Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

All ships can be "ridiculous" when built in the appropriate in-game shipyards, equipped with the in-game appropriate modules, crewed with the appropriate in-game knowledge and all of that good in-game stuff.

Why bring only the Snow to the torches and pitchforks when you actually have ships in game that over perform more than the Ontario !?¬†ūüėé

Share this post


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

All ships can be "ridiculous" when built in the appropriate in-game shipyards, equipped with the in-game appropriate modules, crewed with the appropriate in-game knowledge and all of that good in-game stuff.

Why bring only the Snow to the torches and pitchforks when you actually have ships in game that over perform more than the Ontario !?¬†ūüėé

"Other things also broken!" isn't an argument against fixing the thing someone is pointing out as needing fixed.  

But I find it hard to name another ship in the game that can punch above it's weight so effectively.   The snow features disproportionately often in stories of high rate ships being killed by low rate ones, because the turn rate makes it nearly invincible in 1v1s with any other ship in the game, if you have enough skill to read your opponents maneuvers quickly enough to counter them.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is not an argument :) 

I'm fine with fixing it if it's broken.

Just saying... don't forget other stuff

( not only what fits your game style ;) )

Share this post


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

A snow is a entire class of rigged ship, not a ship.

The HMS Ontario is the named ship you refer to.

There's plenty of snows being referenced in the annals of maritime history.

---

The majority of "clients" for the carronades during the "carronade era" were in fact unrated and 6th rates, sloops of war and the like. They were terribly undergunned by that time, remember that this is the transition from 18 pounder to 24 pounder frigates, and a FAST and ECONOMICAL way to do it was to refit the small vessels with carronades. Brought the broadside up while retaining a semblance of their sailing capabilities with the planned outfit.

For obvious reasons the carronade age was short but there are plenty of examples of carronades versus cannon, varying from full fledged battles to small ship to ship fighting, with successes on both sides. Sometimes carronades won, most of the times cannons won.

But, this is a game and while expecting gunnery to perform as expected from a realistic point of view means that one should also expect the vessels to perform as realistically as possible while sailing ( alas they might not perform as they should ;) but that would be too much for most huh ). After all the warships were nothing more than gun platforms - that is all they were. Everything was built around the guns and for the guns and to bring them to battle. 

Are the 32 pounder carronades weird in a snow rig ? Not so much given sloops of war during 1812 war mounted them full broadside.

Do they perform outside the envelope of realistic behaviour to wind and all that ? Well... all ships in game do :D ; so why shouldn't the guns be outside the envelope as well ?

You are absolutely accurate in everything you say and correctly point out that this is not necessarily a "dead on, balls accurate" simulation.  I think though, that as it's a game, there needs to be a nod to enjoyable game play.  As @admin pointed out in another thread, there were some line ships that could catch 5th rates IRL.  While this was true, it poisons the game play for extremely powerful ships to be able to catch smaller rated ships.  Logical gameplay should allow that a smaller warship should be able to evade a significantly larger ship (does not apply to traders!).  This logic applies even more to something like the Snow and it's heavy guns/OP manoeuvrability.  The amount of investment needed to sail one of these "super" Snows is miniscule compared to that which is required for a Line ship.  The amount of rage that it produces when a Snow kills a heavy ship is out of proportion.  Real life ships did not have the kind of crazy manoeuvrability and speed that we have in this game and so, giving that to a 32pdr gun platform in the hands of a skilled player is an over the top advantage. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good way to put it. 

So, why should a frigate achieve the same result and, proportionally to dimensions, have, in some cases ( all depends on ship setup ) better handling ?

Same could be said with some the SOLs. 

I completely withdraw myself, since a while, from all suggestions or observations regarding necessary resources to build or achieve something given there's too much resistance to such a design and you are right - snow user has a infinite pool of resources when compared to SOL user ( if we assumer theoretically the Snow only builds snows and the SOL only builds sols). Even comparing relative displacement/broadside weight, the ratio is insanely in favor of the snow rig. Same for the schooners and other vessels including frigates.

Given vessels armed with carronades do have, in game, extreme better performance in battle when compared to reality counterpart, is no brainer that in game the carronade is, in the majority of encounters, the favorite. Is not only the resources needed to build the vessel, else in reality carronade would also be king.

Has to be something else, don't you think ? Not looking only to one particular ship, but to all.

Share this post


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

Has to be something else, don't you think ? Not looking only to one particular ship, but to all.

I suspect that because the damage model is fairly close to realistic, the other performances (gun accuracy/Ship speed/manoeuvrability) which are exaggerated,  tend to put us in situations where something like a Snow can become a monster.  It's ability to cling to the stern of a line ship is very unrealistic and causes continual grief amongst players who have been victimised in this manner.  The fact that they were sailing their brand new, shiny line ship as a solo is another game difference from RL.  The expectation among many players is that because in real life these tiny ships didn't create the British victory at Trafalgar, it won't happen in our game.  Real life use of Line Ships was generally restricted to fleet actions.  We do not want to see that in the game, because we all (not me!) want to sail the big boys.  Yet they are far too vulnerable when used in game to smaller warships.  I think that comparisons within any class are fairly close. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just add snow to the kill list of privateer fleets. That will solve a lot of the issues with that little pest. Since its only real use is for trader clubs to club tbrigs in others capital waters. If somebody wants to go after your trinc in the middle of the ocean with a snow, good for him. But that doesnt really happen (unless you are moscowb)

On the carronade meta, it makes sense because at a distance it can be tough to hit anything other than a tall decker like a wasa... have you tried to long range say an essex? or... a requin? It's not exactly a viable thing.  Longs still are supreme for the demasters but at typical engagement ranges, its all about the caros. and im ok with that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the carronades meta is gonna be the thing i would advice to reduce manouverability on basically all ships and/or reduce the reload rate of all guns. Considering the turn rate is phased up due to gameplay reason (understand able) we now have the situation where you could almost Dodge a full broadside of cannonballs (not ulike sid Meyers pirates gameplay). 

It doesent matter if u use carronades even if the battle is at distance vs longs because you can just angle and dodge balls

Edited by erelkivtuadrater
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A snow is still a snow. Its destructable quite easily. This applies for basically all 6th rates

 

Edited by Je maintiendrai
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

A snow is still a snow. Its destructable quite easily. This applies for basically all 6th rates

 

agreed. a stiff breeze kills a snow.

i just fear the snow v snow "wars" and a snow wins in 1 broadside :P.

but a Snow also has very little limitations in what it "can't" do and a highly skilled player can essentially because indestructible with one. Now those players just got a huge carro boost...nightmares are abound.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

agreed. a stiff breeze kills a snow.

i just fear the snow v snow "wars" and a snow wins in 1 broadside :P.

but a Snow also has very little limitations in what it "can't" do and a highly skilled player can essentially because indestructible with one. Now those players just got a huge carro boost...nightmares are abound.

Try chaining a 1st rate with your snow carronades!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think carronades need worse accuracy in our game, for the sake of balance. So a ship with long guns can enjoy distance fighting. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

A snow is still a snow. Its destructable quite easily. This applies for basically all 6th rates

 

Yes ofc vs bigger ships. Im more meaning towards ships of the same rate, 6th vs 6th, 5th vs 5th, 4th vs 4th.

There is no reason to pick longs anymore since the carronades as just so much better in all ways, the only downside is penetration, but that can be played around by angling in longs distance

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there should be a price to pay when using the 32 lbs carronades. Since they add a lot more weight above the waterline, the heel should be drastically increased (maybe doubled or more).

So you get the higher firepower and you opponent the increased chance to shoot leaks.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2020 at 4:48 PM, AeRoTR said:

I still think carronades need worse accuracy in our game, for the sake of balance. So a ship with long guns can enjoy distance fighting. 

Their accuracy is already shit, that's not the major issue. Even with the carronade master perk and Congreve's/Pellew's, they're terribad with any ammunition beside ball, and only marginally better with it.

The issue is the painfully obvious power creep of certain ships getting much larger carros than they should have access to. Even before the 32pd carro patch, there was a overwhelmingly strong carro meta in place for 7th-5th rates.

If you really want to buff ship armaments, devs, give them larger calibers of cannon, not carronades. Players need some semblance of incentive to actually attempt to use cannons again, or this braindead carro meta will persist indefinitely.

And for the record, I don't believe ships deserved armament buffs across the board in the first place. As baffling as the decision to buff the already-ridiculous Snow was, I'm just as confused at the devs' decision to buff armaments at all. It's as if they're attempting to undo everything they did to make lineships so powerful compared to small ships. I simply can't understand their logic.

Edited by The Geth
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see the possibility to chose a wider variety of cannon calibers. But if you chose a higher caliber that results in much heavier guns, then that should carry a penalty. Currently there is no penalty for picking 32p carros over 24p carros. Much heavier guns should dramatically affect the handling of the ship. 

 

Edited by Never
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin, may I gently remind you that we are all still waiting for an explanation to this seemingly-inexplicable set of changes? Please?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and i've never quite understood why the 6pd ships can suddenly carry 32pd carronades. British lineships equipped 32pd carronades on their weatherdeck because they had next to equal weights as 9pd long cannons. Which would mean on a 6pd ship say the snow it would be a huge risk taking that extra load.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Never said:

I would like to see the possibility to chose a wider variety of cannon calibers. But if you chose a higher caliber that results in much heavier guns, then that should carry a penalty. Currently there is no penalty for picking 32p carros over 24p carros. Much heavier guns should dramatically affect the handling of the ship. 

 

i totally agree. Its also illogical that you can for instance transport 100 42pd Cannons without penalty in your basic cutter, but damn you if you use any higher caliber then 4pd cannons to defend yourself with. The weight on those 100 cannons would guarantee a trip to the bottom of the sea

Edited by erelkivtuadrater
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2020 at 10:21 AM, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

If i recall well, admin said carronades were historically superior so they will not balance them in game.

Fact is this make carronade the golden gun, while it remain a common craftable item without permit or limited access while historically this technology was not that common.

We never said so. Please quote us - if you cannot find a quote please amend your message
Carronades were never superior and had one use - devastating close range broadsides. 

All ships that can fit 32 carronades due to size of the port received this ability. This is based on the historical book findings that we posted in other topics
0UwD1YC.jpg

 

As a result all ships that can fit (physically) a 32 lb carronade got the ability to carry it

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

We never said so. Please quote us - if you cannot find a quote amend your message
Carronades were never superior and had one use - devastating close range broadsides. 

All ships that could fit 32 carronades received carronades. This is based on the historical book findings that we posted in other topics

Just because they could historically does not mean we should give them so freely.  The combo of a realistic Carro loadout with an incredibly Unrealistic manoeuvre/speed envelope puts a too powerful punch into a smaller ship. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2020 at 9:22 PM, Je maintiendrai said:

Try chaining a 1st rate with your snow carronades!!!!

Why would a snow need to chain a first rate? They are floating bricks?

Share this post


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

We never said so. Please quote us - if you cannot find a quote please amend your message
Carronades were never superior and had one use - devastating close range broadsides. 

All ships that can fit 32 carronades due to size of the port received this ability. This is based on the historical book findings that we posted in other topics
0UwD1YC.jpg

 

As a result all ships that can fit (physically) a 32 lb carronade got the ability to carry it

think its more of a problem now  that the penetration is so high that you fight broadside to broadside at 400m, when Historically as you say battles were usually fought in less then 500m with longs due to . Suggestion to reduce penetration, and increase splinter damage? they should be devastating at close range, but we dont have that close range in the game because the aiming is static through whe whole broadside, meaning if you aim at a point you will allways hit the same spot, no matter if the ship is affected by roll or turn or waves etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...