Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Mr. Doran

Acceleration Is Broken

Acceleration   

41 members have voted

  1. 1. Which acceleration do you prefer?

    • I like the old acceleration shown in the videos
    • I like the broken acceleration we have now


Recommended Posts

    This post will be so simple and full of videos that even the average sub-100 IQ-degenerate-abomination-of-a-forum user should be able to understand it. 

Rules for comparing acceleration:

1. Always compared from 100% sails up.

    Most people who have any clue of what they are doing will fight with as many sails up as possible and neutralize them to decelerate rather than lowering sails. 

2. Always from across beam. 

    This is probably the most common polar fighting occurs at even if most of the fight is chasing some retard down-wind. And Because neither Jodgi or myself were going to make five tests covering all five major points of sail. 

 

What acceleration looked like BEFORE:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What acceleration looks like NOW:

 

 

For those of you who need a graph. 

8ae71c4942ec7662b21caa5c5cd17d46.png

 

Without going into a deep technical examination of how this effects individual aspects of combat maneuvers which would realistically require me to write another manual to fully explain here is an excerpt from a document I wrote that I gave people to understand how acceleration impacts combat; more importantly how acceleration effects a very specific aspect of combat that I call delta-distance. 

b991e8e2042d83153eed76b0e819741e.png

 

For those of you who don't quite understand it, the faster you can control your rate of change of distance the easier it is to sail. The consequence to the high acceleration we currently have and thus high delta-distance is that it takes far less skill to sail, maneuver, and plan. The skill ceiling for combat as a whole goes down drastically when you can control your acceleration and deceleration with UFO like qualities. There was once a time in Naval Action's history when sailing took skill. The last patch I know for certain that the acceleration was not broken in was the patch just prior to the testing and introduction of structure. From what I can guess is that it probably was broken during or some time shortly after the patch that caused ships to turn like spinning tops which may have also been the lee-way patch if I remember correctly. 

 

Acceleration does not have to be shit. The once great time that existed in the first three videos can again. But will Game-Labs do it? 

 

 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

remeber game has to be fast otherwise player leave becuase of slow progress and traveltime😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small ships advantage is in the acceleration. If heavy frigates are accelerating as fast as corvettes then I would say it is in fact broken.

  • Like 7

Share this post


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

I like faster fights to be honest, so appreciate new acceleration curves. But I agree with Slim on the relative curves should be quite different, and so I vote new but if they're broken relative to other ships and their masses then it should be fixed and revisited.

I can definitely say that ships feel different (the Ratt for example is a piece of garbage) and so I'm inclined to say that relative performance is reasonable.

 

This.^

Having played through all the various sailing models, I prefer faster acceleration because it moves combat along a bit better. It could use some slowing down, but it doesn't have to be as painfully slow as it used to be.

I do agree that regardless of what is done (if anything) Acceleration does need tuning on certain ships which behave like rockets, while other ships similar in size are laughably sluggish.

Also of note, you seem to be disregarding the massive impact that wood type and mods has on acceleration and deceleration (at least in your video comparison). Is the Endy something with massive acceleration buffs (which, I'll probably agree with you, are bad for the game)? What were the other ships? (I seem to remember Jodgi always testing with teak or oak...) The videos really are not apples-to-apples comparsions of the acceleration changes. Your graph is though. I just wanted to point that out. There is a 12.5% difference in acceleration values between Live Oak and Fir. Fairly significant. 

 

I do agree with you though, the skill cap is much much lower these days. Remember how difficult (almost impossible) pulling off a 4v10+ was when the enemy had a range of ships, some bigger and some smaller than you? When it happened, you knew that those 4 were VERY good players, and/or the other side were completely terrible players. Now that kind of stuff happens on the regular, because now it takes much less skill to do so.

But don't blame the acceleration model.

Blame the sailing model (have you looked at the sailing profile curves recently? So many useless ships....).
Blame unlimited repairs.
Blame the horrible new damage model.
Blame mods that allow me to stack so many deceleration bonuses that I can tack a live oak first rate nearly as well as a teak Bellona.
Blame mod stacking that gives me 20% more turn rate, HP, thickness, reload speed, ship speed, etc. 

But to lay the blame for the low-skill cap on simple acceleration is quite silly and dense. I expected better from the famous Trinco duelist ;).

Edited by William Death

Share this post


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

But to lay the blame for the low-skill cap on simple acceleration is quite silly and dense. I expected better from the famous Trinco duelist ;).

 

3cd25f86983ab024c6e179cfc3aed900.png

 

Are you sure i'm the dense one? 

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0j7e2dvfvicke96/Propositions.zip?dl=0

If you want the full run down of how f-ucked everything is there are five PDFs with proposals detailing pretty much everything wrong with the CM included in that link that have been sent privately over time. Acceleration is not the only problem but it is however one of the biggest. Sailing is the core to the combat of this game and the current acceleration makes sailing way too easy. You can fix the things listed in the four other documents included in that zip file, but without acceleration fixed there is still a mile wide hole in the CM. 

 

4 hours ago, William Death said:

What were the other ships? (I seem to remember Jodgi always testing with teak or oak...) The videos really are not apples-to-apples comparsions of the acceleration changes. Your graph is though. I just wanted to point that out. There is a 12.5% difference in acceleration values between Live Oak and Fir. Fairly significant. 

12.5% does not make a difference when the acceleration has been buffed 200-300% from what it used to be. Jodgi always tested teak/oak from what I recall. To put things in perspective, pre-wipe acceleration was reduced by around 12 percent and nothing changed. 

To anyone in doubt, does accelerating to EIGHT KNOTS in TEN SECONDS sound okay to you?

Edited by Mr. Doran
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mr. Doran said:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0j7e2dvfvicke96/Propositions.zip?dl=0

If you want the full run down of how f-ucked everything is there are five PDFs with proposals detailing pretty much everything wrong with the CM included in that link that have been sent privately over time. Acceleration is not the only problem but it is however one of the biggest. Sailing is the core to the combat of this game and the current acceleration makes sailing way too easy. You can fix the things listed in the four other documents included in that zip file, but without acceleration fixed there is still a mile wide hole in the CM. 

Agree with your ideas about balancing demasting around HP. I've advocated for that since the implementation of the thickness + pen damage model. Remember all the times we flip-flopped from iron masts to cardboard masts and back? Yeah they should have picked a reasonable thickness and tweaked HP from there.
Relatively low thickness, high HP for masts. I disagree with your ideas for what distance that demasting should happen at. Do you realize you can't pitch shot into the masts at 50m with some ships vs some ships? LOL (we went through this when you posted that in a topic several months ago). Good idea, bad numbers. 

I disagree with raking sinking a ship. (Do you even history bro? :lol:
Raking is in a nice spot, IMO. Does decent structure damage, takes out a whole lot of cannons if you know how to aim, and it does a lot of crew damage too. I do, however, agree that there should be no magical necromancer resurrecting our crew every 24 minutes. Get rid of that along with multi-reps for hull and rig. Then re-address tuning raking damage.

 

31 minutes ago, Mr. Doran said:

12.5% does not make a difference when the acceleration has been buffed 200-300% from what it used to be. Jodgi always tested teak/oak from what I recall. To put things in perspective. Pre-wipe acceleration was reduced by around 12 percent and nothing changed. 

To anyone in doubt, does accelerating to EIGHT KNOTS in TEN SECONDS sound okay to you?

10 seconds is representative of what...about a minute? (remembering we have time compression). Too quick for a sailing ship, to be sure, hence why I said it should be toned down some. Does it need to take the historical ~10-30 minutes+ (remembering we have time compression) to accelerate? No...I don't think so. 

Work on it, tune it, whatever. Find a happy medium where it doesn't take so long to get moving, but doesn't also feel like engine-driven boats. 

All I'm getting at, is there are far more pressing issues with combat than how fast your ship accelerates. Those issues need working on first, then tune acceleration. But maybe don't return it quite to the way it used to be.

29 minutes ago, Mr. Doran said:

Are you sure i'm the dense one? 

Yeah, I saw that before I posted. You still make it sound as if acceleration is the biggest issue . I maintain it is rather minor in the scheme of what's wrong with combat. Agree to disagree. I'm doubtful any big changes to the combat model are in the future for us anyways (sadly). Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

I see you mentioned the port bonuses + mod stacking that yields +green bonuses on almost every stat for almost every build. THAT is one of those big problems we can agree on. I think that should be addressed *before* we worry about tuning acceleration values. Do that and then look at balancing the other stats.

Something about rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic....

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Agree with your ideas about balancing demasting around HP. I've advocated for that since the implementation of the thickness + pen damage model. Remember all the times we flip-flopped from iron masts to cardboard masts and back? Yeah they should have picked a reasonable thickness and tweaked HP from there.
Relatively low thickness, high HP for masts. I disagree with your ideas for what distance that demasting should happen at. Do you realize you can't pitch shot into the masts at 50m with some ships vs some ships? LOL (we went through this when you posted that in a topic several months ago). Good idea, bad numbers. 

I wasn't going to bother including it here but here is the most recent demasting proposal. Thickness is based off of gun-caliber in the most recent one. You will need a spread sheet processor to view it. The colors mean the largest ship class by caliber that gun can penetrate at that distance. N/I is "never immune" at that distance and "A/I" is always immune. 

204870e3127ad66cdaa3cd1d063cb568.png

380258ea0b52715e42b86416b119f8d2.png

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgsnqc73m7ywp5u/Demasting Proposal.zip?dl=0

50 meter is a hyperbole as my numbers for the previous proposal as ships of the same rate at closest had to be around 100 meters to pen. Additional distance was allowed for larger ships so they could hit each others masts as well. The new one is slightly better. I don't know if you misread something as well because I never said masts should be balanced around HP. I have said in the past as I do now that HP mods for masts are totally cancer but HP alone is not the trick. 

34 minutes ago, William Death said:

I disagree with raking sinking a ship. (Do you even history bro? :lol:
Raking is in a nice spot, IMO. Does decent structure damage, takes out a whole lot of cannons if you know how to aim, and it does a lot of crew damage too. I do, however, agree that there should be no magical necromancer resurrecting our crew every 24 minutes. Get rid of that along with multi-reps for hull and rig. Then re-address tuning raking damage.

 

I always advocated against raking-sinking up until the point I wrote that document. Which if you actually read through it thoroughly you would have read that the ship still needs to be disabled before it sinks. I realized that people will only ever really want to rake their enemies if there is the serious possibility to sink them by doing so. Game-labs also does not like having very high gun and crew damage without the ship leaving the ship almost completely disabled but not sunk; in other words they want the ship to be killed so the player does not feel his time is being wasted sitting there. That proposal is written with that mostly in mind. I have always been in the lobby that crew repairs were utterly cancer and that there was a reason they got rid of them really quickly the firs time they were tested (along with f-ucking CD multi-reps) but unfortunately double backed on it. If we had no crew or gun-repairs raking would be much closer to be fully balanced. As of now, it is serviceable against bad players but what isn't. 

 

34 minutes ago, William Death said:

10 seconds is representative of what...about a minute? (remembering we have time compression). Too quick for a sailing ship, to be sure, hence why I said it should be toned down some. Does it need to take the historical ~10-30 minutes+ (remembering we have time compression) to accelerate? No...I don't think so. 

Work on it, tune it, whatever. Find a happy medium where it doesn't take so long to get moving, but doesn't also feel like engine-driven boats. 

All I'm getting at, is there are far more pressing issues with combat than how fast your ship accelerates. Those issues need working on first, then tune acceleration. But maybe don't return it quite to the way it used to be.

Yeah, I saw that before I posted. You still make it sound as if acceleration is the biggest issue . I maintain it is rather minor in the scheme of what's wrong with combat. Agree to disagree. I'm doubtful any big changes to the combat model are in the future for us anyways (sadly). Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

I see you mentioned the port bonuses + mod stacking that yields +green bonuses on almost every stat for almost every build. THAT is one of those big problems we can agree on. I think that should be addressed *before* we worry about tuning acceleration values. Do that and then look at balancing the other stats.

Something about rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic....

 

Yes that is correct, I am saying it is one of the biggest issue. If acceleration were fixed it would make the other elements of cancer present a lot more digestible. We do not need historically accurate simulator numbers but the current ones are a far cry to what they used to be. If I were to show some people I know who have long since stop playing the old ones and then the new one they would think I was joking. 

Edited by Mr. Doran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Aegishjalmur said:

If acceleration was more realistic / slower, maybe the acceleration buffs wouldn't be so useless.

Acceleration mods are useless because you are trying to modify something marginally that is already basically maxed out. Its like giving a high heroin addict more heroin at that point. You probably won't get them anymore high than they already are but it might kill them. 

Edited by Mr. Doran
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Do you think repairing 2/3 of a ship in 2 minutes is okay?  Because of time compresssion, and the way that the current sailing model interacts with the damage model and all of the various mods and port bonuses (particularly these) if you reduce the ability to maintain guns on an opponent by nerfing acceleration or turn rate you are basically eliminating sinking in many cases.

I think you have to think far beyond the simple case of acceleration if you want the system to be anywhere near balanced (and I'm not claiming it is) but you can't just twiddle one knob here.

3cd25f86983ab024c6e179cfc3aed900.png

 

While we're at it. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0j7e2dvfvicke96/Propositions.zip?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgsnqc73m7ywp5u/Demasting Proposal.zip?dl=0

Edited by Mr. Doran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't looked through all proposals, but I agree with your observation on acceleration being main issue. One can gain enough speed when close hauled in no time to tack against the wind when sailing most 5th rates. Acceleration for back sailing also feels funny, with iron's virtually non-existent, aside from for 4th rate up with (very) badly damaged sails perhaps.

Overall I fill that sailing component has been dumbed down, so to say, with non-stop tacking against the wind and back sailing as key moves, when in reality those were tricky maneuvers. Back in the early days of the game (and quite realistically) tacking against the wind was a maneuver that required thorough preparation: checking speed, measuring distance, timing. Risk of being stuck in irons was real, particularly for ships with (slightly) damaged sails. Now it's not the case from what I have seen so far. 

So, some additional work on sailing mechanics is in order imho.

Edited by Stilgar
  • Like 6

Share this post


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

Overall I fill that sailing component has been dumbed down

 

This is also such a massive part of it. The very soul and ethos of what sailing used to be has been completely ripped out of the game. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
20 minutes ago, Stilgar said:

Haven't looked through all proposals, but I agree with your observation on acceleration being main issue. One can gain enough speed when close hauled in no time to tack when sailing most 5th rates. Acceleration for back sailing also feels funny, with iron's virtually non-existent, aside from for 4th rate up with (very) badly damaged sails.

Overall I fill that sailing component has been dumbed down, with non-stop tacking and back sailing as key moves, when in reality those were tricky maneuvers. Back in the days tacking was a maneuver that required thorough preparation: checking speed, measuring distance, timing. Risk of being stuck in irons was real, particularly for ships with (slightly) damaged sails. Now it's not the case from what I have seen so far. 

So, some additional work on sailing mechanics is in order imho.

1. I fully agree with you

2. BUT...

Devs said: "This long time was spent on perfecting the combat model and sailing simulation; which many claim is the best in the world."

So I must assume you are wrong because Devs are always right.

3. I was just joking with point 2. :D

Share this post


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

I can appreciate all of the time and thought that you've put into thinking about the model and how sailing and combat interact. But I think at its core what you're wrestling with is a matter of preference for a lot of players.  What I would like to see isn't what you'd like to see, in terms of simple game play, primarily because I value having players in the game. And what I think you're pushing for (and the developer's have made missteps towards in the past and currently) is for a more hard core, slow and frankly ultra-niche kind of game play style.

In my ideal world I would like to see a stretching of the spectrum across ship speeds and roles. Where first rates are even have even less acceleration, and smaller ships have more utility in battle because of their agility and speed. At it's core the sailing hasn't changed, it's just gotten faster. And people who are faster with their decision making and ability to react, combined with having the best ships and builds will have more success. I know this runs antithetical to the old fart mentality of having the best captain be the determinant of battle, but let's face it: In a game where players are the only content, you must be focused on what keeps the most content in the game. Because the old farts who value a slow, methodical, strategic game 1) aren't going to keep the game afloat financially and 2) aren't going to keep the game afloat with content (PvP and RvR), we need to make some concessions to a game play style that is more attractive to the more casual, less "sim" oriented players where gear and group matters as much as individual skill and strategy.

 

The best CM we ever had, defined by the most balanced, was right before structure was being tested and then introduced. There was no lee-way then, no zombie crew, no bullshit. Acceleration was like it was in the videos, hull damage was reasonable, raking fire was balanced, with the only exception being demasting being imbalanced but that is pretty easy to fix. So if what I always call the "pre-structure patch CM" is the reference point and that was too niche and hardcore then yes there are different mentalities being entertained here.  

36 minutes ago, Wraith said:

At it's core the sailing hasn't changed, it's just gotten faster. 

This is objectively incorrect. If you really, really, want me to I will go into technical details of combat maneuvers but in short you can just get away with a lot more shit and do maneuvers that were pretty much impossible to pull off easily if at all. Stilgar hits on some points of what I mean when it comes to tacking for instance. In the old acceleration model it would be paramount to suicide to do most of the tacks you can do now.

Another easy to digest example is the fact "boom and zooming" is no where near as effective as it used to be because of the delta-distance concept. Because you can regain high speeds very quickly it is not punishing to lose your speed to begin with. It really is not punishing to even drop most of your sails to begin with. In turn you cannot punish players that do drop all of their speed regularly since there is very little opportunity for taking advantage of the gap in time that it takes your opponent to regain speed. In the past if you already had high speed (or energy) and your opponent did not you could convert that speed (energy) into more potential speed (energy) by going up wind if you set up the geometry of the situation correctly. There are a multitude of ways you could implement this type of maneuver but very commonly just after raking an enemy who dropped all of his speed and very often most of his sails in the process. Obviously if you can regain your speed your delta-distance very quickly (how many meters you cover per second) you simply are not punished for dropping your speed and therefore losing your energy. 

Take my word on it or not, I can provide more examples, but the acceleration has altered the way you can and do sail from what it used to be in the past. It is a far cry from what it used to be. 

Edited by Mr. Doran
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I understand some people like the new acceleration, better values sure does feel better ;)

Notice there hasn't been any patch notes where "acceleration has been buffed 2-300% for all ships". The new acceleration could be considered a side effect, or bug if you like, from the sail force changes we had a long time ago.

There is no deliberate "new acceleration". We may have gotten used to it but it isn't the result of some design goal. The old acceleration was deliberate and we had extensive discussions and testing on the issue.

Please, let us try to fix acceleration so we can get back to what we really wanted.

It would be sad if our CM slid sideways into meme-land:

Volkswagen-not-a-bug-a-feature.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Hmmm... I understand some people like the new acceleration, better values sure does feel better ;)

Notice there hasn't been any patch notes where "acceleration has been buffed 2-300% for all ships". The new acceleration could be considered a side effect, or bug if you like, from the sail force changes we had a long time ago.

There is no deliberate "new acceleration". We may have gotten used to it but it isn't the result of some design goal. The old acceleration was deliberate and we had extensive discussions and testing on the issue.

Please, let us try to fix acceleration so we can get back to what we really wanted.

It would be sad if our CM slid sideways into meme-land:

Volkswagen-not-a-bug-a-feature.jpg

 

I asked (somebody) about acceleration and why it is so f-ucked up. (Somebody) said that there had not been any changes to the acceleration curves since wacky patch 6.9. I also think the new sail force changes may have ushered this in but I was not around at the time to confirm it. So I think that (Somebody) really did not intend to change the curves.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea its the sail force change that brought that on us, i think also the drift is part of it aswell. 

But ... some people here are saying that higher acceleration makes fights faster. That is complete nonsense. In fact they make fights take longer because every scrub can speed out of irons now like he doesnt care. It makes bigger ships better compared to smaller ships, because tacking is so easy now, even a child can do it. So its even more about the grind than it has allways been. There is almost 0 risk to getting stuck in the wind. 

In total: the current acceleration makes fight waaaay less skill dependent and waaay more grind dependent. 

And the fights will in fact take longer. 

Over all... you cant really complain about fights taking "long" when it takes you about 5h or more to find a half decently matched fight.

With this current acceleration there is no immersion.... you cant even comprehend how risky and dangerous and skillfull an actual tacking maneuver with a frigate or a sol of that time actually was. It was a nightmare for captains to do that in battle. Right now, the ships just turn like it's nothing... 

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

By increasing acceleration you're making those decisions more frequently and thus, making the skill in making those decisions compound, even for larger ships.

 

To give a mathematical analogy, there are less solution points than there used to be that can solve the equation. The current acceleration dumbs down the sailing so there are less possible correct decisions you can possibly make. It narrows down the envelope of what you have to do in order to win. You can only skin the cat one way now in other words. Its the equivalent of converting a complex RTS game into Bejeweled.

 

4 hours ago, Wraith said:

I love to sail 6th and 7th rates exactly because it allows me to be thinking potentially five turns and broadsides ahead instead of just one.. while if you're sailing a line ship, two turns and a tack might be equivalent to another whole repair cycle plus a wind change, while you get far, far more sailing and decision-making in per repair cycle in a smaller ship.

 

 

This is so backwards. Light ship play has always been more algorithmic and simple mainly because everything is so absurdly up-gunned and able to nuke each other.  Disabling, with the exception of any existing carronade demasting that has existed time to time for 6th and 7th rates, is pretty much out of the question. You just plan the most optimal set of BS exchanges to sink the other guy that usually occurs at the closest ranges you can possibly play in this game. Even fixed acceleration would not change this much because light ships have always had retard tier acceleration to begin with. You aren't making more or more complex decisions you are just making the same few decisions repeatedly. 5th rate gameplay and higher when acceleration actually did function properly was not thinking just one or two turns ahead. And with the gameplay at its best when it was a beautiful positional battle that in order to win at times you may have only needed to fire a shot to keep your opponent tagged. A positional battle that I think most players did not think they were ever losing to begin with and could compound to the consequences that it amounted to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.. oh wel.. I still want a chance of lighting your self on fire if you fire your top deck guns are Full Sail with all those sparks and ll that canvas so close to each other:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tacking:  I agree, ships accelerate too fast out of tacks. Its quite noticeable in large ships. But the flip side is that ships lose their way much easier now. I used to be able to tack my live oak dueling Santi and hold 3.5kn+ the whole way through (and that was without even bothering to accelerate to max speed before turning upwind). Now if I'm careful and do everything perfectly and have the right mod stack, accelerate to a good speed, etc....I can tack and hold a small positive speed the whole way through. When in the wind though, speed tanks nowadays compared to the old model where your ship's mass seemed to carry you right through. 

Remember how easy tacking was back then if you were any good at sailing? Here's an old video from jodgi showing 2016 tacking of an Agamemnon. Notice he holds 4kn+ through the tack. Can you do that now? No (at least you couldn't the last time I sailed an Aggy), not without customizing your build just for sail force + deceleration + turning mods. Now you'll be reversing through quite often on a lot of bigger ships. Even if you take the time to get to full speed before initiating maneuvers (as jodgi did in the video). 


Where I see the big difference is in how much you'd be punished for failing a maneuver. Now you can reverse out, and accelerate quickly away again. With the old sailing model, you had to carefully back out of irons, and slowly accelerate forward again. Leaving plenty of time to be raked/boarded/demasted. Good for those of us who prefer that kind of 'two elites, dueling it out' kind of playstyle. Maybe it was a little too punishing though, considering that most players still don't know how to manual sail properly (they just use double taps)? 

Again, rather than go right back where we were at the beginning, why not slow acceleration bit by bit, till we find a nice balance? Take off the rose-colored glasses for a minute and think about whether the sailing model should be tailored to the handful of us who are still salty we lost our beloved lobby/dueling rooms....or the folks who want the action a little more fast-paced. Sometimes the things I want are not what the game population as a whole wants. And thats a shame.

I mean, I really dislike the new combat model where you basically go spam big guns into smaller ships and get LOL screenshots for the forums. But apparently I'm in the minority here. I was quite vocal (along with a number of other players) about my dislike of it when it was first implemented....and yet so many more were excited for the new damage model and supportive of it. Rather disappointing that one of the better (although it was definitely still flawed) parts of the game got replaced with what I felt was an inferior update. 

In an ideal world, I'd want my version of NA to have:

  • the sailing model from 2016, with some tweaks,
  • the mod/upgrade model from 2016, without rare RNG drops,
  • the combat model from 2017 before they added the structure bar,
  • the RvR mechanics from 2016 (with tweaks and the 2017 land in battles), 
  • the ship lineup they had before they started re-rating ships for no good reason,
  • the old UI,
  • and don't forget the duel room and small battles room

But I think we've got greater chances of getting Santa Cecilia blueprints than of the above happening ;).

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Tacking:  I agree, ships accelerate too fast out of tacks. Its quite noticeable in large ships. But the flip side is that ships lose their way much easier now. I used to be able to tack my live oak dueling Santi and hold 3.5kn+ the whole way through (and that was without even bothering to accelerate to max speed before turning upwind). Now if I'm careful and do everything perfectly and have the right mod stack, accelerate to a good speed, etc....I can tack and hold a small positive speed the whole way through. When in the wind though, speed tanks nowadays compared to the old model where your ship's mass seemed to carry you right through. 

Remember how easy tacking was back then if you were any good at sailing? Here's an old video from jodgi showing 2016 tacking of an Agamemnon. Notice he holds 4kn+ through the tack. Can you do that now? No (at least you couldn't the last time I sailed an Aggy), not without customizing your build just for sail force + deceleration + turning mods. Now you'll be reversing through quite often on a lot of bigger ships. Even if you take the time to get to full speed before initiating maneuvers (as jodgi did in the video). 


Where I see the big difference is in how much you'd be punished for failing a maneuver. Now you can reverse out, and accelerate quickly away again. With the old sailing model, you had to carefully back out of irons, and slowly accelerate forward again. Leaving plenty of time to be raked/boarded/demasted. Good for those of us who prefer that kind of 'two elites, dueling it out' kind of playstyle. Maybe it was a little too punishing though, considering that most players still don't know how to manual sail properly (they just use double taps)? 

 

This isn't exactly the full picture of whats going on. 

     1. With the prior acceleration curves and without the new sail force modifiers you could only achieve this kind of tack if you already had considerable speed to begin with.  

     2. With the current acceleration and sail-force modifiers you can achieve fast tacks with much lower speeds than what was achievable in the past. Potential carry through speed can vary lower depending on the initial speed but overall it is many times easier to not get stuck in irons.

     3. Because your accelerate 200-300% faster than previously you can achieve the critical speed threshold necessary to perform a tack very quickly. 

     4. The only thing that changes is there is a greater window of solution points in the equation that may cause backing but it essentially negated by the fact how quickly your can turn through the wind due to the new sail-forces on the foremast. The amount of backing time normally experienced (if at all) is minimal and as previously stated just ends up getting you through the wind anyways. 

    5. Even at closed-haul and close-haul you accelerate so quickly that you are able to generate enough speed in a short period of time to perform a reasonable tack. 

    6. I forgot to add probably the one of the most important points. Once you are through the tack you can regain energy and your delta-distance at a much greater rate now than you used to be able to with the previous acceleration curves. Even if you end up being caught backing for a very brief amount of time the fact that you can accelerate to a high delta-distance once you through the wind at an incredible rate it doesn't even matter that you tack was botched to begin with. In the old acceleration curves it took a lot of time to regain that speed once you went through the wind with or without carry through speed. 

The net change is that it is pretty much objectively easier to do almost everything related to tacking. To give another way of thinking about it. If I could somehow have the properties of the new sail-forces applied to my ship only in a duel against a ship using the acceleration and sail-forces of the prior acceleration curves I would have a massive advantage even without the new acceleration.

Adding to point three, this goes to the heart of delta-distance. In the past you had to cover more distance in order to gain more speed  obviously. This left you in another potential window of vulnerability because you could only gain critical speed for the type of tack shown in that video by going in a straight line for quite some time. If your opponent already had a high delta-distance value or his max-delta distance value he could launch an attack against your or convert his energy to a positional advantage. 

Edited by Mr. Doran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer the slower, more realistic combat. It not only felt better but it looks more natural. Having every ship accelerate as fast as a knt a second really takes away from the historical accuracy. I know combat is already sped up, doesn't mean it needs to be lighting fast. It doesn't mesh with age of sail to have ships THIS fast.

Damage model is sort of the same for me. I do not like the decision made to make sinking faster and keep unlimited repairs, what should have happened was increasing the health of ships, and limiting repairs to 3, with urgent repair doing a minor repair every 5 minutes to avoid the classic demast fest. Gunnery to be made less accurate, maybe even removed gyro with the ability to fire in bursts.

Instead of using structure as the be-all for damage, especially for large ships v small, what could be done is using FIRE and minor explosions as the devastator. Right now a broadside from a SOL into a 5th will damage it by half, problem with that is gunnery is very accurate and this is easy to pull off a full broadside, especially with the nature of ship combat being if I can shoot you, you can probably shoot me.

There's a suggestion, that was pinned a while ago that I thought was a good direction for combat. I do hope this is re-explored because it's full of fantastic ideas, and I think it was pinned for a reason so it should have some relevance with where we're going

 

In all  there is no one thing that can be changed to perfect the sailing, it has to come in one vision.
Everything has to fit together. You can't just limit repairs now because the DM is not fit for it
Same with sailing, I'm sure there's tweaking that needs to be done to make it work
Is it worth it? For me it is, it's gotta "feel" complete or it's not.

Edited by Slim McSauce

Share this post


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

 

 

Most changes to make a coherent combat system could be accomplished in one fell swoop if there was the will on the part of (admin) to do so. The basic cancers could be cut off quite easily and thus the CM reverted to the state it was previously at. For example, just killing all CD repairs and replacing it with one of the old limited systems would do a lot in conjunction with a universal increase in hull HP. What few people probably remember at this point was the fact that there was a 20% reduction to hull HP during the initial introduction phase of structure. The most coherent damage model we ever had was just prior to the introduction to structure. Structure could still be introduced into that DM but without all the cancers that have come up with it to date. My point being, it realistically wouldn't be that hard to revert two years of bad decisions.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Mr. Doran said:

Most changes to make a coherent combat system could be accomplished in one fell swoop if there was the will on the part of (admin) to do so. 

Not only could it be accomplished this way, it's may the best way to do it in the long run.
We've been testing many phases of combat, leeway, structure, small arms fire, thickness, rate changes and different sailing models.
Point is the linear path has gotten us all the exploration points from testing the waters, now we can put it all together.

Now there's opportunity that we've explored all these aspects, to pool the best ones together to create a complete, final combat model.
We've got pretty much all the parts down, now is the opportunity to create a body of work from it that, from then on will only require minor tweaking.
If the devs feel like trying this, I would suggest looking towards a historically realistic, but still fun and rewarding combat model.

I would try to get everything in and make it fit. Every phase has been valuable it just doesn't always work if it all wasn't made to fit together.
It's much easier to design all the pieces in accordance instead trying to fit pieces in that cause to disturb the others.
Now that we have all the pieces of the puzzle, (thanks to release) we can put it all together nicely.

and it SHOULD (confident should) be a lot easier.
Mainly because you're now developing to a larger audience.
which grants you more hype and support.
done right that grows :)

Edited by Slim McSauce
  • Like 1

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...