Seasonal Patch: The Missing Links Part 1

[Frosty]

57 minutes ago, admin said:

I will tweak pens slightly so lower  LONG/NAVY calibers are useful at longer distances against heavily upgraded thickness. 

So that frigates will get penetrated even more? This pen "rebalance" is killing the frigate game....

[admin]

11 minutes ago, Frosty said:

So that frigates will get penetrated even more? This pen "rebalance" is killing the frigate game....

no its not. The difference is much smaller now between top class rates and even cutters. (25 vs 77 vs 70vs100)

[You]

8 hours ago, admin said:

thanks for artillery tests

I will tweak pens slightly so lower  LONG/NAVY calibers are useful at longer distances against heavily upgraded thickness. 
Will also review masts and change them slightly

imo the pen values are ok for masts, the problem is the accuracy over 100m there are no curve to the ball when it fires, its a direct line and only declining in height.

It would be far more logical if the ball left the cannon from the centre and it would be much like the carronade aiming section for the long guns. Unless you want to program in the magnus effect from scratch

See the Magnus Effect : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_effect#:~:text=The Magnus effect is an,the object is not spinning.

https://www.britannica.com/science/Magnus-effect

http://pencilcricket.blogspot.com/p/magnus-effect-in-leg-spin-bowling.html?m=1

Edited August 18, 2020 by You

[Frosty]

20 minutes ago, admin said:

(25 vs 77 vs 70vs100)

Is this the base thickness you're talking about? 

By the way, take for example an endymion, which is the only frigate with 24pd longs: That caliber will also penetrate oceans at mid range (as you just said you'll increase pen of lower calibers). So if it pens 1st rates, I don't want to imagine how much it pens an endymion, even if it ends up having 10/20 (or more?) less thickness. 

When are you updating the pen values and the mast thickness values? Want to test with the new values to give more feedback. 

Edited August 18, 2020 by Frosty

[Lizzo]

Just a small suggestion, which should not cost much programming time: Why don't you take the current thickness and penetration values from the testbed and simply halve all values (except the mast thickness, where I suggest -25%)? That way we get historically much more accurate values without changing the gameplay.

[Varlog]

@admin Извините что на русском, но я тут почитал обсуждения и не понимаю при чем тут история? То что сейчас на тестовом сервере, это не играбельно. Все бои сведутся к отстреливанию мачт. Сейчас на основных серверах сложилась хорошая боевка, ее нужно просто немного подшлифовать, сделать не такими долгими бои. Вы же хотите все опять с ног на голову поставить. Вы 4 года мучаете эту боевку, оставьте ее уже в покое. Займитесь чем то другим. 
p.s. Новая механика с ветром интересная, в целом можно пробовать на боевом сервере. Чисто для разнообразия

Edited August 18, 2020 by Varlog

[Urchin]

How about you only implement the wind changes for now so we don't have two major changes to combat going in at the same time.  Because this pen and demasting change is looking more ridiculous by the day.

[freddykrueger66]

@admin Looking forward to the further tweaking of the hull and mast thickness. However could you reduce the windshadow? It's waaaay to strong for gameplay reasons and kills any possible counterplay once someone has the wind advantage. I suggest reducing the range and the intensity of the effect by 50% for 1st rates. It makes sense if you are 100 meter away from someone that it's gonna have a huge effect, but as it is now it makes fleet manouvering nearly impossible to a point where you can't even tack if someone is windshadowing you from 300 meters away.

[Rolando]

56 minutes ago, Varlog said:

@admin Извините что на русском, но я тут почитал обсуждения и не понимаю при чем тут история? То что сейчас на тестовом сервере, это не играбельно. Все бои сведутся к отстреливанию мачт. Сейчас на основных серверах сложилась хорошая боевка, ее нужно просто немного подшлифовать, сделать не такими долгими бои. Вы же хотите все опять с ног на голову поставить. Вы 4 года мучаете эту боевку, оставьте ее уже в покое. Займитесь чем то другим. 
p.s. Новая механика с ветром интересная, в целом можно пробовать на боевом сервере. Чисто для разнообразия

Поддерживаю. В реале попасть с 500 ярдов в мачту была вероятность 0,01%, а в Naval Action половина бортового залпа задевает мачту.  Только если hp мачт (стеньг) сделать порядка 3-5к - будет адекватно.

В конце того года был опрос про то, какие ввести модули. С ними уже бардак, например, крафтовые Железные Кницы стали полезнее, чем Nav.Structure, которую можно только "снять с трупа" или купить аж за 15 комбатов. Все модули на пробой с копеечным бустом, и так не сильно популярные, станут более бесполезными с новым пробоем с километра.

"Тень ветра" - да, интересна. Не все будут одевать на фрегаты и шлюпы каронады. Особенно если появятся малокалиберные бломфильды, нави-ганы, полу-пудовые единороги... И если вероятность возникновения пожара от стрельбы с каронад будет повышенной.

Edited August 18, 2020 by Rolando

[Timberjac]

I'm not sure, that the mechanics of stealing wind are neither necessary nor useful and I don't even know what you want to introduce for, other than to help even more the clans that make the most pvp.

And I say this, because the mechanics of stealing the wind is a scam, if in the same way when a ship is on depends on that positions on the wind (for example, entirely with the wind at stern) the rear sails do not steal the wind to the bow sail (closer is impossible) and do not tell me that the boats are designed for that purpose , because no one believes it (the speed reduction in that position for example should be a lot more brutal than the current one and then maybe, things like this would be reflected and we could talk about stealing the wind).

There are mechanics that should be more urgent if you want to contemplate a naval combat, such as that the chain-shoot ammunition, for example, is not really to make broken in the sails, even if it does, but its greatest function, is to break the rigging and the rest of the ropes and ends that withstand the tension that the sail produces on the mast itself , causing it to split, something that graciously, is missing in a game that tries to simulate the battles of the age of sailing.

Also, it is stupid that the game does not contemplate carrying ammunition of different types (or even introducing different types of each with different qualities and production costs) as well as carrying replacement of the guns to replace one of the lost or still without them.

In addition, the repair mechanics, is more broken than broken, sending the simulation component to hell (I understand that some damage can be fixed, although the reality is that except the very serious ones, for the survival of the ship, not that a shipyard is carried in the pocket.

And let's not talk about AI or the winds that always turn like a stopwatch.

Edited August 18, 2020 by Timberjac

[DeRuyter]

23 hours ago, Lieste said:

It wasn't a range issue (Essex hulled both Phoebe and Cherub, and Cherub hulled Essex with her carronades). It was a mast casualty from carrying too much sail, followed by anchoring on springs, but having the springs shot away, so bearing with the broadside wasn't possible).

I know about the springs but the common view is that at least Phoebe stayed out of range of the carronades. Do you have a source?

[Hethwill]

8 minutes ago, DeRuyter said:

I know about the springs but the common view is that at least Phoebe stayed out of range of the carronades. Do you have a source?

Check both "Hunting the Essex" Allen Gardiner Midshipman journal and "The Shining Sea"

 

[DeRuyter]

2 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Check both "Hunting the Essex" Allen Gardiner Midshipman journal and "The Shining Sea"

 

I'll have to look at those. @Lieste here is a contemporary history with extracts from Captain Porters correspondence. He mentions several times the British ships maneuvered to stay outside of the range of his carronades. He does also talk about the springs being shot away as well.  Porters letter to the Secretary of the Navy begins on page 132. He mentions the carronades several times starting on page 136. 

https://archive.org/details/biographyofprinc02wils_0/page/136/mode/2up

 

 

[Luvstruck]

A case for battle sails

 

Battle sails - sailing crew required under battle sails is capped at 25%

IE - a ship requires 400 crew to sailing crew is capped at 100 crew leaving 300 to filter to other jobs

This pushes crew to man guns and other things.

While under battle sails the turning of the sails acts as if 100% crewed with the % dropping as crew is lost.

This gives battle sails a purpose, mimicking the reduced crew required to handle the sailing of the ship under reduced canvas.

When increasing above battle sails the 25% cap in crew required instantly removes allowing crew to transfer back into the sailing position to increase sail.

When decreasing to battle sails the crew would complete the task then filter automatically to other areas, for instance when the gun decks are full they would filter to boarding.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Luvstruck

[You]

2 hours ago, Luvstruck said:

A case for battle sails

 

Battle sails - sailing crew required under battle sails is capped at 25%

IE - a ship requires 400 crew to sailing crew is capped at 100 crew leaving 300 to filter to other jobs

This pushes crew to man guns and other things.

While under battle sails the turning of the sails acts as if 100% crewed with the % dropping as crew is lost.

This gives battle sails a purpose, mimicking the reduced crew required to handle the sailing of the ship under reduced canvas.

When increasing above battle sails the 25% cap in crew required instantly removes allowing crew to transfer back into the sailing position to increase sail.

When decreasing to battle sails the crew would complete the task then filter automatically to other areas, for instance when the gun decks are full they would filter to boarding.

totally agree, unfortunately suggested several times by several players

Edited August 19, 2020 by You

[kapteinsnabeltann]

Save the global chat!

[GhostOfDorian]

On 8/17/2020 at 9:14 PM, Jan van Santen said:

So why increase it even further ? You can now get it to 140+ (my alt has a 144 cm hull 4,  tk(s)/wo(s) navy plank, navy struc LO on testbed....

A little extra to the historic values is fine, as she wasnt built lo/wo but european oak in France. If...you had built the historic LO with seasoned top quality lo and wo, she would indeed have a thicker hulll, but certainly not 140+ cm.

Edit:

https://ussconstitutionmuseum.org/2015/10/08/walking-the-plank/#:~:text=This combination of white and,is approximately 22 inches thick.

This combination of white and live oak make up the ship’s “iron” sides. At the waterline, Constitution‘s hull is approximately 22 inches thick.

And thats the entire point of it: faster than anything with guns heavy enough to penetrate that hull and to strong for anything that could race it....

 

Of course we can discuss the extra thickness of hull 4, rare logs etc. But then we also have to discuss the uncredible grinding to get this extra thickness. If you don't get a huge advantage over those who deny this extreme extra work all of those changes should just be removed. Since it just doesn't make any sense anymore to spend weeks and weeks for just a few centimeters better thickness which allows you to survive 5 minutes longer.

When it comes to mast thickness we should heavily increase the amount we get from mast and rig one to four. That was always the upgrade clans improved last, since it had never the same use than hull, speed or crew.

A good balanced game still allows demasting of a rare log 1. Rate with rare guns, as long as the demaster takes a severe risk to lose his complete armour (also rare logs vs. rare guns) while trying to demast his opponent. It should not allow to easily demast or destroy armour of a rare log 1. rate with regular guns.

If demasting, boarding or leaking is the superior way to go, it will become noobish to shoot hull instead. Therefore any investment in hull will be a waste of time and resources. Those who want to go for demasting, boarding or leaking have to take a high risk to get defeated with another tactic if they don't implement their tactic without mistakes.

If any patch doesn't guarantee this rule battle mechanic will lose most of its variations and the game will become a lot more boring, what will lead in a loss of a lot of players.

[GhostOfDorian]

On 8/18/2020 at 10:16 AM, admin said:

thanks for artillery tests

I will tweak pens slightly so lower  LONG/NAVY calibers are useful at longer distances against heavily upgraded thickness. 
Will also review masts and change them slightly

This heavily upgraded thickness is the result of heavy grinding. If this can be neutralized with regular longs there is something wrong with balance. I have no issue that navy guns which also need heavy grinding to get can neutralize thickness as a result of heavy grinding.

Gunnery four should neutralize hull four. Navy guns should neutralize malabar/danzic.

[Puchu]

Well, there are some significant design elements that you have to take into consideration though.

 

This game has a very unnique way of doing things.

One of them is: Some things are just simply straight up better than others. I allways considered this to be a horrible thing, but that's how it is. A Naval clock is just simply better than a sextant. Thats how it is. Same goes for port upgrades and woods and so on. 

So if your ship can be just straight up better than the ship of others, in even fights, you will just straight up win. But you wont win like 50% of the times, but (unless you are just bad) you will win almost 100% of the times. So if you fight in great ships you almost never loose them. 

That is bad for the game. The reason being: People make money and it doesnt disappear. It just accumulates, since people dont loose their great ships. 

So if you are someone who sails bad ships, you will sink way more often and you will become poor as a result. If you sail strong ships, you will become rich, since you allways have the advantage by default. 

Basically it's like this: Get a good ship and it becomes a money printing machine untill you make a significant mistake. That's why it is so important to squeeze the last bits of thickness out of something, because 1cm of thickness will mean the difference between killing the good enemy ship and taking all the profit, vs loosing your own ship and loosing hours and hours of work.

That's one ... lets call it "feature" ... of the game. It's "winner takes it all". So everything that just gives you a straight advantage is crucial since it decides if you take it all or loose it all.

[GhostOfDorian]

5 minutes ago, Puchu said:

Well, there are some significant design elements that you have to take into consideration though.

 

This game has a very unnique way of doing things.

One of them is: Some things are just simply straight up better than others. I allways considered this to be a horrible thing, but that's how it is. A Naval clock is just simply better than a sextant. Thats how it is. Same goes for port upgrades and woods and so on. 

So if your ship can be just straight up better than the ship of others, in even fights, you will just straight up win. But you wont win like 50% of the times, but (unless you are just bad) you will win almost 100% of the times. So if you fight in great ships you almost never loose them. 

That is bad for the game. The reason being: People make money and it doesnt disappear. It just accumulates, since people dont loose their great ships. 

So if you are someone who sails bad ships, you will sink way more often and you will become poor as a result. If you sail strong ships, you will become rich, since you allways have the advantage by default. 

Basically it's like this: Get a good ship and it becomes a money printing machine untill you make a significant mistake. That's why it is so important to squeeze the last bits of thickness out of something, because 1cm of thickness will mean the difference between killing the good enemy ship and taking all the profit, vs loosing your own ship and loosing hours and hours of work.

That's one ... lets call it "feature" ... of the game. It's "winner takes it all". So everything that just gives you a straight advantage is crucial since it decides if you take it all or loose it all.

How do you get rich by winning a battle? How do you get rich by winning almost all battles? They increased the bounty for winning a battle. For the 40 minutes you need to kill an ocean you get around 250k reals now. Only to compare. For the five hours sailing 12k rare logs from one side of the map to the other you earn 180kk reals. That's almost 100 times as much with the same time spending in game.

It's a fairytail that players with the best ships can buy an unassailable lead to regular players. Everybody can get those ships, as long as he is willing to do the hard work needed for. Truth is that players with the best ships spend a lot of time and money to finance them.

[Puchu]

People with the best ships spend a lot of time and money to get them. That is true. But once they have them, they almost dont ever loose them again. 

And I never said you will get richer than traders, I just said you will get richer than the ones that fight in worse ships. Because the ones that fight in worse ships will get poor, since they are most of the time just plain and simply outmatched.

I love every unexperienced trader that sails his amazing ships into battle, since he will probably get crushed by experienced pvpers in equal ships. But often the ship quality makes so much of a difference that an inexperienced trader can just win vs an experienced pvp player, just because his ship and mods are so much better. 

I am saying that good ships rarely die. And that the game is a "winner takes it all" environment. Im just doing that to explain why 3cm of thickness matter so much.

 

I personally hate hate hate the concept that there are things in this game that are straight up upgrades to other things. I've proposed the "sidegrades" thought 5 years ago, but it never got into the game since the devs prefered to focus on the grind, rather than on versatile gameplay, because the grind is what keeps players playing. At least thats the thought process behind it. 

 

But yes, we can focus back on the patch now. I dont know how the thickness changes will affect the overall combat behavior. The way i see it: If you get a close upwind tag on someone, he is dead. And if masts go down so fast, then what already is a very very good strat will become even better. 

[GhostOfDorian]

5 minutes ago, Puchu said:

People with the best ships spend a lot of time and money to get them. That is true. But once they have them, they almost dont ever loose them again. 

And I never said you will get richer than traders, I just said you will get richer than the ones that fight in worse ships. Because the ones that fight in worse ships will get poor, since they are most of the time just plain and simply outmatched.

I love every unexperienced trader that sails his amazing ships into battle, since he will probably get crushed by experienced pvpers in equal ships. But often the ship quality makes so much of a difference that an inexperienced trader can just win vs an experienced pvp player, just because his ship and mods are so much better. 

I am saying that good ships rarely die. And that the game is a "winner takes it all" environment. Im just doing that to explain why 3cm of thickness matter so much.

 

I personally hate hate hate the concept that there are things in this game that are straight up upgrades to other things. I've proposed the "sidegrades" thought 5 years ago, but it never got into the game since the devs prefered to focus on the grind, rather than on versatile gameplay, because the grind is what keeps players playing. At least thats the thought process behind it. 

 

But yes, we can focus back on the patch now. I dont know how the thickness changes will affect the overall combat behavior. The way i see it: If you get a close upwind tag on someone, he is dead. And if masts go down so fast, then what already is a very very good strat will become even better. 

It's not the problem of the experienced pvp player who has only equal chance against the unexperienced trader in top ship. There is nothing wrong with that. Since both take the best advantage out of their skills. The problem is that the only pvp players stand no chance against the experienced pvp players who know how to trade as well or have a clan on their side which organizes them the ships they can compete with everybody.

This game is not made for players who wanna jump in for two hours and have some instant fun and a lot of success.

[Puchu]

yes this game is not made for me

 

[jodgi]

29 minutes ago, GhostOfDorian said:

This game is not made for players who wanna jump in for two hours and have some instant fun and a lot of success.

 

26 minutes ago, Puchu said:

yes this game is not made for me

T_T

[Liq]

how does "hard work" translate in dull afk sailing a trader for a couple hours? next lvl game content

also regarding balance: as long as there are woods ingame that boost your HP by 50(!) %, I dont see much of a point even trying to start arguing about balance.