Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

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

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Sparkydog said:

It would have never been possible for a Cerberus to destroy a 1st rate. With one broadside, the 1st rate would have completely wrecked and probably demasted the small frigate. It’s just the way it was.

In RL, a 1st rate would never have been unescorted.  In RL, the manoeuvrability difference between 5th and 1st rates would not have been so big.  It's still a game and these smaller ships can have a shot. With the new shot weight, they won't survive a broadside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two Connies should be able to take a first rate- that would be showing good balance.  The introduction of the heavy frigate ended the era of line of battle and SOL.  Anything smaller than heavy frigate should need a 3 v 1 to have a realistic chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sparkydog said:

Two Connies should be able to take a first rate- that would be showing good balance.  The introduction of the heavy frigate ended the era of line of battle and SOL.  Anything smaller than heavy frigate should need a 3 v 1 to have a realistic chance.

You're still thinking "realistic".  In this game, there is a huge manoeuvrability advantage with smaller vessels.  Stern camping an SOL in a small vessel will continue and I'd be willing to bet that the small ship experts will continue to take down the big boys.  Player skill will continue to trump simple ship size and power.  Lots of players put themselves into a 1st rate even before they can fully crew it, and they are easy meat for the wolves.  Now a skilled player in a 1st rate may not be as vulnerable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2019 at 12:37 AM, admin said:

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.

Be careful @admin if you’re trying to make all classes viable to the battle.

Combat is the game, it’s the only reason why players are playing and it’s not broken!

Change any of the combat aspects at extreme risk.

The reason why players aren’t taking 1st rates out is much simpler, they’re too expensive, too much effort to craft, now players are less likely to risk all that effort.You have already priced 1st rates out off “commonality” and the result of this has yet to be seen.

Making stern raking more effective will give mobile ships even more of a reason to stern camp.

“Bow tanking 74s” will give those rates the ability to take on 1st rates, that is, giving them more mobility so they can bow tank the enemy return fire and the turn to fire a boardside, then turn bow on again (or angle alittle).

Would be better to look for other ways to make 5th, 4th... rates viable (if that's the goal, well it should be).

Edited by BuckleUpBones
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

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.

will Armour thickness still be a thing then? Lets say you do this test and first rates still have 80-90 cm Armour. The smaller guns still wont do damage or will they? If the smaller guns don't do damage then 1 1st will become unkillable by even 4 aggys since the aggys 9s and even 18s cannot pen an ocean. There is a reverse stream of me firing 18pounders into an ocean from 5m and not penning. I did not miss because I am expirienced and I was hugging it. If you change thickness DPS will become a problem again. Smaller guns having DPS advantages is also bad. There is a sweetspot that needs to be found. How about the same DPS for all guns? Once there is no DPS advantage maybe this patch could have potential to be really good. If DPS was not a problem then there might be a tactical advantage in having faster lighter, more maneuverable 1st rates with 32s, 24s and 12s for example.

I want to clarify my DPS idea. I have not really done the math so am not even sure how practical this would be. 

All long guns have a DPS of 4000

All mediums have a DPS of 4500 

All Carros have a DPS of 5000

Numbers are completely random and have no meaning to them. 

By this broadside weight will be more important than DPS. 

There also could be an issue that the medium gun becomes even better than the long gun. Armour thickness is good and bouncing should happen but imo it is still to much. Top decks of first rates are useless. 

What does the community think? Should a nine pounder pen a first rate at 250m? I personal thing they should especially since the ocean has a major hull shape advantage over the santi for example. The santis model is not as well detailed as the ocean and that is a bit of an issue since her hull is to flat. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Would be better to look for other ways to make 5th, 4th... rates viable (if that's the goal).

Cannons are the only thing that seperates 4th rates and 1st rates. If 3 aggys can do damage to 1st rates instead of 50% of their broadsides bouncing then maybe it will make smaller ships viable? I personally believe the pre structure combat was the best in game we had so far. Don't get me wrong. Leeway and structure were great additions to the game but the other things that came with it is just meh. You are right though. They should be careful and thats what I fear aswell. 0-100

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, z4ys said:

now he quits before he even reaches that rank because he is an one shot in most battles and not allowed to do any mistakes against vets thats will most likely use bigger ships or cant pve with firends that are far more advanced into the game and dont want to sail smaller ships? Game will be even harder for them.

And they will look up to the big ships, eager to sail one

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys I advocate for a chill pill. So far nothing has happened and as germans say "painting the devil onto the wall" is not really fruitful here. If it comes we can test it, I hope for a reasonably long time.

I'm not a programmer so I don't have any idea how much time it needs to code this and to tweak it afterwards, my feeling tells me: quite a long time. Therefore I do not really unterstand the intention of this change. In NA atm there is (to me) one thing working pretty well, as it was tested and tweaked for years now. That's combat mechanics. I just think this change might be too big at the current state of development. 

I also agree to Hachi who said people buy this game to play the Vic. If 80+% of war servers pop play the game as casuals - and my experience tells me they do - it's a roaring broadside of a SOL they want and not the speed of a frigate or the agility of an unrated vessel. 

From NA sabbatical with love o/

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

If a casual player buys / builds a 1st rate he expects to win against 4th/5th/6th/7th rates. If not he will be dissappointed and quit most likely.

 

That's entirely possible, but there is a chance we're selling casuals a bit short.

In my head, the people who gravitate towards this game is a lot like the crowd who likes the qualities of a flight sim. This is an assumption and it could be wrong.

People who play flightsims have no trouble accepting that a Me262 is terribly powerful and almost untouchable once it has reached altitude and a certain speed. At the same time, it's almost helpless at low altitudes and low speeds due to its terribad climb and acceleration performance. 

1st rates have a fantastic broadside weight but bad speed and maneuverability, under some circumstances a big ship will have trouble bringing those guns to bear at a much more mobile ship.

Simmers don't expect the Me262 to always win against slower and more maneuverable planes, for similar reasons I think OW players would understand a big ship can't always win against a well handled mobile ship.

_____

I'm extremely curious to see how a weight based damage model would play out, it could be better or could be worse overall. It would make ships sink more, I think, and that is something OW players are extremely ambivalent towards. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, z4ys said:

now he quits before he even reaches that rank because he is an one shot in most battles and not allowed to do any mistakes against vets thats will most likely use bigger ships or cant pve with firends that are far more advanced into the game and dont want to sail smaller ships? Game will be even harder for them.

but noobs in 6th and 7th rates already doesnt engage bigger ships because they expect their ships to get vaporized if they get a broadside from a sol, its only vets and experienced players that dare to go up against sols because 1. they dont see who it is until their inside battle and then decide if they want to risk it, determined who the player they tagged is or 2 they know that their ship can soak all the damage with 130 mast thickness and hugkill it without any big risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1st rates are weak anyway, you just hold them in battle for 1,5 hours and gather a fleet outside to kill it

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Wyy said:

but noobs in 6th and 7th rates already doesnt engage bigger ships because they expect their ships to get vaporized if they get a broadside from a sol, its only vets and experienced players that dare to go up against sols because 1. they dont see who it is until their inside battle and then decide if they want to risk it, determined who the player they tagged is or 2 they know that their ship can soak all the damage with 130 mast thickness and hugkill it without any big risk.

And they can run.

Share this post


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

I also agree to Hachi who said people buy this game to play the Vic. If 80+% of war servers pop play the game as casuals - and my experience tells me they do - it's a roaring broadside of a SOL they want and not the speed of a frigate or the agility of an unrated vessel. 

 

Pickle doesnt sell copies.

SoL does.

Edited by Intrepido
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Pickle doesnt sell copies.

SoL does.

Why new guys don't start in sols right away. Ditch the rank system improve ship knowledge. That should be the key to the ship. Not the rank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, z4ys said:

Why new guys don't start in sols right away. Ditch the rank system improve ship knowledge. That should be the key to the ship. Not the rank.

All the good things require time.

Thats why you can sail pickles right at the begining.

Edited by Intrepido
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

1st rates are weak anyway, you just hold them in battle for 1,5 hours and gather a fleet outside to kill it

Can confirm, Rediii has done this to my santi. He waited 1.5 hours outside my log off spot with a few people.

 

Once I logged in, they tagged, stern camped, mortar briged my masts off, and then boarded.

 

Edit not even a revenge fleet, just open world sailing...

Edited by Phaserburn

Share this post


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

Dude this is a game. I can't remember that historically every nation had hundreds of 1st rates.They were used as flagships, so if you want to make the game historical we should limit every nation to a handful of 1st and 2nd rates and slow them down to 6kn, 8kn with full speed mods.

You can't just make them invincible because it fits your historical sources. Frigates need to have a chance against a lone SOL. Even now the only advantage a Frigate has over SOLs is their speed and the captain behind the helm.

Frigates in plural should have and do have an advantage against a lone SoL atm..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Phaserburn said:

Can confirm, Rediii has done this to my santi. He waited 1.5 hours outside my log off spot with a few people.

 

Once I logged in, they tagged, stern camped, mortar briged my masts off, and then boarded.

 

Edit not even a revenge fleet, just open world sailing...

Atleast you didnt get dragged into battle before :) but yea its NA meta atm to tag someone and call for help to finish him. Its very nice gameplay

Share this post


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

With the new shot weight, they won't survive a broadside.

Whats that?

Share this post


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

And when all is harder (which often translates in more grinding) the pop goes down.

This fact is a truth that was showed to us after every hardcore patch.

Precisely. But it’s important to stress part of your first statement: harder has usually translated in this game as more grinding.

If “harder” instead meant more complex, more meaningful, more interconnected aspects of the game, then I think the game would ultimately draw more players and those players would be more involved.

In my opinion, this game will be successful if it requires more strategic planning in both military, economic, and manufacturing actions.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Farrago said:

Precisely. But it’s important to stress part of your first statement: harder has usually translated in this game as more grinding.

If “harder” instead meant more complex, more meaningful, more interconnected aspects of the game, then I think the game would ultimately draw more players and those players would be more involved.

In my opinion, this game will be successful if it requires more strategic planning in both military, economic, and manufacturing actions. 

 Can you produce “harder” introduced themes that has increased pop? (with steam chart date references too please).

 

Edited by BuckleUpBones
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

 Can you produce “harder” introduced themes that has increased pop? (with steam chart date references too please).

 

No, I can’t. Because to my knowledge, it’s never been tested in game, at least not for any length of time. All changes in game economy and crafting have been very drastic and when there was a massive shock effect in the player population, instead of refining, there were often huge changes reversing the course.

Remember the austerity patch? It shocked the population and many quit. But rather than making minute changes to refine things and yet preserve value, there was a 360 degree turn and folks made millions. 

We saw it again with doubloons. Many “quit” with their introduction. To reverse that trend, the faucet was turned on full so that doubloons are falling in value at a breakneck pace. However, changes to stimulate RVR have been slow in coming and massive demand for lineships is the only thing that will burn enough excess doubloons.

The idea that port ownership has its costs is a good one but there’s never been any further development. Instead of just gold (or now reals) ports should need economic activity. Investments in ports should not just buy a timer, it should buy a benefit to the owner.

But, in answer to your question, I CAN point to a time when everything was so straightforward and easy. You just had to logon, you were given a ship, and you fought. It could not have been easier. It was called Legends and was greeted by the population with a giant “meh”.

I’m not sure what you are advocating, but I want a game that rewards those who spend time and effort in the game but by “effort” I do not mean grinding AI to obtain a certain book or to make a living of doubloons and reals. Perhaps I am in the minority, but I’m not looking for a game that one succeeds at the same level if they only play 2 hours every couple of weeks. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin What if the problem is not the damage but the penetration of the guns?

How many times have I seen 24-32-42 bouncing against frigates? Thats one of the main reasons why hercules is so popular, its 5.18 turnrate makes wonders when the player wants to bounce shots.

A 32pd ball shouldnt be able to bounce even at 45 degrees when the hull of the enemy is a medium frigate like hercules, essex, belle poule, cherubim...

You dont make any damage if you dont pen so fix penetration values for high pounders and it help SoL fights against frigates.

Share this post


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

@admin What if the problem is not the damage but the penetration of the guns?

How many times have I seen 24-32-42 bouncing against frigates? Thats one of the main reasons why hercules is so popular, its 5.18 turnrate makes wonders when the player wants to bounce shots.

A 32pd ball shouldnt be able to bounce even at 45 degrees when the hull of the enemy is a medium frigate like hercules, essex, belle poule, cherubim...

You dont make any damage if you dont pen so fix penetration values for high pounders and it help SoL fights against frigates.

The problem is treating the vessel as 'armour' with structure behind it. If you use the wooden structure to resist penetration of iron shot it will be damaged. The more penetration you absorb (especially by angling) the more damage the side takes. This is *especially* obnoxious when considering the injury to masts, spars and yards, which are made from lighter timbers, notable for being less resistive than oak, beech or elm. Even a partial penetration which doesn't pass, should damage the timbers, the main difference with a penetration and a failure to penetrate is the generation of splinters behind, and the exit of the iron shot to strike other targets potentially using the residual velocity.

It shouldn't really lose 'thickness' overall once damaged either, rather have a 'hole' which allows water in if submerged, and can offer a small chance of a strongly reduced or absent protection (and subsequent damage) when shot hits a holed area (in the same way as shots passing through or on the edge of constructed ports/scuttles/galleries).

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

The problem is treating the vessel as 'armour' with structure behind it. If you use the wooden structure to resist penetration of iron shot it will be damaged. The more penetration you absorb (especially by angling) the more damage the side takes. This is *especially* obnoxious when considering the injury to masts, spars and yards, which are made from lighter timbers, notable for being less resistive than oak, beech or elm. Even a partial penetration which doesn't pass, should damage the timbers, the main difference with a penetration and a failure to penetrate is the generation of splinters behind, and the exit of the iron shot to strike other targets potentially using the residual velocity.

It shouldn't really lose 'thickness' overall once damaged either, rather have a 'hole' which allows water in if submerged, and can offer a small chance of a strongly reduced or absent protection (and subsequent damage) when shot hits a holed area (in the same way as shots passing through or on the edge of constructed ports/scuttles/galleries).

It is quite interesting your post but I believe @admin will have a hard time coding that realistic approach.

Also we should have in mind the big picture, which is that other parts of the game need much more love.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...