Proposal To Add A Ship Striking Mechanic

[cporter]

This will be something of a long and complicated post. I apologize in advance. TLDR summary at bottom.

 

Following the 6.9 patch I have noticed some division in the community over the new sinking/damage mechanics. After participating in a lively discussion in global chat today I realized that this debate comes down to two essential issues. 1) A feeling expressed by some that ships are too hard to sink and can sometimes be endlessly pummeled without apparent effect, ultimately necessitating boarding actions. 2) That as a result gunnery is now less relevant and that play styles based on closing and hammering opposing ships have been restricted by this change. One person expressed this frustration arguing that before the patch he rarely boarded a ship but now he feels forced to board most of the time. A play style he finds less enjoyable. While another was annoyed and surprised that a ship with no armor and half a crew was still fighting him. I believe that the addition of an involuntary surrender or striking mechanic in addition to the 6.9 changes would address this frustration and enhance game play and historical authenticity.

 

In my opinion the new damage/sinking model is an invaluable and well balanced addition to the game, directly linking sinking to flooding caused by holes at the water line forces the player to play more tactically, aim more carefully and really consider what they are hitting. It is no longer sufficient to simply hit a ship; one must now hit specific parts to achieve specific tactical goals and that is a very good thing. I already enjoyed Naval Action, and these changes have made me enjoy it even more.

 

Yet as we are all probably aware some players do not like this system and prefer the older more arcade damage model. Put bluntly, they want to be able to blast away more indiscriminately at an opponent and end a battle without feeling that they are forced to either board that ship or spend an hour sinking it. We can give them a third option by introducing a mechanism whereby under certain circumstances a ship will involuntarily strike it’s colors and surrender.

 

Historically most ships crews would not fight to the death, as they currently do in game. At the point that a ship was badly damaged, suffering heavy casualties and unable to either offer further resistance or hope to escape her surviving officers would surrender the ship or her crew would simply stop fighting. This could be reflected in game by giving the crew a morale value modified by crew deaths, remaining armor integrity, serviceable cannons and damage to the sails/masts. Combined with some randomizing factor this calculation could set a point at which ships both player and AI would strike their colors and involuntarily surrender. (A combination of these effects would be required, so that a ship that had lost most of it’s armor but could still maneuver and fight would not surrender, but one that had lost a large number of men, significant armor and many of its guns might.)

 

This idea would allow players an alternative to taking a ship by boarding or by grapeing the entire crew and add a new dynamic to both PVE and PVP battles by causing heavily damaged ships to sometimes unexpectedly give up. Further, because ships would have to be heavily damaged to reach this surrender point it would be expensive to repair and less valuable to sell, therefore discouraging abuse and retaining a distinct reason to use boarding to capture a ship. I believe that some variation on this idea in combination with the new sinking and damage mechanics could represent a compromise position and appeal to the Naval Action communities varied play styles. Allowing a player to choose between sinking a ship, boarding a ship and trying to bombard it into submission with the full understanding that the captured ship will be very badly damaged in the process.

 

 

TLDR:

I propose adding an involuntary surrender mechanism based on a crew morale level modified by crew losses, damage to armor, sails/masts and guns as a solution to the concern held by some that ships are too hard to sink or that 6.9 patch changes have forced a boarding based play style.

[OlavDeng2]

personally i disagree with involuntary surrender, however i think that there should be more penalties to dying and when surrendering those penalties are not as bad.

[Ronald Speirs]

Would this just be a player Vs AI mechanic where the AI surrenders or also a PvP mechanic, players would hate to have this feature lose them the battle, i had 2 enemy ships with no sides and stern and it still took an extra 10 minutes for them to sink, so if it was just an AI mechanic then i think it should be fine so it doesnt cost us more time in a time hungry game.

[Powderhorn]

As discussed above, this is just for AI. A mechanic I agree with in principal.

Concurrently, I would suggest some sort of lasting mechanic that crosses over between battles. It would be tied to number of crew killed, and a sunk ship would act as all hands going down with the ship.

Whatever lasting penalty would have to be severe enough to induce players to strike instead of fighting every ship to the death, as we currently see.

Alternatively, striking penalties could be less than being sunk. (Perhaps removable mods and officers could go with the player so there is no ship duping.)

[Jon Melkier]

Im all for slugging it out and sinking them but it just isnt cost effective, the amount of repairs you need to pay after when a ship that should not be firing back is still damaging you, you end up losing money.

 

I have sent so many shots at cannon decks and not once have I see the AI lose a cannon but there are cutters with 6lb cannons blowing mine up on their first barrage.

 

So either increase the money per hit ratio or as this man says some form of surrender maybe on a cool down timer so you cant exploit it you can order a single ships surrender and dependent on how damaged it is it can agree or disagree and then you have to wait 15 minuets to use it again?

Edited September 13, 2015 by Jon Melkier

[cporter]

Would this just be a player Vs AI mechanic where the AI surrenders or also a PvP mechanic, players would hate to have this feature lose them the battle, i had 2 enemy ships with no sides and stern and it still took an extra 10 minutes for them to sink, so if it was just an AI mechanic then i think it should be fine so it doesnt cost us more time in a time hungry game.

 

My proposal would apply to both players and the AI, I understand the concern that players may not like an involuntary surrender system. To counterbalance this striking would only become a possibility (it would establish a morale point at which striking can not automatically will happen) once a ship is both heavily damaged and essentially unable to continue to fight or escape. A ship with no armor would not necessarily be at risk, but a ship with no armor, heavy crew losses and significant sail damage could be at risk. Perhaps this calculation could also take into account the condition of enemy ships. So that a badly damaged ship would not be likely surrender to another badly damaged ship in a one on one action but be far more likely to surrender to two or more relatively intact ships. (This could be measured against all other ships in combat or against the ships that have fired on the target in the last X minutes for example).  

 

Essentially, while some players might still be unhappy that they did not get to go down with the ship, the point at which their ship would be at risk of striking would be a point at which their ability to continue to effectively resist is already gone.

[maturin]

Involuntary surrenders will never happen.

 

You can only incentivize surrenders. When we get officers in the future, I expect there will be a good way to do this.

 

 

I would be in favor of applying the low-integrity planking (low-HP) idea to crew and guns. Hitting a broadside with 0-10% integrity should result in exponentially higher gun loss, so that even if the ship has the pumps to remain afloat, it will be forced to surrender or lose a boarding action. Ships with shattered broadsides could also suffer low morale in boarding, or even lose automatically if boarded.

 

Right now we have ships that sink more realistically, but it's anything but realistic that we can shatter all the planking and then just sit there helplessly, watching it sail around. There should always be a reason to keep shooting and damage it further.

[ShiverMyTimber]

PvE ships; especially ones outmanned or outgunned should definitely strike colours, if you look at it historically; Roberts sailed into a harbour and all it took was the sight of a black flag to make the entire harbour, of 20 or so ships (many armed) to strike their colours in panic.
As far as PvP goes, you should be able to fight to the death as there are also many accounts of captains nailing their flag to the mast (and some humourously having to run back up the rigging and tear it down under massive losses) sure if your crew were sustaining heavy losses and you have officers aboard you may want to surrender with the hopes of keeping your officers.
A crew surrendering involuntarily is nigh unheard of and many captains would have had the guy scrambling to strike the colours shot for cowardice.

[maturin]

 

A crew surrendering involuntarily is nigh unheard of and many captains would have had the guy scrambling to strike the colours shot for cowardice.

Surrendering, no. Deserting the guns to shelter below the waterline, leaving the ship helpless, certainly.

 

I'm all in favor of catastrophic collapses in morale. That leaves players the option of running away, or hiding behind friendlies with the possibility of slowly rallying their men.