Minor port battle changes next patch

[LeBoiteux]

So get trolled by cutters in the only type of port battle ships of the line can actually get in, yeah that sounds fun.

 

On the other hand, if wind strength is implemented, any ship class might have its importance in a deep water PB.

See http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/13614-ship-role-comparisons-of-vessels-and-wind-strength/

[Uhgtred]

what will you use a firstrate for if this patch comes out? they are totally useless then. i like the idea of havin 3 levels. but there have to be MUCH more ports you can fight in with the big ships

[la Touche-Treville]

This isn't a minor change but a major well awaited one!

Love the cap zone idea as long as they are equally distant from attackers and defenders. This will introduce a whole new strategy, a greater variety of ships etc...

Can't wait to test this.

 

However the port reset makes me nervous. Is there a list of what ports will fall back to their original nation? I have ships parked all over the place and would like to see well in advance of this patch, what ports my nation is going to lose so that I can anticipate.

Thank you

[Xaelendra]

isnt that the whole porpose?

 

To give frigates a place in PBs? ause right now its go big or go home.

1st rate only fleets are not rare..

 

Well, I don't think that frigates have a place in PB. From Renommée to Constitution, this is fast ships which are perfect for hunting and tagging in OW. This is how they are efficient, like no ship of the line can be. Perhaps frigates don't have a place in PB, but they definitely have one in the game.

 

3rd rates in the other hand... they are no hunting ships, and they are not strong enough for PB now that 1st rate only fleet aren't rare. Bellona and 3rd rate are the new bastard ships according to my opinion. Make them available in normal deep water could give them a new usefulness.

 

 

PS: Sorry for my poor english.

[Ponci]

Love these ideas. It takes away from "lower levels" being left out of the port battles, puts less emphasis on just the big guys AND stops people from moving massive fleets closer and closer, giving other countries little chances of defense. 

 

The idea of the 3 capture zones and removing BR as a necessary issue is a great idea too. It leaves the battles at that, battles, and not only about who showed up and ran around with the bigger ships. 

 

I think this will take a huge emphasis away from the costs of boat making and acquisition from those who aren't leveled up. It also means those of us with bigger ships (that paid dearly for them in time and gold), can stress less about just keeping them for show, and use them when needed.

 

But just to clarify - "Regional Capitals AND Capitals" will both be able to take the bigger ships, correct? 

 

Thanks!

[Zisme]

Request: Please change outposts docks accordingly and start re-positioning your forces 

 

Where am I to move ships to? I have 15-20 ships spread out. Do I move them to free ports? My main Home one is alrady 5/5..

[Ledinis]

Although an attempt of getting a bigger diversity of ships into the actual meta is commendable, do you actually believe that limitation like that will change much ? It will just go from a power creep of Santisimas to a power creep of Ingermanlands. I really hope you guys come up with a crafting system that would make higher tier ships rarer to acquire and thus making all of them an asset to your nation instead of implementing 100 new ships whilst only 3-4 of those are used. 

 

As for the port battles themselves i would much rather see a system where the attacker needs to assault the actual fort. Like batter it to an actual pulp until all of the forts defenses are down and then send troops to conquer it via a group boarding operation, not a copy of world of warships domination mode, with a fort in the background that is there just for the looks.

[Captain]

Instead of a full 25 1st fleet in the actual port battle, we will then see a full 25 1st fleet OUSTIDE the harbour, waiting to intercept 25 Connies oder Ingermanlands ...

 

Good! 1st rates are expensive its good to get more use out of them. 

[captain_andrey]

I disagree with any artificial mechanic to limit ship sizes in battle. There should be tactical reason to bring smaller ships eg shallow capture point, low winds or capture point that is significantly upwind from starting position.

Edited May 4, 2016 by captain_andrey

[Burca]

This is making the 3rd rate quite useless. She can't go to the mid tier not to the top. Maybe OW but there the Consties are much better.

I've read many times that 80% of the ships in the big battles were 3rd rates but I guess it won't happen here.

 

I do undertand what the purpose of this is but I think you should rather come up with a system where there is a cap for each type of ship or maximize the battle rating. I know it's complicated but yea, ppl will always try to bring the biggest ship they can. Wouldn't you?

 

Or capturing a port would build up from several battles which have ship type limitation. The winning side of these battles would gain important advantages for the main battle like less/more (powerful?) towers for the defenders, better wind, AI help, more spot, whatever. Or simply best of 3. If you win 2 of these battles then the port is yours. (ofc gathering 75 ppl could be problematic for small nations but here comes the diplomacy or the battles should not happen at the same time)

[Quineloe]

My biggest concern is that this will make 3rd and 2nd rates completely obsolete for port battles. If you only need your first rates for Regional capitals, it will become so much easier to maintain a fleet of 25 of them.

At least occasionally you only have 50% of a PB consisting of first rates at the moment (Mugeres today for example).

That PB will be fought with 25 4th rates from this patch onwards. Lowers the entry barrier drastically for normal deep water ports, which is good.

Isnt it gonna be very easy to screen/defend outside a port when its not deep water?

If you gather a frigate fleet to attack a port, can't the defense just gather up a SoL fleet and reck the frigate fleet?

Constitutions just sail away from first rates.

Good! 1st rates are expensive its good to get more use out of them. 

 

First rates are not expensive. They cost increase is linear. If anything, they're pretty good on armor and firepower compared to their cost, the only downside is 1 durability. Which, as we know now, isn't much of a downside, as repeatedly sinking first rates did not deter anyone from using them anyways.

[admin]

This is making the 3rd rate quite useless. She can't go to the mid tier not to the top. Maybe OW but there the Consties are much better.

 

 

what is their use now?

[BallsOfSteel]

Good to see that those without first and second rates actually can play in port battles, the big ships will see plenty of use in fleet missions at the commodore and Rear Admiral anyway, I got 3000 xp and 155000 gold from a single mission last night in a Bellona alone and we were up against plenty of first and second rates..

 

Port battles will still be about zone protection and expansion and really provide an environment where you can certainly participate in a lesser ship and still influence the outcome especially with zone capture ( Read cutter )

[Hugo van Grojt]

what is their use now?

 

The "no more captured 3rd Rate" patch is not out for very long - but we see a war of attrition mechanic working already (slowly but surely). As wars become more protracted, more 1st Rates will be lost than can be replaced by a nation's labour hour pool. In the medium to long term, we would therefore see more mixed fleets as Santissimas become more scarce for some nations.

 

In the current game system, I strongly believe that the 3rd Rate has a place. We just haven't played the war economy game long enough to see the effects.

 

I would also suggest to make 3rd Rates usable in normal deep water PBs - there should be some tactical reasons, however, to also bring 5-10 Frigates and Mortar Brigs to the fight for tactical maneuverability on the battlefield. A line of Constitutions / Ingermanlands only does not sound sexy and very immersive to me.

 

Just the 2 Cents of a Bellona-lover ...

 

Sincerely Yours,

 

Hugo van Grojt

[Destraex]

Just for the record I think blocking out the ships that historically blockaded the ports is a bad idea.

 

Instead I would go for a co-operative approach that involved:

 

a) For each battle making a minimum ratio of ship types that was a little dynamic and having objectives for them directly related to capturing a port. 

 

 

Maximum of 4 (3rd rate and above)

Attacker: SOL objective - Smash all defences - general engagement including destroying non-combatant ships in harbour.

Defender: Sink all attackers. Sail out to destroy attackers supply ships so that the blockade can be broken. If supply ships are destroyed because they are left unguarded the attackers auto lose because their moral is considered broken and the invasion force cannot be sustained by sea.

 

Minimum of 4 (frigates) - 2 frigates must be chosen to specifically ferry marines and 2 to fight.

Attacker: Frigate objective - Land main troop invasion compliment & engage the enemy. 50% of frigates must land troops before they are destroyed.

Defender: Sink all attackers. Sail out to destroy attackers supply ships so that the blockade can be broken. If supply ships are destroyed because they are left unguarded the attackers auto lose because their moral is considered broken and the invasion force cannot be sustained by sea.

 

Minimum of 4 (below mercury) - 2 small ships must be chosen to specifically carry the landing party and 2 to fight.

Attacker: Small Ship Objective - traverse shallow water to clear obstacles and determine intelligence. Such as how many ships and troops are docked and what the defences are further inland. Land special raiding parties onto shallow water defences to neutralise a FORT. Signal the fleet and all ships to proceed. Pickup survivors and prisoners. Transfer admirals flag if flagship sunk.

Defender: Sink all attackers. Sail out to destroy attackers supply ships so that the blockade can be broken. If supply ships are destroyed because they are left unguarded the attackers auto lose because their moral is considered broken and the invasion force cannot be sustained by sea.

[CaptVonGunn]

 I like it all... The only thing I think should be added to test is a new loot system....  If you are going to award us hundreds of 1 kind of resource.. ship it to our nearest Warehouse... Because giving us 400 Compass Wood when we do a battle in a ship with 100 cargo is just silly. If you have won the battle you use local trade ships or cargo ships the fleet brought to take it home(in a real battle),,,  

[Blackjack McGee]

Limiting ships to one or two classes in a port battle is not a good idea.  We need variety in the port battle that includes both mid and higher level ships.  Most naval battle fleets included numerous smaller ships along with the larger ships.  This idea has some merit but all in all it really seems to limit the port battle rather than expand it.

[Bigvalco]

 I personally liked the idea of a BR limit on battles, so we can mix and match to equal the max limit. You could just make it a different max limit on low, mid, and high tier port battles. That way we can get a good mix rather than just bringing the best possible ship for the tier.

[BallsOfSteel]

Actually a total BR limit would make it up to the attacker, and the defencder to choose what they take onto battle, choose carefully.

[Destraex]

balls of steel. People are always going to turn up in their best ship allowed unless its not possible to win with those ships.

[Nalyd]

Yup,

A BR limit is the easiest way to start seeing more diversity of ships in a port battle while putting the strategic aspect of a fleet composition into the hands of the players.

The main point of bringing less powerful/smaller ships is to fight quality with number, sadly this strategy is null and void with the current game mechanics.

 

As long as the game will allow players to bring whatever they want in a port battle within the limit of 25 ships. Don't expect people to use anything but the best ship allowed since there is no benefit to sail weaker ships.

You'd think that the system of victory point earned based on the BR of a ship would help towards this issue, but it won't. Because a fleet of 25 Santissima will obviously snowball the heck out of a fleet of 25 3rd rate before and you'll lose all your fleet of 3rd rate before you could even sink more than 3 Santi in front of you due to sheer firepower difference.

 

-The new Port Battle "king of the hills" is great, because it will actually force people to fight instead of running around in circle for 1h30 to conserve a BR difference under *2.

-Dividing the ports in 3 distinct size is also a good call. This will group ships of "equivalent power" together and will allow more diversity.

 

But adding a BR limit would make those 2 points even better.

I want players to be able to make their own strategy :

-Either having a big fleet of weaker ships to emphasize control over the terrain for the capture points,

-Or having a small fleet of strong ships to emphasize the firepower in a direct encounter to gain victory points over a fight.

-Or having a balanced fleet with a great variety of ship.

 

What I don't want is to keep the current system where the only viable strategy is to bring a big fleet of the strongest ship allowed. Not only does this gets old real fast because you keep seing/fighting/sailing the same damn ship all the time, but because it also makes you wonder why the dev team even bother modeling dozens of ships if we are just going to see like 4 of them for the great majority of the time.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Nalyd

[Bommel]

Request: Please change outposts docks accordingly and start re-positioning your forces 

 

Where am I to move ships to? I have 15-20 ships spread out. Do I move them to free ports? My main Home one is alrady 5/5..

I would like to have an answer to that question too, do we need to store our ships in freeports and national capital before the patch lands?

[Cpt Blackthorne]

This is how PBs should be set up, imo, with 1 or more of the capture circles being shallow, based on whether the port is a shallow or deep port. Maybe even making ports be 3 levels of depth, and the 3 capture points being each depth...

 

[la Touche-Treville]

This is how PBs should be set up, imo, with 1 or more of the capture circles being shallow, based on whether the port is a shallow or deep port. Maybe even making ports be 3 levels of depth, and the 3 capture points being each depth...

 

This is not what it should look like because the cap zones (victory points) are directly behind the defender. So defender gains precious minutes and therefore victory points totally uncontested at the start of the battle by placing 3 fast frigates on each of these zones.

 

Before the attacker get's a chance to move in, the defender has already accumulated a lot of victory points.

 

Cap zones have to be equidistant from both attacking and defending parties in order to preserve balance.

[Eishen]

This is not what it should look like because the cap zones (victory points) are directly behind the defender. So defender gains precious minutes and therefore victory points totally uncontested at the start of the battle by placing 3 fast frigates on each of these zones.

 

Before the attacker get's a chance to move in, the defender has already accumulated a lot of victory points.

 

Cap zones have to be equidistant from both attacking and defending parties in order to preserve balance.

 

Strongly disagree, defense must have an advantage. the points , or at least two of them should be on his side. PB must not be balanced, is deefenders´s port for something

 

On the other side I feel -test will probe if it is right- hat cap zones points would be better fixed amounts that are included on your total for as long that you control it, but do not "grow" as time pass.