Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Boarding + 'Determined Defender' suggestion


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Le Raf Boom said:

What are you showing here? A ship that's already been damaged in combat with other ships. Apparently we should have oars now too according to the picture.

As a counter argument - here is a ship that could not be boarded despite being demasted, surrounded and badly damaged.

c827d79dff90fadad81f16af38930247.jpg

Also

put up a net without masts >>>very interesting thought 

determent defender (active)when the masts are down is wrong

(if we speak about a net)

Edited by Thonys
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another discussion, another split in the player base, another 50-100 players lost when a drastic change is made.

 

Carry on.

 

Seems like things go from one extreme to the other whatever the change,  and as usual in life the truth is often somewhere in the middle.

 

Admin said somewhere 120k copies sold,  and we have maybe 500 at peak players at wk-end.  Maybe devs should do what they want and stop listening to one extreme or the other.

 

Edited by Dibbler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ship physics would have to be changed, boarding from the side only. I mean, this whole business of pushing someone into the wind and the velcro effect these ships display is just not conducive to good game play, in my opinion. This whole thing needs to be looked at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Determent defender works very well imo. The recrew option is very limited now, and has a long cooldown. So only reason you can't board players with determent defender in 1,5 hour, is either because you don't have a advantage or your not aggressive enough.

I know you guys, you just want it to be fast and easy again! Shot some sails, push against the wind and then chain board the player while your mates rake.. There is no skill involved in this, it's just a gank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Archaos said:

Was there not a thread that went through this all just the other day!!!!

 

Problem is devs are stuck between extreme views each time, maybe time to totally ignore players and do as they want.  There is no player concensus on anything just extremes from either side of discussions shouting loudly and ones who are best connected get their way. The silent majority just see massive swings in play and eventually can't be bothered and playerbase declines over and over.

Devs i think just need to do what they want and ignore forum tbh.

Edited by Dibbler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Raf, just showing that reality is way more complex than our NA complex combat :)

Cannot simply say - no smaller ship ever boarded a bigger one, it would be shot to pieces.

~S~

yes i agree

like sailing in full sail and firing your guns , instead of battle sail

did they used cold gunpowder or something ?

when firing a gun it will set you on fire when doing full sail attack specially if the wind is against your ship

we don't see it in this game......

its not that historical also ,>>when firing guns it should be done in battle sails (period)

if not>  and you go full sail you have a 50% chance of burning sails (what will slow you down >damaged sails) 

in this game when sailing in full sail there is no fire to the sails probability at all ..

 

Edited by Thonys
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hethwill said:

Why ? 

( would love ships relative positions being taken into the boarding system )

Because, as far as I know, that gives you the widest area to attack from and the ability to attach to the enemy ship. If you attack from the front/back the defender can defend with a much smaller number of men...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that. But you know what ? Side to side is  a 50/50 affair as documented in the manuals. So maybe, just maybe there's different ways... just saying.

You posted " boarding from the side only"...

...only...

...only..

...only...

*sigh*

This is a game, we should be honest. "I want this because it fits me and sticks a harpoon up my opponents stern" is unwanted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

I know that.

You posted " boarding from the side only"...

...only...

...only..

...only...

*sigh*

This is a game, we should be honest. "I want this because it fits me and sticks a harpoon up my opponents stern" is unwanted.

Mmmm...there are ships, i don't see a whale ..

and when a harpoon is used you will be boarded for sure..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Le Raf Boom said:

Because, as far as I know, that gives you the widest area to attack from and the ability to attach to the enemy ship. If you attack from the front/back the defender can defend with a much smaller number of men...

Please make a suggestion out of that. Imo it makes perfect sense and would place some and much needed depth into boarding. So if you end up boarding a enemy from a bad angle, that could cripple the attackers advantage (counter boarding mods). I love it!  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiedemann said:

Please make a suggestion out of that. Imo it makes perfect sense and would place some and much needed depth into boarding. So if you end up boarding a enemy from a bad angle, that could cripple the attackers advantage (counter boarding mods). I love it!  

Yep, one of the oldest boarding requests :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

So 5 ships attacking you, and you expect them not to board you ?

 

It's the pushing around or even ramming head on with full speed to achieve a full stop that annoys me.

I have seen veteran players with LGV refits heading straight into 2nd LT's on snows, ramming them bow on bow, board, sink, leave battle. Completly stupid mechanic.

Ramming another ship should cause heavy damage to both ships (maybe crew shock due to sudden impact, too), no matter if a 5th rams a 1st or the other way around.

We are talking about ships with a weight of several hundreds or even thousand tons without any breaks.

Edited by Batman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Batman said:

It's the pushing around or even ramming head on with full speed to achieve a full stop that annoys me.

I have seen veteran players with LGV refits heading straight into 2nd LT's on snows, ramming them bow on bow, board, sink, leave battle. Completly stupid mechanic.

Ramming another ship should cause heavy damage to both ships (maybe crew shock due to sudden impact, too), no matter if a 5th rams a 1st or the other way around.

We are talking about ships with a weight of several hundreds or even thousand tons without any breaks.

when ramming a ship it could cripple the attacker 

the shock of the impact could even break a mast (mast shock)

we dont see it in the game also

a lot is done on damaging others by guns, but the damage to your own is minimal (ramming > /fire to sails /hitting rocks/ heavy winds and damage to rigging )for instance

Edited by Thonys
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thonys said:

when ramming a ship it could cripple the attacker 

the shock of the impact could even break a mast (mast shock)

we dont see it in the game also

Entanglement of rigging.

But I can see the meta gaming already :D

"... from the wrath of the metamen, deliver us O'Lord !"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because boarding is used as a tactic to immobilize a player for a gank. I couldn't care less if it's used in 1v1s on a sufficiently crippled opponent, it's the effort you put into the crippling part instead of just steering an enemy ship into the wind and wtfpwining them with 'boarding mods'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This perk is soo overpowered, there has been several suggestions to remove/change this, why it is back in the game noone knows, there are no explanation from the devs why they put it back.

Probably reload noObs who complain of getting boarded when they get to close without any boarding mods. Rather then up their game by equipping their ships accordingly and train in boarding they whine how unfair boarding are, there are certainly improvements to be done to boarding but it is still part of the game (almost).

I agree that there are an issue with various types of boarding mechanics exploits such as smaller ships board and a second grape, but this perk punishes everyone and are not a good solution and limits the scope and tools of the game for players to use in this sandbox.

Increasing perk cost and mitigating effects of the perk has been suggested before to moderate it, not to mention removing it again. 

I would love to know how the devs are reasoning in regards to why it came back, maybe they can win me over, but i doubt it with it's current configuration.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Le Raf Boom said:

And this is also stupid as it would encourage bigger ships to ram small ones resulting in RAM damage triremes.

Can't you do that ? What is the problem ? 

I am not a stupid captain to stay in the way of Victory or Agamemnon if I am in smaller ship ! So ramming should give hull damage and leaks aside from rig damage or even demast. 

Edited by AeRoTR
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

Can't you do that ? What is the problem ? 

I am not a stupid captain to stay in the way of Victory or Agamemnon if I am in smaller ship ! So ramming should give hull damage and leaks aside from rig damage or even demast. 

The whole ramming thing is weak.  If a 4th rate (or higher) rams a 6th or 7th rate (90degrees or "T-Bone") the smaller ship should be destroyed.  If the smaller ship rams a much larger one, it should be like hitting a wall, with all damage (or most) on the smaller ship.  Ships of the same rate who ram should both receive damage commensurate with their angles of impact.  Demasting should be a near certainty when ramming results in a sudden stop.  major leaking should also be common. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...