Patch 30: Combat and boarding feedback

[Neads O'Tune]

1 minute ago, Hethwill said:

@Neads O'Tune Sorry for late edit.

Weight of shot ? 

If I understand you correctly then I assume whatever carros the belle poule can carry

[Hethwill]

Yes, can carry from this weight up to this weight  

Look, you either give ALL the correct data or the post is "lost" because it lacks all information.

It is like reporting a "bug". Without info there's zero chance to even start to verifiy it.

So yeah, talk about smartarse attitude. Reckon one needs to be smart first...

[Neads O'Tune]

5 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Yes, can carry from this weight up to this weight  

Look, you either give ALL the correct data or the post is "lost" because it lacks all information.

It is like reporting a "bug". Without info there's zero chance to even start to verifiy it.

So yeah, talk about smartarse attitude. Reckon one needs to be smart first...

I am not privvy to the loadouts of the enemy, i can only go on what I have available to me, and that is what I have given. 

Not sure how much experience you have but when someone sinks your ship and you ask what they are using you usually get one of two responses: 

"HAHAHAHAHAHA NOOB!!!!!!!"

Or a load of made up bullshit

 

The point still stands that 3 minutes battles are NOT good game-play especially if it takes an hour to find said battles.

Additionally, if you don't have the prepared perk then it is pointless going into battle it seems now.

[Tom Farseer]

14 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Yes, can carry from this weight up to this weight  

Look, you either give ALL the correct data or the post is "lost" because it lacks all information.

It is like reporting a "bug". Without info there's zero chance to even start to verifiy it.

So yeah, talk about smartarse attitude. Reckon one needs to be smart first...

So... unless the enemy was beyond stupid it was either 24 (top deck) or 32 pd carros (main deck).
I know the post you refer lacked info (It's creator is prone to rage-y reactions sometimes :P) but a little thinking can go along way.

The point was quite clear to see in my opinion:
@Neads O'Tune is of the opinion that a bell poule with a fairly standard loadout killed a mast at medium-ish range with 4 shots is.. well... problematic, to put it in a safenotogetbanned diplomatic way. Regardless of the ship he himself was sailing (that info is actually really the one missing ).
I share that opinion. Damage across the board needs to be nerfed a bit. Carronade damage particularly so.

[Teutonic]

3 minutes ago, Tom Farseer said:

Damage across the board needs to be nerfed a bit. Carronade damage particularly so.

yeah, and I'm not against bigger guns doing more damage - it's just that damage all seems high.

Lineships absolutely should have a devastating broadsides to 5th rates and smaller
Smalls ships shouldn't be fighting lineships without some serious tactics and maneuvers

but I think we could all benefit with lowering damage from all cannons across the board. I believe the Admin has already stated that next patch we should expect changes and so far, I like all the adjustments that they plan to do.

Edited March 7, 2019 by Teutonic

[angriff]

2 hours ago, Hethwill said:

With what guns ? What charge ? What shot ? From what distance ? Where did the shots hit ?

Probably carronades that are OP 

[huliotkd]

@admin please don't nerf damages!

if you have to nerf something, nerf only carro penetration above 100mt...all other guns are ok!!

[DeRuyter]

10 hours ago, admin said:

This is an issue of DPM disparity which is exaggerated for some overgunned ships 
Hercules mixed gun DPM was 1700 in the old model and 3400 in the new - doubling damage output. This is causing too much importance on first shot, to the point that second shot does not matter. 
We are working on balancing this

Here is the rationale
Gun captains used powder to control the penetration power (1/2 1/4 1/3 charge). Ideal charge was that provided enough power to generate as much splinters as possible (just enough to be penetrating the hull), overcharging caused nice accurate holes on both sides (low damage to hull). Undercharging did not penetrate. 
Carronades were short and used low powder thus generated a lot of splinters and were easy to reload and maintain.

But their damage was definitely not equal to the long gun damage. As energy was not enough. 

As a result
Carronades should not generate so much damage but should generate as much splinters as before. + some tweaks to HP on lower level ships must be applied.

Overall penetration should be lowered across all guns slightly. And HP for some low ships should be rebalanced. 
The gap between carronades, mediums and longs should be lower. 

 

Please don't nerf carronade damage too much or you will remove one of the reasons small ships carried them. They allowed a ship-sloop or brig (Rattlesnake/Niagara) to carry much more weight of shot than their size would allow at the expense of range. Some larger ships had them on the QD for close range work and loaded them with shot and grape to clear the enemy decks. Several thoughts:

1. A carronade should have a similar damage output to a long gun of the same caliber. Reduce medium range accuracy and damage.

2. Limit availability to ships that used them especially on main gun decks - ie; large frigates, LeRequin (that also balances LRQ with other 6th rates). 

[Marquês do Bonfim]

Capturable ships should reward you more than sinking one. If you go into battle and cap a ship, you should get more reals and xp for that than just by sinking the enemy ship. I hope this comes into the game as soon as possible, it will also give purpose for capping ships.

[Palatinose]

14 hours ago, Neads O'Tune said:

Not sure how much experience you have but when someone sinks your ship and you ask what they are using you usually get one of two responses: 

"HAHAHAHAHAHA NOOB!!!!!!!"

Or a load of made up bullshit

Despite you're right imo with the pointed out problem (unless you were in a T-Brig or so - therefore plz give Infos on your used ship) I wouldn't agree to this.

It's like in real life: if you are polite, you usually get a polite answer.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Palatinose

[mikawa]

I must say that I love the new damage model in combat. It feels rather realistic, gives every braodside more weight and helps in finishing smaller ships more quickly. Together with the slower turn rates it requires now more precise positioning in battle.

The "20 mins open for weaker side join rule" turns out to be also a very good idea, so gankers should now be more careful. Spreading more small NPC's around capital is good, though I still don't see the benefit of these bigger NPC groups. If someone wants to fight NPC's in a group he would surely rather take a fleet mission then to rely on random spawn.

[Neads O'Tune]

1 hour ago, mikawa said:

I must say that I love the new damage model in combat. It feels rather realistic, gives every braodside more weight and helps in finishing smaller ships more quickly. Together with the slower turn rates it requires now more precise positioning in battle.

The "20 mins open for weaker side join rule" turns out to be also a very good idea, so gankers should now be more careful. Spreading more small NPC's around capital is good, though I still don't see the benefit of these bigger NPC groups. If someone wants to fight NPC's in a group he would surely rather take a fleet mission then to rely on random spawn.

Forgive me if I'm wrong but you sound like someone who spends a lot of time doing PvE in home waters (as is your right) and from a PvE point of view then yes this patch is great if you like taking out a 1st rate and attacking large groups of smaller AI. 

But from a PvP perspective the current damage output is a negative change for the game for many reasons. 

As for the new ROE, it is open to abuse by those same "gankers" And is a major step backwards in my opinion in its current form.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Neads O'Tune

[Tom Farseer]

First experienced of a mate of mine with todays damage changes:

"New damage model is still [censored]. Caught a herc coming out of battle with AI tagged him before he realised and was able to repair, was down to half hull one side. Just happend to be the side I spawned beside with Prepared and sunk him befor the timer even started.
Actually two salvos but the first one just f**ked him over."

Guess damage is still a bit extreme...
Granted the Hercules was at half hull HP but still, the first salvo should have an impact but it shouldn't decide the outcome of the whole battle.

[Angus MacDuff]

7 minutes ago, Tom Farseer said:

First experienced of a mate of mine with todays damage changes:

"New damage model is still [censored]. Caught a herc coming out of battle with AI tagged him before he realised and was able to repair, was down to half hull one side. Just happend to be the side I spawned beside with Prepared and sunk him befor the timer even started.
Actually two salvos but the first one just f**ked him over."

Guess damage is still a bit extreme...
Granted the Hercules was at half hull HP but still, the first salvo should have an impact but it shouldn't decide the outcome of the whole battle.

Hercs are a bit of a glass cannon now.  Sounds like a combo of a bad Herc driver and a great tag.  Was you mate's ship carrying heavy guns?  This may be exactly what we want.  He never should have let himself be tagged that closely.

[Neads O'Tune]

14 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Hercs are a bit of a glass cannon now.  Sounds like a combo of a bad Herc driver and a great tag.  Was you mate's ship carrying heavy guns?  This may be exactly what we want.  He never should have let himself be tagged that closely.

Ahh yes, the "get gud noob" mentaility as it's finest. 

It doesn't matter what he is sailing, ships are doing far too much damage altogether, most of the time that first broadside is so damaging that the player can never really recover from it. 

The battles are decided pretty much by whoever can get their broadside in first. Either you take a broadside to the side and you are into structure OR you take that first broadside to the mast and they instantly topple over. 

Either way if you don't have prepared or spawn in exactly the right position you don't stand a chance

[Tom Farseer]

What my esteamed colleague above wants to point out is:

• Mistakes should be harshly punished in a hardcore combat model.
• but people need the opportunity to make said mistakes before the just get roflstomped because of a lucky/unlucky tag.
   

Basic rule of thumb: If a single Perk seems to be without alternatives (as Prepared is right now) that means balances is askew. Same goes for Upgrades, wood choices or just ships in general. If you have fifty things to choose from and only one really makes sense for all situations, something is wrong.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Tom Farseer

[Teutonic]

8 minutes ago, Tom Farseer said:

What my esteamed colleague above wants to point out is:

• Mistakes should be harshly punished in a hardcore combat model.
• but people need the opportunity to make said mistakes before the just get roflstomped because of a lucky/unlucky tag.
   

Basic rule of thumb: If a single Perk seems to be without alternatives (as Prepared is right now) that means balances is askew. Same goes for Upgrades, wood choices or just ships in general. If you have fifty things to choose from and only one really makes sense for all situations, something is wrong.

would it be better if everyone had prepared, or no one had prepared?

EDIT: I still agree though that shallow water ships seem to be doing too much damage, but I haven't tried it out with the new carro damage numbers. it's possible that we still just need a 10-20% HP boost on the small ships.

As for demasting - I agree it still seems too easy.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Teutonic

[Angus MacDuff]

42 minutes ago, Neads O'Tune said:

Ahh yes, the "get gud noob" mentaility as it's finest.

It's not that at all.  Mistakes have a cost and if you come out of a battle and immediately get tagged, you probably made a big mistake.  Additionally, the attacker ended up right beside him.  Why wouldn't you have your guns ready to fire when you initiate combat??  There is nothing wrong with "Prepared" (except that it's a perk at all).  The size of the attacking ship is very important, because if he had heavy guns, firing at a lightly armoured 5th rate, he should indeed reduce him to wreckage.  Is it perfect yet?  No, of course not, and that is why there was just a modification of the damage model.  And thanks for telling me what my "mentality" is.  I never have a clue...

[Tom Farseer]

1 hour ago, Teutonic said:

would it be better if everyone had prepared, or no one had prepared?

Not quite my point. It would be better if whether you had prepared or not were a tad less decisive in OW battles.

[Angus MacDuff]

1 minute ago, Tom Farseer said:

Not quite my point. It would be better if whether you had prepared or not were a tad less decisive in OW battles.

That was another discussion (long ago and far away).  And it ties in with spawning position.  If we spawn right beside a guy with "Prepared", it is indeed decisive, especially with the damage model.  So the answer is to spawn further away and have to manoeuvre in order to get our shots in.  The issue with that, is that then your target runs away clean.  For me, the answer is spawn at a reasonable distance but have "Control" (with no need for cannon hits) up to some reasonable distance.  This would allow you to chase an unwilling victim and as long as you are closing, they can't get out.

[Njord]

Everyone should have prepared, like sextant it's just a given in my opinion to keep it authentic. *Warships lumbering toward each other over the course of an hour after spotting on the horizon* Captains:"Remember lads, don't load the guns until we are at spitting distance, we are not prepared!"

[van der Clam]

16 hours ago, Portuguese Privateer said:

Capturable ships should reward you more than sinking one. If you go into battle and cap a ship, you should get more reals and xp for that than just by sinking the enemy ship. I hope this comes into the game as soon as possible, it will also give purpose for capping ships.

I believe the devs and most ppl consider the ship (and being able to sell it and the guns and the cargo) is the extra "payment". However, I absolutely believe that captures need to be counted as kills and so we should be rewarded with Combat Marks and PvP Zone points for captures.

[admin]

2 hours ago, van der Decken said:

captures need to be counted as kills and so we should be rewarded with Combat Marks and PvP Zone points for captures.

capture is the reward  - you get the ship.

[Angus MacDuff]

1 minute ago, admin said:

capture is the reward  - you get the ship.

Yes, you've stood firm on that statement.....But.   I find myself sinking enemy ships because I would rather have the PVP rewards.  It goes towards the PVP mission total and even the SP rewards.  We (selfishly) want both.  In a realistic sense, capturing a ship denies it to the enemy just as much as destroying it completely.  So why shouldn't capturing an enemy ship add to our tally for PVP rewards?  Its only a few doubloons in the wallet, but I feel that a capture is just as valid as a sinking in PVP.

[van der Clam]

What @Angus MacDuff said. It makes no sense forcing us to choose a "reward" when the "action" is the same....the killing of another captain.

@admin Here is a legit question. I just saw this happen outside El Toco not 5 minutes ago. One Dutch captain was chased and tagged by a fleet of Russians. The battle started as 2 v 1. Over the next 2 minutes, the Russians kept piling in the battle...it went up to 3 v 1, then 5 v 1, now after 10 minutes  it is 5 v 3...BR 3450 to 780.

Why were the Russians able to keep piling in there when I thought the new ROE had a balancing BR?