Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Penetration and armor thickness feedback - moderated

Recommended Posts

Please provide feedback on penetration, armor thickness and cannon loss

 

Target penetration tables

 

Medium guns

4WxifGa.png

 

Long guns

sjKzi9f.png

 

Carronades

iFRmRWA.png

 

Current vision

  • Ships must tank with broadside
  • Cannon loss must matter
  • Long distance combat should be ineffective unless you have powerful artillery
  • Angle must matter
  • Light guns should be ineffective at long distances (french penetration tables show 17x difference in energy at 1000 yards between 4lb and 42lb
  • Cannons can block shots (due to carriage structure)
  • Masts have strength (thickness) too 

Potential changes

The guns difference in reality was a bit smaller (from 70 to 155 on standard powder charge). 

We increased the difference a bit for gameplay purposes. It could be brought back while reducing the HP differences making more ships around your level withstand the fire from high caliber guns. For example essex melts cerberus currently with 3-4 broadsides. Maybe ships of the similar side should be able to hold broadside fire for much longer.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Medium guns got nerfed too much? Much less penetration than long guns,  I see no reason for any ship to arm medium gun now, 

 

Also, i think the new model would make frigates much harder to take a larger SOLs. since you need broadside shots to effective damage them. That will make the game much boring..

Edited by amosblanco
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Medium guns got nerfed too much? Much less penetration than long guns,  I see no reason for any ship to arm medium gun now, 

 

dps - they have 20% more dps 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I needed over 1 houre to take down a Santisima with my Victory.

i was side by side in about 100 to 150m.

the 12pd were just useless. just bouncing off.

the 24pb bounced 50 to 75%

only the 42pd were usefull.

Using all long guns

 

and in the fight i lost nearly 20 guns on one side...

 

There is no chance to win a port battle with this mecanit as attacker any more...

Not a good thing at all

Edited by SaintGordon
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dps - they have 20% more dps 

To utilise that dps you must first be able to penetrate and right now, between 2 SOL penetration is far more important since only a fraction of the cannonballs actually penetrate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to provide precise number adjustements but :

 

- I would rise quite a lot penetration of 24 pounders and more, as they do not penetrate enough SoL armor. 50% of broadsides of 32 pdrs bounce when directly shooting a 3rd rate in close combat. I would think 5-10% is a more fitting number.

- I would rise penetration of medium cannons, as they seem to be very inefficient at penetrating SoL armor, making them useless.

Edited by Azzak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I posted in the other thread, I'll only post a short summary.

 

Was fighting in a fleet mission, cannons feel very ineffective versus all ships of the line. Either armor is too strong or cannons are too weak.

 

Edit; I was in a Santisima with 42 / 24 / 12 / 9, none of the cannons felt particularly effective, though as expected 42 pounders had the most penetration.

Edited by Alan Demarest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or there is a bug, because people are reporting no penetrations where chart above says shots should penetrate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or there is a bug, because people are reporting no penetrations where chart above says shots should penetrate.

 

heel affects angle

hull shape affects angle

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

90° on 100m distance on a Santisima. so no real curve hull or so

so, i dont think, any angle issue there

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heel affects angle

hull shape affects angle

 

Yes, understood, but what people were reporting was pretty extreme, e.g. no penetration from 24pdr at point blank range and 90° to hull side.  Haven't tried it myself yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were trading shots broadside to broadside, no angle or anything. Shots still bounce off for no apparent reason.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heel affects angle

hull shape affects angle

 

I'm fairly certain everyone here understands that.

 

Heel and hull shape shouldn't even be a factor at less than 50 meters using 24 pounders.

 

The 3rd rate has no particular hull shape that assists in bouncing shots and even if there is no heel the shots still bounce even though, as stated earlier, they shouldn't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or there is a bug, because people are reporting no penetrations where chart above says shots should penetrate.

 

F11 please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I' ve tried the new update in a port batlle in connie and.... It is very very very hard to sink another ship of the same rank with it.

I mean, at close distance against an inger, full broadside just do a scratch, not even 10 hull.

I dont talk about 12 pound canons, just useless actually.

Mid distance with another connie, almost every balls bounce against it.

I took several broadside from an inger, and i lost something like 10% of my life on the side. And I was in a Teak Wood (no BS or Planking) Connie. So I dont want to imagine what kind of tank is a LO BS one.

I can understand you want to make the penetration & armor system more realistic. But a battle just last 1h30 max.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the new dmg model and it is a step into the right direction. Sinking an enemy ship is now very difficult and time consuming and the demasting with small caliber guns from far away is finally gone. But I think in the future we need some other changes too, to make the new dmg model really shine.

I believe a large portion of the playerbase agrees, that ships shouldn't be sinking so easily like before. It isn't very historical etc. But too compensate for that you should maybe rise the crew loss when shots penetrate. In the end this could go hand in hand with a new crew mangament system (officers etc, crew that actually matters) and a surrender mechanic (if wie will ever get one :D) which makes sense to encourage surrender if you are loosing a fight badly. there are already many topics about that.

 

Until then (if we will ever get it), I wouldn't mind if the new dmg model gets tweaked a bit. Right now I have the feeling that it only encourages rage boarders who hunt in packs even more than before. They go in fast, don't care about your broadsides, push you into the wind and rape you with their boarding mods (which are still ridiculous in my opinion). Right now, you have to be very close to do significant dmg and this is what they want.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Medium guns got nerfed too much? Much less penetration than long guns,  I see no reason for any ship to arm medium gun now, 

 

Also, i think the new model would make frigates much harder to take a larger SOLs. since you need broadside shots to effective damage them. That will make the game much boring..

 

Frigates should not take on larger SOLs in the first place... Frigates are more maneurable, usually faster, so why do you want take away one main benefit  SOL actually has over Frigate, which is sturdiness of its construction? Frigates never stood a chance against SOL. It was so unfair, that captains of SOLs never actually oppened fire at Frigates unless they fired first... firing at them first, meant huge disgrace...

 

so, technically, i think experience points could be distributed based on ship rating difference... so ships with high rating would not gain exp points from shooting at low rated ships.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so, technically, i think experience points could be distributed based on ship rating difference... so ships with high rating would not gain exp points from shooting at low rated ships.

 

isn`t iit already like that... Was the impression it was a while back....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the Santisima haves less armour than Victory?, All knows that that ship was very strong, Trafalgar battle show it

Makes the victory more viable and brings more diversion. Would be a good change. As is santissima was just better in every category rendering the victory a second class 1st rate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the Santisima haves less armour than Victory?, All knows that that ship was very strong, Trafalgar battle show it

Victory has thicker sides and more closely-spaced frame timbers than Santissima. 

 

Santissima soaked up so much damage at Trafalgar because IRL large ships are almost impossible to sink with gunfire alone. At least without extremely careful and deliberate aiming at the waterline, which was not often done (it would allow the enemy's gunners to shoot at you unimpeded).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Victory has thicker sides and more closely-spaced frame timbers than Santissima. 

 

Santissima soaked up so much damage at Trafalgar because IRL large ships are almost impossible to sink with gunfire alone. At least without extremely careful and deliberate aiming at the waterline, which was not often done (it would allow the enemy's gunners to shoot at you unimpeded).

 

 

well it is like this now :)

people find it boring.

we will keep it until next wednesday (hot fix time) because maybe people have not just adjusted to new system and there are reports on 24lb guns not penetrating at close range

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only had a few battle, loving the changes so far, feels much more realistic. 

Loving the new "compacted" HP for 5th rates , much less disparity, no more über auto-win ships (trinco versus frigate for example, ships of same class and same era ...) 

IRL : 

-Combat victory was decided at close range both in frigate fight, and line battle (by breaking the line) 

-Long guns were outdated by napoleonic era, actually medium canon is the technological evolution of long guns. they were used as chaser that is all. 

-Caronades was a decisive techoligical advantage in most of the cases, and some experiment with caronades exclusive ship were very successful. Some battle were lost because of exclusive caronades loadout, but not as much as we think :) , and it was mainly because of a good tactic from the "cannon" ship captain. 

-Most of the naval engagements were inconclusive, both in small actions and large battle, we just only remind the conclusive ones, because they stayed in history. 

-Boarding actions were not common .... but far more than sinking :) 

What we have now : close quater battle decide everything, sinking is very long, and not common, long guns restricted to very skillful tacticians or chasers, boarding can be very rewarding versus a canon engagement ....

All good for me, maybe needing tuning on some penetrations and armor values, but everythingelse feel some much more authentic ... Thank you !  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...