Minor port battle changes next patch

[Nalyd]

It will not work because battles are not DOTA matches and are not pre arranged.

Letting the fleet composition into the hands of players for an important battle is a recipe for disaster - ask any clan

If you don't control entry into PB your composition will be screwed up by a couple of random joiners. Its already happening but it will become worse if there are limits

 

Letting the fleet composition into the hands of "EVERY players" is a recipe for disaster. It's like allowing every single grunt inside the commander's tent to talk strategy which is not what I want.

A port battle by its very nature is something started by an already organized group of players which obviously have a leader taking command for this battle.

Just check any port battle video out there. You'll mostly hear 1 guy talking during almost all the video while everybody else listen or gives concise info.

 

You said it yourself, "If you don't control entry into PB your composition will be screwed up".

 

Then allow the flag's holder, highest ranked player (talking about the political rank), the one who initiated the battle, or through a vote to decide who should "lead" the fight etc. To see who's present with what ship and to decide who gets in the fight and in which position (front/middle/rear) with a drag and drop system during the 5-10min of preparation, add a counter telling you how many BR your fleet has and how many you can have at most and voilà.

 

You already established that random players doing whatever they want without caring about others and the general plans are a nuisance. Fleshing them out so they don't grief all the other players (be it intentionally or not which will also avoid the new player bashing trend) and/or forcing them to get involved into the general politic of a nation in order to participate is a good idea.

 

And to make the parallel with DOTA, in a tournament

About the pre arranged nature of a port battle, I would argue that having to tell which port you're going to attack 2-3 days beforehand like suggested in your port battle/war post is the very definition of something "pre-arranged".

Just like in DOTA, you know which team you are going to confront many weeks before the actual battle (replace team with nation for NA), and you don't know which is the composition of the enemy team before the last minute, which is also the case in Naval Action.

If we are to compare the Port battles in NA with a DOTA game, i would say that they are not that distant to each others and actually share quite a bunch of similarities.

 

If the only reason to why this BR limit system won't work is because random players can grief it (again, intentionally or not). Do something about this issue (I gave a suggestion to how above) THEN add the BR limit.

And since this "random players grieving a large group" is already happening, you'll have to deal with it sooner or later anyway if you don't want clans/group of players to get pissed over individuals

 

BR limiter etc. will work in tournaments and events. But not in OW port battles where the goal of your group or nation is to destroy enemy by bringing a superior force (in skill or in guns or in both).

 

Nothing prohibit the attackers to bring a fleet of 50+ players to guarantee that 25 of them will manage to go through the defensive fleet and get in the port battle. In fact, it's already the case with screening fleets happening on on both side.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Nalyd

[Zisme]

 

please read the notes carefully

• We said captains should reposition their ships because lineships will only be accepted in port battles for regional capitals. There is no reason to hold your lineship fleet in cities that have no RC around them. Thats just a friendly warning to make your life easier.
• We also said that nations will lose ports because mechanics are new. Not because ports change or something.

 

Thank you for replying and expanding. it makes sense that you are suggesting we repositions ships better for the coming patch. 

[Guest]

I sincere hope that orize money (xp and gold) will no longer given to them only who did the most damage to enemy ships. This must be given more equally to all captains, maybe according to their rank. Could be that you are sitting in a Reno instead of a Santi because a fast ship will be needed for capping areas. Would be a shame if only captains with big boats would be honoured.

[OTMatt]

True. The point of the open world is to be creative and take whatever ships you want... but port battles are more set piece. Perhaps if the open world indicated who was on the way and what slot was reserved for them ahead of time (if they can get within a particular radius to reserve the slot)? So you could see the slots filling up and who was bringing a frigate (clans will have this covered in detail pre-battle anyways) if you hovered over the port info on the map. Combine that with my earlier suggestion for SOL, frigate and small ship objectives and roles... maybe even have a few blockade runner battles around the port battle for those that miss out... while the next battle is filling for the ports over the 24hr port battle window.

 

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.

 

What do you think of this idea.

 

http://i.imgur.com/Jzavwsh.png

 

BR might not even matter if ships can enter and leave various rooms. Instead its more of a multihour siege that requires goals to be accomplished and various types of ships to work together.

[Quineloe]

A start to get balance back into 3rd 2nd and 1st rates would be a good idea, not artificial limitations.

 

Issue #1

First Rates not only have considerably more firepower than third rates, they also have significantly more armor. In POBS, the difference was fairly minor, IIRC the Valiant came with 1940 armor, the Reason with 2100 armor and Prince only had 2200 armor.

Here, a Victory has an armor advantage of 4k over a third rate, more than 50% more armor! Why? That means not only are First rates a lot better at sinking ships than third rates, they're also a lot harder to sink, which puts the durability advantage into perspective. Is 3 dura really that much better than 1, if you're far more likely to lose your ship? I've never seen a first rate get completely demolished at range in a short time. I've seen first rates escape what people thought was certain death, because 25% repair on that armor is a lot of hitpoints. Enough to limp out of line and click out, or even stay in and provide BR at a distance.

 

Issue #2

the pricing is fairly linear. If you have a third rate ready, you have 2/3 of a Victory. In POBS, a third rate was ten times as expensive as a fourth rate, and a first rate was five times as expensive as that third rate.

 

POBS surely did many things very wrong, but the first rates entering the game were far from as numerous as we're seeing here. IIRC, 3 months into the game, ie where we are now, sometimes you saw a few second rates in PBs.

 

I would change both of this. Pull them closer together in terms of combat strength. Raise armor on third rates to 9000, on second rates to 10000, and make it much cheaper to maintain third rates by raising their durabilities to 5. On top of that, raise the cost of first rates a good bit by adding more Furnishings, Knees and other hull parts.  How is it a Renommee needs 16 Furnishings, and a Victory 5? Look at the transom of the Victory. That is one huge, gaudy thing.

If we're getting to the point where a full fleet of 25 third rates can engage a full fleet of 25 first rates and come out ahead if they sink 3-4 of them while losing 20 ships themselves, the problem might regulate itself to the point where fleets would rather mix first rates with more expendable ships so they have ships to sacrifice when their first rates get into trouble.

As it is right now, 25 third vs 25 first rates is most likely to be a one-sided slaughter with maybe 1 first rate sunk, which is far less of an economic setback than even 12 third rates.

[DeRuyter]

Keep in mind that this is just the first part or patch to series of developments. The dynamic will change once land gets in to PB and again with the RvR system. So we may see all Connie/Inger fleets for regular deep PB - that will change as the system evolves.

 

Looking forward to testing the Cap zone system (a bit like a WT battle - will there be giant letters hovering over the sea!?!).

[oldcrankyman]

I think that the BR limit is the best solution to the ship size problem.  The proposed system is just making 3 levels instead of 2, so isn't any sort of fundamental change.  

[victor]

One question for the Admins: ships docked in free towns will be safe from port wipe (if any)?

Edited May 5, 2016 by victor

[Paint]

Last Port Battle i participated a dutch fleet was attacking a pirate harbor so we build a defence fleet and even if the dutch got bigger BR - more First Rates- they just sailed away to keep us busy without the intention to capture the Port.

In the End, the Circle of Death forced them to get in range, so we where able to sunk 6 First Rates in the last 15 Minutes. Without that Circle they will stay out of range 90 Minutes and no fight happens at all.

 

If the Attacker dont want to fight he must be punished in some way if he dont leaves (its ok to leave if you see you losses will be too high, but just stay out of range to bound the defender, will kill the fun and i stopped playing that day like many other Pirates in the last weeks)

 

So Defender should also be able to win the fight by gaining Victory Points

You obviously didnt understand. You can also get points by capping. So if the Enemy sails away take all the zones and Easy.

[Bigvalco]

Yes and it is better than to only have First rates. .

Captains who deny that - do not understand that it has already happened: Deep water port battles consist of 2 ships already. Santisima Trindiad and Victory (but mostly santisima trinidad). 

 

 Well the solution to only having 25 santi fleets is now going to be... 25 ingermanland fleet? It's a little bit better, but I feel like it is more of the same.

 

It will not work because battles are not DOTA matches and are not pre arranged.

Letting the fleet composition into the hands of players for an important battle is a recipe for disaster - ask any clan

If you don't control entry into PB your composition will be screwed up by a couple of random joiners. Its already happening but it will become worse if there are limits

 

 I don't really understand the argument being presented against a BR limit... If we use the system that is being proposed of what size ships for certain ports and then also add a BR limit, then I don't see a problem. 

With a BR limit there will be a mix of ships or there will be a limited number of the best ships. Without a BR limit, then all we have is 25 of the best ships for that tier. 

 

 The problem of random joiners is already a threat and will remain with the new system so I don't understand that as being an argument against a BR limit. 

 

 I'm down for testing whatever is coming, but I feel like this change will just be more of the same without a BR limit to help mix up the ships that enter the battle. I personally don't want the fix for the 25 santissima fleets being turned into a battle of who can make the best ingermanland fleets... Let's get some more variety! 

Edited May 5, 2016 by Bigvalco

[Destraex]

as long as its not ahistorical. Your first suggestion sounds like it may be?

A start to get balance back into 3rd 2nd and 1st rates would be a good idea, not artificial limitations.

 

Issue #1

First Rates not only have considerably more firepower than third rates, they also have significantly more armor. In POBS, the difference was fairly minor, IIRC the Valiant came with 1940 armor, the Reason with 2100 armor and Prince only had 2200 armor.

Here, a Victory has an armor advantage of 4k over a third rate, more than 50% more armor! Why? That means not only are First rates a lot better at sinking ships than third rates, they're also a lot harder to sink, which puts the durability advantage into perspective. Is 3 dura really that much better than 1, if you're far more likely to lose your ship? I've never seen a first rate get completely demolished at range in a short time. I've seen first rates escape what people thought was certain death, because 25% repair on that armor is a lot of hitpoints. Enough to limp out of line and click out, or even stay in and provide BR at a distance.

 

Issue #2

the pricing is fairly linear. If you have a third rate ready, you have 2/3 of a Victory. In POBS, a third rate was ten times as expensive as a fourth rate, and a first rate was five times as expensive as that third rate.

 

POBS surely did many things very wrong, but the first rates entering the game were far from as numerous as we're seeing here. IIRC, 3 months into the game, ie where we are now, sometimes you saw a few second rates in PBs.

 

I would change both of this. Pull them closer together in terms of combat strength. Raise armor on third rates to 9000, on second rates to 10000, and make it much cheaper to maintain third rates by raising their durabilities to 5. On top of that, raise the cost of first rates a good bit by adding more Furnishings, Knees and other hull parts.  How is it a Renommee needs 16 Furnishings, and a Victory 5? Look at the transom of the Victory. That is one huge, gaudy thing.

If we're getting to the point where a full fleet of 25 third rates can engage a full fleet of 25 first rates and come out ahead if they sink 3-4 of them while losing 20 ships themselves, the problem might regulate itself to the point where fleets would rather mix first rates with more expendable ships so they have ships to sacrifice when their first rates get into trouble.

As it is right now, 25 third vs 25 first rates is most likely to be a one-sided slaughter with maybe 1 first rate sunk, which is far less of an economic setback than even 12 third rates.

[captain_andrey]

Yes and it is better than to only have First rates. .

Captains who deny that - do not understand that it has already happened: Deep water port battles consist of 2 ships already. Santisima Trindiad and Victory (but mostly santisima trinidad).

Well that is just not true and if you really beleive what you are saying here then you are making game mechanic changes based on false information. If your nation or clan only plans to take one port in the time slot then sure they bring their best ships. Most major offensives would involve multiple attacks and screening battles where lower rate ships are very well used. If you want frigates to be viable in the port battle itself then make them actually viable instead of forcing people to sail ships they dont want to sail. On top of this 4rth rates are currently disposable ships with connies being aquireable from the ai shop. The scafters are being shafted again. Why would anyone use crafted ships costing 4 high level notes when you can have virtually free ones. This will be disposable 3rd rate spam all over again only these ships will have 4 dura.

[Destraex]

RO is not an open world game. it will not work here

You sailed your 2nd rate to a port through enemy thorns. Then you enter the battle room and given a cutter?

 

Whats the point of the OW then. RO is a lobby based shooter. You cant even choose a class if your favorite class was taken and have to run with the Kar or Mosin

 

BR limiter etc. will work in tournaments and events. But not in OW port battles where the goal of your group or nation is to destroy enemy by bringing a superior force (in skill or in guns or in both).

You cannot change ship when you get there. You just have to hope or have planned to have the correct amount of ships when you arrive and also have some sort of system where the flag purchaser can choose his clan members to get first slots. It can be a flexible ratio as well. Just capping the ratio of each ship not necessarily having a perfect slot for each player.

[Destraex]

What do you think of this idea.

 

http://i.imgur.com/Jzavwsh.png

 

BR might not even matter if ships can enter and leave various rooms. Instead its more of a multihour siege that requires goals to be accomplished and various types of ships to work together.

 

I like it! Especially being able to spawn from the open world to the different battle areas. 

But yes only some ship types should be able to carry troops. Frigates that were gutted and merchants were common. While cutters and small ships could ferry them ashore. At least in the regional capital battles. I think roles should be ship type related. 

P.S. Free ships should also be banned from port battles as an anti-griefing measure?

 

It's like crafting... this port requires X ship transports + X frigates min to enable objective completion.. before purchasing flag you are told know this.

 

Combine your map below with my concepts and with some refinement it could be a very good system:

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.

[Arsilon]

There are ways you can enable more effective BR limits.  Some ideas:

 

• Based on the harbor type, size of city, terrain etc. preset distribution of ships for the battle that would be known ahead of time just like we know now what the overall limits are.  Instead of it being Cerberus through 4th rate it could be 5-10 5th rates, 3-8 4th rates, 1-3 2nd rates, 1-2 first rates
• You could have the lord protector set not only the window but also the battle type required to take the port using same type of limits above.
• Using these same type of limits you could actually have the attack fleet form before the attack is launched rather than click in once they get to the port itself.  Therefore any ships lost along the way would be lost for the battle too making the Open Sea more interesting and having a direct impact on the port battle since you are not just hunting the flag carrier but also the actual attack fleet as well.  Make attacking a port really require coordination not just having a speed rigged Renomee run the flag while the rest of the fleet lies in wait nearby the destination.
• You could enable water depths and channels that make it impossible for a 100% 1st rate fleet to actually succeed in taking a port.

 

These are just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are plenty of other ways to go about it.

[Musuko42]

What do you think of this idea.

 

http://i.imgur.com/Jzavwsh.png

 

BR might not even matter if ships can enter and leave various rooms. Instead its more of a multihour siege that requires goals to be accomplished and various types of ships to work together.

 

I think that looks fantastic! It'd make tactics important; the attackers and defenders will need to choose where to concentrate their forces, and events would unfold fluidly throughout the course of the action.

 

A few suggestions:

 

Make the landing zones shallow only, giving those ships a vital role, increasing ship diversity, and forcing both sides to carefully decide the composition of their fleets.

Similarly, the depth of the port entrance will vary depending on the type of port, as will the fort areas; some ports will have a mix (eg: two shallow, one deep).

Remove the need for flag purchase and flag carriers altogether; any port can be blockaded at any time, and have a countdown meter that goes up when a port is blockaded, and diminishes slowly over time. Blockade a port for long enough and it'll become open for attack. All players within that faction will get a "port is being blockaded!" notification. If you require several hours' worth of blockading to open a port, then it'll give enough time for defenders to muster. So, as an example, for every minute a port is under blockade, one point is added to the meter. When the meter hits the threshold (which can vary depending on the type of port; capitals have a higher limit, shallow lower, etc), the port becomes open to attack. But, for every minute the port stops being under blockade, or for every attacking ship that is sunk, a point is deducted from the meter.

Perhaps to count as blockaded, the areas need to contain a minimum BR of attackers, plus a minimum BR difference between attackers and defenders. So, a handful of ships would not be able to blockade a port; it'd take at least eight, say, to start the countdown, and defenders can nullify the blockade effect by having at least present at least half the BR of the attackers.

Or, perhaps, the stronger the attacking force in the blockade areas, the faster the blockade meter fills.

 

Something like that, anyway.

[Destraex]

Another half baked idea connected to earlier port battle ideas above would be. Similar to the French supplying america and wresting command of the seas on a temp basis from the english to do so and also on them blockading and forcing the surrender of was it boston?

 

• Create port battle. 
• Designate troop and AI supply convoy
• Sail to destination at port flag created from by attacker
• If attacked on the way. Any attacker or defender lost can no longer participate in the battle including the touching or helping the invasion convoy.
• So every player has one shot essentially. Simulating the actual strength of the enemy and friendly fleets in the area and disallowing multiple spawns. Forcing players to choose the moment of attack.
• Once the invasion fleet arrives the attack starts as above.
• This way it would perhaps be better to take frigates rather than slow SOLs depending on how you want to play it.

[Demonale]

What about free towns I have a base in Cabo on the PVE USA will that affect me trying to get my Santi in and out of there?

[vonKollenberg]

kind of a strange idea I just thought of:

 

Respawns during a port battle by using your durability.

 

Bringing lesser rates with more durability (respawns) could becomes a valid tactic.

[InBlack]

But it is still better than only 140+ gun creep like right now

 

Guys - get reasonable and think things through. 

• Current system only 1st rates are valid (only 2 choices in any port battle)
• New system - at least some frigates and 4th rates will be useful (2x better than old one). And it gives choice to those who hate ships of the line. And dont like sailing them.

Comments that there are only going to be constitutions and ingers in some of the battles; Yes it might happen but it is a better situation compared to today. It is making consitutions and ingers and other heavy frigates finally viable in port battles which are not fit for ships of the line because of depth. 

 

Regarding ship differences

The only way to make all 135 best angle frigates viable is to make them all 12 knots and 5000 hp

If we go for at least some historical performance people will choose the ship with most guns and speed for OW and most guns and planking for PB.

Taking WW2 analogy - what is the point to drive Pz -2 with machine gun if everyone else drives a Panther

 

The main difference in ship performance was crew and motivation related. (it is hard to manage 300+ men) and better leaders fought better even when their ship was worse. It is impossible to replicate crew management psychology and motivation without adding a football manager game and a lot of RNG removing skill (gunner fell on the blood during battle broke leg and started asking to send him back to his wife on land). 

 

I agree with all that you said, but still feel that the system could be improved to include ALL ships of the line, instead of just 1st rates in Regional Capitals and 4th Rates in the rest of the Deep Water Ports.

My proposal is actually simple:

 

Split Deep Water Ports into further categories, so my proposal would look like this:

 

1. Shallow Water Ports: As suggested by admin Up To Brig

2. Deep Water Medium Draft: As suggested by admin, up to 4th Rate ships can dock and fight PB

3. Deep Water Deep Draft: Up to 2nd or 3rd Rates. (This could be further split up but these two types fight well together so would probably be used together)

4. Regional Capitals: As suggested by admin all ships, up to 1st rate can dock and fight PB

 

I would even add the different depths to the (as it is now with the shallows water ports) to the bays of the different ports and mark them as such on the map, so that it adds another layer of strategy to the map. And so that the different ships cant physically even approach the bay's of the shallower ports. I don't know how difficult it would be to code all this, but it can't be that hard as you already have shallow water ports and seas. 

 

Thank you.

[Wyspa]

When the land comes into play I would like to see no Ship limitations based on port type, instead there should be a lot of shallow waters near certain ports with let's say just a narrow channel leading to the port. Capture zones then can be placed on those shallows so only smaller ships can get in. That way Larger ships can't get to the capture zones and it would be a task for smaller ones. 1-3 rates then could just blocade the port, firing from afar using open waters or try to attack using that narrow channel risking to be out manuvered.
Basically it should be up to players what ship they bring in, however terrain near every port should be a huge factor in choosing attack fleet composition, even to the point when attacking some ports with huge ships is just impossible. 

I think this way not only the problem of too many large ships in PB can be addressed,  but every port attack would require different tactics and would be unique experience for the players.

 

I could see a lot of variety in that... lets say we have we can have different capture zones placed in deep or shallow waters, we can have ports where SOLs can attack from affar but can't get into capture zones, or they can capture one zone when rest would be a task for smaller ships or maybe they can get to one of the zones but the channel is so narrow that they couldn't really maneuver there... a lot of things can be done just by map design. 

Edited May 6, 2016 by Wyspa

[admin]

Well that is just not true and if you really beleive what you are saying here then you are making game mechanic changes based on false information. If your nation or clan only plans to take one port in the time slot then sure they bring their best ships. Most major offensives would involve multiple attacks and screening battles where lower rate ships are very well used. If you want frigates to be viable in the port battle itself then make them actually viable instead of forcing people to sail ships they dont want to sail. On top of this 4rth rates are currently disposable ships with connies being aquireable from the ai shop. The scafters are being shafted again. Why would anyone use crafted ships costing 4 high level notes when you can have virtually free ones. This will be disposable 3rd rate spam all over again only these ships will have 4 dura.

you are talking about the outside

i am talking about the inside (once battle started)

inside the battle with all other things being equal you need 25 first rates right now to win (if both sides have equal skill)

 

and your proposal "if you want frigates to be viable then make them viable" is ridiculous and does not belong here on the forum!

I AM making them viable creating a greenhouse - space  for them where only frigates participate. You on the other hand propose NOTHING to make them viable.

 

Here is a challenge for you

Propose 3 ideas to make frigates viable in a port battle consisting of 25 first rates, without limiting the entry rights, without talking about depths and without creating additional goals done specifically for frigates (because it is not going to make them more viable it will just force people to pick frigates as they wont be able to win the PB without them. 

[admin]

What do you think of this idea.

 

http://i.imgur.com/Jzavwsh.png

 

BR might not even matter if ships can enter and leave various rooms. Instead its more of a multihour siege that requires goals to be accomplished and various types of ships to work together.

 

here is what i think of this proposal

Your idea does not describe the ? part

all ports have different harbors. where, how victory conditions,

who places markers, how this is all interconnected on servers, ai coding, routes.

the idea is only great when a. its sounds awesome b. can be implemented (the @?@ part is clear and can be done) 

 

 

simple solutions solving 80% problems are better than unfinished awesome things

your proposal is the car without wheels - impossible to implement 

we are making a 1 or 2 with a smiley face

 

thus

to make frigates viable = make some battles frigate only - simple, works, creates no confusion, gives options. 

 

also remember the general perspective guys

• 800 users participated in port battles last month
• 20000 users logged in and played

[Sir Robert Calder]

Haha, this is why I love the devs of this game.

 

shots fired.

 

To be honest frigates are very viable outside of Port Battles, inside them I really can't see how you could make them stand up against a 25 1st Rate fleet within the confines of the Age of Sail setting. Things like tackling, disabling, stunning, and other MMO status effects would be useful to put on the smaller and more nimble ships like Frigates (and give them a purpose in PBs), but obviously that doesn't work very well here if we're staying true to the setting. I'd considered weather being a factor that benefits smaller ships more (or varying degrees of shallows to give smaller ships more maneuverability) to consider bringing frigates, but those are monumental tasks to undertake and for the moment the upcoming PB changes are sufficient to me.

 

Also laser towers chew up frigates like no tomorrow, which is another huge strike against bringing frigates to PBs at the moment.

[Vernon Merrill]

While I think many of us would agree that underwater topography would be the ultimate way to go with this, let's give what the devs have come up with a shot and see what is good and bad. Rome wasn't built in a day, gang. I, personally, am pretty excited to get real forts and land at this point. Remember, it's a small team.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Vernon Merrill