Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
RKY

Weather gage rebalance

Recommended Posts

Currently meta grants too much an advantage to the holder of the weather gage, and a good fleet commander can keep it as long as the wind shift is not too punishing.

It results in draw games where the leeward fleet does not engage due to the incapacity to close the distance and / or if willing to engage is at risk due to hull rolling.

This is the current situation.

Although it is normal for the leeward to have exposed hull, it should also be the only one able to use its full firepower. The weather gage fleet should not be able to use its bottom deck precisely due to rolling.

 

I suggest to implement exactly that. Past a certain angle upwind the weather gage fleet must have a penalty to not be able to shoot bottom deck, UNLESS they drop sails to battle resulting in reduced rolling. basically if the origin of the wind is 0, anything between 15:75 degrees and -15:-75 degrees should cause enough rolling to disable bottom decks and limit upper deck capacity unless there is not enough sails out to make the ship roll.

 

Expected result:

- leeward fleet gets more firepower than weather gage fleet on a head on line fight

- leeward fleet is more at risk and exposed due to hull roll

- if weather gage fleet decide to drop sails to battle to maximize firepower, leeward fleet gets a chance to take the wind or to close in to engage in close quarters

 

If such mechanic is implemented fights will be more oriented toward the angles of 60:120 and -60:-120 with more dynamic fights were each fleet can get the weather gage multiple times in a fight, less running and more tactic option than we currently have.

I see only bonus to the fight mechanics with this.

 

@admin what do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an interesting concept.

With the way you described things, would it be safe to say that the meta would be unchanged if people were more consistent with depowering prior to broadsiding?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a huge negative. The current mechanic makes positioning before the tag a tactical question that can affect the instanced battle severely. What you seem to want is a solution that will absolve careless or unattentive fleet commanders for being just that - careless and unattentive. Irl the wind decisively affected fleets to control engagements and so it should be in game as well.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lars Kjaer said:

I see a huge negative. The current mechanic makes positioning before the tag a tactical question that can affect the instanced battle severely. What you seem to want is a solution that will absolve careless or unattentive fleet commanders for being just that - careless and unattentive. Irl the wind decisively affected fleets to control engagements and so it should be in game as well.

IRL, my dear, it was exactly as I am describing here.

Don't fool yourself, contrary to what is usually told on these forums, not every navy favored the weather gage. British did, french didnt for instance. They both came with advantages and inconvenient.

One allowed to deny battle and or dictate the battle rythm, at the cost of firepower, the other maximizing firepower and capacity to flee at the cost of hull exposure.Thus resulting in battle usually in wind relatively neutral as I describe.

The current meta is to have a hunter and a hunted which is kinda boring to be honest. (in proper line battle, not ow random battle)

16 minutes ago, TheHaney said:

That's an interesting concept.

With the way you described things, would it be safe to say that the meta would be unchanged if people were more consistent with depowering prior to broadsiding?

No, stay sails only allow ships to keep some speed upwind and reduce the rolling a little in game. What causes the rolling is the cheer amount of sails deployed the closer you get to the wind up to a certain point the more wind force is applied to each square sail which transfer the energy to the mast which cause the hull to roll.

Btw @admin I dont remember if spanish square sail has an extra penalty on rolling but i should, although I don't know to what extent forces are calculated in the game I guess more force already cause extra rolling. but an extra penalty can't be that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with @Lars Kjaer here. This is one instance where I think the balance is already about right and there's no need to change things, especially since it somewhat aligns with historical accuracy in an already meaningful way.

The solution to your problem?  Sail a better upwind-capable ship in a mixed-fleet squadron.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wraith said:

I agree with @Lars Kjaer here. This is one instance where I think the balance is already about right and there's no need to change things, especially since it somewhat aligns with historical accuracy in an already meaningful way.

The solution to your problem?  Sail a better upwind-capable ship in a mixed-fleet squadron.

give me historical treaties to prove your words then if it is "historical".

I don't see any balance in the current state of the mechanic.

Edited by RKY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RKY The disadvantage in firepower for the windward fleet is dependent on the wind strength and sea state, which are not in game. During Sea Trials storm battles you had this effect but we don't have storm  battles atm. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DeRuyter said:

@RKY The disadvantage in firepower for the windward fleet is dependent on the wind strength and sea state, which are not in game. During Sea Trials storm battles you had this effect but we don't have storm  battles atm. 

indeed it was related to wind force and sea state. And indeed we don't have those. Instead we have a perfect gentle breeze with a relatively quite sea. Thus i suggest to base it on wind angle.

Remember, fleet action were in majority of cases, to my knowledge, fought under 6knot and not full sails. We on the other hand are going full sails and don't heel much to be honest.

Edited by RKY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cut your loses and sail upwind. If they really want to fight, then they will have to follow you.

Edited by Slim McSauce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

Cut your loses and sail upwind. If they really want to fight, then they will have to follow you.

that doesn't change, you can run upwind. you just cant shoot your bottom deck. Thus it only really affect fleet action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't participated in enough full line fleet fights to really give any serious input, but I would be concerned about the added fiddly-ness for new players in smaller fights. Since I imagine the eventual goal is to attract a bigger crowd. I know the concept of dumbing-down for the sake of the casual market is not a popular one here but I think there's a point where adding bits like "oh, by the way, now you can only effectively fire at specific wind angles" is a detriment.

Edited by TheHaney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is historically and physics wise accurate for SOLs at the very least. And it gives more tactical possibilities and challenges.

give 4% leeward heel to any SOL, and with the muzzles out they shoot in water at best or are into water which is not the case currently because the environment mechanics are too gentle. Obviously it should affect ships base on canon position height wise compare to waterline.  maybe don't disable the decks but see it that they can t shoot anything other than water unless hull to hull fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RKY said:

leeward fleet gets more firepower than weather gage fleet on a head on line fight

to my knowledge and i could be very wrong here but i have only heard of 2 battles in history were the leeward ships had an advantage because they could use their full firepower. I don't like the idea of re balancing the way the wind works because its already not that hard to win from a downwind position. If what you propose was implemented in the game having the wind would be a huge disadvantage because of DPS. It would be retarded. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely not.

Having the weather gauge is one of the few things NA combat model still has right. Even if 15 minute wind shifts is dumb.

Implement rough seas and variable winds and then you can have stuff like this. 
 

In heavy winds, a lineship should be the fastest thing afloat, but they can't use their bottom decks without taking on water (implement ability to close and open gunports on a 2 minute timer; captains must make a judgement to open the ports and man the pumps or keep them closed and suffer reduced firepower).

Frigates should excel in rough seas where they can make use of their higher gundecks and keep good firepower, but they suffer a little bit of speed because they can't hold the same press of canvas.

In light winds, frigates and small ships should be the fastest, with lineships ghosting along (but not too slow, nobody wants to sail 3 knots downwind and stationary when trying to go upwind).

 

However, I think there are a lot more important issues and bugs to get worked out before we consider reworking the entire combat model...again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RKY said:

Although it is normal for the leeward to have exposed hull, it should also be the only one able to use its full firepower. The weather gage fleet should not be able to use its bottom deck precisely due to rolling.

Hats off to you RKY for the suggestion. Coincidentally, I just finished a Patrick O'Brian novel in which an enemy ship had to close it's lower gunports due to heel at a certain angle to the wind, neutralizing them for a short amount of time. I believe it was a 3rd rate.

It does seem a little odd that the current battle mechanics allow for below-the-water-line damage due to heel when on the leeward side, but does not allow for any correlation to the windward side. 

Something for Game Labs to ponder.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Captiva said:

 

Something for Game Labs to ponder.

We pondered and will focus on unfinished things

ulzNwRn.jpg

  • Like 42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, admin said:

We pondered and will focus on unfinished things

ulzNwRn.jpg

Bravo, sir, bravo. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Naval Action is a hardcore, realistic [...]

@admin I would not draw combat as shiny as it is in the picture you posted when the following words are used in steam description.

Although this is a suggestion for future, something to keep in mind and could be introduced at later stage. I do know you have your agenda and priorities.

 

Most people will scream and cry against it, as they did for the change on chains. But look at it now! would a single person wish to revert back to the previous chain system? I doubt it.

One thing I did not mention is also the current incapacity of the leeway fleet to use top decks on close quarters due to rolling. To use those decks the fleet must either depower or neutralize sails. There are literally no advantages being leeway which contradicts highly history, basics of physic and tactics. There is a reason most battles were fought on neutral winds and at battle rythm.

The game allows us to go full sails in battle which is not realistic and that is fine. But one should not be granted so much advantage compare to the other. All the comments here complain about how it is heresy to reduce firepower of a weather gage fleet, but if such system was put in place, people would know about it and know they can neutralize sails or drop them to maximize firepower. That is what would happen at start. Then after a few days to adapt fight would see their course on more neutral winds than we currently have which would be more realistically accurate.

Bear also in mind it is commonly accepted people are part of the ship, in battle crew would mostly go along the broadside to be fired and reloaded. Thus the weather gage fleet would have extra roll caused by the crew position, while on the other hand the leeward fleet gets reduced roll for the the very same reason. don't neglect crew impact on rolling. (consider 500 gunners with an average of 75kg, that is 35t)

Also when neutralizing sails or dropping sails, a ship roll doesn't initially goes back to 0, it goes pretty much to the same angle it was on but on it windward side and so on for a few minutes until it stabilizes.

Edited by RKY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, RKY said:

The game allows us to go full sails in battle which is not realistic and that is fine. But one should not be granted so much advantage compare to the other. All the comments here complain about how it is heresy to reduce firepower of a weather gage fleet, but if such system was put in place, people would know about it and know they can neutralize sails or drop them to maximize firepower. That is what would happen at start. Then after a few days to adapt fight would see their course on more neutral winds than we currently have which would be more realistically accurate.

the game needs a setting where you have for instance 100 crew on sail on full sails, and for each stage the crew requirements for sails go down, e.g Battle Sails will only take 40 crew so you have 60 crew for gunnery or repair or whatever you feel. Also battle sails were used to decrease the chance of fire from the cannons and up to the sails, if the sails could catch fire when you go full sails and fire full broadsides, people would probably go more in battle sails

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, admin said:

We pondered and will focus on unfinished things

 

 

 

will you set up a poll so that the community can vote for the things we want most? although I think more new content will top that list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RKY said:

I would not draw combat as shiny as it is in the picture you posted

Get out of here!

I would draw the combat as the shiny front of a unicorn and not as the finished hind part ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rickard said:

 

will you set up a poll so that the community can vote for the things we want most? although I think more new content will top that list.

non-english speakers might argue that localization is a better option

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, admin said:

non-english speakers might argue that localization is a better option

I dont believe that, at all.

The game hasnt a story or full explanation texts to make it so hard to understand what to do.

If this game was a RPG title I would fully agree with you.

 

 

Edited by Intrepido
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

I dont believe that, at all.

The game hasnt a story or full explanation texts to make it so hard to understand what to do.

If this game was a RPG I would fully agree with you.

 

 

We have other games in our portfolio and the difference is drastic. Imagine playing this game in Chinese: possible but really not optimal.. 
UI and localization is our top priority, once done we will explore other directions 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
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

×