Patch 14: Part 3 experimental patch increasing realism in ship behavior

[maturin]

Surprise acts much more naturally now. Good job devs.

[PenguPirate]

4 minutes ago, maturin said:

Surprise acts much more naturally now. Good job devs.

I haven't been on mine yet. How "naturally" are we speaking?

[maturin]

Just now, PenguPirate said:

I haven't been on mine yet. How "naturally" are we speaking?

Still tacks well, but actually bleeds speed in the process.

[PenguPirate]

1 minute ago, maturin said:

Still tacks well, but actually bleeds speed in the process.

Should have a race event. Maybe near the Swedes and their islands. A circuit to test sailing ability and ship's Loadout performance.

[admin]

6 hours ago, maturin said:

You're simulation is missing one big thing however:

http://www.learntocruise.ca/downloads/leeway.pdf

Basically, when you are sailing at a broad reach, the sideforce of the sails is converted completely into forward force. This is because the hull goes through the water forward, more easily than sideways. The difference between the force vectors of the sails and the hull's momentum are so close, that they become equal.

If you hit a nail with a hammer just a little crooked, the nail still goes down. It ignores the misalignment of the hammerblow, because it is very small.

Basically you could turn off leeway for wind angles between 180 and 100, and ship speeds over 3 kts.

Leeway is a problem for close-hauled sailing, primarily.

 

No its not missing that big thing. Read the document you linked. For example
 

Quote

0. Vessels sailing close to the wind (close hauled, close reach) will experience more leeway than vessels sailing downwind (broad reach, run). With the wind abaft of the beam, leeway should be negligible - little or no leeway should be expected sailing downwind in moderate conditions.

my understanding of the quote from the doc

• Vessels sailing close to wind: close hauled close reach = more leeway, or max leeway
• Vessels sailing downwind: broad reach, run = less leeway. (still some leeway but less than close reach or close hauled)
• Vessels sailing ABAFT - negligible leeway. Abaft https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abaft

This exactly how it works in game

• More leeway close hauled/close reach
• Less leeway broad reach/running
• Negligible leeway - abaft - (wind directly from stern)

Stop doubting please.

 

[DustyTrashenborough]

1 hour ago, admin said:

No its not missing that big thing. Read the document you linked. For example
 

my understanding of the quote from the doc

• Vessels sailing close to wind: close hauled close reach = more leeway, or max leeway
• Vessels sailing downwind: broad reach, run = less leeway. (still some leeway but less than close reach or close hauled)
• Vessels sailing ABAFT - negligible leeway. Abaft https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abaft

This exactly how it works in game

• More leeway close hauled
• Less leeway broad reach running
• Abaft Negligible leeway

Stop doubting.

 

Have faith. Believe.

 

Edited December 29, 2017 by DustyA

[DustyTrashenborough]

@admin What was changed?

[DustyTrashenborough]

New PVP rewards :

1. Reinforced bow - 20 PMs
2. Reinforced Stern - 20 PMs

Reinforced bow : 

1. Bow Thickness +65%
2. Crew Damage reduction  +15%
3. Speed -1%

Reinforced Stern:

1. Stern Thickness +150%
2. Crew Damaged Reduction +15%
3. Speed -1%

Edited December 29, 2017 by DustyA

[DustyTrashenborough]

@admin, any plans to remove the conversion of Victory marks to combat marks? I've accidentally converted 3 VM to 300 CMs

[Gysendorf]

So I play devils advocate, so you can get mad by the following sentence Game labs.

Game engine change was the right decission, but @admin posted the last years always what they plan to implement for the next half year and it feeled they did maybe 25% of it. Instead they implemented new hull and new sailing profiles. Did the gankers of pvp whiners cry so loud that this was necessary before implementing all the missing stuff?

There are still the harbor screens to reimplement and some mechanism of preventing of cheating. Some part of the player base is convinced that the most famous gankers cheats. On the Prussian TS there was some time ago screenshots posted how to do this - simply load with hexeditor running client.exe and search and edit values, if I remember right it was changing the repair time and set back the actual amount of cannons to the max value of the own ship.

So devils advocate ending, one comment about cheating: I will never try this out because cheating destroys the fun in every game. Before I start cheating to get the equal chances as the rest of the (cheating) player base I quit the game, as I did in World of Warships and WoT (both common usage of aim bots/mods).

 

 

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

13 hours ago, admin said:

The thing is that players don't need to know side force so we probably just have to remove it from the speed visualization. (like we don't show speed of bow turning or stern turning).

Or they need to know side force separately (like pilots need to know vertical speed separately)

I would vote show both.  Do the main speed and than list the adjusted or side force with something simple like 10.4 knts/7 knts with the first number being speed without side force and than the second be the side force adjustment or something like that.  Keep it simple but for those that want more date have the second one too.

12 hours ago, Landsman said:

Just me or does the default look better? Any paint job is good of course but im not really digging this one...

I kinda agree the none painted model of that ship actually looks nice when others look very bland.  I think my biggest problem with the new paint is that every time I try to take it out to look at it's freaking dusk or dawn in game...lol

[admin]

3 hours ago, Gysendorf said:

So I play devils advocate, so you can get mad by the following sentence Game labs.

Game engine change was the right decission, but @admin posted the last years always what they plan to implement for the next half year and it feeled they did maybe 25% of it. Instead they implemented new hull and new sailing profiles. Did the gankers of pvp whiners cry so loud that this was necessary before implementing all the missing stuff?

There are still the harbor screens to reimplement and some mechanism of preventing of cheating. Some part of the player base is convinced that the most famous gankers cheats. On the Prussian TS there was some time ago screenshots posted how to do this - simply load with hexeditor running client.exe and search and edit values, if I remember right it was changing the repair time and set back the actual amount of cannons to the max value of the own ship.

So devils advocate ending, one comment about cheating: I will never try this out because cheating destroys the fun in every game. Before I start cheating to get the equal chances as the rest of the (cheating) player base I quit the game, as I did in World of Warships and WoT (both common usage of aim bots/mods).

 

 

 

wtf? hex editor? for a server based game?

lets do this.. do that thing you are talking about. Increase your speed for example to a 1000 knots in a battle instance and post your sailing adventures here on the forum.
Its a simplest way to prove to you that people who spread lies about cheating in NA have no clue (or clueless). 
 

[maturin]

8 hours ago, admin said:

No its not missing that big thing. Read the document you linked. For example
 

my understanding of the quote from the doc

• Vessels sailing close to wind: close hauled close reach = more leeway, or max leeway
• Vessels sailing downwind: broad reach, run = less leeway. (still some leeway but less than close reach or close hauled)
• Vessels sailing ABAFT - negligible leeway. Abaft https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abaft

This exactly how it works in game

• More leeway close hauled/close reach
• Less leeway broad reach/running
• Negligible leeway - abaft - (wind directly from stern)

Stop doubting please.

 

You are misinterpreting an English nautical term here.

wind abaft of the beam =/= wind abaft

'Abaft of the beam' refers to the entire range of wind angles between 91 and 180. In context, it generally means broad reach. A common description would be 'two points abaft the beam', which means wind angle of around 115.

• More leeway - close hauled
• Less leeway - beam reach
• Negligible leeway - broad reach
• No leeway - wind astern

 

Also, as I said before, I am unable to distinguish between the different amounts of leeway in my tests.

An LGV makes a visually identical amount of leeway when close-hauled and when on a broad reach. Judging by the angle of the wake, that is. I also can't tell the difference when judging the leeway angle by using the Home camera.

Maybe the leeway changes exactly the way you say, and my tests are too crude to identify it. But it doesn't seem like it.

 

[admin]

10 minutes ago, maturin said:

You are misinterpreting an English nautical term here.

abaft of the beam =/= abaft

 

 

 

we don't want to waste time on linguistics.

but what you are talking about is running speed. abaft is exactly from stern.
the document you linked exactly describes what happens in game currently.  

the statements 

• the in game leeway has the same strength at any wind angle
• there should not be any leeway at running speed whatsoever (running range is huge)

are both incorrect

Leeway changes depending on hull position and wind power and wind angle. And there is some leeway at running speed because running angle definition is too wide to be exact. Running angle has less leeway than close hauled and broad reach, but it still happens because due to nature of the age of sail ship keel cannot convert all wind power into forward force - if an angle is involved in any force some of could leak to the side (simple vector physics)

[Odol]

13 hours ago, admin said:

All statements in your post were incorrect. Sail power and leeway force does not jump back and forth and it is calculated properly taking into account hundreds of parameters. 

Here is an example of our Rig individual parts and parameters (which is used in sailing model and damage model calculations)


When you start posting statements which will confuse others stating things completely opposite from truth we would have to protect ourselves. Please avoid.

The situation is simple
Speedometer does not know how to work with side force. Its like it is playing checkers and game plays 3 dimensional chess. It can only count into 1 dimension. We added a multiple new dimensions (forward back and to any side over 360 degree plane)  to a 1 dimensional speedometer (forward/back)

What do the numbers and colors mean?   I mean I can show you a picture of a ship with letters and designs all over it and tell you it is a snowflake but without some kind of legend to go with it, it is just pretty....

 

BTW is that the HMS Hercules?

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 hours ago, admin said:

wtf? hex editor? for a server based game?

lets do this.. do that thing you are talking about. Increase your speed for example to a 1000 knots in a battle instance and post your sailing adventures here on the forum.
Its a simplest way to prove to you that people who spread lies about cheating in NA have no clue. 
 

Some of the folks in this game blow my mind. I remember we got a copy of a port battle recording of the other nation we just did a port battle with (US if any one wants to know).  I was listening to it and they mention how I brought my iron wood ships no one could pen (LO, Stiffness, Hull build Aggy's and Victs) and how I could always pen them and they couldn't pen me (DOUBLE Charge and learning to angle your ship when fired upon).   Than near the end they mention about getting DC in battle and one guy says he always used a VNP to get into game so they can't dedos him and use lag switch on him.  DO THESE GUYS EVEN KNOW WHAT A LAG SWITCH IS.  I mean we where cracking up so much how these guy used every excuse as to why they lost the fight other than actual fact they brought store bought ships to a port battle.  They where in three different team speaks and couldn't organized crap and than last they are using other ways into the game than direct connect and wonder why they lag out or get DCed.   When most the time they get beat by folks that learn the game, learn the mechanics and than use the to the best of there teams abilities.

This is also why we have said things in Global Chat about using our pirate hacks, you have to activate them with the pray button (yes folks thought we actually had pirate hacks).  Never believe anything I say in Global chat when I'm trolling you, cause that exactly what I'm doing. It's like when I had a BUCC the day after wipe. I said I had a buck in my pocket and we went with that as a joke that I had the ship.  Folks actually thought my clan had Buccs and Victory's the day of the wipe.  Yes I had a 3rd rate within a week and we had some 1st rates the next week, but we didn't have them on day one.....some folks will use any excuse to explain there short failings lol

[maturin]

26 minutes ago, admin said:

the statements 

• the in game leeway has the same strength at any wind angle
• there should not be any leeway at running speed whatsoever (running range is huge)

are both incorrect

 

So what are the Unity curves like for an LGV? How much leeway should there be at 130 degrees?

Because we can't test anything if we're just told that the results of our tests are "wrong." How do the devs measure and test leeway? With a debug tool that traces the ship's path?

 

Quote

Leeway changes depending on hull position and wind power and wind angle. And there is some leeway at running speed because running angle definition is too wide to be exact. Running angle has less leeway than close hauled and broad reach, but it still happens because due to nature of the age of sail ship keel cannot convert all wind power into forward force - if an angle is involved in any force some of could leak to the side (simple vector physics)

Sailing close-hauled you are relying on lift created by the sails, like an airplane. When the wind is abaft the beam (broad reach etc), you are relying on drag created by the sails. No one worries about leeway when sailing downwind IRL. Compared to upwind sailing, the sideforce vector is almost in line with the hull. And then a tiny bit of that 'leaks.'

In this picture, I have sagged about 20 feet to leeward while sailing less than 200 feet forwards. Around 10 degrees of leeway and that is excessive. Most ships should only make 10+ degrees when close-hauled in considerable wind and swell.

[Odol]

13 hours ago, admin said:

i have even easier explanation of this bug with the speedometer
imagine a helicopter flying 0 kmh forward (forward force)
but flying 3km h upwards (side force)

our speedometer tries to visualize it in one number
when helicopter, still flying up, moves 10 m forward from the center point it shows 3.01 positive speed. it is 3.01kmh from the center point)
when helicopter, still flying up moves 10 m backwards from the old center point it shows -3.01 negative speed. it is still 3.01 but it shows negative because its opposite direction from the old center point. From the old point it is an opposite direction and distance passed by the helicopter is 3+/-01.

• If you look at the helicopter form above it only moved 10m forward and 10 back (old speedometer)
• but it also flew 3km up which speedometer does not know how to show so it shows it as positive or negative depending on change of direction from the starting point
• as a result speedometer shows 3.01 when helicopter flies 10m forward while moving up 3km/h up and shows -3.01when it moves 10m back. because its the distance passed in 2 dimensions. 

Not exactly what you are trying to say?

Helicopters have several "speed" gauges.  They have a climb/decent meter, a slip angle gauge and a speedometer with different settings, for different altitudes... like AGL, TRU, and ASL. 

Helicopters would be a BAD analogy for sailing. 

 

 

[admin]

11 minutes ago, maturin said:

So what are the Unity curves like for an LGV? How much leeway should there be at 130 degrees?

Because we can't test anything if we're just told that the results of our tests are "wrong." How do the devs measure and test leeway? With a debug tool that traces the ship's path?

I don't know what you have tested though.. Leeway at broad reach is higher than leeway at running. It also depends on the sail plan. ships with higher % of stay sails will have a different angle of max leeway. But its definitely not equal at all points of sail.

[maturin]

20 minutes ago, admin said:

I don't know what you have tested though.. Leeway at broad reach is higher than leeway at running. It also depends on the sail plan. ships with higher % of stay sails will have a different angle of max leeway. But its definitely not equal at all points of sail.

I'm sure it's not equal.

All I'm saying is that the observable differences are small, from the player's perspective.

Too small, it seems to me, but all I can do is fiddle with the Home camera.

 

For instance, IRL changing course from 45 to 90 halves your leeway, or thereabouts. As a rule of thumb, leeway decreases 'linearly.' So by the time you get to 135 degrees, it barely exists.

Modern writers don't even talk about leeway on a broad reach, because it just doesn't matter anymore.

5-10 degrees of leeway was considered typical for a close-hauled 18th century square rigger in moderate conditions.

Cruising Sailboat Leeway Angles (beating (B) or reaching (R))
Sailboat type	Wind 3-10 knots	Wind 11-21 knots	Wind 22-33 knots	Wind >33 knots
Shoal draft cruisers	B:10º / R:5º	B:8º / R:4º	B:12º / R:10º	B:20º / R:12º
Deep draft cruisers	B:6º / R:4º	B:4º / R:2º	B:6º / R:4º	B:12º / R:6º
Extra large cruisers	B:10º / R:4º	B:8º / R:4º	B:12º / R:12º	B:20º / R:15º

[admin]

1 hour ago, maturin said:

 

For instance, IRL changing course from 45 to 90 halves your leeway, or thereabouts. As a rule of thumb, leeway decreases 'linearly.' So by the time you get to 135 degrees, it barely exists.

 

Yes it decreases.  the amount of leeway needs to be tuned of course. Current leeway might be too high compared to combat reports 
maybe you can share more reports like the one on wasa here for better tuning. 

[Captain corn blower]

Well I play on PVE server and the NPC ship are 90 of the time to perfect they seem not effect by these changes. they stop dead and instantly back up at speed also they stop and start sinking your sail down and depowered well keeping pace just keeps going or raise sails and back away as they sink now .can you make this game any more stupid and still not add any new content .in PVE there are no small first rate fleets in open word for a single player to attack or ever second rate fleets . you waste everyones time with these realistic changes that no one cares about in a game that is so unrealistic of the time with out any content to boot . I believe you DEVS ARE LOST AT SEA. with this game 

[maturin]

1 hour ago, admin said:

Yes it decreases.  the amount of leeway needs to be tuned of course. Current leeway might be too high compared to combat reports 
maybe you can share more reports like the one on wasa here for better tuning. 

Unfortunately I only have a few 'benchmarks.'

Leeway:

Niger-class and Lowestoffe-class (12-pounder frigates from 1760s) were reported to be very weatherly. This meant 3 degrees of leeway when close-hauled, 'all sails drawing.'

More typical angles for a ship, however, would be between 5 degrees and 12 degrees.

Leeway is greatest in rough weather, due to wave actions as much as wind. 20-25 degrees or so.

Quote

"A ship is supposed to make leeway only when she is close-hauled and a rough sea on."

-A New Treatise on the Practice of Navigation at Sea (William Thoms)

No one ever reports the leeway they make on a broad reach, because it is negligible.

 

In terms of turning, I have only seen Chapman and the French ever time their ships during maneuvers.

We know that the best frigates can tack in their own length (turning circle <150 feet) and wear in 4 times their own length (turning circle <600 feet).

French 80-gun ship sailing at 7 knots, tacking in 6.5 minutes.

Whaling ship Charles W. Morgan (in 2015) tacking in about 2.5 minutes in a light breeze.

Chapman's 40-gun frigate sailing at 6 knots, tacking in 4 minutes (this was considered disappointing).

Replica ship L'Hermione reported tacking in 4 minutes.

Wasa was recorded to have both tacked and wore round in 2.5 minutes (I am skeptical about wearing so fast. Maybe the cursive was hard to read.)

French 74-gun ships reported (IIRC) wearing in 10 minutes or more.

 

[Barbancourt]

The bottom represented on the screen (which looks very nice) in battle is not the actual bottom for physical interaction with the ship.  Yesterday I got "stuck" on the bottom even though I could see that there was still plenty of water under my ship!  Full sail with favorable wind and my ship would not move, and was actually getting pushed over on its side as if it was beached.  I was actually in battle at the same spot a few days before and did not get stuck like this with the same bottom clearance.  I did F11 it.

[Sir Texas Sir]

@admin any patch notes from this mornings update?