Hotfix for patch 14.

[Molder169]

@admin I am sure it has been said above. But combat news should NOT display sinks from Fleet Practice.

But also thank you very much for fleet practice!

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 hours ago, DeathBaron said:

 

I translated the topic of Patch 14 to Portuguese for a better understanding of the Portuguese and Brazilian community, a new topic has been inserted in the "Naval Action Spanish Language" until a new Sub-Forum be created for Portuguese Language. You can access this Link

 

 

Good job was wondering about this as we had a Brazil clan on Global and a few times info would not get passed to them.  Good chaps for the most part though.  My Portuguese is so rusty all I'm good for is understanding it not translating it lol.

2 hours ago, Eyesore said:

How long were fights going on before masts actually started to fall? Is there documentation on how many broadsides/balls were needed to inflict critical damage to rigging and masts? How many masts fell on their own? How many fell after being damaged but needed collisions to finally collapse?

Would captains back then reduce sail (in a combatsituation) if they received more and more damage to the rigging? Simply to be able to keep the masts standing?

Just asking, because if the effect shown on the pictures is only the result from shooting hours/days(?) on end and collisions ... then perhaps in game it should not be possible to get a mast down in the first 5 minutes or with 6 balls that hit the mast?

The rigging actually holds up a mast, so would it not make sense that, ingame, we should also do enough damage to that rigging (shooting chain, simulates riggingdamage already?)? Shooting only ball can still bring down a mast, but it would require more broadsides/balls because you do less damage to the rigging than with chain? The order in which you deal that damage makes no difference (you can hit masts first and then work on the sails, or the other way around, or both)

Sure demasting is a viable tactic/strategy but coupling both rig and mastdamage could make a bit more sense?

And perhaps, coupling chaindamage and balldamage to rigging and masts gives the player that gets demasted a chance to use his rigrepair to delay the falling of the mast and thus continue to focus on hulldamage on his opponent?

I can't remember what the battle time compression in game is, but think of it this way 10 mins is like 1 hour real life.  So you have a hour and half battle timer right?  That would be 9 hours of battle.  Many of these engagements that where docutmented could be just a small few hour skirmish to several days.  As some one posted it was a tactic to go for mast.  French was more famous for doing it cause it keep the ship in tack.  While British I think was more known for shooting low and going for the hull.  I'm sure some one more knowledge in such can drop some links and facts for you.  Folks also have to remember that we get one damage table and it's only a percentage for damage that is sail, mast, and rigging.  You can take 100% sail damage and never loose your mast if it's never hit or pen (normally the sail percentage stops going down at a point).  Also remember coring out some one can cause the mast to drop cause it looses support.   

You want to know how to decresss sail damage?  IT's CALLED BATTLE SAILS.   It also helps reduce roll too.  Again as I started above to many folks constantly fight at full sails. I go to battle sails a lot in combat and you can actually get some better performance like your turn rate and such out of a ship while in battle sails compared to full sails.  It's also why when we would have port battles a lot of folks sails would be way down but mine won't be cause I presented less sail target to the other team.  Mainly cause I keep myself in Battle sails unless I needed the speed to get out of something than I went full sails.

Oh and remember fires depending how big effect your sails too.  Loved it when they added this into game.

[Eyesore]

18 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

You want to know how to decresss sail damage?  IT's CALLED BATTLE SAILS.

Sure, but that is not what i was talking about ;-)  I would like battlesails to be more usefull in game aswell though, agreed on that. Turning yards and depowering works well aswell.

@maturin Allright, thanks for the link with the accounts :-) It is more or less as I thought then. I do like reading about history, but there is so much of it ;-)

I geuss, in-game the windstrength is always the same, perhaps a bit too fast for small ships and a bit too slow for bigger ships ... so the endresult would be that only the midtierships can reach their theoretical topspeed? Would that be correct? And could that be a compromize to stop the debate about speedcapabilities (or interpretation of them) of different ranks of ships, a balance will have to be made eventually? Or will that still give too much of an advantage to some shipgroups?

Or can we only hope for variable windstrength and more sailplans?  :-p

[Sir Texas Sir]

3 minutes ago, Eyesore said:

Sure, but that is not what i was talking about ;-)  I would like battlesails to be more usefull in game aswell though, agreed on that. Turning yards and depowering works well aswell.

@maturin Allright, thanks for the link with the accounts :-) It is more or less as I thought then. I do like reading about history, but there is so much of it ;-)

I geuss, in-game the windstrength is always the same, perhaps a bit too fast for small ships and a bit too slow for bigger ships ... so the endresult would be that only the midtierships can reach their theoretical topspeed? Would that be correct? And could that be a compromize to stop the debate about speedcapabilities (or interpretation of them) of different ranks of ships, a balance will have to be made eventually? Or will that still give too much of an advantage to some shipgroups?

Or can we only hope for variable windstrength and more sailplans?  :-p

Yah would be nice if they did gie better perks for using it.  Like less accuracy when your at full sails and such.  It blows my mind when folks complain about loosing sails and mast and you watch them pretty much let you ping there mast one shot at a time or line up for a rake than they complain.  Maybe fight smarter.  Once had some one laugh at me for messing up my stern rake until his mast dropped the next time i fired....I WASN'T AIMING AT HIS STERN.   Those are the same folks that complain about game mechanics they don't understand and than throw out things like, "You had to be hacking to beat me."  LOL I miss getting called a hacker and I'll be honest even though I'm a Vet I'm a very average player specially in 1 vs 1.

[maturin]

1 minute ago, Eyesore said:

Sure, but that is not what i was talking about ;-)  I would like battlesails to be more usefull in game aswell though, agreed on that. Turning yards and depowering works well aswell.

@maturin Allright, thanks for the link with the accounts :-) It is more or less as I thought then. I do like reading about history, but there is so much of it ;-)

I geuss, in-game the windstrength is always the same, perhaps a bit too fast for small ships and a bit too slow for bigger ships ... so the endresult would be that only the midtierships can reach their theoretical topspeed? Would that be correct? And could that be a compromize to stop the debate about speedcapabilities (or interpretation of them) of different ranks of ships, a balance will have to be made eventually? Or will that still give too much of an advantage to some shipgroups?

Or can we only hope for variable windstrength and more sailplans?  :-p

The in-game windspeed is perfect for all vessels, all the time. Realistically speaking, many in-game ships carry light weather sails (royals, flying jibs, topgallant staysails), which would probably not be set in conditions where speeds of 12-14 knots were achieved.

If you're referring to hullspeed, then generally speaking large ships of this era were incapable of reaching their hullspeed. With a waterline length of around 100 feet (or less) and a very high sail area to displacement ratio, some vessels could do it.

[Eyesore]

7 minutes ago, maturin said:

The in-game windspeed is perfect for all vessels, all the time. Realistically speaking, many in-game ships carry light weather sails (royals, flying jibs, topgallant staysails), which would probably not be set in conditions where speeds of 12-14 knots were achieved.

hmm, ok ... erm ... let's just say the sails we see in-game or just esthetic (it's nice to see all the canvas up ;-) ), the topspeed per ship (relative to the windstrength used in-game) can still be derived and applied to gameplay? Probably more something for admin. Maybe it's not even necessairy when he's done rebalancing.

By hullspeed you probably mean the Max Q (no use in adding extra energy, can't overcome the drag anyway)?

[maturin]

23 minutes ago, Eyesore said:

hmm, ok ... erm ... let's just say the sails we see in-game or just esthetic (it's nice to see all the canvas up ;-) ), the topspeed per ship (relative to the windstrength used in-game) can still be derived and applied to gameplay? Probably more something for admin. Maybe it's not even necessairy when he's done rebalancing.

By hullspeed you probably mean the Max Q (no use in adding extra energy, can't overcome the drag anyway)?

There's no particular wind strength; it's abstracted. And you can't derive the speed of a sailing ship any more than you can derive the speed of a runner by measuring their muscles and limbs.

And I do mean hullspeed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_speed

Hullspeed can be exceeded by adding more energy, it's just a point where the energy requirements increase exponentially.

[Eyesore]

Ok, i think i get what you mean.

Also yes on the hullspeed, your explanation is correct. (max Q is nowhere relevant here, I'm mixing things up, time for bed :-) )

[Sir William Hargood]

5 hours ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Can you kindly look a bit further and check if she got dismasted due to direct hits to masts or by heavy damages to sails, so to yards, stays and shrouds?

That might be somewhat of a challenge but I'll look into it. I have come across several references to "her masts were shot through in several places" throughout my reading of maritime history. Suffice to say that severely damaged shrouds and stays would render masts unstable. Standing rigging being the fixed rig support of masts. Apart from chain shot: two balls with an adjoining chain section there was also bar shot designed specifically to damage masts and stays. In the light wind conditions at Trafalgar I would suggest direct mast damage the more likely culprit. Also considering the approaching British Squadrons would have presented juicy perfectly aligned mast targets.

 

 

Edited January 27, 2018 by Sir William Hargood

[AeRoTR]

In game, when demasting happens, I don't see lucky few shots from veterans. I see single shots, well placed, achieved in short amount of time. How is this real, a ship is demasting 2 other ships, 6 masts total in 5 minutes. Do not try to turn your fantasy in to reality. The fact is you can not snipe enemy upper mast 200-300 years ago, with those cannons. However it is true that today you can achieve it with modern ships, you can demast a frigate from  18th century in 5 minutes with your 21th century ship !

[Licinio Chiavari]

Indeed I never said demasting should not happen.

I do repeat this should happen during prolonged battles after high damage to sails (so yards, stays, shrouds...), nothing you could aim for from a full speed turning ship to another full speed turning ship at over 100mt within first couple of broadsides.

Thinking about, to rebalance and making it a bit more real, I'd propose to double masts HP but mast HP are reduced by the same percentage of sail damage sustained and to reduce precision of guns.

This way a ball broadside will have chances to demast as at the moment only at close (reduced precision) against a target with sails reduced at 50-60% (that means with doubled base mast HP but 50% sail damage, you'll be in the same situation as now).

Add also (because I can see how damaged my masts are) a mast HP bar and high speed collisions (and may be also brutal manouvers like going 5kts backward) do damage masts too.

[Sven Silberbart]

21 hours ago, admin said:

3rd rates a better in every way unless you need to run away (especially upwind) or for maneuver combat. that makes frigates great for hunting, scouting, or stern camping.
 

Not enough. Only look at realism could kill this game.

- Good 4 Hunting: Whom, if everyone is sailing big ships, because they are so much better in the important properties

- Scouting: Scouting means, to run away if the enemy come in bigger ships (which will be), but ship is too slow

- stern camping: Yes, maybe. But that's only for experts and is useless in bigger battles, cause there are too many enemies around.

What i want to say: This kind of realism could easily kill the smaller ships in this game and makes Naval Action a "World of Lineships" - Game

Edited January 27, 2018 by Sven Silberbart

[Doug Maoz]

@admin Thanks again for increasing the Wasa BR!

Tonight at Hat Island we saw a very interesting mix of ships, where before literally everyone was in a Wasa. We even saw a heavy frigate in a port battle!

Keep up the good work, we are all looking forward to the upcoming overall rebalance.

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

8 minutes ago, Doug Maoz said:

@admin Thanks again for increasing the Wasa BR!

Tonight at Hat Island we saw a very interesting mix of ships, where before literally everyone was in a Wasa. We even saw a heavy frigate in a port battle!

Keep up the good work, we are all looking forward to the upcoming overall rebalance.

That is very good to see.

 

What I would like to see in Port Battles are factions having to create a mix of heavy ships, heavy frigates, and light frigates into their fleet make-up creating unique experiences in every port battle.

Edited January 28, 2018 by Davos Seasworth

[NavalActionPlayer]

Is there a spreadsheet showing the new values for the wood types....there used to be one on here somewhere?

[Licinio Chiavari]

11 hours ago, NavalActionPlayer said:

Is there a spreadsheet showing the new values for the wood types....there used to be one on here somewhere?

We'd need indeed updated sheets for everything: wood, ship datas and speed, mods and detailed effects etc...

BTW necessary to be able to meaningfully propose changes. 

[Amihai]

14 hours ago, NavalActionPlayer said:

Is there a spreadsheet showing the new values for the wood types....there used to be one on here somewhere?

this

[Amihai]

Game update 30-01-2018

Delivery orders broken.
 

[NethrosDefectus]

2 minutes ago, Amihai said:

Game update 30-01-2018

Delivery orders broken.
 

I suspect "removed" is the more accurate term

[Thonys]

update 1.2 mb 30.01-2018

what is changed or fixed?

[Ink]

On ‎25‎.‎01‎.‎2018 at 1:44 PM, admin said:

30 Jan Update:

• Bowsprit visual glitch fixed for several light ships
• Delivery orders were disabled for rework

 

[CTC_ClanLeader]

11 minutes ago, Wraith said:

I suspect it was in response to the guy that had so much money he overflowed the long integer value that was storing it.  He was exploiting the fact that delivery orders would continually respawn for the same location.

It appears he had stockpiles of goods at the delivery locations and would just take those delivery orders when they respawned and turn them in, maximizing profits.

Yeah, its the right work to disable it ... omg someone got insane reach buy taking the same delivery order ... go deaktivate it, hurry!

Hope they fixed the overflow bug also ... 

 

@admin

Quote

Hello Captain

The abnormal rewards that look strange and sound strange must be reported as they are probably a bug or a potential exploit. 
There was a bug (or oversight) that was granting the person delivering the goods abnormal profits if he did a certain order of actions.
All the abnormal profits will be removed from the accounts who used the bug extensively. 

Delivery mission button was disabled in the today's hot fix for rework.

 

so u say, getting the same combat order is no bug, but getting the same delivery mission is a bug and using the mission is an exploit ... well done 

Quote

widget

Edited January 30, 2018 by CTC_ClanLeader

[admin]

21 minutes ago, CTC_ClanLeader said:

so u say, getting the same combat order is no bug, but getting the same delivery mission is a bug and using the mission is an exploit ... well done 

Please avoid making assumptions about things you don't have full details about. As this might spin the situation in the wrong way for others and will force us to remove your posting privileges to protect you from spreading confusion.

Bug was found and used it extensively without reporting (bug that was increasing rewards basically printing some money if certain conditions were fulfilled); we give everyone, who encountered it and used it extensively, a benefit of the doubt so they will get away with warning and removal of abnormal returns. For now.

 

[CTC_ClanLeader]

19 minutes ago, admin said:

Please avoid making assumptions about things you don't have full details about. As this might spin the situation in the wrong way for others and will force us to remove your posting privileges to protect you from spreading confusion.

Bug was found and used it extensively without reporting (bug that was increasing rewards basically printing some money if certain conditions were fulfilled); we give everyone, who encountered it and used it extensively, a benefit of the doubt so they will get away with warning and removal of abnormal returns. For now.

 

If u dont share details - we have to make assumptions of everything about how na works. If we not know how should things work in na we cant decide if something is a bug, or not.

[Odol]

4 minutes ago, CTC_ClanLeader said:

If u dont share details - we have to make assumptions of everything about how na works. If we not know how should things work in na we cant decide if something is a bug, or not.

So what you are saying is communication is key?