Why we need armor on masts?

[Spyboy]

For what its worth I haven't seen a lot of demisting,

[Austrum]

I did some testing last night with my Surprise in PVE, just firing at the enemy ships masts and de-masting was absolutely not a common thing.  My first long range broadside hit the main mast and took off the top portion but the remaining 20-30 broadsides I fired did nothing but hit sail,  Fired about 6-8 broadsides with single round shot (med to long range), 3-6 broadsides at close range with double shot, 3-6 broadsides with Chain close range.  In addition to never again de-masting the NPC Surprise, past that first lucky long range broadside, I found that single and double shot barely did any damage at all to the enemy sails, in fact after the test, aside from maybe at very long range where it is just easier to hit sails, I feel it is just a waste of broadsides to fire ball at the sails.

 

Now perhaps the sheer number of guns and weight of broadside fired from an SOL like the Victory or Sanit increases the likelyhood of a mast hit, but it seems the 19 guns from a Surprise aren't effective at de-masting enemy ships.

[Prater]

I'll just chime in and say:

as soon as chainshot cutting off stays helps bringing masts down, sure, add some armor to them.

 

In the meantime, I think it's fine as it is. Since the mast buff demasts are pretty rare (that I've seen), and the fact that cutting rigging has no effect on demasting (that I've seen either) means that yeah, maybe demasting with ball is a tad too easy. But is more than countered by the fact that using rig-cutting shot helps nothing towards that goal...while it should go a long ways towards it.

 

I agree on the chain part.  They need to allow the chains attaching the rigging to the hull to be shot and destroyed, and other rigging as well.

 

Though long range mast sniping is not fine how it is.  Have you looked at the masts on the ST?  How are those being knocked down at the base (which is like 15-20 feet thick) by just a few shots, over half of which hit the tops and up?

[Modern Major General]

Again, losing masts is a common factor in this kind of warfare so again bad luck if your on the receiving end, there is one factor missing in all of this which has not been programmed in yet though I'd expect it to be a critical factor in an engagement which I note in paragraph 2.

 

The Santi for example on both occasions struck her colours due to losing her masts.  Its a typical and acceptable form of attack on large ships and usually a dismasted ship signalled an end to that ship's engagement in the battle and an expectation of colours being struck when challenged.   This was a kind of acceptable form given the immense sums of resources to field them and the temptation of the prize in their capture.  No Captain really intended on sinking, only to neutralise, secure and move on.  Hence why dismasting is such an effective tactic.

 

Colour striking if anything is missing immensely in this game testing so far, it should be the form to which an engagement ends rather than everyone just sinking everything.  Taking the Prize was more important and valued, sometimes sinking was very important, for most of the time though preservation of your crew and your ship over ruled a fanatical death wish.  This is where the AI needs to improve too for factoring in morale for them as well as your own crew's morale as a risk factor when certain kinds of damage events occur on your ship.

 

At Trafalgar HMS Africa got a little too eager when seeing the trouble the Santi was in, the Africa was the smallest (64 gun ship) in Nelson's fleet and mistakenly assumed the Santi would strike her colours as they came alongside and began the formalities.  The boarders were informed that the ship was still in action and asked to leave which they did.

 

Despite this the Santi was effectively neutralised.  She had been neutralised before in the past having being dismasted in the battle of Cape St Vincent in 1797 where she was lured away and set upon by smaller ships.  They failed to secure her as finally other Spanish vessels arrived on the scene despite her striking her colours knowing full well it was pointless to continue. 

 

Despite a little ship not being able to penetrate the hull, its the fact you are dead in the water with hundreds of mouths to feed with no means of returning to any land that motivates you to surrender and therefore have a chance in seeing a new day being towed back.

[jackplego]

We need sails ripping themselves from stormy winds, masts which rip themselves off from decks because of the stress while ramming other ships. We need less accurate cannons (600 meters might be close to reality), we need effective grapeshots. But we dont need armored masts.

Just my 2cent on the subject.

I agree with you on the spars being carried away from wind or stress and the grapeshot, but right now the cannon accuracy is pretty well done.

[Prater]

@Modern Major General

These were not at extreme range though and weren't on purpose.  The Brits weren't aiming for the masts of the ST at 800 yards.  Shot isn't going to go through that much wood at that range.

[jackplego]

@Modern Major General

These were not at extreme range though and weren't on purpose.  The Brits weren't aiming for the masts of the ST at 800 yards.  Shot isn't going to go through that much wood at that range.

They might have not been aiming for the ST, but they certainly hit it enough to dismast her.

[Austrum]

I agree on the chain part.  They need to allow the chains attaching the rigging to the hull to be shot and destroyed, and other rigging as well.

 

Though long range mast sniping is not fine how it is.  Have you looked at the masts on the ST?  How are those being knocked down at the base (which is like 15-20 feet thick) by just a few shots, over half of which hit the tops and up?

 

Do you realize just how much stress those masts are under?  First there is the weight of the sails and rigging to consider, then the fact that it isn't uncommon for their to be a 20-30 mph wind pushing against a huge surface area of sails.  Basically there are tons and tons of force pushing against those masts and as soon as you take out a bunch of the lines plus even manage a glancing blow that cracks or sheers off even a small  part of that mast, it is very, very likely, the force of the wind, is going to finish the job that the cannon ball started.  This is especially true at the base of the mast because that is where it is under the most stress.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Austrum

[Preserved_Killick]

There's also the potential that when the full game comes out and you're able to take enemy ships as a prize that you must also sail that vessel back to a port, meaning you wouldn't want to demast it unless absolutely necessary.

[Lord Vicious]

110+ games not got demasted once tbh

[Prater]

They might have not been aiming for the ST, but they certainly hit it enough to dismast her.

 

Yes, because IRL shot has dispersion.  Aiming for the hull, some shots will go over the hull.  Some will hit the chains holding the rigging to the hull, some will cut rigging, etc.  Little of this is at long/extreme range, but at close range.

 

 

 

110+ games not got demasted once tbh

 

Happens each day I am on.  Maybe not to me personally every day.  Have you ever played on a storm map?  Who are your opponents and their tactical skill?  Going by what you have said I should only get demasted 1 out of 100+ games.  I should have 8 demastings then, but I can assure you it is much, much, much higher than that.

 

 

Do you realize just how much stress those masts are under?  First there is the weight of the sails and rigging to consider, then the fact that it isn't uncommon for their to be a 20-30 mph wind pushing against a huge surface area of sails.  Basically there are tons and tons of force pushing against those masts and as soon as you take out a bunch of the lines plus even manage a glancing blow that cracks or sheers off even a small  part of that mast, it is very, very likely, the force of the wind, is going to finish the job that the cannon ball started.  This is especially true at the base of the mast because that is where it is under the most stress.

 

What does this have to do with long range mast sniping?  A few balls to the lower section, the experts on sailing who browse this forum have all agreed, isn't going to do much.  The lower section of the mast should rarely ever break if ever at all.  Currently, you can hit the tops and up and quite often will take down the entire mast.

 

P.s.  Masts come in sections.  They aren't all one piece.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Prater

[jackplego]

There's also the potential that when the full game comes out and you're able to take enemy ships as a prize that you must also sail that vessel back to a port, meaning you wouldn't want to demast it unless absolutely necessary.

Actually thats exactly what you would want to do. You have to dismast or at least slow down the ship before you can board her. Remember, these sailors were expert craftsmen and could refit at sea. Dismasting , or at least carrying away spars, was actually pretty common.

[jackplego]

Yes, because IRL shot has dispersion.  Aiming for the hull, some shots will go over the hull.  Some will hit the chains holding the rigging to the hull, some will cut rigging, etc.  Little of this is at long/extreme range, but at close range.

Except for the fact that they were aiming at her hull, because they knew there was almost no chance of penetrating unless they were at int blank range. So, they aimed for her spars and rigging in hope to immobilize her (which the wind already had at Trafalgar).

[Prater]

Except for the fact that they were aiming at her hull, because they knew there was almost no chance of penetrating unless they were at int blank range. So, they aimed for her spars and rigging in hope to immobilize her (which the wind already had at Trafalgar).

 

Except they could penetrate at range with anything above an 18lber, and they didn't fire on the ST at long range but in close action.  In fact, the ST lost her masts from the rolling of the waves from her damaged rigging after they had been engaged hotly for awhile at close range.  Read the accounts of both sides at the battle.  Included is the account of the ST.

 

http://archive.org/stream/enemyattrafalgar00frasuoft/enemyattrafalgar00frasuoft_djvu.txt

Edited February 20, 2015 by Prater

[Lord Vicious]

More than armor on mast we need a raffiguration of the enemy ship target  masts  hp  as well the 4 side of ship..  not only % of sails

 

Also imho they need to augment at what range you can "spot" the nickname and see enemy ship informations is a bit low right now  

Edited February 20, 2015 by Lord Vicious

[Alex Connor]

Except they could penetrate at range with anything above an 18lber, and they didn't fire on the ST at long range but in close action.  In fact, the ST lost her masts from the rolling of the waves from her damaged rigging after they had been engaged hotly for awhile at close range.  Read the accounts of both sides at the battle.  Included is the account of the ST.

 

http://archive.org/stream/enemyattrafalgar00frasuoft/enemyattrafalgar00frasuoft_djvu.txt

Basically this.

 

Quite simply, you aren't going to bring down a 36in thick (or more) SoL mast by hitting it with a few 4in (9pdr) to 6.7in (42pdr) diameter cannonballs. You will need to damage that mast, yes, but short of hitting it multiple times in exactly the same spot and physically severing the mast you'll need to shoot away a lot of the standing rigging supporting it before there is any chance of bringing it down. Since the dispersion on a broadside fired from a rolling ship by smooth bore cannon with poor or non-existent sights is pretty massive, the volume of aimed fire required to do so is far beyond anything one or even multiple ships are going to able to achieve at range. Especially since that standing rigging can be replaced.

 

All you can really do by shooting at rigging from range is cutting up sails (which can be replaced almost endlessly so it will only slow the opponent down while repairs are made), and maybe you'll get lucky and shoot away a spar or topmast, which is more easily done than bringing down lower masts but still not easy.

 

Personally I don't think masts should be replaceable in combat, but to destroy them should be a lot harder (practically unachievable at range). This would make mast loss significant rather than routine but repairable.

[Axralis]

We need live oak masts

 

Im sure that they didnt use oak for masts,they used lighter and more bending wood type, Oak is very heavy and stiff wood its not good for masts.

I think they used cedar , Firs .Pines and similar wood types but im not 100% sure on this but if im wrong someone will correct me for sure

[Axralis]

Demasting is not rare at all.

actually it is in normal  games without stormy weather regular pvp almost never but in Traf it is a different story,sure there you can see demasting more often but on the other hand keep in mind that for example 16 SoL are focusing one SoL on the other side and all of 16 SoL are trying to demast that ship with big hevy many guns so do some math and see how many cannon balls are there .