Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'cannons'.
Found 25 results
-
Notes: If Anyone has any suggestions please reply to this topic, I'm interested to see what weapons the community will dig up that I couldn't find If anyone wants me to go into more detail about anything i happily will. General: -Have multiple styles of guns for each calibre, possibly with different stats like turret rotations and price and visuals. -For nations like Germany and Britain who switch their turret style above 16 inch guns enlarge the 16 inch gun models to serve as 17 and 18 inch turrets - Allow us to use destroyer guns as secondary guns on larger ships such as battleships. -Allow placement of secondary gun barbers everywhere on the ship America: Britain: Japan: Germany: France: Russia: Italy: Spain: Austro-Hungarian Empire: ps. This is my first forum post ever
-
Would be nice if we could use stern guns on the privateer, even 4 lb cannons the gun ports are already on the model
- 21 replies
-
- 12
-
-
Hello captains, after a while playing now, i find it strange to see limited ammonition on double shoots and charged shoots but unlimited ammonition for the rest of the ammonition. I played another game "pirates: caribean hunt", these games are very similar but there is one major difference. The ammunition is limited to what you bought in a habour and loaded on to your ship. This works very well in my opinion. It also lays a small layer of complexity on the econemy. What seems to be necessary is that we get some values how much powder is used in varios gun types dependend on the ammunition used. So for example would a charged shoot use more powder than a normal shoot. But i have no indepth knowledge on the differences between other variants. Furthermore we need to know what a certain ammount of projectiles and powder weight. What this could add to the game is clear. Immersion and a way to balance very powerfull ships. Imagine you have to pay for every shoot you do on a ship like the L'ocean.
-
I wish, just like we can with modules and ships, that we could break up cannons to get resources back. I'm literally rolling hundreds of mediums cannons that no one wants, and I would LOVE to break them up and make them longs. or SOMETHING that I can do to "upgrade" them to longs. Anyone else feel the same?
-
“…Hello, my name is Norfolk nChance ……and I’m an addict….” The Patch 10.00 roll out was I think Wed 24th May So, 10 days POST the big wipe. I was looking through the STEAM discussion threads, don’t roll your eyes there are jerks on this forum as well, author included. Anyway, there are some really pissed off teenagers here. Then I look deeper, and its wider than that. It’s not just the “this game is crap, should be on sale crowd…” no no… this is “Not going in the fun direction…”, “Making Money WTF…” “PvP is now dead….”. With lots of feedback, not just the usual spam troll rubbish… Somethings happened here… so I go the forum… I suddenly find were the STEAM kids got their potty mouths from… Vocal, real pissed off at the grind. WTF Admin… The economics are broke… Trader buff, reduce cannons, PvE Economy is broken… Then I was able to condense all posts starting the 24th May to today on the two forums basically down into six words. Yes, from pages and pages of threads to hundreds of posts. Just six little words… “Player no money, cannons too High…” We are talking broad strokes here, but you see it, don’t you? It came to me from a short but brilliant POST from [Victor] in the forum called STAGFLATION. Go read it. I mulled with piece for some time because it rang totally true but not quite. He seemed to have captured the “Six Little Words”. I’m not an armchair Admiral, but a real life economist. This I do for a living, and the one thing missing in the post is TIME. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation Read “Causes”, first sentence then look back at the “six little words” above. Ring any bells. The depression of internal demand of Goods due to the fact people don’t have enough money to buy them. Think about that East German Girl, in 1990 watching the wall come down becoming ONE Germany again. In her mind Disneyland, Paris, Clothes, Coca Cola… however want them all she likes she’s no money to pay for them. This is you in NA right now… My clan [ELITE], we haven’t been pulling out all the stops, but really just getting used to playing with each other again. A Bit of trading, some missions and well the odd Gank now and again. Nothing hardcore. Our cash pile is growing, we are working to a plan. I want the same L’O just as you and the other things. It will take time for me to get. There is actually no depression at all. The economy is 10 days old ONLY. It (the economy) just hasn’t started to get rolling momentum yet. But it is rolling all the same. The Junkie What we are witness to in Naval Action is player depression from needing something that he’s being used to having and replacing easily for the past year. This is what we are looking at. If I said remember when you first started … you seriously can’t, that world is tinted by rose glass that clouds our view. We need to asked a Brand-new player that understands numbers. What do you see, feel, hate, like… And this [Victor] knocks it clean out of the park… “harming the players progression (and fun) after the big patch” Fun Factor is not an economic term, but ask most adults in 2008 fun might not be the first word that springs to mind. What was left in 2009 was for most adult’s depression. This is how we are looking at Naval Action now. RIGHT NOW. The Brand-New Player doesn’t suffer from our past addiction. He’s in a new and exciting world to explore. His “Fun Factor” I’d guess might be higher right now than us old sea dogs. We have 500 to 3,000 hours of XP living in a world that’s just 10 days old. Let me just say the again… Just 10 days old… So, seriously is the Naval Action in stagflation or are we coming off them addiction blues? The Dealer If you’ve worked out who the junkie is, then you must know who’s his dealer. So, our beloved Genius, he tries to soften the blow (excuse the pun) of doing cold turkey. How, by giving us XP Rank Craft plus three ships and a get out of France free pass. He tells you in no uncertain terms… “Do Not Redeem your Redeemable’s unless you are absolutely sure you want to remain in that nation” So, have you snorted your XP yet, Smoked the Surprise Joint or injected an Indefatigable…? The Economy is ONLY 10 days OLD. WHY? Well, answer me this truthfully when you snorted, smoked or injected… you didn’t get that same high you were expecting right? The whole mechanic has change… you know this…? However, when a junkie doesn’t quite get his fix, what do you think happens to his Craving…? http://www.thefreedictionary.com/craving Go back and just look at the mass and mess of threads on the forum and STEAM discussion pages. You see it yet..? Rehab Think about looking at a 10day Universe for all that NA experience you have. It might seem like a good idea, but it comes tarnished. Just before the wipe, I took my ALT onto the testbed. I wanted to do a complete cold newbie start. Following [Powderhorn] excellent “New Player” experience guide. It was very hard, but fun. It was like being re-introduced to an old lover. Missions hotfixed overnight turning from Pickle to Lynx opposition to Rattlesnake Brig and SNOW lmao but not up in arms…. But I truly didn’t feel the grind. It was fresh. Getting into the first paid guns on the BASIC Cutter, felt like a great achievement. But still not grind. Trading, I wrote down prices circled Fort-Royal Ports trading away… It didn’t feel the same as what YOU or I feel now… In fact, I will admit I had more fun being a returned newbie than right now how to build my best Connie. On the ship tree… spreadsheets in the age of sail or what? Task to Complete If you can, go to either of the other two servers you don’t use. Log in and reset the PC and pick a Nation so far left field it might as well be France. Spend the next 5 days ONLY starting from scratch. However, within that time under no circumstance can you go back onto your main server. Then tell me, no tell Admin how it felt. My Suggestion The Next Wipe Admin, stop messing about and do a COMPLETE and FULL wipe. RANK, CRAFT, everything. Give [Balls of Steel] his Yacht on product launch only…. “….My name is Norfolk nChance ……and I’m an addict….”
- 24 replies
-
- 14
-
-
I would like to have ships and cannons listed in somekind of search tool, it feels kind of booring that you need to sail to KPR to efficiently sell ships and cannons. Id like them to be searchable in trader tool or have different mechanism to search for ships sold in distant ports or just ports even in my current region.-
- 1
-
-
- trade tool
- search
- (and 2 more)
-
hi guys and devs, like title says , i would love to be able to put this free 4pd medium cannons on each ships , this will help a lot now at the start after the wipe cause cannons price are very high and craft is hard for solo players. i dont mind if in the future the market will be full of cannons crafted by players, i need now the possibility to put free bad cannons at least and get started instead of grind in basic cutter. thoughts? -
I've been working on and mathing over a subject that's been bothering me for quite a while - Cannon Penetration. Specifically, Carronades and how their penetration drops off to 0 at extreme ranges, so it got me thinking. Could one really stop a 42-pound iron ball that's been flying through the air for 1000m by...holding up a piece of paper? Noooo, that's silly. Therefore, I'd like to introduce a concept I like to call Minimum Penetration. Min Pen should be identical for shots of identical size, no matter what sort of gun they're fired from. Min Pen is based on the terminal velocity of an iron sphere of a specific mass in free-fall for an indefinite period of time. As I was pondering this subject, I said to myself, "You know, I'm sure the devs have a formula in the background that they tweak for this sort of thing, but it isn't readily apparent and carronades don't seem to follow a simple mathematical model." So, I devised a plan. Two alternate models for cannon penetration, easily adjustable based on the minimum (infinite-range) penetration, maximum (gun barrel againt hull) penetration, and the distance at which the devs want the weapon to have a pen value halfway between min and max. Edit/Update: After far too many hours than is healthy, I've updated things. I dropped the previous "Falloff" model as it was a little silly and had zero chance of being adopted. Instead, I have done extensive research on the internal and external ballistics of cannons and cannon balls for a "Historical" model that should more closely fit a realism-based scenario. The Epic Spreadsheet of Epic The above sheet shows current values, Exponential Decay, and "Historical" models as well as data on relative penetration based on kinetic energy divided by projected area. I arbitrarily set 4 pdrs to pen through 5cm of wood in a free fall, which seems reasonable to me, but this is easily adjustable with the data present After lots of research, I finally was able to simply calculate the hypothetical oak penetration, at terminal velocity, of the various weights of cannon rounds. The key is that minimum penetration is solely dependent upon the mass of the iron ball - 42pd carronades and 42pd long guns will have the same minimum penetration at hypothetical infinite range. I have two models here. The first is a gamey, Exponential model that has, as Gamelabs does, all guns of the same type lose energy at the same rate, and has Carronades' initial penetration equal to Long guns of half their caliber. The second is a "Historical" model that attempts to more accurately model internal and external ballistics. In the Exponential Model, I attempted to adhere to the theme of Gamelabs design - long guns maintaining energy over long ranges, Carronades dropping off quickly, and medium guns somewhere in between. Here, Medium cannons have 5% less 0m-Pen compared to Long guns of the same caliber, and Carronades have the same 0m-pen as a Long cannon half its caliber. The horizontal lines are for reference, from top down, Victory mast thickness, Connie mast thickness, Actual physical diameter of the HMS Victory's lower mainmast, and the current thickness of the Victory's hull. It's clear that even using this model that, while any gun is capable of damaging a 1st-rate's hull if the ship is close enough (Privateer swarm ftw), being able to deal effective damage to the masts of a 1st-rate is nigh-impossible; ONLY 42-pounders at close range (and 68pd Carros at sneezing distance) are able to pen through the thickness of those masts. The advantage of this model is that it keeps carronades short-ranged in all regards and clearly defines roles for guns. The disadvantage is that it can make using carronades, and even medium guns in some cases, frustrating at anything more than a stone's throw from an enemy ships. The Historical model attempts to more accurately simulate both external and internal ballistics. With this model, Long guns are 20 calibers in length and use a 1/4 charge-to-shot ratio. Medium guns (historically termed Short cannons) are 16 calibers in length and use a 1/5 charge-to-shot ratio and have a 10% lower muzzle velocity than Longs. Carronades are only 8 calibers in length and use a 1/12 charge-to-shot ratio but have much tighter windage that results in a higher-than-expected muzzle velocity for such a lower charge. This winds up with Carros having about a 30% lower muzzle velocity than long guns of the same caliber, but curiously about the same muzzle energy as a long gun of half their caliber (even though it's a little less penetrating potential since the same energy is being distributed over a larger projected area). Here, Carronades are slightly less effective at point-blank range, but it treats, externally, all shot of the same size the in the same manner - a 42 pound ball will lose energy flying through the air at the same rate (as a proportion of its velocity) as any other 42-pound ball. However, larger shot maintains its energy better over distance (since the shot's mass increases as a cube of radius, while its projected area only increases as a square of radius) and thus will lose penetrating potential slower than smaller long guns. It can be readily seen that guns of the same caliber, regardless of type, decay to the same minimum penetration value at extreme range. With this model, accuracy becomes much more important; long guns are the kings of this, while medium guns have a little more dispersion and slightly reduced muzzle velocity and carronades are not very accurate at all. Carronades, while having the potential to reach the same range as a long gun (due to the capacity for higher gun elevation), it will not only strike with less force, but a higher impact angle (which significantly reduces the effective impact energy). Large carronades fired at range, if aimed well with decent accuracy mods, might be acceptable for chaining sails or raining grape onto weather decks, but little else. The Comparison chart shows existing 42pdrs in red, Exponential model guns in green, and Historical model guns in blue. Obviously, no concrete data is available for shots beyond 1km with the current values. Personally, I am a fan of the Historical model that I've concocted here. It makes Carronades much more of a skill weapon - high damage potential with very low accuracy. A skilled captain could, potentially, out-damage a similar ship at medium range with carronades. While this treatise does not address cannon damage, my initial thoughts are that damage and reload should be adjusted so that cannons of the same caliber do the same damage, but different types of cannons have faster reload times. E.g. 50 damage for 42-pound shot, 72 seconds for a 42-Long, 64 seconds for a 42-Short, and 48 seconds for a 42-Carro. Edit: It is this way mostly, already, just some minor tweaks and fine-tuning. The other issue at hand is mast thickness. Hull thickness is more or less acceptable (a few outliers, like the Constitution), but Masts are far and away far too thick to avoid "demasting at range". A general rule of thumb to go by is that the lower main mast should be no thicker than 4/3rds the hull thickness. By this logic, the thickest that a Victory's main mast should be is 100cm. This means that, even with the Historical model, all but 42-pd carronades will have trouble demasting a Vic, while Long 12s and Medium 24s should be up to the task, albeit at very close range. However, that doesn't mean they should be necessarily easy to demast. Lower mast sections were quite tough. While this thickness should be dropped to less than 100cm, the mast HP should be buffed easily 50% for lower mast sections, and 25% for mid-sections with the lower mast thickness. One amusing side effect of the Historical model is that the 68pd-smashers would actually retain more penetrating potential outside 1200m - but good luck hitting anything, let alone hitting it square enough to do significant damage.
- 9 replies
-
- 10
-
-
- penetration
- damage
- (and 2 more)
-
Are there maximum range differences between guns of different calibre e.g. a 4 pound long cannon versus a 9 pound long cannon? Also, can i find information anywhere on how much crew a specific gun needs? Thanks in advance.
-
We can't capture the ships, but at least allow us to remove cannons for later use or sale from AI combat ships we successfully board. It's not going to make anyone rich but it would provide a bit of income to pay for the crew and ship damage we sustain in combat. -
Testbed: removing cannons from boarded AI
Farrago posted a question in Feature proposals and Gameplay Help Q&A
Am I doing it wrong? I thought we were now aupppsed to be able to remove some cannons from AI we successfully board on the test bed? After boarding more than a dozen enemy AI combat ships, I have yet to see a cannon in the hold when I'm removing loot. Is there a button or screen I'm missing? -
Only stupid question is the question not asked, but this one may come close... Despite the name, do Mortar Handbooks assist with deck guns? It says they affect: DECK_CENTRAL CANNON_DISPERSION_PER100M, CANNON_DISPERSON_VERTICAL_PER100M AND CANNON_DISPERSION_REDUCTION_SPEED
-
Does wind direction affect cannon range or accuracy in game?
-
Hello all, My sincere apologies if this has already been discussed but I was not able to locate it. I suggest that another form of cannon fire pattern should exist, based upon the command "fire as she bears". I will not explain the mechanics of the actual command, purpose, and procedure, as I am sure we are all familiar. Obviously, within the confines of the game it is not practical to have an "automatic" fire that fires each cannon as it passes a target. However, given that there is already a rolling front, rolling rear, and random fire pattern I think there should be one more: a succession fire from front (though I suppose one from stern could also be utilized) that simulates firing as the ship bears. Thus, for example, raking would be far more effective if the cannons fired in the correct order as you pass a stern, or you would be able to fire into a ship as you pass it along one side. Thank you. -
Hello fellow captains, I recently got command of my first Constitution, wich is also my first ship that has a restricted gun deck. Now i'm not complaining about this or anything, but it just seems odd to me that the heaviest cannons (42 pound carronades) can be mounted on the weather deck, while i can only mount 18 pound cannons on the gun deck. Can anybody tell me why this is? It just seam illogical to me. Having the heavier guns on the weather deck means that the ship is more likely to roll (the center of mass is higher up). It would also seem logical that carronades would be mounted on a lower deck where they are more likely to be able to hit a smaller ship at close range (wich is what carronades are made for) -
I think long cannons are decidedly the most popular choice of cannon for PvP, but with the recent Patch 9.7, which, medium or long, would you say is better for missioning? The circumstances being that: 1) You are fighting ships of 3rd rate or higher where you cannot use cannonades on the lower decks 2) You are the only player character 3) You are not under-crewing your ship Factors: 1) I've noticed long cannons really up the crew requirement for gunnery 2) Long cannons have more penetration (not sure how much more though) 3) Mediums have less range and accuracy as longs, but AI tend to get up close anyways 4) Mediums have a faster reload time, but less penetration Questions: 1) Do you need the extra penetration of the longs for these situations? 2) Do you need the extra accuracy and range of longs? 3) Which does more DPM?
-
So this guide came out recently that organized some of the more hidden (especially before this patch) values for guns. What immediately jumped out to me was that most of the bigger long guns have the same penetration values (as well as the 4-9 pdrs). Now I have heard that this data is not necessarily up to date at all (the recent patch notes seem to confirm that, but they may simply reference a change in penetration mechanics across the board rather than a change to individual guns relative to each other). However, I was trying out an under-crewed connie after the patch and found the 24 pdrs really didn't do anything more than 18 pdrs. A friend and I were playing some missions and he was running a trinc, so we could compare directly how many shots we were penning and how much damage we were doing(using ctrl-L). Against the same targets it appeared that we penned about the same ratio of shots and he seemed to consistently do a little more damage. I have since switched my connie over to 18s and continue to find that they are as effective and sometimes even more effective than the 24s were. All of this is to ask: If the penetrations of guns are grouped up like this...why do we want larger guns? Would not the best pen and dpm combos be the best?
-
Hey guys i need help with something, i am new to the game so i do not know allot. but i was looking in the harbor how things work. So i did sellect my cannons and threw them in my warehouse. now the problem. When i try to get them back in they pop in ( like they used to do) but in a split second after throwing them in they pop out again back to the warehouse. I do not have a ship now. i do not know what to do : ( can someone help me plz? i do not own any other ships
-
So I'm wondering if there will be cannon recoil when they fire? I think it would be nicer when letting off a broadside, especially on a 1st rate. I think the recoil should also make ships start to heel for a certain amount of time after a broadside? Also port closing and opening, since if there will be storm battles you would have to have the bottom ports closed unless you want salty water splashing through the ports causing you to sink. I also think closing the ports as your ship starts to sag below the waterline where the ports are, closing them should slow down the sinking rate and leaving them open will cause you to sink faster. Let me know what you guys think. I know it might be too taxing on systems but worth a mention.
-
I just logged on today after the update to find that my Yacht was removed from my fleet (with no gold refund), and that my cannons on my Lynx are completely gone as well. So bascically I am defenceless because of the recent update. Anyone else having this issue?
-
I would just like to know what the different shots do in the game.
-
Hello I have ben playing naval action for about a week now and i love it, I have notice that you have, the battle of trafalgar in as a battle option. It is great fun. So i was hoping to see mor historical battles in the game. And since i am a dane the first battle that comes to mind, is the battle of copenhagen, The british was attack copgenhagen, the the danish fleet was defending, so it could be some some attack defend game play. Mayeb something like if the brist get to much damage to copenhagen they win or something like that. As you can see on the old battle map how the fleet is line up in a good way to start the battle with the british coming in and the danes waiting in line, and the just some scenery that look like old cophagen in the distance More Painting form the battle And a little video abourt the battle - Nelsons hardest battle https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6AU6gIW0q8 Sorry for bad spelling, my enlish nor danish in not so good. Hope you will consider this suggention Great work so far!
-
Just a short question, why is there little to no material about detailed cannon firing effects and impacts on different surfaces? I have read a book from a Dutch author who describes this in good detail, but its a book so you miss the visualization. Also there is nothing about shell impact. Just a link for people who can read Dutch: http://issuu.com/otteblom/docs/boektest So do you guys have some links to any useful material? Ps. In the famous paintings of Willem van de Velde de Oude you can see a lot of detail in smoke and damage. How far is NA planning to go with damage smoke and water?
-
I was wondering about cannon customization. Back then, not all ships of the same class carried the same kind of armament, some ships took long range cannons, others took carronades and 16lb cannons. It depended mostly on cease fire periods, war time, the purpose of the ship, etc. In my opinion, enabling armament customization, between certain parameters for balancing purposes, would add to the gameplay. Unlike Potbs, you cannot be sure what you will face, since every player can have a different setup. This would add variety to the game! Have a good day. P.S: Keep up the great work devs!
- 10 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- cannons
- armament customization
- (and 2 more)
-
1. History I've been reading something about how cannons were managed. The captain orders were about: - what type of cannonballs to load and where to shoot - when the batteries would be fired "Load round shots, double charge, shoot at tack, right to steerage" The master gunner orders were about: - the distance - the list "Load round shots, double charge, shoot at tack, point at 300m, no list, right to steerage" The piece chiefs actions were about (depending on the previous informations, the wind, the relative motion predictions): - the azimuth (with the carriage tackles) - the backsight adjustment (with a handspike lever and a focus wedge) Then the piece chiefs had to decide when to shoot exactly. At long ranges they had to choose the right moment depending on the ships actual positions, the roll and the pitch. Thus pieces weren't always fired at the same time. 2. Features overview That brings us to ask how aiming should be represented, from the captain to the piece chief. I think a fully realistic system wouldn't work well, but if "skill" has to be needed to aim, a PotBS system should be complexified. PotBS had a system that although simple was effective: 3 general types of ammo (sails shots, hull shots, crew shots), 2 types of zone (sails or hull). Depending on the ammo type, the aiming zone was automatically detected. A ship had different defense values for the sails and the hull, and the shooter had accuracy (to counter distance) and target tracking (to counter speed and relative motion). Whatever the zone that was hit, each ammo type featured a % of damage to sails, hull or crew. The number of cannons destroyed was proportional to the hull damage. Introducing aiming with a damage system that isn't fully realistic seems difficult (no full ballistic system). Basically, the potential parameters are: - the initial propulsion of the balls - the speed and deceleration of the balls - the weight of the balls - distance - wind direction and its force - list - roll and pitch And the possible player actions: - powder charge - cannonballs type - azimuth with its limitations - backsight adjustment with its limitations - when to shoot a cannon individually Ranges can be separated: - long range where the balls deflection due to gravity and wind affect the impact zone - mid range where the balls deflection is negligible - short range where aiming at the rigging becomes impossible, or all the cannons of a battery can't shoot at the same point And features can be: - skipped because requiring too much bandwidth - coded because adding to the gameplay - skipped because not interesting for players - driven by players 3. Possible tools I'm not a coding expert, but to avoid a full ballistic system, shortcuts have to be found. A ship is 2 cubes. One for the sails, one for the hull. Each cannon emplacement is known on the hull cube. Depending on the maximum horizontal and vertical orientations of each cannon, the game knows if a cannon has the possibility to shoot somewhere. The possible impact zone of a broadside is like a cube but with bigger edges at distance. The target is a point. If some of the cannons of a battery can shoot at the point, the theorical impact zone is a point. If only some of the selected batteries can shoot at the point, the theorical impact zone is a vertical line (all the remaining batteries pointing as close as possible to the point). The player can choose to shoot all the batteries or only those that can shoot at the point. The real impact zone is an ellipse, but only one trajectory is calculated, and then the number of hits on a ship cube depends on other parameters than the ballistic curve of each shot (like accuracy). 4. A possible shooting system I'm not a supporter of a special realistic aiming view, because it would only add to the immersion feeling, but would complicate the cannons management and break realism with no tactical gameplay advantage. Not to mention the cannons were actually differently placed in lenght and height. Also it's better to see the batteries being fired from distance (for movie feeling). I'd rather see an intuitive system: a player selects a broadside, a battery or multiple batteries, and the azimuth arcs would be shown on the screen. When the player puts his mouse somewhere, the cursor indicates the batteries that can hit the point. The targeted point could be on the sea, or anywhere on the cubes of a ship. That point would represent where the balls would hit if the shots were instant and direct. If needed (i.e. at longer ranges), the player would have to apply an azimuth correction (directly with the cursor) and a height correction (a "vertical angle" scheme would appear when holding the mouse button or using the mouse roll). However, the height correction wouldn't represent the backsight adjustment, but the overall correction that each piece chief would apply. There would be notches rather than angles. Such system would feature: - skipped because requiring too much bandwidth: full ballistic system - coded because adding to gameplay: the initial propulsion of one ball, the speed and deceleration of one ball, the weight of one ball, wind direction and its force, distance, list (as a lean of the target cubes) - skipped because not interesting for players: list (as a shooting parameter), roll and pitch, precise backsight adjustment, when to shoot a cannon individually - driven by players: powder charge, cannonballs type, azimuth, overall height adjustment Also when zooming in, the view would almost be an aiming view. The accuracy value (driving the number of actual hits) could vary depending on many parameters such as distance, crew skill...
