Hotfix 9.83 Patch notes

[z4ys]

I have F11'd this, but in shallow water battles, shallow water ships cannot Penetrate the towers !!

 

In Deep (mid) and Cap (top end) then on say an Ingermanland only the bottom deck can pen towers.

 

Point blank range...and its NERF BALLS !

 

Did anyone use mortarbrigs? Isnt that their purpose to kill towers?

[Jerome]

I like the changes but the leaks. I still don't like that you can sink a ship with only one broadside and now it's even easier?

I want to say (again) that not one single time in history a ship sunk by leaks after canonball penetrations. There is only one ship recorded which sunk because of ball damage and this ship lost it's whole stern after a devastating broadside at battle of trafalgar.

Would like to see that changed in further patches to have a historical more accurate game.

I find your claims unbelievable. Ships with holes sink.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3462882/Mary-Rose-sunk-by-French-cannonball.html

[Quineloe]

Did anyone use mortarbrigs? Isnt that their purpose to kill towers?

 

They're pretty terrible at it, and they waste a spot you need if the port is defended, but yeah maybe that's our best shot at this point.

[CaptVonGunn]

Still firing PvE missions while defending empty ports?! LOL.

And then mock someone who has probably taken down 10x the number of REAL players you have...

PRICELESS.

Really? His post was about losing to a AI trader then proving he has no idea how boarding works....   AS for more Real players.. no telling.. It is so hard to find any that aren't n in big groups.... I average a couple real player captures or sinks a week.. But then Only usually get 2-3 fights a day with actual people in Open World. 

[CaptVonGunn]

I find your claims unbelievable. Ships with holes sink.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3462882/Mary-Rose-sunk-by-French-cannonball.html

 

 True.. but warships had a large supply of plugs per cut and ready for combat.... They were sized for the various cannon ball sizes in use at the time... I wont say never  as he did.. but losing a Warship in the Age of Sail to leaks was very very rare... Most ships were either captured in boarding not a large amount there either.. Normally they  struck their colors due to low moral(either teh crews or the Commanders) or being dismasted. 

They're pretty terrible at it, and they waste a spot you need if the port is defended, but yeah maybe that's our best shot at this point.

 

 Really? did they change them again? I know last week we had a couple guys that are decent shots with the,,, decrewing a Shallow tower in 3-4 hits or so low a Merc could board it quick and easy.... Haven't seen one in a Deep yet.

[NavalActionPlayer]

 True.. but warships had a large supply of plugs per cut and ready for combat.... They were sized for the various cannon ball sizes in use at the time... I wont say never  as he did.. but losing a Warship in the Age of Sail to leaks was very very rare... Most ships were either captured in boarding not a large amount there either.. Normally they  struck their colors due to low moral(either teh crews or the Commanders) or being dismasted. 

 

Yep - like I said earlier in this thread. That's the correct mechanism the game should have - actions impacting morale and the lack of morale causing ships to strike.

[Pada]

Good job on the penetration fix, also grape feels better. But masts are still a bit to weak. They usually fall in 2-3 volleys, even with reinforced masts.

[CptEdwardKenway]

I find your claims unbelievable. Ships with holes sink.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3462882/Mary-Rose-sunk-by-French-cannonball.html

And where do they say it sunk by one broadside and with 10-20 leaks?

During Napoleon war ships used to suffer up to 1000 canonball hits. And only one ship during this war sunk because of canonball hits. And this ship got it's whole stern destroyed. Your link is from an event way out of timeline. At 500 years that's about 250-300 year before the time of this game. Ships changed. Go a little bit more into past and you will find ships which got sunk by ramming.

[maturin]

I find your claims unbelievable. Ships with holes sink.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3462882/Mary-Rose-sunk-by-French-cannonball.html

I'm sure the researchers did good work, but their conclusions can only ever be speculation.

The idea of a single six-inch shot-hole being ignored for the extravagant amount of time required for the flooding to decisively affect displacement and stability should inspire incredulity, not an 'a-ha!' moment. Pumps were primitive back then, but if one shot hole was all it took, the frequency of founderings in battle would have been overwhelming.

"The ship had sailed successfully for 34 years before sinking. It wouldn't have come to grief without cause," Dr Fontana said. "The ship wasn't behaving as she should have done and a hole caused by the French seems to be the logical reason."

And this quote proves that the researchers have not seriously studied stability casualties. Vasa is the very rare exception when a dangerous design shows its teeth immediately. Usually such vessels sail the globe for many years, with cautious and skilled mariners compensating for their defects. Until the luck runs out.

[BorisDemontford]

Good job on the penetration fix, also grape feels better. But masts are still a bit to weak. They usually fall in 2-3 volleys, even with reinforced masts.

 

Masts are round and hull planking is flat, the mast thickness should be increased to reflect this and make them effectively stronger.

[midgetgrimm]

Great news! Thanks devs

[Quineloe]

Looks like we're back to ultra long range penetration.

 

70 leaks into a constitution - sinks instantly.

Edited June 5, 2016 by Quineloe

[admin]

Looks like we're back to ultra long range penetration.

 

70 leaks into a constitution - sinks instantly.

 

1) what do you mean ultra long range?

2) 70 leaks from lets say 24lb is a lot of water - even if the hole is 10cm its 70*10cm = 7m hole

 

to all

we think masts are weak - need to be buffed.. all battles i seen lately were all about demasting only.

[Ledinis]

1) what do you mean ultra long range?

2) 70 leaks from lets say 24lb is a lot of water - even if the hole is 10cm its 70*10cm = 7m hole

 

to all

we think masts are weak - need to be buffed.. all battles i seen lately were all about demasting only.

Think you might have overdone it with reducing Line ship armor also, pvp they feel like overgrown frigates once more... PVE it takes less than 10 mins to kill a first rate with another first rate

[HarryButpain]

 Took my frigate two broadsides to sink a merc today. The merc didn't even have a chance to lose some side armor before it went down xD

Edited June 5, 2016 by BACk ALLEY ShENANiGANS

[Hethwill]

Chain is very accurate combined with the damage. It makes sense to do 1% ( on the individual canvas sheet spread ) each shot but the shot spread at every 100m should be increased. Quite no-brain to do a rolling chain across the entire length and make it drop to under 80%, with a Suprise/Frigate and even the Snake. Sometimes provokes even rigging shock.

 

The catastrophic leaks are back yes. Had 17 leaks to plug in a single rolling broadside on my essex from a Ingermaland. Couldn't plug them and using a Fine pump was not helping, it was over really fast. High heel ships suffer the most and cannot hope to even recover.

 

Masts yeah, along with the chain has brought the old meta combat back.

[Sir Henry de Montfort]

This patch has def. Gone I think too far on the gun pen. My previous post on my testing the fir armor with gun penetration. Using a fir pavel taking Santi broadside as an example. 1 Santi broadside sank the pavel. First it was 250 meters, decent gun range (not too far, not too close). Ship Angle was 45 degrees (Pavel) to the Santi's broadside. Good bounce angle for the Pavel. I have never seen a line ship go down on a single broadside. The pavel was not listing and was stopped in the water, sails down. How do we explain 55 pens and of those 44 leaks created. The ship then went down in 38 seconds. Now almost 3/4 of the pavel side armor was taken off. Fir is soft, not concerned about that. But the fact the pavel was at an advantage with her angle off the santi. She was not listing, showing any lower hull/waterline. She was not moving to assist with flooding. How is it she received 44 leaks at that angle and with no lower waterline showing? Then to go down in 38 seconds?

I was just testing the fir armors damage resistance. Instead, I became extremely concerned with the pens/leaks results. Any admin want to touch on this? Only time I've seen a line ship go down this fast was when the ramming model was being tweaked.

Edited June 5, 2016 by Sir Henry de Montfort

[Jesters-Ink]

I find your claims unbelievable. Ships with holes sink.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3462882/Mary-Rose-sunk-by-French-cannonball.html

 

Yup, they do, but it was like "in a blue moon". If you are choosing the Mary Rose as an example its a pretty poor example. 

Look at the battles closer to our in game timeline, ships sank when absolutely battered or they were hit in the mag.

Ships of that age could take a massive amount of cannon fire and still be afloat. Its not really a valid argument in a game, because games should be fun and people tend not to enjoy too much historical accuracy. We will end up with what the Devs deliver too us.

I for one, enjoy the more historic argument for realism myself, but I'll take what ever is delivered as long as its fun enough and not stupid. Let's see.

[Quineloe]

1) what do you mean ultra long range?

2) 70 leaks from lets say 24lb is a lot of water - even if the hole is 10cm its 70*10cm = 7m hole

 

to all

we think masts are weak - need to be buffed.. all battles i seen lately were all about demasting only.

 

1. so far that the name isn't being shown. So far I have to aim in the sky for the balls to hit the hull. Barely chain shot range at 0° heeling. Saw a consti get torn to 50% armor by Inges from that range fairly quickly. Sadly we have no accurate way to measure distance in this game, I'd love to give you more precise answers on this.

2. yes, that's a lot of leaks. The point is that it's very easy to punch that many leaks into a ship now and have it instantly sink since penetration is a guaranteed leak, right?

 

I think it's pretty hard to balance the damage in a way that it drops off with increasing range instead of going full.full.full and then falls flat on the face because penetration becomes too low. Right now close range damage feels good, but long range damage is a bit weird.

 

It feels almost like an actually realistic tank simulation (ie not wot), where you are in a tiger and can blast a sherman comfortably at 1500m, because you know he can't possibly fight back in return. That's basically what it feels like to fight a ship one "rank" higher. They just need to get to a distance where they can penetrate you, and they will with most shots, while you bounce all shots.

[SeaMist]

I am not in a position to test this ATM but I am in a position to say that at Constitution and below that I was perfectly happy before you made any changes. Personally I hated the leak thing when it was in before. I am not happy to hear it has returned. Anything from constitution up are meant to be tanks so please ignore the " I couldn't sink a third rate with my surprise" type of comment. Not even a constitution should be able to sink a third rate outright. That's why we have fleets.

Personally ( before) I was quite happy with the damage model at Connie and below.

I can imagine that some people ( understandably) would be irate with the realistic time required to sink an SOL. Might I suggest ( as has been suggested) that rather than nerfing the damage model so SOL's go down in 5 minutes that at that size boarding be made the prime method of removing a ship from battle. That would be realistic both from a damage model and a historical perspective.

[Snoopy]

Maybe we need to have the laser range finder back for a bit so people can give more accurate descriptions of penetration and distances involved.

Had a couple of fights over the weekend.. it doesn't feel much different than a month ago .. other than SoL being a bit more tanky at range *shrug*

[Quineloe]

yeah what snoopy said. Equal ships can hurt each other at long range again.

Just smaller ships can no longer get involved.

[blademage]

@Marines:

 

I would make them start the prep @battle start, not @boarding-start. What do Marines do in battle, when boarding isn't activated? Do they sleep? No. Marines get ready with the first whistle.

 

@leaks:

 

It basically feels good now - or at least the best way currently possible.

(Idea on that:

- What I am missing is a more direct crew management. When Sailors are fixing the leaks, I would really love to have a better crew management (Maybe something like the energy-management in StarTrekOnline). Not just binary priority / non priority, but maybe percent or high/mid/low/off settings.

- Another nice feature would be an option to double/increase fixing rate with a rep-kit

 

@grapes:

better now, but still not perfect. There should be an effect when hitting the deck with an entire broadside of grapes as well as hits to the rigging should hit the sailing crew...

[DeRuyter]

Yup, they do, but it was like "in a blue moon". If you are choosing the Mary Rose as an example its a pretty poor example. 

Look at the battles closer to our in game timeline, ships sank when absolutely battered or they were hit in the mag.

Ships of that age could take a massive amount of cannon fire and still be afloat. Its not really a valid argument in a game, because games should be fun and people tend not to enjoy too much historical accuracy. We will end up with what the Devs deliver too us.

I for one, enjoy the more historic argument for realism myself, but I'll take what ever is delivered as long as its fun enough and not stupid. Let's see.

 

Agreed - when you are talking about large warships or a fight between similar sized ships. A ship of the line or large frigate should be able to sink a small trade brig or schooner like the Lynx in one broadside. I think they can find a balance that is fun and reasonably accurate.

[Vernon Merrill]

My personal opinion is that the range and penetration is pretty damn close to being good.  We had a "once in a million years" PvP engagement of me in a Bellona and my teammate in a Pvel vs. two Pirates in the exact same ships.  (I know, right,???  That NEVER happens)  Anyways, it was a great fight with both teams at distance trying to beat up to get the wind and doing some long-rang sail work.  Pretty much at the same point we all decided that if this was going to be done in time we'd have to give up some wind and close the range.  So the engagement started with us all on a beam reach and firing anywhere from yard-arm to yard-arm to about 250-300 meters.  My thoughts were that penetration was decent with my bottom deck as long as I didnt rush the angle, the upper deck guns did decent work against crew and cannons and that the masts seemed just about right as well.  It was a good test, as everyone clearly knew how to handle their ships.  Ultimately, the battle was decided with 4 mins remaining on the timer, one ship sunk, and 3 battered into barely sailable hulks, with only one ship left with more than one mast.  

 

All in all, I'd say they are getting pretty close with the new damage model.