Teamski Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 This is going to change everything! I can see a bunch of stuck ships on the shore line. Should be hilarious! -Ski 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Loe Posted March 30, 2016 Author Share Posted March 30, 2016 This is going to change everything! I can see a bunch of stuck ships on the shore line. Should be hilarious! -Ski No more running. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doschichis Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 No more running.more ramming maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendrik die Seevaarder Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) Extremely pretty screenshots That looks amazing! One question though : will ships run-aground with the first "land battle" patch, or will it be like how OW is currently (i.e ship comes to a complete stop with no damage inflicted near shallow water until you sail into deeper water)? Edit : oops already been asked. Should've refreshed the thread before posting >< Edited March 30, 2016 by Hendrik die Seevaarder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 That looks amazing! One question though : will ships run-aground with the first "land battle" patch, or will it be like how OW is currently (i.e ship comes to a complete stop with no damage inflicted near shallow water until you sail into deeper water)? Edit : oops already been asked. Should've refreshed the thread before posting >< We are not sure about realistic damage yet and detailed depths. Main reason - detailed collisions eat a lot of FPS. Better shallows/depths would only be possible if we cut down the battle size. But who knows. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Current OW implementation of shallows would be sufficient (restrictions on turning in place in battle instance would make it more meaningful and realistic in and of itself with no need for more complex implementation). However, if OW shallows are ignored in battle instances, it will severely limit the potential for added variety in gameplay with shallow-draft ships. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I'd like to see the numbers. Certain changes might be warranted (18-pdr and 12-pdr crew sizes were often the same). I was just about to mount 12-pdrs on an Essex because I'm under-ranked. Current numbers!!! (Click to view) I'll add the numbers for Carronades today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamz Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Is this the date of the server map/asset reset too? Or was that for land-in-port-battles which is later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfimp Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 We are not sure about realistic damage yet and detailed depths. Main reason - detailed collisions eat a lot of FPS. Better shallows/depths would only be possible if we cut down the battle size. But who knows. As long as it's not possible to sail through the land, and there is some sort of consequence for running to the land (i.e. loss of speed, etc.), I don't think a whole lot of detail is required to achieve the desired effect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Current numbers!!! (Click to view) I'll add the numbers for Carronades today. Penetration numbers are outdated and were replaced by cannon class vs armor class when damage 4.0 was implemented in game. you probably based them on the sea trials 1 xml s which still exist in game but does not work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Really surprised that the 42lber isn't that much better than the 24lber with the longer load time.....interesting. -Ski Current numbers!!! (Click to view) I'll add the numbers for Carronades today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Really surprised that the 42lber isn't that much better than the 24lber with the longer load time.....interesting. -Ski 42lb is heavier than 24lb - but the difference in diameter is a lot smaller its 16.9cm vs 14.1cm +/- But in game 42lb will do more damage on average because it penetrates better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Penetration numbers are outdated and were replaced by cannon class vs armor class when damage 4.0 was implemented in game. you probably based them on the sea trials 1 xml s which still exist in game but does not work. do more damage on average because it penetrates better I found the penetration values in the same XML as the Crew Requirements which is why i thought they were up to date. I'll remove the penetration values from my spreadsheet now, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Rice Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taralin Snow Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I seem to recall reading that Camp Du Roy would go back to being a Free Town with the next content patch (then at the next port reset it will go back to being neutral again). So that change is coming too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I seem to recall reading that Camp Du Roy would go back to being a Free Town with the next content patch (then at the next port reset it will go back to being neutral again). So that change is coming too? it requires a rebuild of all ports database so the answer is maybe next content patch definitely during the port reset some time later. Will try hard. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 We are not sure about realistic damage yet and detailed depths. Main reason - detailed collisions eat a lot of FPS. Better shallows/depths would only be possible if we cut down the battle size. But who knows. I don't think anyone is expecting heightmaps. A two-dimensional line segment can serve as a perfectly adequate sandbar. A pyramid is an underwater rock. Does this constitute detailed collisions? What's the performance hit for the five martello towers in PBs? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvenski Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 The shallows mechanic in the OW isn't engaging or in-depth (no pun intended); it's just annoying. I sincerely hope in-battle shallows have more to them. Also, how detailed do collisions need to be? As far as visuals go, you wouldn't need to see a ship disintegrate on the rocks: if the computer is already rendering the coast, the water, and the ships, how much more does it really need to do in order for there to be believable-looking instances of ships running up on sandbars and getting stuck, or hitting rocks/reefs (receiving a lot of damage and leaks) and sinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
312_JS Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 We are not sure about realistic damage yet and detailed depths. Main reason - detailed collisions eat a lot of FPS. Better shallows/depths would only be possible if we cut down the battle size. But who knows. Please make it happen somehow. I have faith in your team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeRuyter Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I am all for having specific ship drafts and a height map, etc., but if that is too FPS/coding intensive let's at least have more granularity to the deep/shallow system now that we will have land in battles! The shallows should act more like the areas around the Bahamas - smaller ships can sail into it but not larger ones. We should have several gradations of shallows so certain areas can be only entered by the small fore and aft ships and some by the 6th rates and smaller frigates, etc. Adds more strategy to PB when your SOL can't sail straight up to the fort and under its' guns to blast with impunity! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snackbar Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) it looks awesome Edited March 31, 2016 by snackbar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfimp Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 One question based on a closer review of these screenshots: Will the wind direction relative to the land at the moment the battle is instantiated be taken into account? In all the screenshots above, I see the wind is running parallel to the coastline and (if I'm reading it correctly) at one point blowing offshore. Is there the possibility of the wind blowing onshore, i.e. creating a lee shore danger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
312_JS Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 One question based on a closer review of these screenshots: Will the wind direction relative to the land at the moment the battle is instantiated be taken into account? In all the screenshots above, I see the wind is running parallel to the coastline and (if I'm reading it correctly) at one point blowing offshore. Is there the possibility of the wind blowing onshore, i.e. creating a lee shore danger? It's actually perpendicular, not parallel. I'm sure the wind in Battle will be the same as in OW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porpoise Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 I must thank to the admin for posting awesome screenshots. Land in the battles will bring completely new experience to the game. I am also pleased with the speed of adding new ships to the game. Two per month seems ok. I would only like to see more big frigates with 24 pounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfimp Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 It's actually perpendicular, not parallel. I'm sure the wind in Battle will be the same as in OW. First screenshot shows the wind running parallel. Second two screenshots show it blowing offshore (perpendicular), if I'm not mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts