DLC Ships and Port Bonuses - Pay to Win

[Tenet]

About a month ago, when I commented to a friend that Le Requin is an overpowered ship for a 6th rate. The response was "It doesn't matter, because port Bonuses will make crafted ships better overall". Ignoring the fact that a 9 lb / 32 lb Xebec should be at the bottom of 5th rate instead of at the top of 6th, this made some sense. 

When I commented about the speed of Le Hermione, possibly the best tagger in the game, with a price tag on the order of magnitude of an entire new account, a similar response was provided. "Don't worry, eventually we'll have speed-Trincs that outrun the Hermione, DLC ships not be a factor".

When I spoke about the idea of a fleet of Rattv's used for Screening taking out a portion of an Aggie/Inger fleet, a similar counter argument was offered - don't worry, the port upgrades will make these a non-factor in actual RvR. "We will build better ships!"

In an under-advertised patch note this last hotfix, Randomized Port Bonuses were added to DLC ships. Now each day you can roll the dice with each DLC you buy, pick the woods, and potentially get a maxed out ship, equal to or superior to anything another person can craft. 

Back when I first started playing World of Tanks, Wargaming sold DLC tanks with the following excuse: They are not "pay to win" because we make sure that DLC Tanks are weaker versions of any regular vehicle of the same rate. Implying that if anyone gets bullied by a DLC tank, it is their fault for not exploiting the included weaknesses. They later betrayed that philosophy to try to grab more cash, but I already quit. 

Unlike WoT, In Naval Action the DLC ships face Crafted-Ships that have 1-Durability, and on top of that, there is no promise for them to be weaker at their tier. I see that as a clear example of Paying to Win.

Here are my thoughts on each DLC: 

1. Le Requin - below is the comparison of the ship to the two other top 6th rates: the Rattlesnake Heavy and the Niagara:

The Le Requin is:

- faster at it's best point of sail, which it shares with far weaker ships. 

- has more guns and heavier guns than the competition, and more chasers in a more useful configuration for tagging

- has a shorter profile and smaller size that makes it harder to hit (edit: why does it feel smaller than a Mercury in combat, while the sizes listed on the model page match the Cerberus?)

- has equivalent turn rate and armor

- has 250 crew, 120 more than the Rattlesnake Heavy, 95 more than the Niagara.

These two competing ships require rare drop permits. The heaviest 6th rate one can gain without the permit is the 70 BR Mercury, that loses in every category outlined above. A DLC ships should never be the top of any rating.

Solution options (keep in mind impact on Missions and Solo-Patrol-Zone): 

Option A. All three rare ships should be upgraded to 5th rate, so that the Mercury, an accessible ship, becomes the top of the rate again. 

Option B. Le Requin stays 6th rate but [EDIT] loses bow chasers, reduced crew to historical* 187-228 crew max, reduced Fire-Zone to 10 degrees. The Niagara or the Rattlesnake Heavy become non-permit, common ships to top the rate.

Option C. Cerberus become a top of the line 6th rate, here are the stats for comparison. It may need to have stats adjusted - HP and thickness, to better match the rate.

 

2. L'Hermione - the problem with the ship is less obvious - basically, it is just too fast. Someone rolling a DLC L'Hermione with sailing 4 will have one of the fastest taggers and raiders in the game. I don't believe a DLC ship should be the "best" at anything, and my recommendation is bringing the sailing profile to match that of the La Belle-Poule. 

La Belle-Poule on the left, L'Hermione on the right. Remove the small downwind advantage, and reduce the speed by 0.3 to 0.5 kn. L'Hermione has more guns, similar sail configuration, it should not have such a speed advantage. La Belle-Poule should be able to mount Bow-Chasers, in the same configuration, and be the crafted alternative. 

I think we should stick to these two examples for now, because they are the most obvious.

Admin should clarify his DLC policy - are the DLC ships meant to be superior to their crafted competition? Is Naval Action a pay-to-win game?

My Definition of P2W for Naval Action:

Pay to Win = being able to pay for a DLC that provides tangible advantages in combat instances and open-world PvP. 

Regarding the face-saving "alternative": Naval Action is by design a game where you are meant to lose ships fairly frequently, and the 24/hour per dice-roll DLC advantage is too great compared to an Admiralty note that takes weeks to obtain. We should be able to recognize that Admiralty notes were added primarily to save face, and we should see through this all too common ploy in Credit Card games. If it is confirmed that Admiralty notes lacked the randomized port bonuses that DLC's received in the hot-fix, it would be a definite proof of the above.

Edit: * According to historical references provided below, the LRQ on occasion sailed with reduced crew of 187 to 228. Crew size seems to be more correlated to Mission type and Length, and operational theater, not just ship size. This is why coastal Xebecs operating in the Mediterranean, who did not have to worry about crew fatigue or provisions, could over-crew their vessels, while Ocean-going frigates were much more limited, despite larger hull size. A Caribbean Xebec performing longer journeys could therefore also be more limited (or other light-frigates can justifiably have their crew increased to balance). 

Edited July 21, 2019 by Tenet
Edited as per discussion below and historical reference

[LeBoiteux]

Le Requin was IRL a 9-pdr ship that would have been considered IRL as a 6th rate by the Royal Navy and that can also carry 32-pdr carronades in game.

Thus she must be compared with ships that actually carried IRL 9-pdr guns or 32-pdr carro and were considered as 6th Rates by the Royal Navy and that carry in game 9-pdr guns or 32-pdr carro, that are :

• USS Niagara
• HMS Cerberus
• HMS Pandora
• La Renommée
• HMS Surprise

All those ships like LRQ are shallow water ships in game and LRQ is not the most powerful one of them.

While HMS Cerberus, HMS Pandora, La Renommée, HMS Surprise were IRL 6th rates and are shallow water ship in game, they've kept their in-game designation  as "5th Rates" (for the missions, I guess).

 

[Tenet]

29 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said:

Le Requin was IRL a 9-pdr ship that would have been considered IRL as a 6th rate by the Royal Navy and that can also carry 32-pdr carronades in game.

...

While HMS Cerberus, HMS Pandora, La Renommée, HMS Surprise were IRL 6th rates and are shallow water ship in game, they've kept their in-game designation  as "5th Rates" (for the missions, I guess).

 

One of my proposed solutions is to bring the HMS Cerberus back to 6th rate. I can see the merits of the historical argument, considering this game is inspired greatly by historical accuracy and simulation. If Le Requin remains 6th rate for purposes of Missions and Solo-Patrols, then all the other ships you listed should be returned to their historical 6th-Rate. 

I would love to do 6th-rate Missions and Solo-Patrols in the HMS Surprise or HMS Pandora. Not sure that is the best solution for the game, but it would fix part of the issues with the Le Requin. 

I do object to the historical accuracy of the gun configuration and crew stats:

https://www.modelships.de/Schebecke-Le-Requin/Le-Requin_eng.htm

"Her crew were 220 men, her armament were twenty-four 8-pdr-guns" -  looking at the model there seem to be 12 gun ports per side, so perhaps I need to walk back my suggestion on reducing the guns. She was about 23 ft wide, compared to 33 ft of the Cerberus. I don't see any room for bow chasers on the model, but there are two clear openings for stern chasers. 

220 crew is significantly more reasonable than 250. 

8pd and 9pd are not the same guns, though in other instances with 5th rates Naval Action also rounded up. (edit: I checked, they are roughly the same).

I think the decision should be made based on the rate, since Captains had choice of guns. If Developers choose to keep the Le Requin as 6th rate, it should have downgraded guns to 6 pd / 24 pd Carro. If it stays as 9pd, it should be a "5th rate" along with the other Light Frigates you listed, or alternatively all the light frigates should go down to their historical 6th rate status.

Edited July 19, 2019 by Tenet

[Despe]

I think that the stats and random port bonuses of DLC ships are not pay to win, are pay to take a free ship every day. Their stats are too similar if you compare with the same rate ship, except le requin, that is a troll ship in my opinion, whose statistics should be changed completely.

[LeBoiteux]

40 minutes ago, Tenet said:

I do object to the historical accuracy of the gun configuration and crew stats:

https://www.modelships.de/Schebecke-Le-Requin/Le-Requin_eng.htm

Devs have better sources than you (Boudriot, Le Requin) and had great forumers' help to animate the model and make the stats of LRQ. You can trust them.

40 minutes ago, Tenet said:

"Her crew were 220 men, her armament were twenty-four 8-pdr-guns" -  looking at the model there seem to be 12 gun ports per side, so perhaps I need to walk back my suggestion on reducing the guns. She was about 23 ft wide, compared to 33 ft of the Cerberus. I don't see any room for bow chasers on the model, but there are two clear openings for stern chasers. 

220 crew is significantly more reasonable than 250. 

In fact, up to 300 crew could embark Le Requin IRL...

40 minutes ago, Tenet said:

8pd and 9pd are not the same guns

Yes, they are.... French 8-pdr = British 9-pdr

Thus I say 'no' to the following part :

40 minutes ago, Tenet said:

though in other instances with 5th rates Naval Action also rounded up. I think the decision should be made based on the rate, since Captains had choice of guns. If Admin chooses to keep the Le Requin as 6th rate, it should round down the guns to 6 pd with 24 pd cannonades as option (remember, we have records of ships going through many changes of guns depending on captain, so this is where we can balance a ship and not be inaccurate). If it stays as 9pd, it should be a "5th rate" along with the other Light Frigates you listed. 

LRQ has nothing to do with a 5th-rate Trincomalee. LRQ is a 9-pdr ship that must primarily fight other '9-pdr ships' (USS Niagara, HMS Cerberus, HMS Pandora, La Renommée, HMS Surprise) and smaller ships (6th-rates).

Edited July 19, 2019 by LeBoiteux

[Tenet]

7 minutes ago, Despe said:

I think that the stats and random port bonuses of DLC ships are not pay to win, are pay to take a free ship every day. Their stats are too similar if you compare with the same rate ship, except le requin, that is a troll ship in my opinion, whose statistics should be changed completely.

You accept that Le Requin provides tangible advantages, by calling it a "troll ship" and you don't need an opinion - you can look at the stats  provided, compared, and the historical references. We can discuss facts. 

I may have made a shorter and perhaps less convincing case about the L'Hermione - but I believe it is almost as problematic when you compare it to the other chaser ships. The game used to have balance where if you wanted something really fast, you had to pay with lack of chasers or worse sailing profile. A ship that size should not be faster then close equivalents. 

The very idea that a $40 game has a DLC of $35 for one ship is already kind of perverse - what kind of value must it provide to be worth buying? What impact does that value have on customers that did not buy it? It's all very sketchy to me. I would prefer to pay for cosmetics and non-combat items. 

[Tenet]

1 minute ago, LeBoiteux said:

LRQ is a ship that must primarily fight other '9-pdr ships' (USS Niagara, HMS Cerberus, HMS Pandora, La Renommée, HMS Surprise) and smaller ships (6th-rates).

Agreed, so Cerberus, Pandora, Renommee and Surprise must be designated 6th rates.  I corrected the post to remove the 9-pdr confusion. I listed it as one of the solutions (though only referenced the Cerberus). Seems like we agree on much of what is important. 

[Despe]

1 minute ago, Tenet said:

You accept that Le Requin provides tangible advantages, by calling it a "troll ship" and you don't need an opinion - you can look at the stats  provided, compared, and the historical references. We can discuss facts. 

Historical references is not enough, this is a game and you need to make ships playable. The problem with the requin is that is an invencible ship, because any ship can catch it, and in my opinion that make a ship a troll ship.

[Tenet]

1 hour ago, LeBoiteux said:

In fact, up to 300 crew could embark Le Requin IRL...

How many crew could embark on a Cerberus? 254 according to wiki. Ships could take on more Marines, on shorter voyages or when acting as troop transports. Careful with that argument. Crew and Marine numbers were quite flexible - depending on duration, location, mission. This is an aspect that should be balanced for Game Balance, not our subjective understanding of what is Historical.

Edit: I removed the wrong wiki reference, I will get the right one. Point still stands.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Tenet

[Mad Dog Morgan]

All hail the new META everyone has 15 kt ships.  Remove the port bonuses and mod stacking. Ships should have performance only from the relative woods they are crafted from and a bow figurehead. 

Edited July 19, 2019 by Mad Dog Morgan

[Guest]

there is a reason i havent bought anything after the Flag DLC, i feel its wrong to buy these dlc's because the reason they are implemented i feel is the wrong reason. @admin stated they were added because people wanted quick action, well they get the woods of their choosing, top in their class as you mentioned (herc is only beaten by a surprise on steroids).

Compare it to a player that dont have the money for DLC ships. He can capture 5th rates just as many as he wants, ok thats fine @admin says, but the ship is guaranteed crew space (not the best build for RvR), and it might be Live Oak which then makes it useless for raiding, or any other crap wood. The only advantage it might have is the special AI refits.

But there isnt guaranteed that the player that doesent have enough money for the dlc will survive with that ship back to port until he heads out.

 

If it were balanced, people would be able to choose 1) a permit to build it whatever they preferred, or 2) a ship redeemed with rng build like the elite ship notes that drop today.

[Serk]

34 minutes ago, Tenet said:

How many crew could embark on a Cerberus? 254 according to wiki. Ships could take on more Marines, on shorter voyages or when acting as troop transports. Careful with that argument. Crew and Marine numbers were quite flexible - depending on duration, location, mission. This is an aspect that should be balanced for Game Balance, not our subjective understanding of what is Historical.

This is not the Cerberus we have in game. The in game one served during the US war of independance. 

[Tenet]

52 minutes ago, Serk said:

This is not the Cerberus we have in game. The in game one served during the US war of independance. 

Fixed:

The ship was wider then the Le Requin by about 10ft, and yet had a smaller complement on record. The issues is that the Xebec most likely fought near ports and coastlines, in the Mediterranean, where supply and cramped quarters weren't an issue because you could disembark very frequently. Nothing stops the Cerberus from having a bigger complement in similar conditions. It's a number related to the amount of supplies taken and the length of planned voyages. 

[Nick the cursed]

Pay to win or not, DLC ships with port bonus is 'till fine for players who don't want to join a clan, play solo.

[o Barão]

I will not speak about the Hermione since I would need to study the stats again from many frigates to make a good comparison. However about the Requin you are wrong about important things. I was one the players that made hard critics how op they were when they were release and now it is just not the same history.

1 requin historical crew was 245 not 220.

2 doesn't matter if the Requin is faster at his best angle, many ships are the fastest at a specific angle, however requin have a big weakness. It can't chase anything downwind. So if the Niagara and rattlesnake players know what they are doing the Requin player can't do anything to catch them.

3 The elite pirate rig that made Requin a terror in the ocean was nerfed badly.

4 the bow chasers are historical accurate and they can't be removed just because you feel like that make them too OP. But I will add the important factor you are ignoring. You can't use chain shot on them. That is why I never chase a Requin. The only ship that could chase a Requin is another Requin and because you can't use chain shot in the bow chasers but you can in the stern chasers it easy to understand why is a waste of time.

 

Now there is one thing I agree that is too much. Those 32pd carronades. For a gameplay balance to limit the Requin to use only 24pd carronades would be better IMO.

[Vernon Merrill]

I eat Xebecs all day in a Prince....  especially carro-fitted ones.  

Xebec is a completely one-trick pony that can easily be escaped from and/or beaten by nearly any square rigger that's paying attention in the OW.  It can also be countered effectively by a cheap, non-permit ship.

Doesn't feel like its too OP to me.  

[Oli Garchy]

6 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

I eat Xebecs all day in a Prince....  especially carro-fitted ones.  

Xebec is a completely one-trick pony that can easily be escaped from and/or beaten by nearly any square rigger that's paying attention in the OW.  It can also be countered effectively by a cheap, non-permit ship.

Doesn't feel like its too OP to me.  

You're not the average player let's be fair

[Vernon Merrill]

5 minutes ago, Oli Garchy said:

You're not the average player let's be fair

Well I appreciate the kind words, ….   However, the tools are available to everyone.  

To me, the biggest problem with the Xebec is the broken hit boxes on the sails...

[Tenet]

34 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Doesn't feel like its too OP to me.  

Facts don't care about your feelings. I posted evidence to support my claim, and provided sources (both the API info from Netlify, and the historical references). If you want to add anything useful to the thread, you should address the facts. Personal anecdotes with a sample size of 1 do not count. Facts trump statistics. Statistics can be used to supplement facts. You don't even have legitimate statistics. All you have is your biased memories which were not systematically recorded. 

I thank you for the reminder about the 'broken sail hitboxes', I did notice something like that in my duels, but didn't have enough evidence.

48 minutes ago, no one said:

1 requin historical crew was 245 not 220.

First of all, you need to provide a source. Second: Crew Numbers clearly varied depending on mission - the Xebec being a coastal / non-ocean ship designed for shorter trips could have more crew on average historically. It's a matter of mission length, mission type, and supplies - not an inherent ship quality.
 

Quote

2 doesn't matter if the Requin is faster at his best angle, many ships are the fastest at a specific angle

Actually it does matter that the main way to cover the upwind angles is now a ship locked in a DLC. If we had a non-DLC Xebec of similar size, your argument would make sense. 

Quote

4 the bow chasers are historical accurate

Prove it, it's only fair for you to also share your research. Most ships in game historically mounted swivel guns and could mount brass chasers depending on the captain's preference, if the hull could support. They can be added or removed as part of game balance. Removing them is one of the options I offered to balance the ship, as part of a set of changes. There were other alternatives offered that you failed to address. 
 

Quote

Now there is one thing I agree that is too much. Those 32pd carronades. For a gameplay balance to limit the Requin to use only 24pd carronades would be better IMO.

I'm glad we have a point of agreement. I don't think this alone will be enough to make it a 6th rate, and I still advocate for Cerberus and possibly other light frigates being moved to 6th (or the Le Requin promoted). There are multiple problems with the ship.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Tenet

[Vernon Merrill]

Keep on tilting at those windmills...  I'm sure it will work out great for you...

[Tenet]

Just now, Vernon Merrill said:

Keep on tilting at those windmills...  I'm sure it will work out great for you...

I should start a tribunal about your forum conduct. 

[Vernon Merrill]

11 minutes ago, Tenet said:

I should start a tribunal about your forum conduct. 

Please do.  (For someone who supposedly cares little for "feelings", you sure are touchy).

Oh, and here's some facts, Senor Quixote....

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by Vernon Merrill

[o Barão]

36 minutes ago, Tenet said:

Facts don't care about your feelings. I posted evidence to support my claim, and provided sources (both the API info from Netlify, and the historical references). If you want to add anything useful to the thread, you should address the facts. Personal anecdotes with a sample size of 1 do not count. Facts trump statistics. Statistics can be used to supplement facts. You don't even have legitimate statistics. All you have is your biased memories which were not systematically recorded. 

I thank you for the reminder about the 'broken sail hitboxes', I did notice something like that in my duels, but didn't have enough evidence.

First of all, you need to provide a source. Second: Crew Numbers clearly varied depending on mission - the Xebec being a coastal / non-ocean ship designed for shorter trips could have more crew on average historically. It's a matter of mission length, mission type, and supplies - not an inherent ship quality.
 

Actually it does matter that the main way to cover the upwind angles is now a ship locked in a DLC. If we had a non-DLC Xebec of similar size, your argument would make sense. 

Prove it, it's only fair for you to also share your research. Most ships in game historically mounted swivel guns and could mount brass chasers depending on the captain's preference, if the hull could support. They can be added or removed as part of game balance. Removing them is one of the options I offered to balance the ship, as part of a set of changes. There were other alternatives offered that you failed to address. 
 

I'm glad we have a point of agreement. I don't think this alone will be enough to make it a 6th rate, and I still advocate for Cerberus and possibly other light frigates being moved to 6th (or the Le Requin promoted). There are multiple problems with the ship.

https://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=15543

 

https://www.ebay.de/itm/Le-Requin-47-Scale-1-48-Full-Rib-Wood-Ship-Model-Kit-High-End-Boxwood-Version-/253452543168

Edited July 20, 2019 by no one

[Sir Lancelot Holland]

A warship, no matter how good she is  on paper, are only as good as the the men who man her, this is why it has always been the case that those who commanded warships were the best of their kind. All ships had their virtues, and,their vices, good captains exploit them, poor and mediocre Captains do not, they may well be competent Captains but if they cannot exploit their ships strengths and their opponents ships weaknesses they remain competent Captains and will rarely become renowned.  Competent Captains are ten a penny, Captains of renown are far rarer creatures and on a bad day can be bested by competent Captains or by circumstance.

A competent Captain should know when to to fight and when to evade, he should know that if he cannot beat a Le Requin that she cannot run before the wind and will act accordingly, if he knows he can stand his ground  with a good chance of winning then he'll do so, it is the Captain who makes both the ship's and his own name, and, not the ship that makes the Captain, this is why not every Captain becomes a John Paul Jones or a Nelson, I will not be either, but I know I can hold off a Le Requin even in a traders brig, and have done so, although the Captain in question clearly had greater stock in the the reputation of his his ship than his own abilities in her!

The issue of a ships rating is complex,almost every navy of the time used different criteria for rating ships, so unless only one rating system is used there will always be differences in opinion of what a specific class of ship should be rated, one mans 6th rate can easily be another mans 5th rate, or vice versa, likewise, with cannon differing weight scales can result in heavier poundage doing less damage than an apparently lighter gun since there was no standardisation of cannons or weight of shot between nations.

[Tenet]

38 minutes ago, no one said:

https://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=15543

https://www.ebay.de/itm/Le-Requin-47-Scale-1-48-Full-Rib-Wood-Ship-Model-Kit-High-End-Boxwood-Version-/253452543168

Excellent. Threedecks does list crew as 245. Was that crew number the same regardless of missions and voyage length? Could a Xebec be used in the ocean, away from coastal waters?

The model you linked doesn't show anything about the bow chasers (and seems less detailed than the one I linked). The kit only includes 24 brass pieces - though I already conceded there seem to be two gun ports on the stern (masked by circular designs). The other circular openings on the front, the black railing, are the same as the other railing on the ship. It's just a railing. I want to see evidence of guns, and serious chasers, not just swivels. 

1 hour ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Please do.  (For someone who supposedly cares little for "feelings", you sure are touchy).

Oh, and here's some facts, [racist slur deleted]

 

I care about you polluting a good discussion with your self-aggrandizing garbage. 

Fact: You have so far provide a sample size of 1 battle, with screenshots clearly taken Prior to release, Prior to Port Bonuses being added to the Le Requin. Your sample is therefore invalid, and you are back to zero (0) evidence. 

If you can't deal with facts about the ship (Netlify) and want to use statistical arguments, here is how you gather statistics:

1. Record 100 battles in the current hotfix / game-version. (This is a tiny sample size for statistics, I picked it solely because that was the extent of the effort I've seen from players in other games, particularly among WoT Unicum experiments). 

2. For each of the battles, record the starting positions, name of people involved, results of "prepared" broadside, duration of fight, PvP ladder rank of the people involved, the screenshot showing the battle stats at the end, and a Twitch Highlight (or Youtube video) of each battle. You can then give that data to a researcher that will try to isolate a representative sample and provide some possible conclusions that would be of interest for balancing discussion. 

Statistical research is hard work. It's not as easy as linking some personal screenshot from early access.

This is why Netlify facts are a much better means of comparison - they are objective truths about the ships that we don't have to refine to compare. They can be used directly in arguments.

We can simply point to the stats and say "If we move the Pandora, Surprise, Cerberus and Hercules to 5th rate, we should have the Le Requin follow". Any of these ships can theoretically be taken out by a Basic Cutter - such anecdotes are irrelevant.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Tenet