time to give your opinion about what I wrote. Thanks for that.
Neither did the 9-pdr frigates of the game (except maybe the British version of the Surprise, according to some NA posts iirc, but not to R. Winfield, British Warships in the Age of Sail). Neither did the 12-pdr L'Hermione...
The 9-pdr frigate La Renommée built in 1747 and broken up years before the invention of carronades should be the queen of the frigates in her ocean with her 9-pdr guns... like lots of other frigates. That's the impossible equation. Reserved areas was just an attempt to solve it. At least there are the shallow waters for the 9-pdr frigates.
Sorry about that. I play War Thunder - so my first thought was to non-historical BR matching. As you have said the solution for the early frigates vs. the later more heavily armed ships is not easy. Nor should it be about artificially balancing so every 5th rate has a chance against another 5th rate. Allowing carronades to the earliest ships even if they did not carry them - the 9 pdr frigates is plausible. Had they been active later they would have been upgunned etc. This did happen with 6th rates. Taken together with removal of main deck carronades on the 18/24 lb frigates this would certainly help diversify the fleet.
As to different zones I agree it may work to an extent, but it puts the sandbox element at risk. Maybe just increasing the areas of shallows allowing more area for the 9/12 lb frigates to fight each other. Proper ship drafts and bathymetry would be great, but alas we don't have that.
-
On 11/18/2019 at 12:42 PM, LeBoiteux said:
Among your references, don't you have the date of 26 May 1716 when George the 1st created the first two permanent 'companies' of Royal Artillery ? Am I wrong ?
No - wow nice find! 👍
-
On 11/17/2019 at 6:49 AM, LeBoiteux said:
if we take this very interesting reasoning of yours further, there should be reserved areas (such as the current shallow waters) where :
- only the 9-pdr frigates (and smaller ships) meet and fight (Surprise, Hercules, Pandora, Renommée)
- only the 12-pdr frigates (and smaller ships) meet (L'Hermione, Belle Poule...)
- only the 18/24-pdr frigates (and...) meet (Trincomalee, Endymion...)
- only the 7th rates meets
- only the 6-pdr ships meets
- etc.
@DeRuyter ... 😉
That looks suspiciously like some kind of arena game with matches determined by BR 😉
Actually I like your earlier thought that giving main deck carronades to smaller ships helps.
I would go a step further: Remove main deck carronades from the larger ships like Trinc/Endy and Indy. Realism bonus none of them carried main deck carronades IRL! Trinc - 18lb battery on main deck.
-
On 11/16/2019 at 8:41 AM, JaM said:
no, what i meant, is that artillery was always organized into battery. No matter how many guns its had, it was always called battery.. 2,4,8 or 80... always a battery.
Your statement above was that artillery "was never called company". My references clearly showed that this was not correct at least during the AWI and Napoleonic wars and this game is set during that period.
Sure a unit of guns can be and is generally referred to as a "battery" but in some cases was called an artillery company. Breaking it down further you see references to a "section" of guns or in the case of cavalry a "troop".
-
37 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:
I don't agree with you but fair enough....I will speak for only myself. I disagree with admins all the time and I have never been banned for it. I don't like several aspects of the game and have spoken passionately about how it should be changed. Still here.
Agreed - It is all about how you state your criticism. Too many ppl start with "Oh the game will now die because of x or Y new feature and then inset some sarcastic comment". Disagreement stated with reasons and suggested solutions seems to be appreciated.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, sterner said:
UA:AoS and UA:D are developed by different teams.
We work to stabilize the campaign and to prepare everything that we promised for EA. Regarding the release date, if the game is unstable and quality is out our and your expectations, then the release date will be shifted to the begging of 2020.
Thank you good to hear.
Double Shot and Double Charge at close range
in General discussions
Posted
I could tell you how they work in Naval Action. 🙂
Double Charge give you greater penetration. Double shot gives you 50% greater damage but is inaccurate at anything but short range and loses penetration. The range should be reflected on the map in UAAOS. Historically double ball (or Triple shot as loaded on the Victory at Trafalgar) was loaded as an initial broadside if a ship was closing to pistol range, 50m or less. It was highly inaccurate. Often a ship would load ball + grape on the Quarter deck guns as an antipersonnel load. Double shot is trickier because it risked blowing up your own gun!