Kngsbrg
-
Posts
56 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Kngsbrg
-
-
It is a good suggestion and certainly one should look into, but only once one fully knows how to employ unitys engine and has everything set up to properly focus on getting it to work.
I believe to have the unit collision handled in a reasonable manner will take a lot of effort and that the game is not there yet, but I sure would be glad to see it around v2.x!
-
Moin,
I am fully aware of this state being a <1.0 Version, yet I would love to see something like this being implemented.
Those additional lines would help with the accuracy of gunning.
Schot- und Mastbruch
Kngsbrg
-
Just my luck, I got my key today while at work and just got home and installed. I had such high hopes! Oh well, hopefully we get it up soon! Can't wait to play!
It truly is a marvel, the wait will be worth it!
-
I do not agree. The tendency of ships to lie ahull under bare poles (and then to get knocked down) is the result of impact from the waves (not the wind). The waves are necessarily coming from the same direction as the wind. In the almost flat waters of most maps the ships wouldn't lie ahul, they would turn to present their narrowest aspect to the wind. The exception is the storm map where a ship should lie ahull and then be knocked down.
Yes that would be cool. Need to factor in depth for anchoring and swing. IRL you need 2.5-5 time more length of cable than the depth because an anchor must lie in a long curve so that the force is almost all horizontal and not vertical. That's how they get off the anchor, they sail up to it and then pull from directly above.
In any case vessels at anchor drift so that the anchor is to windward and will spin around the anchor point if the wind changes.
Being hove to is another option, which I mentioned in another post. They would need to fix the ability to set the jib on the opposite tack for fore and aft rigged vessels, for square rigged ships I don't know how they do it.
That's a fantastic idea, I hadn't thought of that. Also roll could be a big factor in other areas. For example when running you roll a lot but when close hauled you hardly roll at all.
If I go out in a modern sail boat even if I'm going under power I put the main up for just that reason, it's godawful to be powering along in a sailboat with no sails up because you feel every bit of roll on every point of sail. The main stabilizes the vessel the vessel a lot.
Another step would be to introduce weather helm and lee helm in manual sails configuration but that's a bit technical I guess and maybe already included in the turn mechanic? (That is where you can unbalance your sails so they turn against each other - for example on a bermuda rig you can carry too much jib or genny so that you turn away from the weather, or too much main and you turn into the weather).
agreeing with you on most things, but you need to learn how to multiquote...
OT: I like OP's notion
-
With the current gun dispersion or lack thereof if you start with the high lee gauge you can pretty much kyte forever without being stopped with ball or chain...
exactly my thought... one of the many things I would like to see changed.
-
no, a new era is a specific setting with specific content. I rather have one era with indepth content than two or more eras with lacking content, because someone wanted to be Jack Sparrow. This is not a pirate game, please keep that in mind. The engine screams large scale naval combat and not merchant-sacking by fast, little ships.
If you want a pirate game, go play one of the many games out there or wait a little longer, but this game will not do a 180° turn just for you to live some romantic, unrealistic expectation of Long John Silver.
TL;DR: rather focus on one era and get it right, gameplay and content wise, new eras are possible down the road, but not prior to 2.x version
-
1
-
-
very good... imagine this with a battlefield-styled commo rose!
-
skipped this shit...
jk! Thanks!
-
1
-
-
Pretty much sums it up can we get a lock button for the ads so we don't mess up are shots with a little mouse movement.
I believe the ALT-Button is what you are looking for... it will not prevent your aim going up/down from heeling though, which is fine imho!
-
I have not read any of the comments in this thread and would like to only state my opinion about the poll:
Are you guys out of your mind? This engine provides sea dynamics, ship combat and that is about it. Introducing ports, land structures and what not for you to run around and "do your business" is not needed and would cause a huge spike in development. Time and money they could spend otherwise on core aspects of the game. I would be absolutely fine if they'd keep all landsided interactions GUI based and just be done with it.
-
1
-
-
It would certainly put a face on those over the battle declining crew numbers... but too much to handle, I doubt this will come anytime soon. It would either look very generic or would be a huge burden on the engine, even if you'd run it completey on the client side.
-
God bless the Trin...
-
HMS Indefatigable!
-
1
-
-
I've almost 40 hours, if not more, already. At $1/hr, where can you go for that kind of value?
While I really like your thinking, you probably have to add costs for power consumption, a share of the computers buying price plus interest over the years and data, if you do not have a unlimited plan (e.g. in the US).
But all in all, you are right. It is not much per hour and the 40$ are well spend!
"PVP Random" Battle mode?
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted · Edited by Kngsbrg
Your proposal is a valiant one, but you are, like many great men before you, ahead of your time. Currently, there are two major problems with your proposal.
A.
At the moment, the player base is split roughly into two by allowing PVP and PVE. A further division would result in smaller battles and extended waiting times, less accurate group battle samples and, most of all worse matchmaking. This is something one can look into once there is a stable playerbase big enough to support such modes. Think about it that way, would you rather have normal PVP or random PVP if you only could have one of them?
B.
The way progression is handled at them moment such a game type would not do. As ships tend to do more damage the more guns and higher caliber guns they have, you could not implement a general experience earned. One could implement a certain factor, like 1.5 for snow, 1.0 for trinco or 0.5 for victory. One could most certainly make it work, but only at the expenses of a lot of trouble and most likely a lot of folks unhappy with the progression system. After all, people want to play that shiny new ship they just unlocked and most think bigger is better.