Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

The 1st Rate dilemma


Recommended Posts

When it comes to PB they should just force us to use a composed fleets for example 2 x 1st rate, 2 x 2nd rate, 4 x 3rd rate, 4 x 4th rate and all the rest 5th rates or below. Depending on the type of port these numbers could vary. Maybe from 5th rate down specify the ships more, like 2 x trinc or essex, 2 x frig or BP, 2 x Surprise or Ren, 4 cerbs, toss in some merc's etc.

 

I think this formula would be absolute fun, having a mixed battle that is an even fight but requires allot more tactics to be used.

Now obviously the smaller ships could be wiped away easily by the big ships, but wasting a broadside might cost him his ship, as its one less broadside you can put in the ship of the same size.

 

It would probably be more realstic too.

 

In OW i don't consider the amount of SoL to be a problem, or to even be the most seen ship type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st rates are too cheap (though people already seem to be terrified to sail them), but that said.... I can solo a 1st 2nd or 3rd rate in a 5th rate any day. There is no "bigger is better".

Maybe not in 1v1, but you try a PB (or even OW battle) with 25 1st vs 25 5th rates and see how well that goes.

 

As soon as the big slow ships have friends to protect the stern it becomes a question of broadside weight vs armor + repair capability.

No amount of manouverability or skill will keep you out of the line of fire of ALL enemies.

Not only that but winning a PB is more about keeping or getting BR advantage anyway.

I will put my money on the 25 1st rates every time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe not in 1v1, but you try a PB (or even OW battle) with 25 1st vs 25 5th rates and see how well that goes.

 

As soon as the big slow ships have friends to protect the stern it becomes a question of broadside weight vs armor + repair capability.

No amount of manouverability or skill will keep you out of the line of fire of ALL enemies.

Not only that but winning a PB is more about keeping or getting BR advantage anyway.

I will put my money on the 25 1st rates every time

 

thats not completly correct, since there are tactics to break the line formations and single ships out reducing the effectiveness of the lineship team, of corse in a symetric lineship battels a frig is very fast dusted. however with the future changes it might be possible, hell it will be a freaking hard fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not in favor of PB quotas or lobby systems in this game. A few reasons.

1. The sailing time and occasionally risk to get to the Port Battle to then only be denied in by a ship quota would be terrible. The 25 limit is as bad as that should get.

2. First rates in Regional port battles works. It is restrictive keeping the value if first rates low and with the cost high it makes a third rate a more cost effective workhorse ship. 1st rates will be a luxury. So what if the enemy brings x25 first rates to a port battle. They only have one dura. Faced with a x25 third rate fleet they may win. But all losses will have to be replaced. Meanwhile those third rates are good for two more battles. In a long battle of economic attrition the third rates win out as long as the cost to build 1st rates stays high and at 1dura per build.

3. As important as it may be for some players to sail 1st rates it is just as important to others that it be expensive and restrictive that they do. It's balance.

4. I have, to date, found no solid use for 1st rates since the PB size restrictions to only regionals. I can build my own, have captured a few and found no real use for any of them other than throw always on a regional PB. I don't even bother to build them anymore. Which means the devs system for reducing their numbers is working in many ways. It's a luxury ship and should be for the most part.

Edited by Bach
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading more about this time periods naval history , it seems quite clear that first rates were so expensive to build that only the biggest navies could afford them. Also they were so expensive to maintain that they were left in ordinary or mothballs for half of their careers, seeing little action.

 

if the Devs want more realism in the game and to see less 1st rates , maybe they need to restrict each account to one first rate per month or every six months?

 

If accounts get restrictions on ships they can build or own then it will be a game changer as to what ships you see in port battles. you will have to think carefully about bringing your 1st rate into a port battle, nations would need to choose wisely when to use their 1st rates.

 

example

 

1st rates are 1 per account and when lost cannot own one for another six months.

2nd rates 1 per account and when lost cannot own one for another month

3 rate no restrictions etc

 

Thats on top of the massive cost to build and maintain a 1st rate too.

Edited by Rebel Witch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would have thought this was common knowledge.

 

At Trafalgar the brits had 27 SOLs and 6 smaller ships.
3 1st rates, 4 2nd rates and 20 3rd rates.

 

The same for the franco spanish fleet, only 7 smaller ships.

 

or Cape St. Vincents

Brits 15 SOLs 7 smaller ships
Spanish 24 SOLs, 12 Smaller ships.

The same pattern at the Nile.

 

If we got back to the 7 year war and we get the same at Quiberon Bay...

 

The ship of the line is the standard ship used in big naval battles... something that really should be rather obvious.
 

 

Forcing battles with both 1st rates and a large number of sloops would not solve anything or be historical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would have thought this was common knowledge.

 

At Trafalgar the brits had 27 SOLs and 6 smaller ships.

3 1st rates, 4 2nd rates and 20 3rd rates.

 

The same for the franco spanish fleet, only 7 smaller ships.

 

or Cape St. Vincents

Brits 15 SOLs 7 smaller ships

Spanish 24 SOLs, 12 Smaller ships.

The same pattern at the Nile.

 

If we got back to the 7 year war and we get the same at Quiberon Bay...

 

The ship of the line is the standard ship used in big naval battles... something that really should be rather obvious.

 

 

Forcing battles with both 1st rates and a large number of sloops would not solve anything or be historical.

 

 

The problem we are all trying to solve is the port battles with 25v25 1st rates or something similar where its all 1st and 2nd rates. So yes nobody is saying that SOLs cannot be a big part of battles in NA. The discussion is about limiting SOLs especially 1st rates so we dont always have big battles filled with just 1st rates.

 

Your example is proof we need to limit 1st rates too because look at battle of cape st vincents

9 1st rates, 4 2nd rates and 26 3rd rates involved in that battle.

 

So clearly the real world gives us plenty of examples that 3rd rates are plentiful in big battles and 2nd and 1st rates are not as common.

 

So again my ideas of limiting the number of 1st and 2nd rates in a port battle.

Edited by Rebel Witch
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some people in here forget a few things:

 

1. The changes you propose or are being enacted aren't just effecting the port battle players but also regular players for their missions or open world fun.

2. Some people just like to play 1st rates and these increases in cost have a rather shitty effect on them forcing them into ships they don't enjoy (again this is outside of the port battle discussion).

3. While it is called a PvP server it is really just a mixed server - I and probably many others joined this server to experience both options equally and not ahve PvP be regarded as the only option and duty!

4. I think the change needs to occur in the port battles (mechanic) itself and I would be fine with limits inside that. But outside you hurt a bunch of players who sometimes or always couldn't care less about port battles.

5. I'd also not leave out the sail to the port as it is a crucial moment for a possible intercept - flags will disappear but fleets shouldnt just get a free port attack. Even though speaking from a British perspective I think this is were a lot of teh smaller nations shine. While they can't match our first rate fleet they can get some BR together and focus the flag down and I'd surely miss such valiant actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see any problems with 1rd ingame.

To build them, you need a well organized Clan/Player structure or sec account/perfect self organisation.

Even so it is very expensive to lose them.

So in this topic we find a old whine Thread again. The players that are not interested in teamplay learn how hard it is to get the first, sec or even 3rd bring stuff like 1rd problem, everyone in Game with Max Rank would use 1rd everywhere.

Last time (about 3rd) this whine brought all day 4rd battles, so this players could take part with their cheaper connis.

I dont like it until today.

Iam max rank for a while now, i use ships from Rattle, suprise over Essex, Trinc, conni, inger up to 3/2/1rd of needed or just for fun. It is horrible to go alone Open World with a 1rd normaly a clanmember escort me in frigate.

So what 1rd problem were talkin about. At least 1rd battles are really rare and expensive and you cant use your best upgrades because they are dura 1.

So here is no issue with 1rd.

Not Even historical, all big powerchanging battles include 1/2/3 rd (battleships).

Frigates where used for scouting, trade lane raiding, defending and communication

Cya open World

Bartas11

Danish Kontreadmiral

Edited by Bartas11
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem we are all trying to solve is the port battles with 25v25 1st rates or something similar where its all 1st and 2nd rates. So yes nobody is saying that SOLs cannot be a big part of battles in NA. The discussion is about limiting SOLs especially 1st rates so we dont always have big battles filled with just 1st rates.

 

Your example is proof we need to limit 1st rates too because look at battle of cape st vincents

9 1st rates, 4 2nd rates and 26 3rd rates involved in that battle.

 

So clearly the real world gives us plenty of examples that 3rd rates are plentiful in big battles and 2nd and 1st rates are not as common.

 

So again my ideas of limiting the number of 1st and 2nd rates in a port battle.

Read the post I originally replied to. He suggested limiting ALL SOLs and forcing half the ships to be 5th rate or smaller.

And that is simply not historical when you look at the big battles in history.

The none SOL make up at most 1/3 of the ships and often much fewer.

And it will not make for a better gaming experience mixing small ships and 1st rates.

the 3rd rate should be the norm.

 

 

Iam all for trying to limit 1st and 2nd rates... but not with hard rules for the battles. Use price, durability, maybe add upkeep for the big ships or something... 

 

Even better, make the BP maps have different debts of water... so 1st rates can only be used in some  parts of the map.

(Like at Copenhagen, where Nelson only used the smaller SOLs, and even then he had ships hit the bottom)

Edited by thomas aagaard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read the post I originally replied to. He suggested limiting ALL SOLs and forcing half the ships to be 5th rate or smaller.

And that is simply not historical when you look at the big battles in history.

The none SOL make up at most 1/3 of the ships and often much fewer.

And it will not make for a better gaming experience mixing small ships and 1st rates.

the 3rd rate should be the norm.

 

 

Iam all for trying to limit 1st and 2nd rates... but not with hard rules for the battles. Use price, durability, maybe add upkeep for the big ships or something... 

 

Even better, make the BP maps have different debts of water... so 1st rates can only be used in some  parts of the map.

(Like at Copenhagen, where Nelson only used the smaller SOLs, and even then he had ships hit the bottom)

 

 

I see what you are saying and thank you for clarifying. I believe there are two opinions on how to limit the power creep of too many 1st/2nd rates. One group says make SOLs more and more expensive to limit the amount. The other group says put hard limits on port battles for 1st rates, 2nd rates etc.

 

I am in the camp that says put hard limits on the rate of ship in the port battle because i believe in the long run if you keep increasing the cost of players SOLs it will frustrate them more than saying this is the limit and it never changes. From my experiences in games, Players want the rule set then they can work with that, if the devs keep messing around with the cost of ships it is going to piss players off.

Edited by Rebel Witch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read the post I originally replied to. He suggested limiting ALL SOLs and forcing half the ships to be 5th rate or smaller.

And that is simply not historical when you look at the big battles in history.

The none SOL make up at most 1/3 of the ships and often much fewer.

And it will not make for a better gaming experience mixing small ships and 1st rates.

the 3rd rate should be the norm.

 

 

Iam all for trying to limit 1st and 2nd rates... but not with hard rules for the battles. Use price, durability, maybe add upkeep for the big ships or something... 

 

Even better, make the BP maps have different debts of water... so 1st rates can only be used in some  parts of the map.

(Like at Copenhagen, where Nelson only used the smaller SOLs, and even then he had ships hit the bottom)

 

Historicly... Not every captain was able to get a SOL,  US navy was lacking of a useful number (5 till 1820)of SOLs, Pyrates were runing shoners and briggs, Historicly we dont have a TIC TAC TOE game for deciding a Boarding engagement, Historicly Ships have Acclreation based turning, Historicly History was written by the winner.

 

I hope you see the problem with an argument about Historicly stuff

 

Think about it as Game, and as a Gamemechanic, making SOLs a more rare view is inportand for the later game economie and PBs or Regional contesting, you should not be able to dish out SOLs like the US navy dished a Cleveland cruiser after another (i think there were 60 Cleveland cruisers made during the war) Loosing a SOL should hurt, economical AND in military strenght, so giving the troopstrenght of a nation a Tatic value instead of having a throwawayship.

 

in the current game, nobody is crying then he looses his powerful 1strate, but at the sametime less experienced player are to afraid to take em out because a evil pyrate comes up and sternrake it to oblivion (oh acclerate based turning niom nom nom) AND THIS SHOULD CHANGE.

 

Limiting a ships per player is a way, but that would give bigger nations a higher advantage to others, an diffrent aspect is to limit them by nation, also you need prove that you are a captain that would be able to use it first before get one, But dont ask me how you should do that, maybe depending on some statistics,scoreboard or such.

 

Another way is limiting BR per PB. 

 

If you have lets say 7000 max BR to fill then you cant put only 1strates in it well you might but you would be outnumbered by 3rdrates, You can have 3 times more Ingermanlands then 1strates in a battel with that Br limit.

a BR limit would mix up the whole PB and gives also frigatecaptains the opertunity to be in a PB and wreck a bigger ship.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historicly... Not every captain was able to get a SOL,  US navy was lacking of a useful number (5 till 1820)of SOLs, Pyrates were runing shoners and briggs, Historicly we dont have a TIC TAC TOE game for deciding a Boarding engagement, Historicly Ships have Acclreation based turning, Historicly History was written by the winner.

 

I hope you see the problem with an argument about Historicly stuff

 

Think about it as Game, and as a Gamemechanic, making SOLs a more rare view is inportand for the later game economie and PBs or Regional contesting, you should not be able to dish out SOLs like the US navy dished a Cleveland cruiser after another (i think there were 60 Cleveland cruisers made during the war) Loosing a SOL should hurt, economical AND in military strenght, so giving the troopstrenght of a nation a Tatic value instead of having a throwawayship.

 

in the current game, nobody is crying then he looses his powerful 1strate, but at the sametime less experienced player are to afraid to take em out because a evil pyrate comes up and sternrake it to oblivion (oh acclerate based turning niom nom nom) AND THIS SHOULD CHANGE.

 

Limiting a ships per player is a way, but that would give bigger nations a higher advantage to others, an diffrent aspect is to limit them by nation, also you need prove that you are a captain that would be able to use it first before get one, But dont ask me how you should do that, maybe depending on some statistics,scoreboard or such.

 

Another way is limiting BR per PB. 

 

If you have lets say 7000 max BR to fill then you cant put only 1strates in it well you might but you would be outnumbered by 3rdrates, You can have 3 times more Ingermanlands then 1strates in a battel with that Br limit.

a BR limit would mix up the whole PB and gives also frigatecaptains the opertunity to be in a PB and wreck a bigger ship.

 

 

I think i am on board with the limiting BR rate of a battle. that way you can let nations decide what ships they want to bring they can mix and match as they please however gone will be the days of 25 1st rates. you will see more ships represented. perhaps when the devs are able too, the smaller ships will have a greater purpose in battles too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historicly... Not every captain was able to get a SOL,  US navy was lacking of a useful number (5 till 1820)of SOLs, Pyrates were runing shoners and briggs, Historicly we dont have a TIC TAC TOE game for deciding a Boarding engagement, Historicly Ships have Acclreation based turning, Historicly History was written by the winner.

 

I hope you see the problem with an argument about Historicly stuff

 

Think about it as Game, and as a Gamemechanic, making SOLs a more rare view is inportand for the later game economie and PBs or Regional contesting, you should not be able to dish out SOLs like the US navy dished a Cleveland cruiser after another (i think there were 60 Cleveland cruisers made during the war) Loosing a SOL should hurt, economical AND in military strenght, so giving the troopstrenght of a nation a Tatic value instead of having a throwawayship.

 

in the current game, nobody is crying then he looses his powerful 1strate, but at the sametime less experienced player are to afraid to take em out because a evil pyrate comes up and sternrake it to oblivion (oh acclerate based turning niom nom nom) AND THIS SHOULD CHANGE.

 

Limiting a ships per player is a way, but that would give bigger nations a higher advantage to others, an diffrent aspect is to limit them by nation, also you need prove that you are a captain that would be able to use it first before get one, But dont ask me how you should do that, maybe depending on some statistics,scoreboard or such.

 

Another way is limiting BR per PB. 

 

If you have lets say 7000 max BR to fill then you cant put only 1strates in it well you might but you would be outnumbered by 3rdrates, You can have 3 times more Ingermanlands then 1strates in a battel with that Br limit.

a BR limit would mix up the whole PB and gives also frigatecaptains the opertunity to be in a PB and wreck a bigger ship.

The US should not even be in the game. Also they could and did build them... They just didn't use them.

So I find them rather irrelevant to the question.

 

3rd rates was the backbone of the fleets and they should be so in this game. 

Edited by thomas aagaard
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US should not even be in the game. Also they could and did build them... They just didn't use them.

So I find them rather irrelevant to the question.

 

3rd rates was the backbone of the fleets and they should be so in this game. 

sombody cant read... using historicly things, as argument are simply not solid, it always end up in a history lesson but never in a balanced game

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If certain ships shall be limited, it should not be possible to craft them in unlimited numbers once you have the BP. Let each ship require a BP to build. Those might be gained in battle or in events. By this way the devs can control the number of ships. Once the ship is built, the BP is gone and you need another BP for the next ship.

Some ships might be free to craft once a certain level is reached, like today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sombody cant read... using historicly things, as argument are simply not solid, it always end up in a history lesson but never in a balanced game

 

I'd say balance is not good for a game based on history BUT I agree with you. Credibility is what we aim for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say balance is not good for a game based on history BUT I agree with you. Credibility is what we aim for.

 

this game is a split between simulator and arcade, combatwise it does it good, boarding action is very unfair and unbalanced, but it will change wit ha new systeme in the next few months. Also we realy dont want 100% historicly accuracy, it would hurt the gameplay and the comunity. 

 

we should aim for a game that makes oyu feel like a captain, Tactis used in that time should work(they do) Engaging and escape should work (it does), Trading and Economy should mean something and it does rather not, the NPC economy creates random resources and gives everyone a endless resourcepool. the playerside trade and economy is meaningless, since Trade only happens in their nationalhubs (will change with the new resource distribution)

 

1st and 2ndrates and some 3rdrates, should be rare, but meaningful for large battels, while not pushing 5th and 4thrate out of battels (comming acclerationbased turning will overall buff smaller vessels) there should be no metaship.

 

ATM we have meta ships, that are the rattle, the trinc and the connie for OW battels, and Ingerman, and Victories are for PB

 

i personally like the Frigate (cherubin) a very solid ship

 

 

there is a long looooong list in the devblog with stuff todo, most of these thing came onto the list because they need fit the current Gameplay desing, or desing goal

 

trade will have a way bigger impact in the future.

 

Boarding will change entirly

 

the perks give actuel more choices for the player, player like choices

 

more advanced quest(-lines)

 

the new map with regional fighting

 

new ships (more player choices)

...

and so on and so on

 

 

If certain ships shall be limited, it should not be possible to craft them in unlimited numbers once you have the BP. Let each ship require a BP to build. Those might be gained in battle or in events. By this way the devs can control the number of ships. Once the ship is built, the BP is gone and you need another BP for the next ship.

Some ships might be free to craft once a certain level is reached, like today.

 

you dont need to controll the amount of ships, you need to controll the trade and resources to build these ships, and here is the player the balance. In a war there are Tactical and Strategic targets.

 

Tactical targets are Military assests, aka military ships this might hurt the the military strengh of a nation but it will not end a war, you end a war with destroying strategig asset, such as factories, traders or ports with primary resources aka, iron gold coal and stuff like that things you need to build ships, if oyu are able to destroy the economy of a nation then this nation is not able to build ships anymore and need to surrender, that should be also in game, that all port except the capital can be attacked, however some ports will be given back after a nation voted for  surrender.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

reading your above statements from admins.. I hope a lot of them are true..

 

The SOLs turning and accel needs a huge nerf.. 

 

If the top speed is legit from historical aspects of 12knots..it would take a ship a lot of time to get to that speed due to the mass..

 

In battles I am amazed at how well they turn to keep up with 5th rates and some frigs.

 

I'm all cool with them running a ship down after a long time, bu some of these ships turn way to fast and keep there speed.  Even worse turn through wind and do so with ease.

 

I don't think all first rates will be nation specific eventually. Just the really special ones like the current ones we have. Which are extremely famous.

 

My biggest concern is that an attempt at balance of these unique ships with unique characteristics may be made when nations that have a 1st rate they consider is inferior complain. I don't ever want the santi to have exactly the same characteristics as the victory for instance.

There are records of sols catching frigates in real life in the correct wind conditions.

 

Maybe running them down after getting full sails of wind, but I bet it wasn't in a turn base fight with every one doing zig zag criss cross patterns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in the last patch the cost for building a 1st rate just went up by 1000 indian tea or iberian meats. This is yet another attempt by devs to increase the cost of 1st rates to get people to use "other ships" when the most power matters.

 

This tweaking of cost for 1st rates will never solve the problem they intend to fix because 1. Players who want to win are going to game hard to bring the best ship they can 2. Power creep as the game progresses, more and more players become filthy rich, clans work together and you will still only see 1st rates.

 

The only way to fix this issue of wanting a better mix of ships in port battles is to make port battles a lobby organized event.

 

Lobby Organized event is similar to how it was in POTBS. Where players queue up to join the battle event. Doing it this way also solves two problems. Mixes the size of ships and balances battles better.

 

Since the change in regional conflict mechanic is already going to encourage players to sail around areas and PVP. Why not have the main event (port battle) be a Queue event, this way more people can participate as well.

 

By having port battles become Queue events, the devs can put limits to what ships and how many can join for each tier battle. So for a regional capital there could be a limit of 5 1st rates, 10 2nd rates and the rest 3rd rate or below. This solves the problem of having too many 1st rates. By having the Queue system you can jump in a ship at whatever port you are at, queue up to join the battle and pick a secondary or tertiary ship you can use if the max number of 1st rates is already reached. It could be first come first serve basis.

 

You can do the same thing in deep water battles too. Where lets say the max number of 4th rates per side is 10. Then the rest of the ships must be 5th rate and lower.

 

I know this is a huge change recommended and hard core pvp'rs who like the realistic having to sail to a port to defend or attack wont like this. I understand. But at the end of the day its a game and i think the devs are struggling to find ways to limit players bringing so many 1st rates to battles. So instead of the constant upping the cost, maybe its time to find alternative solutions to the game play . this is just for port battles mind you.

 

have fun out there.

 

I was talking about this with a friend and came to the same conclusion. PBs should have caps on different classes of ship to prevent ridiculously anachronistic battles that aren't fun for lower level captains, history buffs or fans of more varied tactics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...