Rattlesnake

[Guest]

Bring back the generic (aka the real rattlesnake) - the heavy rattlesnake is both unrealistic, ahistorical and a physical impossibility. - Just like the Snow (as a sea going vessel it shouldn't be ingame).

[Captain Dug]

Keep them in the game 

[seanjo]

I want a cutty sark with 48 pounders.

[Hodo]

15 hours ago, Bearwall said:

Bring back the generic (aka the real rattlesnake) - the heavy rattlesnake is both unrealistic, ahistorical and a physical impossibility. - Just like the Snow (as a sea going vessel it shouldn't be ingame).

 

The "Snow" did go to sea, just not the HMS Ontario.    The "Snow" is a mast type, Snow masted Brigs.

 

But I agree, remove the heavy rattlesnake, remove the Niagara, remove the 3rd Rate, remove the Pirate Frigate.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Hodo said:

 

The "Snow" did go to sea, just not the HMS Ontario.    The "Snow" is a mast type, Snow masted Brigs.

 

But I agree, remove the heavy rattlesnake, remove the Niagara, remove the 3rd Rate, remove the Pirate Frigate.

As for the mast type - I concede to the point. But the HMS Ontario is not only a lakewater ship, but a poorly constructed one with an imaginary amount of guns and a seaworthyness that defies the laws of physics. The Niagara, the 3rd rate (redundant - everyone builds Bellonas or Bucentaures anyway) and the pirate frigate (imaginary as well) could safely be removed from the game to make it more in line with realism.

[George Washington]

10 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

As for the mast type - I concede to the point. But the HMS Ontario is not only a lakewater ship, but a poorly constructed one with an imaginary amount of guns and a seaworthyness that defies the laws of physics. The Niagara, the 3rd rate (redundant - everyone builds Bellonas or Bucentaures anyway) and the pirate frigate (imaginary as well) could safely be removed from the game to make it more in line with realism.

They can be connected to PvE content. ex. Treasure chests could drop 3rd rate deeds , but we do not have PvE content or chests. This leaves us with remove from the game option which is pathetic. Again, all this remove from the game talking just promotes game failure. 

Edited August 23, 2017 by George Washington

[Guest]

Just now, George Washington said:

They can be connected to PvE features and when used wisely. ex. Treasure chests could drop 3rd rates, but we do not have chest. This leaves us with remove from the game option. 

It has little to do with their availability but rather something to do with them never actually having set sails.

The weatherdeck guns on the h.rattlesnake would tear the upper structure apart from the recoils when firing the guns - there's a reason why all gundecks were made assymmetrically, and the structure in itself wouldn't be wide nor long enough to stand the stress of the guns.

The Snow (aka. HMS Ontario) was never built to be oceangoing and did in fact sink during a storm on lake Ontario. She did have 22 guns of lower caliber and it was one of the main reasons why it scuttled after only being on the lake for active duty for 5 months..

The pirate frigate is entirely imaginary as is the idea that pirates somehow "invented" a faster rigging or otherwise were able to make alterations (i.e. larger guns) to ships that the national navies either did not know about or did not want to do. That's is entirely fictional. The caliber of the guns possible is determined by the lenght to width to draft dimensions (there's a lot of factional phrasing here that may be different in english) and the rigging of the ships was a specialist knowledge that in fact very few pirates knew about - hence the expected life for a pirate was less than two years - only a few survived longer and most that did was former navy officers. 

There has never been such a ship as called the third rate. The generic third rate would be the Bellona for the RN as the drafts for the Bellona was used in approx 70 other third rates from the time of the first plans till the end of the napoleonic era. (Numbers are as far as I recall).

[George Washington]

9 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

It has little to do with their availability but rather something to do with them never actually having set sails.

The weatherdeck guns on the h.rattlesnake would tear the upper structure apart from the recoils when firing the guns - there's a reason why all gundecks were made assymmetrically, and the structure in itself wouldn't be wide nor long enough to stand the stress of the guns.

The Snow (aka. HMS Ontario) was never built to be oceangoing and did in fact sink during a storm on lake Ontario. She did have 22 guns of lower caliber and it was one of the main reasons why it scuttled after only being on the lake for active duty for 5 months..

The pirate frigate is entirely imaginary as is the idea that pirates somehow "invented" a faster rigging or otherwise were able to make alterations (i.e. larger guns) to ships that the national navies either did not know about or did not want to do. That's is entirely fictional. The caliber of the guns possible is determined by the lenght to width to draft dimensions (there's a lot of factional phrasing here that may be different in english) and the rigging of the ships was a specialist knowledge that in fact very few pirates knew about - hence the expected life for a pirate was less than two years - only a few survived longer and most that did was former navy officers. 

There has never been such a ship as called the third rate. The generic third rate would be the Bellona for the RN as the drafts for the Bellona was used in approx 70 other third rates from the time of the first plans till the end of the napoleonic era. (Numbers are as far as I recall).

That is what I am talking about, instead of building players could get them for free if lucky. I am sure you will see people sailing 3rd rates then. Right now Naval Action has beginners and only the best ships, but they forgot to find use for all those unused ones. Trust me poor players will gladly sail these ships if they are acquired through pve content there is no question about it.  

I believe in rewards, Developers must reward players as they progress in game. Why not give these unpopular ships as rewards? They are 1 dura anyway. ex. Complete a chain of missions get a 3rd rate or reach rank .... and get a ship. I do not think it's that difficult. 

3rd rate could be any name... honestly they had 1 class and built 20 ships on same blueprint and gave them all different names while it was that same ship. 

Edited August 23, 2017 by George Washington

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, George Washington said:

That is what I am talking about, instead of building players could get them for free if lucky. I am sure you will see people sailing 3rd rates then. Right now Naval Action has beginners and only the best ships, but they forgot to find use for all those unused ones. Trust me poor players will gladly sail these ships if they are acquired through pve content there is no question about it.  

I believe in rewards, Developers must reward players as they progress in game. Why not give these unpopular ships as rewards? They are 1 dura anyway. ex. Complete a chain of missions get a 3rd rate or reach rank .... and get a ship. I do not think it's that difficult. 

3rd rate could be any name... honestly they had 1 class and built 20 ships on same blueprint and gave them all different names while it was that same ship. 

I believe we're discussion two very different topics.

[z4ys]

Removing ships is taking away the only content NA offers. 

[George Washington]

2 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Removing ships is taking away the only content NA offers. 

Can't agree more. 

[Hodo]

19 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Removing ships is taking away the only content NA offers. 

My point on removal of ships is to replace them with other more realistic ships that most likely saw action in this region.  

Removal of the Snow and the Niagara means 2 more 6th rates can replace them, like the Xebec and Prince.

Removal of the Pirate Frigate.  Replaced with the Hermonie or Santa Cecilia

Removal of the Heavy Rattlesnake, replaced by the Rattlesnake.

Removal of the 3rd rate, replaced with HMS Mars (3rd rate).

 

[George Washington]

6 minutes ago, Hodo said:

My point on removal of ships is to replace them with other more realistic ships that most likely saw action in this region.  

Removal of the Snow and the Niagara means 2 more 6th rates can replace them, like the Xebec and Prince.

Removal of the Pirate Frigate.  Replaced with the Hermonie or Santa Cecilia

Removal of the Heavy Rattlesnake, replaced by the Rattlesnake.

Removal of the 3rd rate, replaced with HMS Mars (3rd rate).

 

Removing ships is just silly, like I said it before add it to PvE content and change their names, add new figureheads and paint. Someone wasted months on those projects and you will allow them to be scrapped? Wow.

Edited August 23, 2017 by George Washington

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Hodo said:

My point on removal of ships is to replace them with other more realistic ships that most likely saw action in this region.  

Removal of the Snow and the Niagara means 2 more 6th rates can replace them, like the Xebec and Prince.

Removal of the Pirate Frigate.  Replaced with the Hermonie or Santa Cecilia

Removal of the Heavy Rattlesnake, replaced by the Rattlesnake.

Removal of the 3rd rate, replaced with HMS Mars (3rd rate).

 

Agreed.

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, George Washington said:

Removing ships is just silly, like I said it before add it to PvE content and change their names, add new figureheads and paint. Someone wasted months on those projects and you will allow them to be scrapped? Wow.

If someone had done a proper job the "projects" would be aligned with the historical data available. In the case of the 3rd rate it was basically a placeholder for the Bellona. In respect with the H.Rattlesnake there really can't have been "months" of development in it since it was a spin off from the generic rattlesnake and the pirate frigate is just nuts from a historical perspective. This is not a question of wanting more ships but a question about making the ships available realistic. Most ships in game has been developed from historical records and plans - let's keep it that way.

[Prater]

There is no reason to remove the Niagara, there is no reason to remove the snow, there is no reason to remove the 3rd rate, or the Pirate frigate.  Resources were spent on these ships and they should not be removed.  And as others have said, limits our content when our content in game are ships and battles.  I agree the Rattlesnake needs to be added back in.

For the argument, "remove these ships so we can add others in," makes no sense.  We don't need to remove ships to add more ships.  They can just be added in.  If you want more ships added in quicker, fire up the test bed and test the Unity 5 engine and help it get released faster.

[George Washington]

33 minutes ago, Prater said:

There is no reason to remove the Niagara, there is no reason to remove the snow, there is no reason to remove the 3rd rate, or the Pirate frigate.  Resources were spent on these ships and they should not be removed.  And as others have said, limits our content when our content in game are ships and battles.  I agree the Rattlesnake needs to be added back in.

For the argument, "remove these ships so we can add others in," makes no sense.  We don't need to remove ships to add more ships.  They can just be added in.  If you want more ships added in quicker, fire up the test bed and test the Unity 5 engine and help it get released faster.

In addition, they just moved to Unity 5. This will allow them to add as many ships as they want. I would just add custom paintwork and figureheads and call it a day. 

Edited August 23, 2017 by George Washington

[Prater]

5 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

In the case of the 3rd rate it was basically a placeholder for the Bellona.

No, the Bellona was in long before the 3rd rate.  The 3rd rate is a generic 3rd rate. It just needs a smaller crew.

[Hodo]

1 hour ago, George Washington said:

Removing ships is just silly, like I said it before add it to PvE content and change their names, add new figureheads and paint. Someone wasted months on those projects and you will allow them to be scrapped? Wow.

The Pirate Frigate I could do in an afternoon and I am not even a Unity 4 coder.  It is just a simple mod on an existing model.  The paint scheme on it is nothing more than a skin mod for the existing model.  The guns and crew amounts are just changing a few numbers in the ships .cfg this includes the bonus for boarding.

Really not that difficult to do, did it more than a few times in Kerbal Space Program which runs UNITY4.

[CaptVonGunn]

On 8/22/2017 at 2:24 PM, Bearwall said:

Bring back the generic (aka the real rattlesnake) - the heavy rattlesnake is both unrealistic, ahistorical and a physical impossibility. - Just like the Snow (as a sea going vessel it shouldn't be ingame).

Well if your going by that neither should the Niagara or more then 1 each of the Named ships... Heavy Rattlesnake should be the Pirate version just like the Pirate Frigate. Since we are not allowed to upgun traders in game:)