Hotfix 9.81 Patch notes

[DeRuyter]

The Connie wasn't as good as many people think and I am not saying it was a bad ship, simply not the super ship many people seem to think. It only every fought smaller ships with a max gun count of 38, a couple of them with only 22 guns, the connie carried between 44 and 50 guns and that made a significant difference. Reading the history of the ship I am struck more by the following:

 

It had good captains who maneuvered the ship very well in combat gaining advantageous positions over there opponents.

 

The crew were very well trained.

 

It seems to have been fairly fast.

 

It also would appear to have been fairly maneuverable.

 

Its sister ships were made with the same basic hull but less guns fared far less well. 

 

The Chesapeake for instance, fought with a poorly trained crew (many were new recruits) against a superbly trained British crew and were handily defeated.

 

It should not be competitive with a 3rd rate of an Ingermland. I believe both of these ships would have thrashed it, though the truth is that it would have run from them anyway as it was primarily acting as a commerce raider. Its popularity is mainly due to a poem and its preservaton.

 

I agree with what you are saying however the sister ships were not built on the same hull. United States and Constitution were originally laid down as 74 gun ships and those scantlings remained. AFAIK President was laid down after the 74 gun SOL idea was abandoned. Chesapeake was designed as a 38 gun  18 lber frigate from the outset and was effectively not a 44 gun class ship. She was defeated by a ship of equal size for the reasons you pointed out. Constitution was popular well before the preservation efforts, certainly with the officers who sailed on her.

 

Unfortunately we have no historical precedent for a 1v1 on equal terms with the US 44 gun class, just the data from the construction and broadside wgt, etc.  President would have fought Endymion were it not for the chasing squadron. Constitution v Leopard another what if. Maybe we can eventually recreate those what if duels in NA. Historically President was ganked of course!

 

Lastly -one point people are missing about Ingermanland - she still carried the old sprit tops'l rig with no jibs and stays' and high stern. So she should not be very maneuverable in particular when tacking.

[John Quilliam]

It has two decks. The top deck does not count as a deck. Only second and first rates are considered three deckers.

 

It's pretty simple, ship of the line means strong enough to stand in line of battle. weakest ship considered a ship of the line in the early 19th century was a 74. Therefore, the term ship of the line changes over time.

 

You like twisting things but as you failed to notice the Three Decks was reference to the information proving it was a Ship of the Line.... I see you therefore are a troll or someone who fails to click links to prove your argument non valid.

 

Here save you the job of looking at it as we know you wont.

 

 

Clearly stating the Ingermanland is a Ship of the line and a 3rd Rate.... next argument or troll response please?

 

 "two-deckers of between 64 and 90 guns that formed the main part of the fleet" Just because the Royal Navy opted for 74 as there basic SoL does not mean every other country did the same.

Edited May 26, 2016 by John Quilliam

[JaM]

Ingermanland is very old Ship of the Line... actually its so old, that if it was British ship, it would be not in use after 1750... its armament is approximately similar to 50-60gun 4-rate Ships of the Line British used in early 18.century, like for example famous HMS Centurion, 60gun Ship of the Line, flagship of Commodore Anson, future first lord of Admiralty, man who was behind switch for larger 74gun doubledeckers like Bellona...    HMS Centurion after that famous voyage was rebuilt to a 50gun doubledecker, and fought at battle of Finisterre, which btw was won by Anson.

 

From technical point of view, if you would put Ingermanland or Centurion into fight with Constitution, they would not stand a chance 1 on 1... their hull was much weaker, while construction was not as sturdy as much more modern Constitution had..

[John Quilliam]

Ingermanland is very old Ship of the Line... actually its so old, that if it was British ship, it would be not in use after 1750... its armament is approximately similar to 50-60gun 4-rate Ships of the Line British used in early 18.century, like for example famous HMS Centurion, 60gun Ship of the Line, flagship of Commodore Anson, future first lord of Admiralty, man who was behind switch for larger 74gun doubledeckers like Bellona...    HMS Centurion after that famous voyage was rebuilt to a 50gun doubledecker, and fought at battle of Finisterre, which btw was won by Anson.

 

From technical point of view, if you would put Ingermanland or Centurion into fight with Constitution, they would not stand a chance 1 on 1... their hull was much weaker, while construction was not as sturdy as much more modern Constitution had..

 

Well the Ingermanlad was broken up in 1750, as stated in my image above... But no matter what age... no matter what others are claiming she was a 3rd rate! 

[Musuko42]

What i really want to see worked on is trading. I recently found out how broken it is. Four of us have decided not to destroy and entire quarter of the map by placing buy orders and creating a trade war between only four players. Keeping the markets empty of anything so no one can purchase a single thing. It really bothers me that four players out of a 1000 people can shut down and entire quarter of the map trade. Seriously, something is wrong with that. Bothers me to no end that i realized that so few players can shut down so much resources.

 

The easy answer to this for warehoused goods to require a regular upkeep, and you can lose goods if you run out of money to pay it; you have to pay for guards to watch your warehouse, and if you don't pay the guards then theives will rob the contents away from you. Perhaps this fee would only apply once the contents of the warehouse get above a certain threshhold (the point where it's a large enough treasure trove to attract criminal attention).

Edited May 26, 2016 by Musuko42

[akd]

You like twisting things but as you failed to notice the Three Decks was reference to the information proving it was a Ship of the Line.... I see you therefore are a troll or someone who fails to click links to prove your argument non valid.

Here save you the job of looking at it as we know you wont.

Clearly stating the Ingermanland is a Ship of the line and a 3rd Rate.... next argument or troll response please?

"two-deckers of between 64 and 90 guns that formed the main part of the fleet" Just because the Royal Navy opted for 74 as there basic SoL does not mean every other country did the same.

By the era of the Bellona, less than 70-gun ships were no longer considered adequate for the line of battle, but many 60-70 gun SoLs (mind you, much later designs than Ingermanland) did soldier on, especially in foreign stations and the Baltic where they were either more economical flagships, or their shallower draft was an asset. However, Russia had come to the same conclusions as other nations and was also pursuing 74s and larger for its line of battle.

Anyways the 74 was an innovation of the mid-18th C., and Ingermanland is a design of the early 18th C. You can't really compare them directly on an arbitrary rating basis. Look at "frigates" contemporary to Ingermanland and compare to Trincomalee. Then compare Trincomalee hull to Ingermanland hull and you will see the complete fallacy of the "it's a third rate, therefore..." line of argument being trotted around.

Btw, the tons burthen on the threedecks page is completely wrong. She is closest to Trincomalee in tons burthen. (1100 or so, IIRC). Constitution, on the other hand, has a greater tons burthen than a mid- to late- 18th C. 64-gun Third Rate like Agamemnon.

[Bulwyf]

ping? how does ping affect anything in our game?

 

Ping certainly affects shooting, in particular if you are passing a ship in opposite directions the delay between when you select to fire and when it actually happens can vary quite a bit and if your ping is especially bad can result in a whole broadside firing into space. I typically have to fire before the ship enters my firing arc so that the shots happen when it does (ping of 400 to 550). With pings of 800 or so on frigate sized targets I have fired just before them and the guns have discharged well behind them. So yes ping definitely has an impact though not so heavily as in other games. I imagine it would inpact on boarding actions in terms of  your responses to enemy actions also.

[Ledinis]

Ping certainly affects shooting, in particular if you are passing a ship in opposite directions the delay between when you select to fire and when it actually happens can vary quite a bit and if your ping is especially bad can result in a whole broadside firing into space. I typically have to fire before the ship enters my firing arc so that the shots happen when it does (ping of 400 to 550). With pings of 800 or so on frigate sized targets I have fired just before them and the guns have discharged well behind them. So yes ping definitely has an impact though not so heavily as in other games. I imagine it would inpact on boarding actions in terms of  your responses to enemy actions also.

I do believe when they say ping doesn't matter they are referring to pings in the range of 300. Though may i ask from what part of the world are you playing? I heard Australian players saying they are roundish 300 ping on the euro server. My ping for the USA server is at 180 playing from Europe, but 800 seems kinda unreal, unless its the issue of slow internet.

[Otsego]

Yesterday we had some constitution vs. constitution-fights and it felt like

 

 

Slightest change in angle lets bounce 90% of the broadside, sometimes i did more dmg to my own broadside cause all the cannonballs came back to me.

[Chromey]

every pirate wants to do damage at long range so they can hit and run better hahaha

[DukeNasty]

Im gonna say it again and again. This damn damage model ruined the PvP fun that this game gave.

And, i'm going to say it again. Unless something drastic changes the game is completely dead. Might as well get rid of the OW and go back to Sea Trials because that's how many people are online at once.

The devs have repeatedly stated that they make the game they want to play. Apparently they don't want to make a fun game AND be successful.

 

TBH, at this point the game doesn't warrant logging in to, and this from a very committed, albeit realistic player.

Edited May 27, 2016 by DukeNasty

[Jomppeli]

I just wanted to say that I love new damage model. My fights last about the same time than pre-patch. I even had some really fast battles when I accidentally put my whole broadside to enemy ships belly, caused many leaks and they sunked very fast. I like new battles much more now, when you have to come closer and keep an eye to the shot angle to do some real damage.

I liked it before, now I love it.

[admin]

Im gonna say it again and again. This damn damage model ruined the PvP fun that this game gave.

 

 

we believe that only concerns ships of the line

frigates still sink in 10 mins in 1v1s if both fight

[HarryButpain]

the idea of armor thickness, penetration of cannons, angle of boat and range in combination is perfect and makes the game 10000 times more intelligent and tactical.. You lie to yourself if think that approach is wrong... From what I read here on the forums, though, modules for boarding a ship are too powerful, is that maybe correct? Then again, I'm not even sure if those who complain about boarding did their best to deal with possible boarding attempts.. For example, when I hear someone complaining about boarding and saying that he 'just wanted shoot instead of boarding' I wonder how much credibility the complaint bout engaging in boarding combat really has..

Edited May 27, 2016 by BACk ALLEY ShENANiGANS

[Inkompetent]

we believe that only concerns ships of the line

frigates still sink in 10 mins in 1v1s if both fight

 

I think that one issue may be the ​synergy of the game's damage mechanics. For example there exists no damage mechanics at all for standing rigging - standing rigging simply can't be hit - and that makes masts, especially now that they are so tough, ridicilously strong and difficult to break even partially. Add to that that boarding is very, very powerful and ships now are forced closer, it has made it even harder than before to successfully stay out of range since there simply aren't enough tools for it. It is very slow to tear apart sails with chain shot, while chain and bar shot should be able to make short work of a ship's rigging faster than we currently can in-game. Even ball shot should be efficient at ruining standing rigging since it can shatter the points at which it is anchored to the hull.

 

The game previously allowed for too much hull damage at range/against too large targets, and mast-shooting certainly was overpowered, but right now targeting rigging is ​underpowered and targeting the hull/boarding is overpowered. Of course hull shots/raking and boarding should be a captain's ultimate goal to defeat a ship, but it is now much harder to get to that point. Seeing how hard masts are to destroy you generally don't want to shoot the masts when fighting an equally sized ship either, so it is either chain shot or ball shot, and ball certainly seems to be the best choice there.

With the hulls and masts being much harder to destroy, and with zero change in how easy/hard it is to slow down and catch up with an opponent, the game does feel.... off. It is almost impossible to FORCE a ship to fight now (especially with the 2 minute exit battle timer), and even crippled ships that have suffered tremendous hull damage can easily slip away simply because standing rigging never took a hit, so sails can be at 100% when hull is at 1%, and at the same time you can't afford to shoot those sails or you will sink instead. It didn't quite work like that before.

Overall I like the new damage system, but we went from one extreme to the other, and now need to find a point somewhere in between.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Inkompetent

[Otsego]

Imho its such patches that lead to a downward spiral like in potbs. Why changing mechanics that where absolutely fine? I don't care if its realistic if a frigate can penetrate a first rate, give the first rate more hp if you have to, but nothing is more annoying than shooting a broadside and nothing happens.

[Atomic Moose]

all damage models need reworked admin frigates are still to long of battle maybe snows are ok but anything above frig is just stupid now takes way to long and people wont play 

late nite there was 250 people on at 10pm cst that is the lowest i have ever seen it people have left and are not coming back out of 50 people in my clan 2 were on they have given up

 

revert the damage back to what it was and fix the other parts of the game that are broke and stop fixing things that are not broke in the players eyes

you game will not survive much longer unless you only want 100 people playing cause at the point that is where you are headed

[Ledinis]

Imho its such patches that lead to a downward spiral like in potbs. Why changing mechanics that where absolutely fine? I don't care if its realistic if a frigate can penetrate a first rate, give the first rate more hp if you have to, but nothing is more annoying than shooting a broadside and nothing happens.

 

When you build a ship with 1 meter thick armor it is for the reason of receiving less damage, not for shit and giggles. If you want all gun calibers to have the same penetration, armor to be non existant, lets just make all ships sail at a default speed of 15 knots equipped with railguns that go through all material regardless of the distance and the ship. While we are at it its a bit to tedious and demanding to aim in my opinion, so could we also remove aiming in this game, like make auto aim so that i only need to left click once in a while

[Otsego]

When you build a ship with 1 meter thick armor it is for the reason of receiving less damage, not for shit and giggles. If you want all gun calibers to have the same penetration, armor to be non existant, lets just make all ships sail at a default speed of 15 knots equipped with railguns that go through all material regardless of the distance and the ship. While we are at it its a bit to tedious and demanding to aim in my opinion, so could we also remove aiming in this game, like make auto aim so that i only need to left click once in a while

 

Well they already removed aiming in last patch, now you have to sail within 100 meters of your enemy to penetrate, even my 87 old grandmother could hit at this distance, even with her hands tied to her back (no i don't usually do that).

[Inkompetent]

Well they already removed aiming in last patch, now you have to sail within 100 meters of your enemy to penetrate, even my 87 old grandmother could hit at this distance, even with her hands tied to her back (no i don't usually do that).

I suppose that means that aiming is too unrealistically easy! There's a reason for why ships fought at that range in addition to needing to be that close to penetrate hulls: They couldn't aim further!

There were no good aiming devices at the time, guns were aimed by looking down the length of the barrel, and basically no one had any gunnery practice as far as accuracy goes. The accuracy with which we can aim in-game is outright ridicilous. Actual crews only were trained in reload speed at best, if they at all had any training worth mentioning. Firing at more than a few hundred yards simply wasn't practical, and even if you hit a ship 300 yards away with a few guns out of your entire broadside, your hopes of doing any damage was slim at best.

I suppose that we maybe should make aiming worse so that people will need to actually sail rather than sniping as if this was Battlefield 4 or something?

[JaM]

Well the Ingermanlad was broken up in 1750, as stated in my image above... But no matter what age... no matter what others are claiming she was a 3rd rate! 

She might have been a 3-rate in Russian service, but British, French or Spanish would call it 4-rate due to its size and armament...

[Otsego]

Yeah i agree this game has to be much more realistic, crew should die randomly from diseases, Ships should sink in heavy weather and navigation should only work through sextant and the stars. I am sure the last 3 ppl that play this game will enjoy it.

[JaM]

I suppose that means that aiming is too unrealistically easy! There's a reason for why ships fought at that range in addition to needing to be that close to penetrate hulls: They couldn't aim further!

There were no good aiming devices at the time, guns were aimed by looking down the length of the barrel, and basically no one had any gunnery practice as far as accuracy goes. The accuracy with which we can aim in-game is outright ridicilous. Actual crews only were trained in reload speed at best, if they at all had any training worth mentioning. Firing at more than a few hundred yards simply wasn't practical, and even if you hit a ship 300 yards away with a few guns out of your entire broadside, your hopes of doing any damage was slim at best.

I suppose that we maybe should make aiming worse so that people will need to actually sail rather than sniping as if this was Battlefield 4 or something?

 

regarding accuracy, its actually quite simple - in reality, guncrew didnt had such an ability to adjust elevation so quickly as you can in the game.... it was all done by a wooden spike under the barrell so adjusting elevation was not "real time" but was set for approximate range enemy should be at, and guncrew then fired at the moment they thought they would hit...  So yeah... aiming in NA is actually much easier than in reality..... way way easier...

Yeah i agree this game has to be much more realistic, crew should die randomly from diseases, Ships should sink in heavy weather and navigation should only work through sextant and the stars. I am sure the last 3 ppl that play this game will enjoy it.

 

 

sorry, but i would take my chances with sextant and the stars, instead of current setup where you dont know your possition on map at all... thats not 18-19.century navigation, but a  navigation employed by Ancient Romans sailing on Triremes around 200BC...

[Chromey]

I prefer the new mechanics realism over the  older mechanics dota ism.