Hethwill, the Red Duke

Very few. Started on NA last weekend with a regular 2 hours (give or take) in the evening, so I guess about over a dozen and under twenty (?) maybe.

Yes. Therefore leading to 1 hour long battles as the majority opts for long range shooting. There are exceptions and very good players at timing their carronades ( I try to do it a lot ! ) but overall ( and after experiencing more combat than usual yesterday ) It becomes a very prolonged affair. At a time we had two Snows always keeping long range distance. Battle ended by timer. Another battle was actually with big ships. The way the frigates behaved was simply... to take advantage of the long range accuracy and damage. Took a ton of time to end and eventually we won because of that. Long range is too precise, plus I can snipe with 1 shot at a time instead of unleashing the full side. Not a lash on my enjoyment but is simply annoying. OW will change this with the chances to disengage. I am talking about fight to the "death" scenarios.

Many thanks for the answer Admin. The book is the "treatise for naval warfare" for the timeframe for sure. I guessed as much we would be playing through its model Seems the mentality of the players have to change then to achieve more decisive results. So, what is stopping us from getting close, Nelson style ? We get massacred by long range volleys way before we reach "close range".

Ah thanks. Mounting some swivel guns on the bow and stern top decks would be a nice addition to my OW idea of a privateer

The fuse at this time was manual and not on impact as you well know. The main idea behind their use in naval combat was to actually make the enemy ship catch fire. Several different approaches were tried but none worked properly.

Yesterday I spent a couple hours more playing this game. Was great fun and attended 2 big full pvp battles and a few very LONG pvp light ones. Given it was my most extended session I became more observant to some details. Especially that the battles are mostly resolved in the long range cannonades. This means that the battles drag forever and ever with surviving ships always keeping distance. Shooting at medium distance gives me the same chance of crippling the opponent and does not open my ship to sure shot close range. So yeah, everyone keeps distance and the battle drag for a long time. Long range shooting is too precise making it the most viable option, especially to mess up sails and masts. Medium range feels like as good as short range so, why should I get close ? I mean, I can be as precise as I need from a safe distance. This forces everyone, apart from the more daring captains, to play the long range-keep distance game. Given that land artillery, let's say a 12 pounder, has a effective range of 800-900m ( but given lines of infantry as targets who cares about inaccuracy but crews kept their cannonade until the lines reached 400m in open sights ) I would estimate a naval non-stabilized version would be way worse in the way a battery salvo would scatter. As it is, and myself as a culprit as well, we keep well over 600m distance with high accurate shots but I guess the Devs telemetry and logs can testify this. Can the developers review this factors ( especially dependency of gameplay in long range shooting ) to make the battles more dynamic and "historically" enticing ? Many thanks.

Yes. Exactly what I found. Maybe they come of use on the OW mode as a highly specialized setup for specific missions.

Damn ! Will have nightmares with that meme now... Have to keep the terminology sticker on my screen Yes I am eager to check the similar classes to the Brig. It looks like a jack of all trades. Capable of going to shallow waters, packs a good amount of firepower, at least enough to defend itself enough to manage to use its speed to run away. Guess I am already thinking like a smuggler even before the open world game is here...

The loss of a cannon crew in the Army ( shell explodes inside barrel ) as opposed to the loss of an entire ship was the main concern it seems. So we can assume this was rather the exception. Several episodes feature naval howitzers, not mortars, and explosive shells are indicated but cannot find any specific use for them chronicled.Some references made of ships against forts bombardment, and makes sense having the mortars, but ship to ship didn't see anything yet. Funnily enough killing the crew is more effective than sinking the ship and many second-hand sources point to the direction where very few ships were sunk with most ships surrendering or being simply overrun and having their crew shot to pieces. Think that some of the major and well known battles testify to this, Trafalgar, with 21 captured and 1(!) actually destroyed(?). So... it is a game, okay. As I said in my very first post the naval action at this age never caught my full interest, but given my liking for some sort of balance between game and History, we are relying more on shot from afar than actual close shot and crew massacres. Sorry for derailing a bit.

Yes, and above all it is a game and the "merry go round ordnance type" for all is a very pertinent excuse to use or not to use it regarding game design. I for one would prefer not to have it if there is no other way to balance it.We don't have limited ammo so yes, it could become an issue. I will go through some borrowed literature and see what can I find for sure.

We have the four options, 1-ball solid shot, chained double shot, double shot and buckshot. Ordnance from the 18th century and forth up to the impact fuse also included the manual fuse explosive shell. Mainly used by the mortar crews but also in carronades and any large enough calibre. Correct ? Will we see this possibility in the future ? How effective were they in reality and how extensive was its use in naval operations is something I intend to investigate further but given than all kinds of ammo were used to "try to lit a fire" on the enemy ship my guess is that it was indeed used, along with red hot iron shot. Are there any plans to extend the ordnance available after the damage model 4.0 is implemented ?

Cheers Ruffin and Vires. After 3 evening sessions, roughly 9 hours (?) I got my Brig. It is a dramatic change. While it is very streamlined and handles good down wind it presents itself with a new challenge. Managing the rig while up wind. The gun layout is pleasing. Given a lot of historical chronicles the Brig model was a highly regarded choice for many privateers, smugglers and the like. Would like the option to mount 2 more guns on either side on the castle deck.

Thanks. Will surely spend a few minutes reading things through. Seeing the "up to May 2015" roadmap it seems good enough. At least the possibility to see the limited open world should give a early hint to how things will work out.

Arlindo is correct. Portugal was the very first colonial power to abolish slavery as a institution, same with capital crime death penalty. But we are used to being overlooked in history books on all these "non important" matters, right ? It is the price of being the oldest "global village" But this is a game and as I see it, and given broken conventions, slavery in a colonial era game is like cannibalism in DayZ. It is subject of prolonged discussion and having Ivory trade or Slave snatching has the same moral issues. All is good as the Devs decide. Having this or that trade in game or not will not make it better or worse. It is "historical consultant" preference and producers decision regarding the markets. Pretty much like military symbols in other games.

Greetings captains, commodores and overall e-admirals. Apparently Game Labs struck the mark with me with two great products. Must say that one of them might be Naval Action of course ( Ultimate General is the other ). Karma has its ways and in the new world of digital order the exchange of "gifts" gives way to spreading word and financial possibility to participate in grand stand and watch good games being developed. So here I am. Financed to a key ( somewhere in time i financed a early access to a game to a buddy so I guess karma has its way! ) after watching, with more or less curiosity this project of yours. I am not, by all extents, a water fan. Lies ! I am not that moved towards the naval aspect of history except for the carrier based naval operations in the Pacific, but only because it involves the air part of it all. So, for me, and having played Wooden Ships & Iron Men pretty extensively in both tabletop and digital forms, Naval Action gives me another subject to research alongside a few hours of game play. So, in two sessions of game play the basics are already learnt and already started manual skipping the rig. Easier said than done of course but I like the learning curve. I would be a liar if I said I am in love with the game. I am not. I am impressed with the combat part. That is enough for now. What I look for more than any other thing is the open world game play, a kind of Frontier: Elite in the age of sail. Trading, piracy, smuggling goods through a blockade and who knows maybe live through the first steamers and exploring the big rivers in Africa and Asia and Americas with a river capable vessel. A yacht can do it up to a certain point. But I digress. After the first sea trials I am pleased with how the game plays. Performance is great and have nothing to point out regarding frames per second related nor any graphical problems. Everything worked out of the box. Not overly impressed mind you but pleased by the age depicted, the setting and the learning curve that might be possible. I have some gripes with the "realism" but overall at this stage a lot of hours of fun can be spent. The game, in its primitive arena form, is a time sinker already. Battle can last well over 45 minutes, being 30 - 45 the norm. So for a couple battles in the evening is perfect but I guess the unemployed and the school/college youngsters will definitely play more time. For me Naval Action, I hope, is not a game based on PvP arenas only, which is a major bonus. Apparently we will be able to sail the world map ??? ; engage in a multitude of activities in a open sandbox ruleset scenario. Trading should be possible. So I guess all the "movie like" pirating, blockade runners, and war admirals will be possible. All depends on what rules and mechanics are coded and to what point liberty of action without restrictions is put into the game, right ? My main questions remain; full multi player as in full population connected to a single game instance ? limited multi player, like in a world zone instanced server setup ? or simply a "matchmaker" instance based multiplayer ? Given the multitude of new techniques to address the open world multiplayer games nowadays this is an important factor of decision. Thank you all and hope to see you at the end of my guns or walking the plank. S!