Mast damage TO DEVELOPERS

[hnrixn]

Hi,

 

I just want to say I absolutely love the game!

I have some remarks I think should be improved after some hours of gameplay:

 

- Mast damage. If the main mast or mizzentop etc is shot down, it should not be possible to raise it again in 1 min gameplay. If you are lucky or good enough to hit and fall a mast, the reward SHOULD be that the ship will remain demasted, at least uintil lets say 15 min of game time or more.

 

- It also should be possible to have a lucky shot straight in the opposite ship battery, which will make the ship explode. This where known to happen sometimes in the Age of Sail

 

- it also should be possible for a ship to be set ablase(fire), for wooden ships, fire where the number 1 enemy and happend frequently back in the days.

 

Im very very satisfied and humbly grateful for the effort you have put in the game so far. I've been waiting many many years for this.

[TheJRT]

Hello, regarding your points,

 

1: I believe that the devs have stated that the sail mast mechanics will be changed soon, maybe with the new damage model. The overall repair system if I'm not mistaken will be revamped, but don't quote me on this second part.

 

2 and 3, once again, partially related to the new DM, also there is a post from the devs on fires and explosions, they are in development and should be soon ingame.

 

Overall remember that this is still pretty much alpha and that many many many features are missing.

 

Hope this may help

 

-JRT

 

 

Edit: the name of the post is "Fires, explosions, branders, and fireships" I can't seem to link it for whatever reason.

Edited March 17, 2015 by TheJRT

[hnrixn]

Thank you!

I always note down on a list when I play so i don't forget what should be in there. Many of the points I have has already been mentioned but it take some time to go through the forums. These I thought where the major ones. Let's wait for the new DM and see. I will go through the post now, just for fun

[admin]

 

 

- Mast damage. If the main mast or mizzentop etc is shot down, it should not be possible to raise it again in 1 min gameplay. If you are lucky or good enough to hit and fall a mast, the reward SHOULD be that the ship will remain demasted, at least uintil lets say 15 min of game time or more.

 

- It also should be possible to have a lucky shot straight in the opposite ship battery, which will make the ship explode. This where known to happen sometimes in the Age of Sail

 

- it also should be possible for a ship to be set ablase(fire), for wooden ships, fire where the number 1 enemy and happend frequently back in the days.

 

 

Mast repairs in battle is absolutely necessary in the gameplay environment. We can guarantee that you will change your opinion in the future. Despite being a little "gamey" there were ways to install a spare mast (it was a part of the first lieutenant exam). If you are on a long term operation in the hostile waters (for the whole evening) you will not appreciate the fact that you have to sail back for 30 mins just to replace the mast. 

 

Explosions will be possible (and fires) in the very near future.

[hnrixn]

Thank you for the rapid answer. 

 

Yes its true that spare mast where kept onboard. Etc spare for mizzentop, bowsprit, main top gallant and so on. But the mainmast itself or the mizzen or fore mast where not so easy to remount. it took a lot of work and then u needed to find it first.

 

I understand that this is a "tricky" decision, since it possibly could be a huge irritation. Maybe you should consider that if you loose some of these vital masts, the repair shall be fast but a temporary so called jury rigg? Not as effective, but it makes maneuvering possible

 

Anyways, thank you and well done

[TheJRT]

Thank you devs for the answer, it cleared the issue.

 

Jrt

[AKPyrate]

Another point about the replacement of masts...currently there are only two types of damage: sail damage and dismasting.  In reality, there were other types of damage that could disable a mast (or at least the majority of sails on that mast) without it falling.  Hitting a yard or a halyard could send that spar dropping (if it wasn't properly chained, or if the chain was broken).  This would destroy the sail set above it, as well as that sail, and would make a major mess down below.  However, currently the only option for something like that is to drop the whole mast.  Think of it as the visual effect for some of this other possible damage that was much easier to fix in battle.

 

Below, besides some masts down, there are also a number of damaged yards.

[hnrixn]

Very good point Ak..! 
I'd love to see the sail flapping in the wind after a successful broadside!
I think this maybe will be for the later stages of the DM.. there are hundreds of things over this on the priority list I reckon

[Birg]

While I do not enjoy the notion of being able to repair a mast, or portion thereof, during battle, I can appreciate that there is a limit to the level of detail that can be added to the game and keep it playable.  I do not understand how far the devs can go into incrementalizing battle damage to the finest minutia, but it would seem that there are limitations we must live with.  I mean how many different animations can we have of pieces of masts breaking, hanging, or falling?  For each type of ship?  I agree that it would be amazing to have every detail imaginable, but I don't think computer technology has reached that level of detail for a game.  As such, perhaps substituting a single animation of an entire mast falling over the side will have to suffice to represent damage ranging from catastrophic to damage that is much less so.

 

We do not know yet the grand scheme, and how the Open World will be realized and its effects on overall game play. As a player I would not relish the notion of spending hours of game time to limp back to port, or the nearest sheltered water, minus a mast or two while being a constant potential target of opportunity.  How will we travel in the Open World?  Will it be through non-concurrent time compression?  Or will it be in real time, but in a world of much smaller proportions than the real world?  How will losing a ship affect a player's career?  Will it be PotBS style where we shrug it off and board a clone in the nearest port?  Will there be a mandatory down time until we are assigned or given the opportunity to buy another (if we have the funds)?

 

I think how NA treats the loss of a ship will have a huge impact on the extremes we may go to in order to save our ships.  If the loss of our ships entailed great loss and pain, we might not be so willing to sacrifice them in the heat of battle.  Perhaps our battles might be much less bold, consisting of the exchange of a broadside or 2 to inflict just a little more damage than the other side and then a withdraw for the win and to live to fight again for another day.  Or perhaps battles would only be engaged when one side has overwhelming superiority, turning NA into a form of gang warfare, where those with the most friends will be the boldest and rule the roost.

 

I think in real life, it would be impossible to replace a mast in the heat of battle, but to be able to do so for game mechanics may make it more palatable in the long term, depending on how all the parts of the game we have yet to see fit together.

[Barberouge]

 We do not know yet the grand scheme, and how the Open World will be realized and its effects on overall game play. As a player I would not relish the notion of spending hours of game time to limp back to port, or the nearest sheltered water, minus a mast or two while being a constant potential target of opportunity.  How will we travel in the Open World?  Will it be through non-concurrent time compression?  Or will it be in real time, but in a world of much smaller proportions than the real world?  How will losing a ship affect a player's career?  Will it be PotBS style where we shrug it off and board a clone in the nearest port?  Will there be a mandatory down time until we are assigned or given the opportunity to buy another (if we have the funds)?

 

Most of those subjects have been or are being discussed in the open world section of the forum.

[Jack Freedom]

Mast repairs in battle is absolutely necessary in the gameplay environment. We can guarantee that you will change your opinion in the future. Despite being a little "gamey" there were ways to install a spare mast (it was a part of the first lieutenant exam). If you are on a long term operation in the hostile waters (for the whole evening) you will not appreciate the fact that you have to sail back for 30 mins just to replace the mast. 

 

Explosions will be possible (and fires) in the very near future.

 

admin it's not that we have a problem with replacing the mast. It's the way it's been implemented in game, it feels like magic and not realistic at all. There are few drawbacks as well.

[kang]

There are few drawbacks as well.

 

Repairs are precious, imo.  IIRC, one repair will give you 75% of a mast.  Equivalent to a rigged spare.  It takes another repair to get a fully restored mast.  In most situations, I'd never waste the second repair for the last little bit.  And the loss of the one repair is still pretty significant.

[Ishigami]

I’m not really satisfied how this currently works.

In general I think NA is currently not just a little “gamey”. I get it GameLabs doesn’t want to make the game too realistically and therefore a bore fest and scare everyone but the hardcore away. After all they got to make a coin out of this.

Still I think there are better solutions out there then to strive for another PotBS.

 

In general I think NA is currently too fast. Sails are changed too fast, guns reload too fast, crew changes station too fast, ships turn and go too fast, damage is repaired too fast etc.

Now like I said I understand that there are good reasons to not make this too realistic and I’m not asking you to do so. But I think it wouldn’t hurt the game to be a bit more about the tactic and less about the action.

What I mean is to have more draw backs and limitations to certain actions that make it necessary for the player to plan ahead instead of merely reacting.

 

Losing a mast should be a big deal and not just because you just lost a repair kit.

For example why not impose certain limitations on how you can replace lost masts with a repair kit?

I could imagine the following limitations:

 

Requirements before you can select to repair masts:

- No sails set

- Crew in survival focus

 

Limitations once mast repair is selected:

- Sails locked in 0% during repair

- Crew locked in survival focus during repair

- X amount of time required to replace masts (should be dependent on which mast is to be repaired and the size of ship)

 

This makes the player mostly a sitting duck while he replaces his lost mast. It gives weight to losing a mast beyond a mere repair kit count.

It also places the player at a tough decision: Can I keep fighting in an impaired state and repair later or do I have to repair now in order to not forsake any chance of victory.

 

I also don’t like that currently weather conditions and sail status does not affect the damage masts take.

It should be easier to dismast a vessel when it has full sails set than lower sail settings. This would give for example the battle sail setting another important role aside from being a parking brake and a button to raise the sides.

Likewise it should be easier to dismast a vessel in heavy weather than calm weather.

 

I once suggested this without reaction:

 

The game should in general introduce a damage system for sails and masts for stormy conditions. I believe it is quite unrealistic that these vessel would travel with full sails set in a stormy condition.

But don’t limit the player, e.g. players can only set half sails in storm, but add a certain risk to it: If you set full sails in a storm you masts may break.

Maybe it can be realized in a sort of damage over time matter. It is a “gamey” solution but I think it would suffice and would take a frustrating RNG out of the picture.

If you set full sails your masts take damage over time and once their “hp” is depleted they break of course. This would mean that if you use full sails in a storm battle that it is easier to be dismasted since you already lose or lost “hp” on them.

In general I think it should be easier to dismast a ship with full sails than one with battle sails no matter the weather condition. This would also add another purpose to the battle sails. And slow down the current race fights.

 

Maybe this can be introduced with a sort of multiplier.

Full sails: 2x dmg

75% sails: 1,5x dmg

Battle Sails: 1x dmg

30% sails: 0,75x dmg

0% sails: 0,5x dmg

[Jack Freedom]

...

 

Maybe this can be introduced with a sort of multiplier.

Full sails: 2x dmg

75% sails: 1,5x dmg

Battle Sails: 1x dmg

30% sails: 0,75x dmg

0% sails: 0,5x dmg

 

In addition to something like this they should take into account whether the ship is being fired upon. Because it should make it much harder to work on the ship.

 

The other thing is that all other elements of the ships should be slowed down while repair is going on, like reloading and sailing should be slowed down.

 

This would make someone think twice before popping a magical repair in the middle of a hail of fire.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Jack Freedom

[Booyaah]

Have you guys not been in battles with 10 ships with long cannons all shooting at the masts of a santi?  They pretty much have no chance to play as 2 masts usually go down as soon as the ship enters range.  I think once you have this done to you, you might be willing to concede a little for gameplay mechanics.  There are some realism aspects that don't make sense in a video game.

[Ishigami]

Have you guys not been in battles with 10 ships with long cannons all shooting at the masts of a santi?  They pretty much have no chance to play as 2 masts usually go down as soon as the ship enters range.  I think once you have this done to you, you might be willing to concede a little for gameplay mechanics.  There are some realism aspects that don't make sense in a video game.

 

I believe thats more of an issue that the guns are way too accurate on long range than how masts take damage.