Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Final damage model mega thread (cannons, pens, structure)

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Dude, you're crazy....   these aren't death stars....    Ships just don't disintegrate from cannonballs....  I think you've been watching too many Pirates of the Caribbean scenes.

I think you're off by a few years on explosive shells.

 

P.S.  Serieuse didn't sink, by the way...  she was scuttled after 150 of her crew were transferred to the Tonnant at the Nile.

There have even been cases of 1st rates forcing 2nd rates to surrender with 1 decisive close range broadside. It is very easy to nitpick cases where frigates did great things. In reality if a large frigate like the trinc past a 1st rate and the 1st rate fired a broadside into a close range. There is no way the frigate is going anywhere. Ships did not need to be sank to be combat ineffective. That's the main difference between game a real life. Please stop using exceptions to the rules because sols are simply bigger than frigates and will crush them. 

Ps I love you too

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

This is why this topic exists because current system works. But it evens out the ships too much 
And the sad thing is that the test will probably show nothing - lots of players will love the more historical balance in HP and gun damage, lots of players will hate it. 

That cannot be true. If it were true I would be allowed to sail vics, Bellonas and aggys to port battles. I don't play rvr for 2 reasons.

1. Lack of players.

2. I will not sail buc and oceans 

Edited by HachiRoku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

I like to sail the Bellona :) but honestly, I like to sail her best in a flag squadron ( rare thing for rovers ) or if in a Conquest drive ( totally rare since clanwars ).

Have enough big ships to participate in anything and I remember ewll sailing Bucentaure and Victory during xoxo initial carving of northern Prussia.

But that's the beauty of it. Using the ships to the tasks they were intended - SOLs in a battle fleet, frigates for sea lanes control and raid.

Maybe I expect too much of authenticity gameplay - hence why i really do expect to see broadside weight to become a real thing - but also expect the sea not to become populated with ships of the line evrywhere, as that lends a "too much fantasy" feel to it.

For the subject at hand and being discussed - naval guns - i did post what is true:

- too small gun crews be poundage; if the manuals state a 24 pounder uses 12 hands + 1 boy while on duty, then in game i would expect that to happen as well :) 

- by going up to a 32 pounder changes nothing, as the gun crew remains almost unaltered with just 2 additional boys.

- at the same time a 18 pounder uses 2 less hands, but a 6 pounder still uses 8 hands

- plus reload times. The reload times we get, if we look to O'Brien books, are on spot for the initial broadsides of the engagement and not the average throughout the entire engagement, whatever duration - historical average being 5 minutes considering the fastest reload, the slowest and the crew quality ( we don't use that except by books and upgrades combos ).

In sum - gun crew count and reload and weight of shot.

That is what, IMO, needs review and fine tuning.

On paper it is perfectly feasible for a SOL to sink a frigate in in four broadsides  or  20-25 minutes, in practice it is a whole different ball game,  there are so many variables involved that make paper statistics less reliable, sea and wind states, how long the ship has been in action, the number of skilled gunners opposed to less experienced gunners, attrition rates, all play a part, especially in large battles, and that is often before it is known how skillful the opponent is at ship handling and gunnery, or, if his ship is already damaged, or not. Within an hour of action starting, gun crews will start to slow down as fatigue sets in and attrition takes it's toll on gun crew numbers so 5 minutes becomes 6 minutes then 7 minutes until fatigue slows gunnery to a crawl.

The preference would have been to put as many broadsides as is possible into the enemy before the next in line engages, or,  the Captain chooses to board her. It could take a considerable time to catch the next ship ahead giving an opportunity for guns crews to rest for a short while, it was one the advantages of fighting in line.

While I would like to see how well modern people can deal with the variables of 19th century naval warfare with ROE that reflect  the Articles of War of the day, and, under the same conditions as they did,  I do not think it is possible to do so, I fear, no one would wish play under those terms, even if, they could all be replicated, the actual sinking of ships is the fun part, and, that, is how most modern people judge success, where, in the 19th century it was considered a success if the enemy were just captured, surrendered, or, driven from the battlefield.  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

This is why this topic exists because current system works. But it evens out the ships too much 
And the sad thing is that the test will probably show nothing - lots of players will love the more historical balance in HP and gun damage, lots of players will hate it. 

It is easy to see which is going to be the minority.

 

Compare people, using game data, that sail regularly in light ships with the ones using the bigger toys (heavy frigate-SoL).

Compare the people in the world that knows the feats of the HMS Ontario (snow btw) with the ones that have heard about Nelson and the HMS Victory.

 

Pick the majority and we will see NA flourish.

Share this post


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

With hugging still a viable tactic, the idea of @admin of devastating rakes (insert science fiction log here), the low speed and turnrate of SOL compared to frigates I still believe ROVER will still enjoy the game.

BIGGER snappy salute.

You are one way focused, that is clear.

Given the ease that it is to get a Bellona nowadays i wonder what is wrong for you...

I will agree with the hugging hence we don't do it but yep, we will rake a lot as we play for the capture mostly - why craft a ship when we can capture one.

What are you proposals for guns ? More historical authenticity or less realistic arcade ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

You are one way focused, that is clear.

Given the ease that it is to get a Bellona nowadays i wonder what is wrong for you...

I will agree with the hugging hence we don't do it but yep, we will rake a lot as we play for the capture mostly - why craft a ship when we can capture one.

What are you proposals for guns ? More historical authenticity or less realistic arcade ?

Anything that stops frigates from having such advantages over SoLs, advantages that have been pointed before by @admin

Edited by Intrepido
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Hence why i totally support the change.

Tell me now, what was age of sail purpose of SOLs and of Frigates again ?

Thanks a ton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Agreed.

Hence why i totally support the change.

Tell me now, what was age of sail purpose of SOLs and of Frigates again ?

Thanks a ton.

I dont believe in restricted purposes/tasks.

 

For example:

Spain used lineships such as Glorioso to transport goods from the americas as well as frigates as the Mercedes.

Lineships, frigates and light ships were used both in naval operations against other countries, even in sieges and naval blockades (siege of gibraltar 1782, cartagena de indias 1741, argel 1784).

 

Most of the time comes to availability, if you dont have X, you use Z.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their gun decks were emptied of guns. Especially the Mercedes so the civilians and their wares could be nicely set on board :) 

But hey, let's ignore the refit of the ship for the task ;) 

Share this post


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

This is why this topic exists because current system works. But it evens out the ships too much 
And the sad thing is that the test will probably show nothing - lots of players will love the more historical balance in HP and gun damage, lots of players will hate it. 

It can be great if...

Draft/wind strength/ crew availability/ cost /maintenance cost/ crew training status ... would become a thing too.

Otherwise it's cherry-picked historical accuracy favoring even more bigger is always better.

Edited by z4ys
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, HachiRoku said:

That would give the lighter gun more DPS, more Speed and more repair space. Multi reps and high DPS setups conflict with eachother. This is why I am so critical of multi reps. They make every problem and meta worse than they should be. They are only ingame because of pve grinders. I am convinced of it. Just imaging the crying if it was patched out. The devs seem to enjoy that the community has a k/d ratio of 800:1 vs AI.

Totally true. Multi reps is the biggest problem.

In a SOL battle you can sink enemy only if he makes a fatal mistake, coz it's very hard to sink a floating ship repair plant with crew of drunk zombies, no matter how big damage make your cannons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, z4ys said:

It can be great if...

Draft/wind strength/ crew availability/ cost /maintenance cost/ crew training status ... would become a thing too.

The change will only widen the gap at the extremes, but on the similar class ships it will make importance of first shots and focus fire slightly higher. Remember that changes in damage and HP will affect all ships carrying heavy calibers. Full carronade Trincomalee will actually feel a better with a new system against first rates if Trincomalee can avoid the broadsides. 

Because just like tracers heavier damage works both ways. In general it will be slightly easier to destroy ships of similar class and +/1 class than before, but it will be harder (longer) to destroy classes that are significantly above your ship class.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Sir Lancelot Holland said:

On paper it is perfectly feasible for a SOL to sink a frigate in in four broadsides  or  20-25 minutes, in practice it is a whole different ball game, 

We're talking about a SOL sinking a frigate in one broadside.  The example used is the Serieuse (French frigate) which was left a sinking wreck after one broadside from a Brit 74.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

The change will only widen the gap at the extremes,

But at least its defensible through historical accuracy while things like mod stacking, speed capped ships and multi repairs are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel that more dynamic behaviour would give interesting results.

At the moment you have "carronade" and "gun" shot as two very different things, across all ranges, and not in a way which makes sense physically.

If instead you used shot size and weight (to allow for optional later use of hollow shot or lead filled shot), and impact velocity (dependent on range and muzzle velocity), then you can use something "along the lines of":

pen_max = kA W/D^2 * LOG10 (1 + (Vi/kB)^2)
pen_residual = pen_max - side / cos (alpha)
Vres = (10^((pen_residual))*D^2/(kA W)-1)^0.5*kB
Impulse transferred = W * (Vi-Vres)
Impulse remaining = W*Vres

This gives a maximum damage to the side at the point where the shot is *just* trickling through, at the expense of damage to the ordnance and other fittings and structure inside. Crew injury only comes from splintering if the side fails, but is closely tied to damage transfer to the side, plus a high energy threat by the shot itself.

There is more damage to the structure from high velocity shot which is stopped by 'angling' the hull, but it is effective at preserving crew and ordnance inside.

Non-perforations still cause significant damage to the side, with the whole of the available impulse being transferred.

Penetration by ordnance at it's optimal distance will do around 50% more damage to the side than at middling distances, but little or no interior damage beyond splintering.

Carronades and double shot (used with a reduced charge only) lie in the same general performance area, single shot can be tuned by using standard distance charges, or by using reduced charges.

Larger ordnance does more damage than smaller types, but tuned well all 'standard' calibres can match the next larger at the same 'optimal' velocity of impact which favours the smaller type.

Note that mostly shot holes are 'closed', and ships can take hundreds of calibre sized shot before you even damage enough of the side to equal the holes pierced for the gun ports, so in *most* cases damage internally to guns and other fittings and the crew should be more significant than damage to the structure.

 

Edited by Lieste
correction to formula
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, z4ys said:

It can be great if...

Draft/wind strength/ crew availability/ cost /maintenance cost/ crew training status ... would become a thing too.

Otherwise it's cherry-picked historical accuracy favoring even more bigger is always better.

Embrace the changes as Hethwil.

Devs can not make lineships so dam expensive because that will destroy their own game. Conquest marks, fine woods, doubloons scarcity... all of them contributed to significantly decrease the online pop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lieste, that's a bit too scientific for 18th century gunnery.  Carros and canons are in fact two different weapons.  Even with same size shot, their velocities would have differed greatly.  You speak of "tuned well" and that's just not a thing of that era.  Pre-made powder charges and imperfect canon balls made any calculation pointless.  Hitting a moving target (in 3 dimensions) from a moving platform (in 3 dimensions) gave a catenary problem such, that anything over 100 metres was a lucky hit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By tuned, I mean appropriate choice of powder charge, the use of double shot to suit the type of ordnance, the range and the target you are shooting.

It means for example, using double shot with minimal powder charges in short 18s to deal with by penetration 'French built' frigates... but that fails when applied to the American heavy frigates. It can also be failed by using single shots and highest charges against the thinner sides close in (as noted in several shore bombardments, where little damage was received on frigates due to poor decisions from the fort gunners).

It is written as a specific form as there are physical principles underlying the proposal, but in practice the behaviour is more organic.

Also, carronades overlap with gun velocities, and thus with performance behaviour for the same shot size. A standard gun uses 1/3rd 1/4th and 1/6th charges, giving an effective charge ratio of 1/8th and 1/12th for double shot. Carronades use between 1/8th and 1/16th, with their standard charge 1/12th. With the greater windage of guns, and the inefficiency of double shot (period documents report 5/9th and 4/9th of the single shot performance for the same powder charge, which is lower than for a shot of double the weight), the 'bottom' shot from double will be significantly weaker than a carronade shot at standard charges, and top shot would be broadly comparable.

Share this post


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

Embrace the changes as Hethwil.

Devs can not make lineships so dam expensive because that will destroy their own game. Conquest marks, fine woods, doubloons scarcity... all of them contributed to significantly decrease the online pop.

Funny thing is, and you can laugh with me if you want, patch 10 had more players than we do now.
Actually, patch 10 had more players than we had for all of 2018. I think people don't mind scarcity as long as the build up is fun. (which it certainly was)
But as with every build of NA developers get bullied out of their visions and flip-flopping ensues.

Edited by Slim McSauce

Share this post


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

Funny thing is, and you can laugh with me if you want, patch 10 had more players than we do now.

That patch came with a wipe, which contributed to rise momentarily the online pop.

Also, it is normal to see less people as they are a bit tired of seeing a development going sometimes in endless circles and without many new thing that push it forward.

Edited by Intrepido

Share this post


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

That patch came with a wipe, which contributed to rise momentarily the online pop.

Also, it is normal to see less people as they are a bit tired of seeing a development going sometimes in endless circles and without many new thing that push it forward.

and it was epic, everyone was working together because shit was hard, but it was fair too. Once this wipe comes, we'll see for absolute certainty which version of the game IS superior. I'm still betting on patch 10 because I have yet to see that sort of energy come form players, random players working together as one. We've seen what happens when you make your game easy, and that's pre-patch 10. So really if you think about it, what happens next if this wipe fails? We go back :)

Edited by Slim McSauce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Intrepido said:

Embrace the changes as Hethwil.

 

Should I stay silent because it suits you?

That's just my opinion. Devs or anyone else can read or skip.

Like admin said system will work great for 1+/- rate. That means every rate above/below (1 +/-) of the meta rate will be dead. Gun change alone will limited the game to a certain ship rate sprectrum and make the game boring/unplayable (time spent for pvp encounter wise ) for people who do not obey or just are not able to meta.

So far no alternatives are presented to keep the game interesting when not meta playing.

Edited by z4ys
  • Like 1

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

×