maturin

And the height of the masts you're looking at, of course. A rowboat and a ship of the line theoretically can see each other simultaneously.

The thing is, none of these 'extra' sails will be used at all times. They are meant for particular conditions, in which there are no drawbacks for using them. So it's something that most everyone will end up buying in order to have their vessel up to snuff. I mean, why wouldn't you want royals? I guess there are two main models of customization: a) buying a base ship and being obliged to pay for all the bells and whistles that will bring it up to optimum performance modifying your base ship with specializing features that have tradeoffs, to better define a role Wait, there's a difference? I know there's loose-footed gaffs, and loose-footed gaffs on lanteen yards, modern gaffs, and that American mini-mast for the gaff luff rings (whatever ya call it).

I sort of suspect that the only people who care are in this thread. Myself excepted.

Well played, sir, well played.

I don't get the picture that they have any real resources to work with here. They need money. Hell, the only thing the game really has going for it are all the ships and Marion is hanging out here instead.

Таран восстановили как тактика уже в серединие 19-го века, но уже говорим про железные корабли.

Фамилия Реймидж звучится же как разговорная форма <столкновение>))))

http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/hendrick-cornelisz-vroom/dutch-ships-ramming-spanish-galleys-off-the-flemish-coast-in-october-1602-1617#close Против Галеаса таран хорошо получается. Это единственный случай, об котором я читал. Осознано столкнуться с кораблем похожого размера--самоубийство. Нос корабля ломается очень легко. Кто таранить утонит. И даже при низкой скорости, буеприт и даже фок-мачта упадут. Медленное, аккуратное столкновение нужное для абордажа, конечно. В таких случаях, корабли очень часто запутываются. Steven Decatur использовал свой бушприт чтобы порезать паруса его противника и так его поймать. Это было бы очень здорого в игре. Поведение кораблей при столкновении в ПОТБС нормально, как я помню. Обсуждение на английском: http://forum.sailingnavies.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1572

Админ, эта необычная картина, которая вам не нравится. Довольно редко использовзли лисели на обеих сторонах, и для всех парусов.

Реалистическое столкновение делаете... таран будет. Очень логичная тактика в игре. Если я скоро утону, почему не попытаться сделать таран, каждый раз? Как можно избежать этого?

Yeah, I read those dev blogs, and saw that they're piddling around with accuracy changes on their RPG diceroll cannons instead of taking this opportunity to actually rebuild and revitalize the game. And then the rest of their attention is taken up by ways of paid content.

Вот по этому поводу мы можем переспорить админ вместе.

I was referring to the idea about setting royals and skysails, which would clearly need model adjustments.

Happily, though, the muzzle velocities of the 32 pounder they were using were not dramatically higher than 18th century cannon.

Так, вы все только говорили про поведение парус, или про качку корабля тоже? Наоборот, парус больше калышится при слабом ветре. Если ветер достаточно, паруса регулируют качку корабля и поэтому волнение не так много будет влиять на них. А говоря о видеоигре, если целый корабль качает в штурме (как и будет в игре, кстати), тогда уже не стоит мучиться о поведении парусов. Реальность здесь слишком сложна. При сильним ветре, парус может стоить как листок железа, или двигаться как флаг. Я даже не знаю, как у меня мнение про движение парусов. На одной стороне объяснение admin более корректно чем требования других. Но на другом стороне, игра сразу дает впечатление что паруса и ткани немного мертвые. Сложность в том, что мы говорим про очень маленькое, тонкое движение. Говорим о том, как 15 метов ткани калшится лишь 20 саниметров. Тоже есть нуансы размера, и иллюзия громадных паруса на маленьком экране. То что естественно выглядет в реальности бывает странным в игре. Иногда надо исправить реальность немного. В любом случае, такая ерунда как в Empire или АС4 не будет. Если паруса сильно и высоко калышится, что-то не так с кораблем. Но я все таки надеюсь, что поведение парусов еще WIP. Если вам не нравится, ищите клипе. Только не с яхтами, блин.

We might also want to focus on customization that require no 3D model adjustments. That's a huge amount of work that demands a big design commitment to customization from the devs.

Wow. Now that is a source. Kudos. There are some very nice range estimates for the effectiveness of double shot (which apparently has penetration problems). It also appears that 32 pounders can penetrate a LOT of oak even at extreme range, and ricochets makes shooting through water pretty much impossible. The author also tacitly states that it was common practice to minimize powder charges in close combat (because of the perceived effectiveness of low velocity shot that just penetrates).

I was thinking of starting a thread where we brainstorm realistic customizations, to take the place of POTBS' fittings. 1) Choosing deep-bellied or flatter sails (my knowledge of sail terminology is awful). The latter gives better downwind performance at the expense of close-hauled sailing, and vice verse. 2) Different weights and thicknesses of sailcloth could also be an option. Tougher sails can be used in high winds, but suffer in light airs, and vice verse. I'm not sure how realistic this is, though. Ships might carry full sets of both. There are all manner of gun upgrades possible, but they present gameplay issues since there is no downside or tradeoff for flintlocks. Everyone would use them, and a ship would not be considered PvP ready until they were installed.

Hmmn, I was under the impression that tallship outfits usually made their volunteers pay for the privilege, assuming they don't have the very rare skillset you can boast, Ryan. I couldn't even get a stipend-paying job on the little schooners that do daysails out in the harbor unless I paid $40,000 for a semester at sea. I sort of feel like I've missed the boat on the whole traditional sail thing.

Are hits under the waterline even really possible? Shot could conceivably travel through a foot or two of water and pierce a thinner sort of hull, but it is almost bound to ricochet at that angle.

Funny you should show up, modernknight. Because not seconds ago I was fruitlessly trying to research a question you might be able to help with. It regards terminal ballistics of roundshot, quite relevant to the thread. There are two things that I have read: 1) In close combat gunners used lower powder charges in order avoid penetrating both sides of the enemy vessel (supposedly allowing to ball to ricochet around the deck and cause additional mayhem instead of smashing right through). It is possible that the explanation of rationale here is incorrect, and they were just trying to save on powder, reload time and above all barrel heat. 2) Carronades were so destructive not just because of the large diameter shot, but also because of the low velocity. It was apparently thought that low velocity shot (so long as it was able to penetrate the hull) would create larger holes and more splinters. This makes some amount of intuitive sense to me, but is also surprising, given what I've heard about bullet wounds. So is it plausible that an overpenetrating 24lb ball going slower will smash up more timber? This second idea justifies the first one. I read one of your forum posts referring to higher velocity shot doing more damage, but maybe you were talking in game terms. Powder charge could be conceivably be a game feature, customizing your gunners' activities. Or if high charge always corresponds to long range and low charge always corresponds to short range, then it could be automated. In that case, long range fights would consume more expensive powder and increase the danger of overheated guns.

It's the Bismark, I believe. And yes, it was a stupendous model. I assume someone had that kicking around their hard drive from an old pet project. Much too detailed to be thrown together for April 1st ad hoc.

I believe the old build still works, if you run it.

And nevermind realistic: it's just better and more fun. This game is evolving towards a tactile, sensory experience, with gameplay based on real skills and choices, not abstractions. It's the first game of recent years (besides POTBS) where the ships look good enough to avoid embarrassment. (Forget Total War, their models don't pass the sniff test.) It's a really weird genre for games: Imagine if WWII enthusiasts and history/gear buffs numbered in the thousands instead of millions. Medal of Honor would probably be full of helicopters and battleaxe-wielding Nazis then. With age of sail game, most of the customer base is essentially looking at spaceships from another planet, for all they know. But this devs team has the vision to make it work.

Teenagers are no longer a particularly vital demographic for games that aren't CoD and Madden. In totality, anyways. The teenager I was not long ago would buy this game.