Revert Mast Changes

[TommyShelby]

My suggestion is fairly simple.

Revert the changes done to masts in the hotfix. 

Mast HP Buff and Mast Thickness Buff must be reverted.
Demasting was already hard to do before the hotfix. Now its impossibru. 
Chaining was used way more than demasting before the hotfix. Now demasting will only be used when SoL are fighting Frigates. 

I will link my posts from the feedback topic because i can't be bothered writing the same stuff again. 

Please comment/like/subscribe etc etc if you agree. Thaaank you. 

EDIT: EliteDelta brought up a good point. The smaller ships seem alright looking at the numbers. But everything bigger than Surprise must be reverted imo. 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by TommyShelby

[Puchu]

Yes, the thickness buffs need to completely be reverted! It was one of the most skillfull things to do and now its gone for no reason.

(Same goes for the speednerfs imo)

[Puchu]

There was no problem to begin with. Sniping masts reliably was already very very hard to do and only like 10 ppl on the whole server were actually good enough to use it as a real strategy in duels.

[Yar Matey]

I think mast thickness needs a nerf. but the increased hitpoints is fine and needed.  2 equally rated ships should be able to demast each other. The hitpoints needs to be increased because I have demasted ships with just 2 broadsides before, and when you add in more ships such as 3v3's, ships have been demasted less than 1 minute into the battle after the first cannon went off. 

Also, Puchu, it is not hard to demast ships, I have been showing clan members how to do it, and once you know how to use your rolling front fire (or back fire) and turn your ship into the broadside, its not hard to hit the masts. 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Yar Matey

[Puchu]

im talking about single shotting. Again, i can understand a very slight hp buff, i dont think it is needed though. But the thickness buff needs to completely go!

Edited December 21, 2016 by Puchu

[Silfarion]

11 minutes ago, Yar Matey said:

I think mast thickness needs a nerf. but the increased hitpoints is fine and needed.  2 equally rated ships should be able to demast each other. The hitpoints needs to be increased because I have demasted ships with just 2 broadsides before, and when you add in more ships such as 3v3's, ships have been demasted less than 1 minute into the battle after the first cannon went off. 

I dont see the need for the HP bonus at all either. Reinforced Masts already exits, as does Stiffness. Both of those will let you tank enough mast hits to either change your position, or escape if needed. However, if you put yourself in a position where you offer a consistent mast rake to the enemy, then you should be punished for doing so if the enemy captain can execute it effectively (like we could before this patch).

Though in terms of demasting something in minutes; context is important. A 4th rate or heavy 5th rate should be able to quickly demast the smaller frigates, like Cerbs, Renos and Surprises, as they will often attack in groups and rarely alone. In terms of 3v3s and whatnot, that is as it should be. If you can accurately and effectively focus fire down the masts of an enemy ships, and their allies don't sufficiently punish you for doing so, that is fair game. The risk/reward was really fine as it was, there was no need to provide a handicap in the form of this HP buff.

But yeah, the thickness buff is utter nonsense and needs to go back please. 

[DeRuyter]

Here is my post from the other thread:

12 minutes ago, DeRuyter said:

  Shooting to disable rigging - not aiming with laser accuracy at a mast mind you, but on the uproll at the rigging which took out control lines, standing rigging and spars was a historic tactic in the age of sail. One has to remember that masts often came down because the standing rigging was shot away not necessarily because it was penetrated by a ball and other types of disabling shot could do this as well.  I am not sure this is modeled directly in game other than by mast HP so some form of dismasting needs to be viable in game.

This tactic should not be nerfed because some players are very good at dismasting (personally I find it hard to dismast a player).

When reading accounts of 1v1 frigate actions you often see both ships suffering a lot of rigging damage so for example a Trinc should be able to damage a Constitution's masts with long guns and certainly vice versa.

Maybe people are conflating chaining with dismasting by shooting ball when they post that it is a ganking tactic or that it is easy?  Anyway maybe HP buff ok especially for lower mast, but thickness is too much.  

I do think you should see upper mast sections falling more frequently than the whole mast. Those lighter spars could be taken out with chain and bar shot. Now just get rid of silly repair of the whole mast at sea

[Pada]

Totally agree, revert it back especially the thickness buff.  Don't know why it was increased in the first place. Heavy 5th and 4th rates now have 113 mast thickness, almost as strong as 1st rates in the past! This is crazy!

[Captain_Chis]

maybe long cannons will be viable in a 1v1 duel

[Mark Leahy]

Revert changes

Add a slight thickness bonus on reinforced masts module

make the module decrease the speed even more by a little bit

Edited December 21, 2016 by Mark Leahy

[Puchu]

Thickness bonus is the worst, because it reduces the range from which you can do damage, and if you are only slightly out of range you just do 0 damage. The Binary matter of it is the sad part.

 

PS: Why do we have a testers forum? Did anyone say anything about masts being too weak during the last patch? Cant we discuss massive gamechanges like this in this forum before they are thrown out into the world? We could prevent things like this. It's so hard to roll stuff back once its implemented. We all have soooo many hours spent into the game that we might be able to judge if an idea makes sense or not.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Puchu

[Yar Matey]

4 hours ago, Silfarion said:

I dont see the need for the HP bonus at all either. Reinforced Masts already exits, as does Stiffness. Both of those will let you tank enough mast hits to either change your position, or escape if needed. However, if you put yourself in a position where you offer a consistent mast rake to the enemy, then you should be punished for doing so if the enemy captain can execute it effectively (like we could before this patch).

Though in terms of demasting something in minutes; context is important. A 4th rate or heavy 5th rate should be able to quickly demast the smaller frigates, like Cerbs, Renos and Surprises, as they will often attack in groups and rarely alone. In terms of 3v3s and whatnot, that is as it should be. If you can accurately and effectively focus fire down the masts of an enemy ships, and their allies don't sufficiently punish you for doing so, that is fair game. The risk/reward was really fine as it was, there was no need to provide a handicap in the form of this HP buff.

But yeah, the thickness buff is utter nonsense and needs to go back please. 

The reason why I personally feel like masts need a buff on their hit points is because it takes less than 1 min 30 seconds for a 2-3 man group to shoot a mast down (prepatch).  You being in OCEAN would know how easy it is to take a mast out.  All one needs to do is go watch some of the tournament battles to see this.  

A mast is different from the side stern or bow of your ship because you cannot protect it.  If one side of your ship is low, you try to keep your weak side away from the enemy, much in the same way you maneuver your ship to keep your stern protected.  Also, you can angle your ship to make shots bounce.  A mast however, cannot be protected.  It is always sitting there for you to shoot at and once it falls, the battle is pretty much decided as you position your ship behind the enemy and stern rake him over and over.  Making the decision to take a mast out needs to be a tough decision, essentially a trade off.  If mast thickness was a nonissue, then it would be an no brainer; you shoot the mast down before doing any other action.  If an enemy exposes his stern, do you go for a rake or do you go for the masts?  Pre patch one might actually go for the mast instead, but the stern is supposed to be the weakest and most vulnerable part of the ship.  

At the same time, however, I want ships that are 1 class lower have the option to demast a ship, this is why not only should we have a roll back, but a nerf of mast thickness.  This way a connie can demast a bellona with its lower deck guns and a frigate can demast a connie with its lower deck guns ect...

Anyway, this is my 2 cents on the issue.  

Edited December 22, 2016 by Yar Matey

[TommyShelby]

Considering that, since the Carronade nerf, i haven't seen anyone go for a demast except for a few matches where 4th rates were demasting Surprises. 

Instead everyone used chain. Chain is all over the place and it has been used in almost all the battles i fought since the Carronade nerf. Heck, i have even started using chain despite the fact that i absolutely hate chain because it is so easy to get good results with. 

I, personally, do not see any reason for the Mast HP Buff.
And the mast thickness change is even more uncalled for which should be obvious to everyone. 

Demasting was barely done before this patch because chain was better. 
Demasting took skill, it required you to get so close to the enemy ship that he would be able to bash your hull or even move in for a rake. (The rake depending on positioning ofcourse.) 
Chaining, well, Chaining is probably the thing that takes the least amount of skill. You can stay at a range where the enemy is unable to damage you. 

So once more, please, for the love of Tommy, revert the Mast HP and Thickness Buff. 

No matter how i look at it i cannot understand why someone would think buffing Mast HP/Thickness in the first place. 
What is argument for making these changes? 
What is the intention of these changes? 

I'm not trying to insult anyone here (So i'm sorry if it comes off an insult), i'm just very very confused and just slightly frustrated.. 
@admin

[akd]

17 hours ago, Pada said:

Totally agree, revert it back especially the thickness buff.  Don't know why it was increased in the first place. Heavy 5th and 4th rates now have 113 mast thickness, almost as strong as 1st rates in the past! This is crazy!

It was based on "feedback from PvP players," but not here or in the testing forum.

[Pada]

Please admin, next time use your tester forum and get constructive feedback from PvP players that know and love the game before you ninja something in that destroys mechanics some people have practiced and put a lot of time in to master this skill.

[Yar Matey]

Lets assume for the moment that a bunch of players were complaining about being demasted, and consequently, maybe just maybe it was too easy to demast a ship, I think the better way to have made the changes was to maybe give mast a small 10% hp buff and let the players test in the world, if its not enough, maybe buff another 10% and see.  It would have been, in my opinion, a much better way to approach the problem.  The reason being is, we had a damage model, that most were really happy with before this change.  Yes, some were complaining about stern raking and maybe some were complaining about being demasted, but I feel like they were the minority.

From now on, if the devs have feedback about what is too strong or weak, only small changes should be made.  Use a scalpel, to fine tune your damage model, small changes here and there.  Small buffs and nerfs, and see how it plays out. 

This goes for any change you make as far as fine tuning the model.  For example, if stern raking is seen as a problem, maybe nerf crew losses by 10% per ball and then test.  The devs already had had a gem of a damage model, please refrain from brining a butcher knife to trim it and remember to use the scalpel. 

[Zooloo]

i've seen much demasts even after carronade nerf in light frigates duels and i think it was a too inevitable tactic in such situations. And while it takes skill, tactics wise it's quite limited.

[TommyShelby]

1 hour ago, Zooloo said:

i've seen much demasts even after carronade nerf in light frigates duels and i think it was a too inevitable tactic in such situations. And while it takes skill, tactics wise it's quite limited.

That could be true, and if you say it i'l believe you! 
I don't sail light frigates myself. The Smallest ship i sail is a Santa Cecilia

[NorthernWolves]

I've seen a Surprise with reinforced masts endure all the charge and double a Constitution had, all within 200m, get down to 54% by that alone and not lose a mast, so this buff is just going to murder the art of demasting.

It's age of sail game, 90% of historical ship engagements involved a lost mast. Spars and rigging should be repairable, but not a mast during combat. Rigging shock should be much more frequent, but permanent yard and rigging damage could be undone by shifting men to repair (but that's a whole other proposal on free form crew sliders).

Also could we get some dismantling shot variety

Edited December 22, 2016 by NorthernWolves
photo

[TommyShelby]

Tested some demasting today. 

(Trinc and bigger).

The Conclusion based on some quick testing and looking at numbers: 
Demasting is not viable. Not in duels and not in group fights. 

You generally have to be so close to even penetrate a mast that you might as well go for the instantly crippling stern/bow rake. And even when close enough to get a perfect mast rake on an enemy ship, masts have enough HP to withstand several mast rakes at 100 meters. 

I plead once more, please revert to what it was before the patch that changed Mast HP/Thickness.
Demasting wasn't really viable before that patch either compared to say, chain, hullbashing and raking... Now it's even less viable.

PS. Why does Trincomalee all of a sudden have higher Mast Thickness than Constitution? I'm le Confused.

[akd]

51 minutes ago, TommyShelby said:

PS. Why does Trincomalee all of a sudden have higher Mast Thickness than Constitution? I'm le Confused.
 

Because most thicknesses in game are arbitrary and have nothing to do with reality. Why does 700 ton Santa Cecilia have thicker hull than 1200 ton Endymion, etc., etc.?

[NorthernWolves]

Yeah I noticed that awhile back too, and that the Agamemnon has a thicker mast than a 3rd rate.

Real life measurments:
Dragon 74 gun, launched 1798, 207 tons bigger than the Bellona, main mast diameter: 36 inches

Constitution main mast diameter: 36 inches

Unicorn (Leda Class frigate): 28 inches

Edited December 27, 2016 by NorthernWolves

[Yar Matey]

Now that we got the changes, or at least most of the changes we were looking for with the revert of mast thickness.  I am curious as to why the Endymion, Ingermanland, and Agamemnon have such thick masts.  The Ingerrmanland and the Agamemnon are the biggest offenders here if the wiki is correct.  111cm puts them in a tier above that of the Bellona.  This makes no sense. 

Currently from the wiki:

Frigate:  86 cm

Endymion:  103 cm

Indefatigable:  103 cm

Constitution:  103cm

Ingermanland:  111cm

Agamemnon: 111cm

Bellona:  105 cm

all 2nd and 1st rates:  119 cm

 

source:  http://www.navalactionwiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

Edited December 29, 2016 by Yar Matey

[Pada]

In game Bellona mast thickness says 111. I think it was increased to 122 in the thickness buff patch and than lowered again in a hotfix to it's previous thickness of 111.

The real question is, why does Trincomalee and Endymion (108cm) still have thicker masts than Constitution and Indefatigable (103cm)?

[Yar Matey]

1 hour ago, Pada said:

In game Bellona mast thickness says 111. I think it was increased to 122 in the thickness buff patch and than lowered again in a hotfix to it's previous thickness of 111.

The real question is, why does Trincomalee and Endymion (108cm) still have thicker masts than Constitution and Indefatigable (103cm)?

 

What about the Agamemnon?