Patch 11.0: New ships, Unity 5, Improved clan based conquest, and many other changes.

[Jef]

Again I'm not asking to remove it at all, I think it needs reducing (a lot reducing), and for a a newbie zone. I still think this post is still a great idea
 

 

[derekticus]

@admin   My feedback on this Patch is that I find it to have been an improvement to the game.  I have 2 reservations:  Firstly, the neutral or AI controlled Ports should offer up a higher level of resistance, as 6 AI Ships are too easy to destroy; and, Secondly, having a "free" 4th Rate ("crafted" using only Combat Marks) is a great idea, but it cheapens the game when that Ship is the most powerful of all the 4th Rates.  If the Wasa is to be the most powerful 4th Rate, then make it so it has to be Crafted, and hand out free Constitutions or Wappen Vons for those who can't Craft.  Devs are undermining the integrity of the game with the Wasa.  I suggest either Nerf it down to a lesser 4th Rate, or have a weaker 4th Rate as the "Craft-free" Port Battle ready Ship.

[Riparian]

5 hours ago, derekticus said:

Secondly, having a "free" 4th Rate ("crafted" using only Combat Marks) is a great idea, but it cheapens the game when that Ship is the most powerful of all the 4th Rates.  If the Wasa is to be the most powerful 4th Rate, then make it so it has to be Crafted, and hand out free Constitutions or Wappen Vons for those who can't Craft.  Devs are undermining the integrity of the game with the Wasa.  I suggest either Nerf it down to a lesser 4th Rate, or have a weaker 4th Rate as the "Craft-free" Port Battle ready Ship.

The 'free' Wasa is quite powerful. Maybe the Wasa available with combat marks, could be limited to peace time armament of 18pdr''s and 24pdr's. 

As I understand, the Swedish navy planned to use the heavier armament only during war, and even then they didn't have cannons available to equip all ships in class with these heavier weapons. This war equipped Wasa could be available in-game to be crafted as normal.

[Vizzini]

22 minutes ago, Riparian said:

The 'free' Wasa is quite powerful. Maybe the Wasa available with combat marks, could be limited to peace time armament of 18pdr''s and 24pdr's. 

As I understand, the Swedish navy planned to use the heavier armament only during war, and even then they didn't have cannons available to equip all ships in class with these heavier weapons. This war equipped Wasa could be available in-game to be crafted as normal.

Or perhaps a set build for combat marks and fully customizable via crafting. That could work out well for both groups, the ones in a hurry or no access to materials or crafters plus the ones who want a ship to their own spec

[jodgi]

54 minutes ago, Riparian said:

The 'free' Wasa is quite powerful. Maybe the Wasa available with combat marks, could be limited...

 

28 minutes ago, Vizzini said:

Or perhaps a set build for combat marks and fully customizable via crafting. That could work out well for both groups, the ones in a hurry or no access to materials or crafters plus the ones who want a ship to their own spec

First, why is it a problem that people are able to access a good ship easily?

Crafters, crafters I know... That a few ships are available via the admiralty only gives crafters the opportunity to focus on shitting out ships only they can make. Those who don't want to get into crafting are happy and role-players living the career dream are happy. I visited EU global chat last evening and if I am to believe the people there PvP has had a boost with the easy access to good ships. I'm sceptical about the stance that more PvP is somehow bad because "it doesn't matter" due to losses being replaced too easily.

Is this really an issue or are we riding a principle here, regardless?

Besides, the ships themselves are just the halfway house. It's fairly easy to get ships whatever method you pick. It's the rigs and upgrades that the big time economy is really about, as shown by the recent tar "scandal". I want to do something about that as well but I'll keep this post about one issue.

[Vizzini]

3 minutes ago, jodgi said:

 

 

Is this really an issue or are we riding a principle here, regardless?

 

I think you make a good point here but we all have to be able to accept that many people play the game for different reasons and get enjoyment from aspects that we might find dull and boring. Once we try and see things from the perspective of others , we are able to understand their pov.

If crafters and grinders and pve 'ers and pvp 'ers can all play the same game , we have to try and cater to them all.

 

Snipped the rest. Some people think pve has no place on a pvp server , some people hate rvr but love ow pvp. Some love to be a trader  and some just want pure PVP

 

[BetaVape]

I think the reason for the Wasa is to give nations that are losing ports and dont have access to good PB woods a way to conquer again. 4th Rate PBs are most common and having a LO/WO or 2x WO Wasa means even if a nation is pushed back to starting area they can get back out and conquer.

[jodgi]

1 hour ago, Vizzini said:

we have to try and cater to them all.

Sure, but then whose gameplay or fun is threatened by easy access Wasa?

___________

I posted this a while back:

It is meant to be taken lightly, but there is weight to it. Admiralty note ships is a tiny respite from the mandatory PVE/eco yoke. OW gameplay is weighted heavily in favor of PVE/eco players so I object when even the smallest escape from eco oppression  receives flak.

[Quineloe]

The problem with the Wasa is very obviously the fact that it's far less expensive to get than the Agamemnon, while completely outclassing it in every single aspect.  There is not one thing the Agamemnon does better than the Wasa, yet it's very expensive to build.  Yet both have BR 250, and both go into 4th rate PBs.

Same for the L'Hermione, while not as relevant for port battles, it has the same BR as the Surprise, while being considerably stronger in all aspects and considerably cheaper.

It's not an issue if cheap access to one good ship is in the game, but answer the following questions: Why even have the worse, more expensive ships in the game? Why not just make all ships of that power level cheap and easily accessible?

Next patch supposedly brings ship balancing. I hope that works out well.

[Teutonic]

I am with Jodgi where I like ships being able to be converted viz combat marks - I'm just not sure that the Hermione and the Wasa should be those ships...I'd prefer ships that aren't used nearly as often as the others.

For example, have the Belle Poule and Ingermanland be the combat mark ships.

[Robert]

I think all ships should be available via crafting and combat marks

1 hour ago, Quineloe said:

The problem with the Wasa is very obviously the fact that it's far less expensive to get than the Agamemnon, while completely outclassing it in every single aspect.  There is not one thing the Agamemnon does better than the Wasa, yet it's very expensive to build.  Yet both have BR 250, and both go into 4th rate PBs.

Same for the L'Hermione, while not as relevant for port battles, it has the same BR as the Surprise, while being considerably stronger in all aspects and considerably cheaper.

It's not an issue if cheap access to one good ship is in the game, but answer the following questions: Why even have the worse, more expensive ships in the game? Why not just make all ships of that power level cheap and easily accessible?

Next patch supposedly brings ship balancing. I hope that works out well.

Teach me your ways, as a new player to me actually the Surprise is considerably cheaper than L'Hermione, even if you don't craft it. 

In my opinion all ships should be available both ways, craft and combat marks that would help to keep both prices in check.

Also, is the sailing profile available anywhere for the 3 new ships?

Edited September 25, 2017 by Robert

[Hodo]

After playing a successful sandbox game for the past few months again.  I am realizing what is lacking here besides a real economy.

There is no point in any ship except the 5th and 4th rate ships.   There isnt much use for the smaller more historically accurate 6th and 7th rates.   This is partly due to the ease of each to get.  And partly due to the limitations on ship dock space. 

[fox2run]

25 minutes ago, Hodo said:

After playing a successful sandbox game for the past few months again.  I am realizing what is lacking here besides a real economy.

There is no point in any ship except the 5th and 4th rate ships.   There isnt much use for the smaller more historically accurate 6th and 7th rates.   This is partly due to the ease of each to get.  And partly due to the limitations on ship dock space. 

Ease? Bring back multiple duras. We wanna fight, not grind. Not all of us like to fight in row-boats. We want SOL in big battles...  ;-)

[fox2run]

More 3rd rates than frigates where actually deployed by royal navy. All this frigate talk is taken out of context.

[Quineloe]

9 minutes ago, fox2run said:

More 3rd rates than frigates where actually deployed by royal navy. All this frigate talk is taken out of context.

[citation needed]

[John Cavanaugh]

9 minutes ago, fox2run said:

More 3rd rates than frigates where actually deployed by royal navy. All this frigate talk is taken out of context.

Core of the problem is lack of traders. Fix the problem bottom up not top down. 

primary income should be trade based, whether the fix comes as a radical adjustment of the economy or better trade missions. Create stable base of traders. Escorts, hunters, and a sinkhole for resources and materials will open - also provides reason for average player to leave safe zone more frequently. 

Edited September 25, 2017 by John Cavanaugh
Spelling

[DeRuyter]

18 minutes ago, fox2run said:

More 3rd rates than frigates where actually deployed by royal navy. All this frigate talk is taken out of context.

You missed @Hodo's point. He was talking about fewer people sailing in smaller "unrated" ships - brigs, schooners, etc. Most navies never had the large numbers of 3rd rates that the RN deployed. Also if you include the post ships (6th rates) I think the numbers may well be different than you think.

Ever heard of "the eyes of the fleet" - look it up you may learn something abut frigates.

Edit: RN ships in commission 1814 3rd rates: 103. 5th rates: 134. 6th rate: 25. Unrated: 360.

Winfield, Rif, British Warships in the Age of Sail: 1793–1817

Edited September 25, 2017 by DeRuyter

[jodgi]

1 hour ago, Robert said:

Also, is the sailing profile available anywhere for the 3 new ships?

https://sites.google.com/view/speedtrials/

Also:

 

[Robert]

17 minutes ago, jodgi said:

https://sites.google.com/view/speedtrials/

Also:

 

Thank you!

Just noticed there are two sailing profiles Hermione and Lhermione, is that a typo?

Edited September 25, 2017 by Robert

[Hodo]

1 hour ago, fox2run said:

More 3rd rates than frigates where actually deployed by royal navy. All this frigate talk is taken out of context.

Actually I dont see where you are getting this from.

According to several sources including the British Royal Navy themselves.  The numbers were close but still showed MORE 5th rates in service than 3rd rates. 

According to "British Warships in The Age of Sail:1793-1817"-Winfield

There were 103 3rd rates in service in 1814, and 134 5th rates in 1814.

In 1794 there were 71 3rd rates and 100 5th rates.

 

So please sir what is your source for this argument?

[Doug Maoz]

On 9/20/2017 at 8:30 AM, admin said:

ah you mean the battle size limits on some battles?
it was tested end of last year on live for at least 3 months in rookie zones and events and did not bring any meaningful results on increasing pvp or online. Nobody cared. Those events did not even let fleets in. Nobody cared.

Listening to people who ask for something and do not use it is a waste of time and resources. If we did not do it we would have had better AI for example and more pvp content (because better pve = better retention = more online = more solo hunting content)

As a result now we focus on players around the tree. The players who don't like that everything previously was done to support solo hunters.

they definitely use functions we added last patch

sorry for being direct.

 

I would just like to say that the rookie zone did not go unnoticed by myself; I had tons of fun hunting solo and small group in the Bahamas region because I knew that my targets' fleet couldn't interfere. In higher rates you can ignore enemy AI to some degree, but in a 6th or 7th rate everything hurts, even AI fleet ships.

I was able to successfully grab people in my solo pickle a few times, and in my rattlesnake more often simply because people were forced into even-ish fights with no fleet involvement. I think this improved solo hunting a great deal, and I'm sorry to see it was unappreciated by most.

[jodgi]

3 hours ago, Robert said:

Thank you!

Just noticed there are two sailing profiles Hermione and Lhermione, is that a typo?

Hermione is Cecilia, the experts can explain why she was called that before or after capture.

[Ink]

Captains, today's small hotfix fixed contract bug and description of French Gunnery Sergeant module blueprint

[Topo de Lezo]

What contract bug?

[Robert]

20 hours ago, Quineloe said:

Same for the L'Hermione, while not as relevant for port battles, it has the same BR as the Surprise, while being considerably stronger in all aspects and considerably cheaper.

 

14 hours ago, jodgi said:

Hermione is Cecilia, the experts can explain why she was called that before or after capture.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like Cecilia sailing profile is similar with Surprise while L'Hermione seems to be subpar by comparison especially where it matters (close haul and close reach).