A handful of suggestions regarding Naval Action ship control and gunnery

[Hethwill]

After more than a "dozen" combats and twice as much time going through all the interesting documentation I could find I must suggest that some aspects of the battle part of the game to be reviewed.

 

I do not forget that this is a game, the is meant to be enticing, fluid, fun. But I also do not forget that fun regarding a game based on history also comes with credibility.

 

Obviously the micro management of the crew and guns is not fun and not intended. We simulate a captain delegating orders and shouting them over the roar of the guns and the shriek of the wind. This is accomplished very elegantly with the mechanics we have so far.

 

Therefore I suggest a review on the following particular aspects, if only for a upcoming experimental patch if the developers want to test a more interesting, as I see fit, approach to ships interaction in battle.

 

W & S keys  sequence is counter productive. Preset commands would simulate the orders better. This has been suggested already by other players, and in all cases a Captain would be commanding direct orders instead of "cycling" through them and having sails collected and set lose until the crew got it right.

 

Ships and Drift and Stability. Unless in a safe harbour in a perfect calm bay and with absolutely no wind the ship is level. The seas we sail into battle have enough wind and waviness and even with Stop sails she would never be perfectly still and level. There are slight changes in elevation in game already, maybe side drift and rotation drift can also be considered to the same measure as the elevation.

 

 

Gunnery. This is the life and blood of combat. Taking both extremes of late 18th century naval gunnery - safe port range was 3 miles and the "ton broadside" was made at "half pistol" distance of 100 yards. Both examples are the extremes of the 32 pounders. The 3 mile rule has a buffer safe zone of over half a mile and the half-pistol broadside was very common in large naval engagements such as the Nile, Cap st. Vincent, Matapan, Trafalgar, New Orleans, etc.

 

The accuracy of artillery at this century was in regard of concentration of guns in a pre determined area. Precision was not an issue. Aiming at range for accuracy lobbing of shots was done by eye and tangents mental calculations not by iron sights. And even if they were used ( they were actually used by many artillery officers ) they served the purpose of pre-determined fields of fire, not the ever moving and fluid combat in the sea or land by horse artillery which relied more on close range barrages for maximum effect.

 

I therefore suggest a review on the precision and accuracy at distance. Rule of thumb for artillery academies at the time suggest accuracy at half range. Precision was non existent. I suggest also a improvement on the attitude of the shot. It is very precise and sniping is possible, unless we would be already using later 19th century guns ( maybe we are ) and even then rifled union shot was set to 900 - 1200 yard interval for accuracy, not precision.

 

It would benefit to have additional 2 rooms for PVP Light and PVP capped at 6v6 or similar reduced numbers.

 

I suggest to reduce the timer when out of bounds. 4 minutes is definitely too long. Two minutes is more than enough even when crossing up wind.

 

I also would enjoy the reload times to be reviewed and prolonged. On top of that have effects of the crew numbers to be more drastic. A complement of 60 men can effectively sail a Surprise but they cannot do everything. We sometimes command this small complements after a boarding and they are super beings, able to obey all sail commands and reload the guns of both sides at the same time and still manage to pump the water way effectively.

 

With the recent experimental touches on the mechanics ruling leaks, planking on different models and future inclusion of renewed hit boxes I can see the whole package described above turning the game into something more challenging and retaining the simplistic design of Naval Action.

 

I firmly believe the changes mentioned above will not change the essence of NA. They will simply fine tune the engagements, open new way to play and overall give a more enticing game aimed at the 18th century naval warfare within the gameplay and fun boundaries.

 

Thank you for you time.

Opinions welcome within critical composure and I don't mind opposite points of view. Remember, it is a game and it is a game recreating history, so credibility and fun must be balanced.

[Balck]

Mostly good suggestions, especially with regards to ship and gunnery behavior.

 

Regarding the timer, it used to be two minutes.  If you get pushed out of bounds closed hauled with an enemy to lee, you wouldn't make it back.  The border is there to kill those who try to grief by running, the 4 minute timer keeps abuses from happening where an almost defeated vessel keeps the victor out of bounds just long enough to sink it.

[PiR]

Hello,

 

Good suggestions overall. I totally agree with the crew number being more important . Every ships should have a point when crew is no more longer able to fight due to casualties, especially when a part of this crew is occupied by survivability matters. I think the fighting potential of a ship is the first to get weakened by casualties. Correct me if i am wrong, but actually I think that, when we are losing crew % we are losing the same % of fighting potential, maniability and survivability. I wanted to add that losing fighting potentiel actually mean losing reloads speed whereas firepower. When we are losing half of our gunners they actually reload all the guns with the double of time, but instead they will reload the half of the guns at the normal speed.

That all for me, forgive my English.

 

Cheers.

[Hethwill]

Another thing I noticed is that the Repairs Kits recover a %%.

This becomes very game breaking towards the SOLs. Given their "resistance" the smart use of them can plainly reset all the effort put into it.

I would suggest a system similar to Gunner,Sailing, rather than a %% armour recovery.

 

Another thing is the shot weight. I reckon that between SOLs the exchange of weight is not that marked given they exchange weight, they shoot and they receive shot. But a bigger ship shooting weight into a smaller one, if it penetrates it adds the shot weight as ballast.

Now let say a Constitution shoots all the 18 pounders into a Snow. That is a lot of weight into the hull on top of the leaks.

 

 

Another thing I would like to see implemented, regarding repairs is, to be impossible to repair any section of the ship that has been completely depleted.

[Prater]

We will have to see how they handle repairs on open world.  Will it be the same, will it require supplies, etc?

 

I agree with the gunnery part.  Some of us have requested greater shot dispersion.  I think the dev's concerns are how long the game would last.  However, this would force everyone to get in closer, so who knows.  And the carronade would become more viable.

 

 

 

even with Stop sails she would never be perfectly still and level.

 

Actually, with stop sails there is more heaving than with sails.  Someone in stop sails should have a hard time hitting targets.

[Hethwill]

I posted a very interesting "leaflet" on the history part of the forum regarding gunnery and the "problem solving" as done by a carpenter.

 

The interesting part is the problems they faced when trying to angle guns. Second was the horrendous issues with proper ranging on a broadside.

For the mathematicians, although he was a "common man", there are extensive diagrams and calculations for your entertainment. Nothing just theoretic but everything practical for the navy and gun crews.

[Sir. Cunningham]

The way gunnery works in terms of aiming atm is fine (guns were infact aimed back then) however the dispersion of the guns is too small, esp. in the vertical where it needs to be roughly doubled to represent reality.

 

As for the ranges at which the fights took place. Most of the time fire was infact exchanged starting already at ranges of over 1,000 yards, with the max effective range of a broadside being listed as ~1200 yards. However during line battles the majority of the fighting actually took place at so called "point blank" range, which in naval terms was the range at which the projectile would hit the water when fired completely level, so around 250-400 yards. 

 

The use of instant firing gun locks in some navies (esp. the RN) allowed the gun capt. to fire the gun accurately by allowing him to both aim & time the shot to the pitch/roll of the ship, whilst tangent/dispart sights allowed him to aim the gun even more accurately. (Sometimes a pendulum as used to gauge the pitch angle was used as well) In addition to this some captains adopted the so called director fire method (described below).

 

 Director fire method, pioneered by Capt. Broke of the RN:

 

More on the use of all these methods in this thread:

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/1799-gun-battery-upgrades/

[Hethwill]

Indeed the guns were aimed and ranged, same as land artillery. They could accurately hit the area targeted for. Alas they had no precision and naval is even worse. There are no pivots and balance point.

 

While the game does not strive for top notch all out simulation of the details the simple act of moving the guns to aim to a bow or stern angle would be enough to lose some of the elevation angle  accuracy as the crew moved the weight around.

[DeRuyter]

Ironically, Capt. Broke's most famous battle was fought with the ships virtually touching. (USS Chesapeake v HMS Shannon).

[Hethwill]

The minimum range of 300 yards for ALL guns to hit the enemy ship is inconsistent with the practice of rolling fire. Actually a full synchronized full guns broadside was not advisable. Too much strain on the planking, especially if the crews tied the carriages down for minimum recoil and aim loss.

 

Below deck the guns are hard to aim. Only reference points is the horizon and the target. Deck guns had more sense of space and range estimation.

 

Given it is a game a compromise can be reached easily while keeping credibility. Precision is not a smooth-bore quality, hence massed fire on a target area, the closer the better.

[Sir. Cunningham]

The minimum range of 300 yards for ALL guns to hit the enemy ship is inconsistent with the practice of rolling fire. Actually a full synchronized full guns broadside was not advisable. Too much strain on the planking, especially if the crews tied the carriages down for minimum recoil and aim loss.

 

Below deck the guns are hard to aim. Only reference points is the horizon and the target. Deck guns had more sense of space and range estimation.

 

Given it is a game a compromise can be reached easily while keeping credibility. Precision is not a smooth-bore quality, hence massed fire on a target area, the closer the better.

 

You misunderstood, at 300 yards the guns are aiming at the same point.

[Sir. Cunningham]

Ironically, Capt. Broke's most famous battle was fought with the ships virtually touching. (USS Chesapeake v HMS Shannon).

 

Yes, that was usually how things ended if the other side was set on capturing the enemy ship.

 

After Broke's pioneering techniques started to be standardized within RN however some outstanding results were achieved thanks to superior long range gunnery, An example of many was the Battle of Valparaiso in 1814 where the American frigate USS Essex was battered into submission by accurate long range fire from the British frigate HMS Pheobe, suffering some 58 dead & 66 wounded. British losses were 5 men dead and 10 wounded.

[Barberouge]

There are already some specific topics for feedback: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/forum/33-sea-trials/ And for specific suggestions: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/616-wheres-the-topic-im-looking-for/

 

Suggestion-listing topics are interesting when they present a perspective, but they are also much more difficult to use.