Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Combat feedback

poll questions  

219 members have voted

  1. 1. Combat length feedback

    • Too long
      35
    • Just right
      168
    • Too short
      17
  2. 3. Cost of mistakes

    • No effect - mistakes has no effect on combat
      34
    • Just right
      166
    • Too costly - impossible to recover
      20
  3. 4. Damage of a perfect broadside

    • Too low
      55
    • Just right
      155
    • Too high
      10
  4. 5. Crew loss during battle from cannonball fire

    • Too low
      44
    • Just right
      130
    • Too high
      46
  5. 6. Sail damage

    • Too low
      27
    • Just right
      151
    • Too high
      42
  6. 7. Mast damage

    • too low
      86
    • just right
      116
    • Too high
      18
  7. 8. Raking (cannon loss + crew loss)

    • Underpowered
      88
    • Just right
      98
    • Too strong
      34


Recommended Posts

I've used F5 in at least group fleet PVE battles where we just plow through instead of linefight.  Shoot my left broadsides at one ship, shoot right at another, now I turn right.  As there is nothing on my left but there are ships on my right, I turn my left cannons off so I do not need to wait for them to reload before my right reloads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had batttle yesterday, me in a frigate another player in pirate frigate. It was quite fun, having a skilled opponent, but when it came towards the end, the other one had repaires about 3 times his ship, me only once, for lack of repair kits, finally the reason why I was sunk. I personally do not like this multiple repair option.

I would like to see one repair for sails and one for hull during battle, if sufficient repait kits are in the hold.

Many have cried for the one dura ships to make the game more "historical", but this repeated repair is less historical than several duras.

A naval battle should be decided by the skill of the players not the repair kits they have abort. I don't see the fun in having to sink a ship twice for all the repair that is done during battle. I would even prefer to no repair option during battle than the current system.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sea Archer said:

I had batttle yesterday, me in a frigate another player in pirate frigate. It was quite fun, having a skilled opponent, but when it came towards the end, the other one had repaires about 3 times his ship, me only once, for lack of repair kits, finally the reason why I was sunk. I personally do not like this multiple repair option.

I would like to see one repair for sails and one for hull during battle, if sufficient repait kits are in the hold.

Many have cried for the one dura ships to make the game more "historical", but this repeated repair is less historical than several duras.

A naval battle should be decided by the skill of the players not the repair kits they have abort. I don't see the fun in having to sink a ship twice for all the repair that is done during battle. I would even prefer to no repair option during battle than the current system.

While I agree with the concept of player skill should be winning the battle there are a lot more things going on than just repairs.

What about the books, mods, wood trim/planking, ships involved and/or getting ganked by multiple players equate into "the battle should be decided by the skill of the players and not by all the above"

Edited by Rigs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sea Archer said:

A naval battle should be decided by the skill of the players not the repair kits they have abort. I don't see the fun in having to sink a ship twice for all the repair that is done during battle. I would even prefer to no repair option during battle than the current system.

Although I would also prefer just single repairs in battle instances, YOU also have the option to carry more repairs. Part of the skill you mention is knowing how many repairs you need and when to use them while still knowing that each repair you carry is going to affect your ship's performance. In fact I can trace a good percentage of the times I have been sunk to my poor choices in this area, usually not repairing soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rediii said:

poll is too outdated for both

Goddamnit, yet another necro'd thread. For a second there I thought the devs were looking at some actual feedback and the number of "it's fine as it is" votes surprised the hell out of me. Now I know why.

Edited by Aegir
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18.10.2017 at 9:42 PM, Farrago said:

Although I would also prefer just single repairs in battle instances, YOU also have the option to carry more repairs. Part of the skill you mention is knowing how many repairs you need and when to use them while still knowing that each repair you carry is going to affect your ship's performance. In fact I can trace a good percentage of the times I have been sunk to my poor choices in this area, usually not repairing soon enough.

I do not complain about being sunk, the other player has used his possibilities and deserves to sink me, I simply do not like the mechanics. When we want to have a somewhat historical game, only battle repairs should be possible, but not building up the whole ship twice. Battle repairs should be something like setting a few guns up and stop leaks for the hull and repairing some lines and sails for the rigging. Setting up a new mast can never done during a battle.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a loooooong while since I looked at BR ratio and XP gained, but I had a quick look today.

Brig (BR 50) vs. Ventre (BR 110):

a5b119131eaf05ec3de63e4de8119377.png

TSnow (BR 10) vs. Ventre (BR 110):

6c13781096bca137feaa02c62951509c.png

How does this work these days?

BR ratio does not affect XP?

It's not THAT important, but a BR multiplier to XP could bring more smaller ships out in the OW. Should everything steer people towards bringing the biggest, baddest and fastest out?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could have simply decrease damage but you had to have high damage because it is realistic? Now we have continuous repair kits, we get new masts and cannons from our arse and bring back dead crew members with rum. Are you sure this is "realistic"? Did you take instead the most unrealistic option available?

Hull damage decreasing speed is disabling effect. High chain damage is disabling effect. Continuous repairing is also disabling effect as it binds your crew members. High rake crew/cannon damage is disabling. etc.

Disabling supports ganks. Smaller fleet is disabled continuously. Gankers don't unfortunatelly have this even close as bad.

Hull damage disabling effect is kind of cool as it supports doubling from which I wrote long time ago. I still think that this is not the right way to go.

This game is full of gankers and because of that I would think a bit what kind of changes you give for players who fight 3vs9 battle for example. There is a high change that these 3 will lose the fight but you don't have to design combat that directly supports gankers.

 

btw. wood types with crew damage resistance could have higher % of resistance.

Edited by Cmdr RideZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did some combat orders and tested what rakes do for my ship.

I don't know if every time but it actually can be that I lost every time stern chasers.

You add multiple repair kits so you have to add damage or make "things" even weaker than in real life. At some point I have to admit that cannon damage did not feel bad at all as you had to anyway repair your ship continuously, made it meaningless. I am not sure tho if damage was not high enough or there were too many repair kits.

IL-2 Sturmovik which is a realistic simulator. You shoot someones wing of and he repairs and gets a new wing. Immersion killer maybe? Tastes a bit like World Of Warcraft or Diablo3 ?

Tools you at least had were hit points, damage, accuracy, repairs. You decided to go with low hp?, high damage, good accuracy, loads of repair kits? Maneuverability means something as well.  Not sure if you could have gone with ok accuracy, or else the game is based on rng. Decrease for example damage here to counter this?

I also read from some battles and results. In one ship surrendered when had multiple foot water and 10-15 dead and another 10-15 wounded. Battle lasted around 2 hours. Not sure if combat has to be always insanely brutal were hundreds or thousands die. I admit that I am not historian but every battle was a massacre?

World of Warcraft is the most popular game so nothing bad if you want to copy from it.

Edited by Cmdr RideZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cmdr RideZ said:

IL-2 Sturmovik which is a realistic simulator. You shoot someone down but actually you don't because your enemy clicks number 4 and got a new wing.

?! huh !?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

IL-2 Sturmovik which is a realistic simulator. You shoot someones wing of and he repairs and gets a new wing.

Wonder, which IL-2 this could be. Wasn't the case in the original IL-2 up to 46 and isn't in Cliffs or Blitz.

Or, perhaps, I did something horribly wrong in the last 17 years. Which is quite possible, to be honest. No crawling back to base, just a key in midair? Dang...

edit: or perhaps he's talking aboutcrashing or limping back to base with damaged rudders, ailerons, engine, whatev', landing, spawning a new plane and take off again.

Edited by Archer11
idea of next day's morning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Archer11 said:

Wonder, which IL-2 this could be. Wasn't the case in the original IL-2 up to 46 and isn't in Cliffs or Blitz.

Or, perhaps, I did something horribly wrong in the last 17 years. Which is quite possible, to be honest. No crawling back to base, just a key in midair? Dang...

I think you misunderstood my post but...

What if Sturmovik would be changed to have 10 midair repairs? You lose an engine, no worries, use a wrench and you get a new one.

Would make a good realistic game? Higher skill cap maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er... no way. Would be a experience killer. IIRC there's not even that option on the IL-2 Great Battles in server admin console. I think the major difference in all online wars at the moment becomes only at Expert vs Normal level - no icons and gps vs icons and gps on, and that's it. Can't remember any server that has all the "debug" options turned on, maybe the Training ones. As offtopic, this are the online wars for one of the servers I play in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UrZmjnvghTrf-dSfGhV0hV7ZTg4y6xE0nb_-46kBM3E/edit?usp=sharing

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 minutes ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

I think you misunderstood my post but...

Oh, get it now. Never thought about that. Horrible idea and immersion-killer in my eyes in a rather serious flight-sim...

But there's a difference in changing the engine of a plane midair (especially in a single seater 😉 ) and repairing a ship with several hundreds of crew, who can use spare-parts already on board.

I'd like to see just one or two repairs for hull/masts/sails or the already mentioned "the more repairs started, the less gets repaired" though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:

Er... no way. Would be a experience killer. IIRC there's not even that option on the IL-2 Great Battles in server admin console. I think the major difference in all online wars at the moment becomes only at Expert vs Normal level - no icons and gps vs icons and gps on, and that's it. Can't remember any server that has all the "debug" options turned on, maybe the Training ones. As offtopic, this are the online wars for one of the servers I play in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UrZmjnvghTrf-dSfGhV0hV7ZTg4y6xE0nb_-46kBM3E/edit?usp=sharing

 

 

2 minutes ago, Archer11 said:

 

Oh, get it now. Never thought about that. Horrible idea and immersion-killer in my eyes in a rather serious flight-sim...

But there's a difference in changing the engine of a plane midair (especially in a single seater 😉 ) and repairing a ship with several hundreds of crew, who can use spare-parts already on board.

I'd like to see just one or two repairs for hull/masts/sails or the already mentioned "the more repairs started, the less gets repaired" though

 

@admin & @rediii can you please take notes here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

 

 

@admin & @rediii can you please take notes here.

 

?

i would also play without repairs. 

I think the game became too much focused on skill alone. In my oppinion cannons are too accurate and have not enough pen vs hulls.

The game gets a portrait of the battles of the time once cannons pen easily, something is done against constant ramming and a big focus is on crew damage and formation sailing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raking damage is so inconsistent and has diminishing returns that eventually its not worth shooting sterns and stern tanking is a good tactic to stay alive. 

Realistically having someone's stern was DEVASTATING. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Flinch said:

Raking damage is so inconsistent and has diminishing returns that eventually its not worth shooting sterns and stern tanking is a good tactic to stay alive. 

Realistically having someone's stern was DEVASTATING. 

We have no morale ( indirectly we do ) nor crew condition, just shocks, and shock is already modelled ( but as with everything can be improved ).

By the way, rake crew shock and then board immediately ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rediii said:

?

i would also play without repairs. 

I think the game became too much focused on skill alone. In my oppinion cannons are too accurate and have not enough pen vs hulls.

The game gets a portrait of the battles of the time once cannons pen easily, something is done against constant ramming and a big focus is on crew damage and formation sailing.

Sorry Rediii, I misunderstood then.

It is either skill or mass. In NA ganks are the most common form of PvP. Question is do you want to support ganking or not? If not, skill has to matter.

 

I don't know if the following video is based on facts or not, but if it is based on facts you had to be close to cause enough damage. Maybe pen vs hull is not that bad?

...

@admin Why did you introduce us repair kits that none wanted? I can see only one reason for these and that would be economics. I think you sacrificed your excellent combat because of this. Don't think it was worth it.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

Sorry Rediii, I misunderstood then.

It is either skill or mass. In NA ganks are the most common form of PvP. Question is do you want to support ganking or not? If not, skill has to matter.

 

I don't know if the following video is based on facts or not, but if it is based on facts you had to be close to cause enough damage. Maybe pen vs hull is not that bad?

...

@admin Why did you introduce us repair kits that none wanted? I can see only one reason for these and that would be economics. I think you sacrificed your excellent combat because of this. Don't think it was worth it.

 

admin confirmed already that pen was way higher historically. You had to be close because then you hit them better. Not because of the pen.

We see very regular that skill is better than many players without skill. Sweden showed it at puerto, BF shows it time and time again and sometimes eve  Havoc shows it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You battered enemy crew into submission. The overall ship would be in fairly good shape even with "historically the penetration was much higher", hull wise, to be towed back without sinking in most cases. And this is with cannons touching the enemy freeboard :)

But we cannot only look the PvP side of things. Trying to simulate something like the walls of oak would be a nightmare to PvE.

I am certain we saw that in Patch 7, when according to many "was impossible to sink any ship in 90 minutes" and honestly was the closest we had to age of sail regarding the wood resistances. We have since then moved to a credible realistic gameplay balance.

We could return IF crew condition would be a thing, but then we would cycle back to "rake rake is OP" era.

Maybe our ships move too fast ? Turn too fast ? Accelerate too fast ? Maybe that's where the baseline "balance" lays ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:

Maybe our ships move too fast ? Turn too fast ? Accelerate too fast ? Maybe that's where the baseline "balance" lays ?

Right... in reality, sail revolutions took far longer than in Naval Action.  I believe it took a first rate almost 20 minutes to set all sail?  Also, broadsides took longer

2 hours ago, Flinch said:

Realistically having someone's stern was DEVASTATING. 

In reality, it would be impossible for any ship to sterncamp.  Sure, a few rakes, perhaps...   The forces on sails would be too great, the strain on the crew too great, for the maneuvers we see in Naval Action.  Ships could not turn or stop on a dime, nor could they sail so close to the wind.

Also, Naval Action does not take into account sharpshooters in the tops, which would pour fire into enemy ships at close range.

Edited by Sir John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×