van der Clam Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 30 minutes ago, Kabocha said: 1. The middle health bar on the ship makes a mast drop, i don't really like this since you get it down with just sternrakes, all we did in the battles was sternraking and nothing else. I like the idea but more as a healthbar visible for the controller of the ship and not for the enemy. The enenmy will see a color change from blue to orange to red. and sternrakes will not effect the masts as much as they do now. While I do understand this is physically possible in RL, I think it needs to be rethought. Even with a mast broken in the midship decks, all the rigging outside would prevent it's collapse, unless that also was destroyed. So, I'm guessing there would need to be a rigging model (months of dev modeling work), or it needs to go back to being included in the sails damage. If nothing else, at least make the center structure bar take a really long time for complete failure to occur..maybe increase it 50-75% more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kabocha Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, van der Decken said: While I do understand this is physically possible in RL, I think it needs to be rethought. Even with a mast broken in the midship decks, all the rigging outside would prevent it's collapse, unless that also was destroyed. So, I'm guessing there would need to be a rigging model (months of dev modeling work), or it needs to go back to being included in the sails damage. If nothing else, at least make the center structure bar take a really long time for complete failure to occur..maybe increase it 50-75% more. Yeah the real life thing is great. Ofcourse sternraking cripples a ship alot and above that you get this mast dmg bonus, so if you lost alot of crew you will outomaticly become a boarding victim. This sounds awsome but might make sternraking a bit too overpowered, no? I would suggest to have normal sail damage and reward a painful sternrake with a smaller mast dmg bonus. So people will not give everything to just get 1 sternrake. I want to feel the balance (doesn't have to be completly perfect since this is all about how you sail) between brawling and sternrakes, so yeah some rebalancing on this middle bar would make battles alot more awsome, alot more fighting options Edited January 27, 2017 by Kabocha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McArdbeg Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 55 minutes ago, n_Ka said: I have trying 1 nation for see, delete my char for going again pirate and the redeemable item are not here ... 44 minutes ago, Jœrnson said: Same for me me and my clan mate tried the same, would be nice if you can reset the char on the testbed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crayon Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 (edited) demasting by shooting the hull is really really weird. My process: Removed stern armor, chewed through hull armor and half hull integrity. Shot the mizen mast till it fell off. Then proceeded to shoot main mast, but it didnt fall off. I was single shooting for better test results. I shot the main mast a good 20 times (My rattlesnake v Navy Brig) but it didnt fall off. I hit the broadside one time, and it finally broke. Edited January 27, 2017 by Crayon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Texas Sir Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Ok DEMAST mission is a cutter against 2 Brigs. That is way out class of s aship. no clue what the Snow went against cause I couldn't find one close by. I'm getting melted by these two brigs cause the only ship I can find is a cedar. The little guns on the cutter can't even do enough damage against ships that can keep turning with me. I know you want us to test the structure stuff, but shouldn't we be testing the other stuff too and why am I going against two ship a BR level higher than myself? I can see if this was like the Kills mission and you face one at a time. I can prob take one on but not two. Notice no one has gotten any of the PvE events done at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Texas Sir Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 38 minutes ago, Intrepido said: A rank 10 officer to test the different ammos would be appreciated. should of did one mission to buy an officer before you redeemed you xp. Would of shot him straight to rank 10 when you ranked up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
van der Clam Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 If anyone has the steps to create a backup in Steam so we can have both instances of beta and beta test games, it would be greatly appreciated 3 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said: should of did one mission to buy an officer before you redeemed you xp. Would of shot him straight to rank 10 when you ranked up. Cheeky nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anne Wildcat Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 3 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said: should of did one mission to buy an officer before you redeemed you xp. Would of shot him straight to rank 10 when you ranked up. I didn't do that either. ? No biggie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JG14_Para Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 "Port battle entry is only allowed 30 mins after login at sea." Does this mean: 30 minutes or more, or up to 30 minutes, or exactly 30 minutes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Texas Sir Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Just now, JG14_Para said: "Port battle entry is only allowed 30 mins after login at sea." Does this mean: 30 minutes or more, or up to 30 minutes, or exactly 30 minutes? This would also mean any port battle that is right when server come back up from maintance no one can join for 30 mins. Which means it will be started by time any one can join. They really need to fix the port battle windows so non can be done during any server times and well so we can fight in our US prime time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirSamuelHood Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 11 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said: This would also mean any port battle that is right when server come back up from maintance no one can join for 30 mins. No it wouldn't. 10 hours ago, admin said: Port battle entry is only allowed 30 mins after login at sea. This penalty can be dropped if you enter any port. If you log off at sea and login within 5 mins (disconnects etc) you don’t get that penalty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuck Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 "All contracts that are more than 15 days long are going to be automatically cancelled from now on." What happens to the purchased goods if you do not have an outpost in that port? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tuck said: "All contracts that are more than 15 days long are going to be automatically cancelled from now on." What happens to the purchased goods if you do not have an outpost in that port? Yeah, that needs to not apply to filled contracts. Re: structure damage - apply full brakes; not a good change, and makes very little sense. Will go into detail in structure damage feedback thread. Edited January 28, 2017 by akd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Texas Sir Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 2 hours ago, SirSamuelHood said: No it wouldn't. Attackers can't enter a port and if it's a port battle at 0900 am UTC when servers come back up after maintenance that means you had to log out close before the servers went down. If you did that than you will have 30 min wait. That or you have to travel from a friendly port which might be father away than 30 mins to get there in some ships and winds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar Matey Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 15 hours ago, Wraith said: Sooooo... What the flying fuck? I applaud the dev's for opening up a test server. Fantastic thought! But why are they spending a minute of their time reworking a damage model that almost without exception we've come to terms with and the players are enjoying? There are so many problems with this game besides the combat and the damage model. These are things that are bleeding players/testers left and right. To dick around with a new damage model while the meaningful stuff sits idle for months on end is like: "Captain! The magazine is on fire!!1!" And the Captain disdainfully responds, "Get back to swabbing the deck you scurvy swine, it's not clean enough yet!" Sigh. I'm giving up hope. I know it can be frustrating trying to communicate with the developers but let's see what the next patch has. Maybe there will be more content we do not know about yet. The test server is for testing their new damage model so, let that play out for now. I am not ready to give up on this game because, to be honest, there is not a better age of sail combat game out there as far as the actual combat is concerned. We are almost to a working game. Like you said, most of the tools are there, we just need content added to the game. We have raiding comming soon, so that is one form of content. Let's see how that is when it is implemented. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stilgar Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 I think it would be more useful to allow just two nations/sides on the test server with capitals/starting points close to each other. In this way getting PvP (including PB) will be much simpler as compared to 50 players spread thinly over nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIerrick de Badas Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 have we to level up a new character? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, PIerrick de Badas said: have we to level up a new character? You get redeemable experience points that brings you to max rank instantly (make sure to recruit an officer first to get it to max rank too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIerrick de Badas Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 As there is probably fw people that will be on this server, i think it could be good to start a list of player there and nation. It would be stupid to be splitted in 50 nation. We should just focus on 2 nations to be able to reach the number to make pb and so no? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 The other thread is a bit too well structured for generic feedback, just going to write then here... About the structure damage, and if you really want it in the game. What is the main goal you are trying to achieve? Really fast improvement could be. If side armor have 1000hp and stern has 100hp, stern hits could do 10% damage to the structure. Also you could consider increasing HP. I do not like that it does not matter how you hit the stern, it seemed to cause maximum damage to structure always. Consider also if hits with high angle to your stern, would actually destroy side armor. Would you need structure after that? Structure could be hitboxes as well, and not just hit the stern in any way you like. Stern raking seems to be way way way too efficient. I honestly do not understand why you want to weak sterns and so strong sides. Crew got killed from sides as well, and broadsides were devastating to sides as well. Why to make stern to be a head shot? Stronger you make sides, probably stronger sterns should be as well. I like more the idea that you cause leaks if you want to sink a ship before it loses its armor. This is actually the best way to do it. Leaks also were nerfed too much. You get a good hit, it causes a leak OR you have HP bars to tear down. I think HP bars are way more arcade way to do this. Not against all HP bars, but not sure if all are good either. I also like that side armor gets wrecked and not some central piece, that just is there, and then it just sinks. Maybe cause side damage instead of central from stern hits as well? Also another crew hitbox to stern, if the stern is hammered hard, closest men are dead -> Splinter damage should not cause additional casualties. Balls that do not go straight in, should not cause crew damage at all, especially if all the cannons from stern are destroyed. When hitting masts, you have very big ball hitboxes hitting mast hitboxes. Consider making balls to be smaller. This will cause way less hits to everything, and could make it in general better. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox2run Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 End of big battles in OW? Im done with this crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said: Really fast improvement could be. If side armor have 1000hp and stern has 100hp, stern hits could do 10% damage to the structure. Also you could consider increasing HP. Here is the fundamental problem (beyond the fact that most players only see a need for tweaks to previous system): we have been told before (rightfully) that hull side HP bars are not armor, they are hull integrity. Hull thickness is "armor" and "armor" cannot be "removed" (although it can be indirectly weakened through loss of hull integrity). This makes sense because ships do not have separate armor and structure. The structure of the ship is the "armor." This is a logical system with only one weakness: structural integrity can be completely reduced putting the ship in a sinking state while only shooting at the hull high above the water, when in reality a ship would have to be holed repeatedly at or below the waterline to sink. You can shoot a ships bulwarks until it sinks, which is a bit strange. But all in all, the system make sense. This new system takes the one conceptual weakness of the old system and doubles down on it: now you can sink a ship without even destroying the structural integrity of the sides or bow at any height, and you can do so with the lightest guns in game. You can most easily sink a ship by shooting its "unarmored" (and thus not part of structural integrity) stern galleries, which should have the least effect on flooding other than indirectly (by killing and disordering crew). I agree that a tweak to the old system would be better: allow quartering fire (e.g. firing at 45 degrees through "unarmored" stern galleries to damage the opposite side hull side integrity post penetration, and decrease the all or nothing integrity damage effect of shots that hit at relatively low angles but fail to fully penetrate (logically a shot that goes 54 cm into a 55cm hull side still has some effect on the hull "integrity" even if it does not damage crew or guns behind the hull). Also, previously mast thickness was increased artificially to the point that light guns are completely worthless to target the masts at any point above the deck (if you a close enough to penetrate even top masts or topgallant masts with lighter guns, you are too close to elevate enough to hit them, making the only valid demasting strategy to use the heaviest guns at point blank range against the lower masts, so that you get all (entire mast above deck) or nothing demasting. We polled our clan internally recently and not one of us has seen a top mast or topgallant mast come down on its own in the last 4-5 months. It simply never happens, which suggests a flaw since this was the most common form of demasting in reality. Now this new system exaggerates the all or nothing problem and adds a new and contradictory twist: the lightest guns can now bring down the lower masts (or make doing so much easier) without even needing to aim at the masts at all. It would be much better to properly extend mast hit boxes down into the hull so that damage to masts from hull hits properly accounts for penetration and aim. Perhaps you could also add "chains" hitboxes to hull sides that indirectly weakens masts. TL;DR: the new system is not something that would be good with tweaking or adjustment. The old system was tried, tested, generally liked and makes more sense than this concept of structure independent of "armor." The only tweak to the old system of hull damage I would like to see would be for flooding to be more dependent on shots to the waterline, not just taking down the integrity of one side (e.g. final 1/3 of side integrity can only be removed by shooting hull along the waterline, not shooting at gundeck or above). Edited January 28, 2017 by akd 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, akd said: This new system takes the one conceptual weakness of the old system and doubles down on it: now you can sink a ship without even destroying the structural integrity of the sides or bow at any height, and you can do so with the lightest guns in game. Kinda simplifies everything. I did not personally test small and big cannons but I believe when you say so. This makes it more arcade. You fire a tank with a cannon. Which you could not and cannot penetrate, you simply cannot destroy it. You open a hatch and empty a shotgun in the hatch 1000 times. Tanks structure gets weaker and it falls in pieces. edit. You have masts, those have hitboxes, you hit those, those get damaged. Structure is a hp pool, kinda like jelly inside ships. ... Devs, if you have good ideas you are planning to implement. It is better to say those before you spend development time. Edited January 28, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox2run Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Please dont make all these restrictions on battles. It's like you don't want it to be a sandbox wargame as intended. Make battles open infinite and limitless. But work on distance to targets, area of reinforcements and exit rules instead. Or drop OW altogether and make a lobby based wargame where we can fight Trafalgar with 49 other players. 6 vs 6 is totally disappointing in 2017. Work on mechanisms where players can get together without ts and clans. Like ALL other wargames. Should be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Map zoom increased 2x in commander tablet Is this the main map or am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts