William Death

Yes. Percentage modifiers affect the base stats of the ship. (Unless something changed recently --- [I don't think anything has changed, my percentage calculations still match what I see in game])

Yeah I don't remember most of the "stock" hotkeys, except for basic steering and repairs. All the little stuff I move around. But yeah bell, mortar, and brace could definitely be moved (I don't know of anyone who hasn't already moved brace to the other side of their keyboard after accidentally hitting H when they were trying to press G to board lol). And yeah I was thinking along the same lines as you, using a key (maybe X) to toggle between main/mizzen/coupled, and just use Z and C to control, but I got to thinking that might confuse some newer players if they don't understand the concept. And still waiting on my gold de ruyter if that random fire toggle off suggestion gets implemented .

Leave it like it is for ease of manual sailing through turns and such, but add the feature when you press a button, it "uncouples" your mainmast from your mizzenmast. Example: When you toggle the button "J", it uncouples the mizzenmast from the mainmast, and you take over control of it with "K" and "L" (I don't remember if these keys are used already or not). Any chances we'll ever get independent sail control? If I'm sailing battle sails and my topsails get shredded, I might like to set one of the courses or a topgallant (you get the idea, one or two sails to add a bit more area for wind to compensate for the shredded topsails). It obviously wouldn't be a balanced rig, but it'd at least keep me moving until time for a sail repair, and prevent me from going to full sails and weakening my mast (I like that part of the new update btw, its a nice stand-in for proper rigging damage)

We must define the period we talk about. I think the best mast balance was during 2017 NA. You could have very strong masts, but they'd always be vulnerable from close ranges. Most masts were demastable with their ship's largest caliber to 250m, with 8-16 well-placed shots. And thats key. You had to be good to get those shots in before the enemy ripped you apart. No sitting at 500m and spamming broadsides until their masts come down while you also spam a repair every 12 minutes. Even a few months ago, masts were OK-ish. You could get those impenetrable masts that'd take 30 or 40 hits and not come down, and I agree, that was a little too much. And I agree with you that from a realistic perspective, the hull will take a lot of punishment and the masts can fall from the sail pressure and just losing some of the standing rigging or the chainplates. But from a gameplay perspective...its overtuned I think. I tested it some on testbed and it was way too easy. Its supposed to be toned down some now, but looking at the numbers, its still too easy to shoot down masts without needing any skills.

False. It bounces shots. Go in a Victory and get shot at by a cannon from a 45° angle. It bounces. Now try it with no angling at all. It penetrates and does damage. I'm talking about gameplay here. None of this will occur, if the shot bounces. (or is aimed into the rigging because the latest patch makes everyone want to demast) For the context of my post above, I don't really care about your theoretical 'real-life' comparisons. What I do care about, is game playability, which is what my post was about. We have a lot of historical incongruities in the game. Five+ feet of hull thickness, reviving dead crew, rebuilding half of your ship, or all of a mast every few minutes, magical woods with insane bonuses, etc. Cannon damage vs historical accounts is not the hill I make my stand on. I'm not sure what part of my post triggered this 'historical rebuttal' but allow me to assure you that I was not suggesting that any of the changes made were historical. I look at the game first and foremost from a playability standpoint. I will briefly point out, that from a historical standpoint: ships have a lot of frames. If you look at the plans and paintings from the time, many ships have very very close frame spacing. Also, while frames are important for the overall structural integrity of the ship, historical accounts reveal that ships could take an immense amount of hull punishment. From personal experience with wooden boats, a few missing or compromised frames is not the end of the world.

No...no irony. I meant it exactly that way. Demasting has always been within anyone's grasp. You just had to take the time to learn to do it well. Same with hull angling, chasing tactics, etc. It takes skill to learn (took me probably 100 hours of practice before I could do it with reasonable confidence). You can't spam broadsides at the hull and expect to do real damage if the enemy angles. Why should you get to spam broadsides at the rigging from long ranges and take a mast down? This may be "historical" but its not so good for gameplay. You should have to think a little bit. Aim at the masts, and roll the broadside into it. Not throw shot in its general direction from 500m away. Thats my whole point. When you take a tactic that previously took skill, and put it in a place where it becomes the normal tactic and everyone is able to do it with minimal practice....then the game has lost a skill element. I've seen this game lose a lot of skill elements over the years, I'd hate to see it lose one more.

Methinks you two are playing a different game than the rest of us 🙂 To address Carrow's example: demasting between frigate classes has always been possible. You had to be good to do it though. Now, speaking as someone who has been demasting ships since 2016 as a primary tactic, I can tell you that having ships capable of taking masts off at insane ranges is not ok. Do you want every battle to devolve into a demasting competition? [insert dramatic oil painting here]. Because while that sounds fun, I can assure you, its really not. A good point was brought up: most people are sailing 3rd rates or above anyways now (thanks Redoubtable). They have the guns needed to take down your frigate masts at basically any range that you could hope to do any real damage to them at. Also you are incorrect assuming that a frigate has the speed to run away from a lineship. Clearly you have not encountered a well handled speed-built Bellona, Redoubtable, Ingermanland, or Christian. While its true, the frigates do have the sailing profile and enough of a base speed advantage to run away upwind, due to random wind shifts every ~15 minutes, thats not always possible. And all it takes is one or two smaller ships sailing with the speed built SOL and its GG for the frigate. Now this wasn't a problem back in the day, because there were a very small number of those speed built SOLs going around. They were basically only useful when employed as above, fighting players too clueless to turn upwind. But now, everyone who has the DLC can get a fast, highly competitive PvP ship that will catch all but the most clever (and very lightly built) frigates. And now they can demast them from 500m+, even if they run expensive mast mods. Since the damage model rework last year, its been a fool's errand to sail anything smaller than a fast 3rd or 4th rate. Currently I think its even more ridiculous. However, admin's comment about potentially changing repairs gives me a little hope. If repairs become limited again, and the mast thickness and cannon penetration values get tuned a little bit more, then we'll be a step closer toward a skill-based combat model again. There's still going to be a massive imbalance in woods and gear meta, but thats something we've been arguing about for years now.

Did you actually play with the leeway when it was implemented to the degree in that video? It was completely overdone and unplayable. Ships were moving faster sideways than they were going forward. It could have been toned down some, and be in a good place. But what we have now (almost no leeway) is at least better than what we had then (way too much). Anyways I digress. The patch looks promising, actually. Anything that forces people to think and have some actual skill in combat again is good. Tired of seeing people using carronades getting 10 yards away and spamming 5,1 every 12 minutes. Perhaps this patch will force people to think, apply some actual tactics, and stay at reasonable ranges. Speaking of the repair spam: @admin will you consider reducing repairs to a maximum of one or two uses per battle again? The repair meta is very much broken at the moment, and it makes combat feel like it doesn't reward skill as much as it rewards stacking repair mods. I remember when we only had one use of each repair, and it forced you to make careful decisions when you decided to trade away your HP to get a broadside in. Lastly, I tend to agree with the sentiments of others...this patch might help the combat area, but Naval Action's crafting side leaves much to be desired still. So many new woods, still just a few meta builds and a lot of useless builds, and a lot of grind to get any kind of competitive gear. It doesn't feel right, and it punishes losses too hard, which encourages trollish gameplay, ganking, and discourages fighting challenging fights. I know of at least a dozen players who aren't playing right now for these reasons. I remember when the maximum differences in mod stacking was far lower (closer to +/-10% when everything applied), and everything was more accessible to the average player. Fights were plentiful and losing a ship was only an inconvenience. I think a re-balancing of woods and mods, along with the removal of a number of wood types and mods would create the second part of the 'missing link' patch.

Instead of tying it to nations, why not tie it to clans? It will move us one step closer to the clan-based system this game needs to thrive, and one step further away from paper nations with troll/rogue clans.

Regardless of whether or not he was sinking due to fire/structural leaks, his tag timer ought to have been reset, given the number of hits (13 sail hits in quick succession from a broadside) he sustained into rig. A player who can land 13 hits from 24 and 36lb cannons into your rig whilst you're on fire and leaking is not trolling you--not the way a ship kiting at max range keeping you in battle is trolling you. Is there a published number available about how much % damage needs to be done in order to keep a ship tagged? Is there a time limit to do this % damage? (EX: 5% damage within 20 seconds.) Can we get a more detailed description about how this mechanic works with the numerical thresholds?

DLC pack with the old user interface. Yes, the old blue interface with white/grey text, and no icons or decorative features. The old UI was fast and very easy to manage, especially if you were a crafter.

I disagree. I've played steadily since 2016. For at least half of that time, we had names in OW. I noticed no change in the amount of PvP I got. Or the amount of times people ran from me in OW, or tagged me in OW. No change. Sure, some people tried to avoid me, but I could usually force a fight, due to better positioning, or ship stats, or whatever. Sure, I avoided some players sometimes. But thats part of the fun. You see a really good player bearing down on you with the advantage, time to run for all you're worth. ..and.. The issue I have with tagging someone into battle, judging their rank, and then deciding to let them go is this: I've wasted my time: I chased him down in OW, when I could have moved past him and continued hunting. I tagged him into battle and have to wait out a timer Thats time I'm not in OW, able to see whats going on and maybe a better target will have sailed right past my battle. I'll never know because of the magic of instanced battles. Thats time for him to spam nation chat begging for a revenge gank to assemble. The wind waits for no captain. I'll be on a different point of sail when I leave. It may make my positioning less favorable to continue the hunt (or make my escape if the revenge fleet was already there). So we've established that I have the enemy in battle, he's not skilled, and I can have him sunk in a few minutes. Also, I've put my ship in peril by spending precious time in an instance while enemies could be swarming my position. And who's to say that player won't shadow me in OW if I leave, continually reporting my position to his revenge fleet? Its hard to convince me I should give up free points toward a PvP mission, plus some doubloons, logbooks, and maybe a loki rune; all for the sake of being a good sport. Not when it was so much easier to be a good sport when I could click and see "oh, that guy is a lieutenant commandant, I'll let him go about his business." See the issue? RE: the types of players who look for the low skilled players to sink: Yes, those type exist. We know them well. Having their names displayed only makes it easier for other nations to target. You've touched on a very important issue with Naval Action here. I've made several posts about it, as have many, many, many others throughout the years. Example: Lets say I run into one of my old friends who I know is very good. I think back to the times I dueled him, and how many times I won, vs how many times he won. We're close to evenly matched. I know I'm in a very expensive ship, I know he's in a very expensive ship. I don't want to risk my ship for this any more than he wants to risk his. We're too friendly to resort to calling in revenge ganks for each other, so we sail away with a salute. We're both slightly confident in respective selves that we'd have won (he that he'd have won, I that I'd have won), but we'll never know because neither of us is foolish enough to risk our kitted out ships to find out. Not when the rewards are so pitiful. In 2016/17 NA, on the other hand, with ships that were cheap, and mods that were plentiful and accessible by everyone (essentially meaning gear didn't matter since we all had equal everything), we'd have fought and had a great time. Didn't matter if one of us lost a ship and mods, a replacement was just a click away. (also durabilities were a thing then). Now whats the point? Risk everything for a screenshot and a notch on your PvP mission? Nah, my ship and mods are worth more than the rewards from many of those PvP missions. Essentially the problem is this: If you want to do well in PvP, and do more than just trade a kill for a kill, you need some skills, and some proper gear. The skills are something you pick up as you fight (win or lose), the gear is a combination of luck, time in the game, and your chosen in-game nation. Proper ships with proper competitive gear is expensive, and you're punished for taking any fight you don't win. So those good old edge of your seat fights with players of roughly equal skill, fighting it out like proper gentlemen don't happen nearly as often. And thats a shame. So, you're right, you can avoid any challenging fight and go for easy kills. Thats what the game rewards you for. But that is an issue that is far, far bigger than putting names back into open world.

Because in a game like this, a name matters. If you are a fearsome captain, you have your reputation as a good player. You earned that. If you run from every fight, you have your reputation as a coward. You earned that. If someone is being abusive in chat, there are already methods in place to deal with that. Those people are dealt with. There is no room in Naval Action for the kind of toxicity that gets reported in tribunals. Ultimately, you choose your actions in the game. You can deal with the consequences. Thats the great thing about a sandbox like this. You can build your reputation. You can decide what kind of captain you'll be. (And, if it all becomes too much, you can forge some papers for a new identity). Also, I don't want to seal club some poor newbie who has no idea how to even manual sail, if I could instead sink the guy over there who's been in game for years and had plenty of time to build up his supply of ships. But with the current system, I wouldn't know. All I see is "enemy player." Maybe I'll end up tagging him and getting a decent fight, or maybe I'll be the 5th person to sink a new player in his first week, causing him to quit and never come back.

Allow us to disable random fire in settings. Almost nobody uses it intentionally.

Allow us to mount 2 bow and 2 stern chasers on all ships that don't have any chasers there. (Maybe just one bow chaser on the smallest ships like the 7th rates with their fine bows) Pros: It would increase the use of ships that are currently under-enjoyed, like Essex, Belle Poule, Pavel, and Cerberus. It levels the playing field among most of the ships. Ships that already had a strong chaser advantage like Trincomalee, Ingermanland, Wasa, Rattvisan, Christian, Wapen, etc, will still maintain that advantage. Its historically accurate (captains could move chasers from the broadside if they wanted to, or simply have their carpenter place some gunports in the bow). Larger ships sometimes have the caliber required to demast ships with their chasers. Chasers are useful for graping when you're close. Cons: It would allow people to troll in more ships. Imagine a fleet of Privateers and Navy Brigs trolling a shallow PB fleet. But since its been announced we're moving to a damage-based tagging mechanic, there's no need to really worry about this. People will complain that maybe some ships didn't show chasers on their plans. Go read the point above, and read some historical accounts about when captains would fit chasers to their ships to help chase their prey (or flee). Would require some modeling work on all the ships without chasers. I'm not a programmer so I don't know how much work this is, but I think its a worthwhile improvement to the game. Other comments: Despite moving to a damage-based tag-timer-reset mechanic, chasers are still important. Chipping a few percent off your enemy's sails as you chase can make the difference between catching or not catching him.