DeRuyter

IMO I don't think they are going to go MMO sandbox with UAD. As ppl have mentioned for multiplayer think of wargames like HOI, TW, Steel Division or a number of titles by Slitherine. Another that comes to mind would be Combat Mission (a WEGO turn system) which I think would work well for UAD. Or just look at their other MP wargame, UG Gettysburg. A dev can tell me I am wrong but I don't think that MMO OW sandbox was what they had in mind with this game design or even MP at all.

+1 Single player strategy game is missing from the OP poll. Look at UG:CW and UA Age of Sail for clues. That is not to say you could not have some type of MP - like UG Gettysburg. But an arena game like WoWs? Hasn't that already been done? This is a wargame/sim and I hope it stays that way.

Very good analysis as always. I thought we did have some aspect of the lower gun ports closed or unusable in the Sea Trials storm battles. @admin ?? But with varying weather conditions it and rigging damage should be implemented. When you talk about light winds I think you have to add the location as well. Close to land you can have a significant wind shadow that is going to benefit the taller rig in calm to light breezes. Out in the open ocean the effect won't be as pronounced. As a practical matter in game I don't think we'll see winds so light that the effect of the taller rig on a larger ship makes any difference. There is a wind range where a smaller ship, and I am talking mostly about unrated ships and fore and aft rigged vessels, will sail faster. For NA the question is what wind strength is represented in general and by the wind gusts we now have in game and what effect does that have on the various classes of ships. With regard to frigates out sailing ships of the line I think you want to look for what the mostly likely outcome was and that is by and large the frigate would outrun the SOL. Now less so at the end of the period with newer designed 74s. Montanes may be the exception rather than the rule (taking into account weather conditions of course). Looking at your chart of Nelson's ships it does appear that the HMS Medusa (32) was the fastest in those conditions. (I am assuming that the 16 knt speed on the Albemarle was a typo).

My response in the Patch thread: Great to see implementation of weather and variable winds. Could use tweaks though. Went out in a Prince and caught I gust that had me going 50 knts @90 degrees! So it was a bit more than 50% greater than the normal speed. That kind of boost implies storm level winds and we should be shortening sail. Seems a bit too much, but ok it is to reduce travel time I get it. But it lasts way too long. Gusts really should be just a spot on the map that everyone benefits from by being there not a moving zone that travels with you when you hit the button. Should really be in a certain direction too. You could leave the markers on the map for visualization. Leaving the gust as a zone on the map, which could be large or small, might just take care of the ganking fears as well. AFK sailors could still miss the area just like irl if you are not keeping a lookout for better wind.

Copying my response in the patch thread to admin: Great to see implementation of weather and variable winds. Could use tweaks though. Went out in a Prince and caught I gust that had me going 50 knts @90 degrees! So it was a bit more than 50% greater than the normal speed. That kind of boost implies storm level winds and we should be shortening sail. Seems a bit too much, but ok it is to reduce travel time I get it. But it lasts way too long. Gusts really should be just a spot on the map that everyone benefits from by being there not a moving zone that travels with you when you hit the button. Should really be in a certain direction too. You could leave the markers on the map for visualization. Leaving the gust as a zone on the map, which could be large or small, might just take care of the ganking fears as well. AFK sailors could still miss the area just like irl if you are not keeping a lookout for better wind.

This ^^ @admin Great to see implementation of weather and variable winds. Could use tweaks though. Went out in a Prince and caught I gust that had me going 50 knts @90 degrees! So it was a bit more than 50% greater than the normal speed. That kind of boost implies storm level winds and we should be shortening sail. Seems a bit too much, but ok it is to reduce travel time I get it. But it lasts way too long. Gusts really should be just a spot on the map that everyone benefits from by being there not a moving zone that travels with you when you hit the button. Should really be in a certain direction too. You could leave the markers on the map for visualization. Leaving the gust as a zone on the map, which could be large or small, might just take care of the ganking fears as well. AFK sailors could still miss the area just like irl if you are not keeping a lookout for better wind.

Okay I have not logged on yet, but I want to understand how the wind patch system works. Do you mean there is a button (redeemable?) that you see on the OW which you sail up to get a gust? I thought it was just a random area on the OW that everyone would pick up if they were in that area. That would be more like IRL - of course you would also have spots of light winds like in the shadow of a land mass. You bring up a good point here - if you are caught in high winds unprepared a ship could suffer rigging damage - implementing high wind areas without the potential for sail damage is missing something. Your SOL or large frigate would catch the schooner since it can carry far more sail in high winds the only way the schooner or lynx in your example gets away is if it starts the chase to windward or manages to get there.

@akd Great article thanks for posting. @Pedroig What is interesting about the torpedo hits is that the hit rate is higher (40%) than the horizontal bombs (16%) but the damage done per hit is much less even given the unready state of the BB line. Obviously the anti-torpedo defenses of the ships modernized in the 1930 & 40 faired much better, but isn't that very late or past the UAD timeline?

Yes but are not some of the units companies - artillery for example? I know you posted earlier that some were erroneously marked as companies - like a grenadier company but was too large. My main point above stands though - I'll revise the scale comment to say that it is more of a battalion/regimental scale as opposed to UG:CW which is more or less brigade scale. You could take it down to company level as well, which would fit with the landing force element of the game.

Well I wouldn't look at it as a regression, rather a different scale. It is a different period in history with smaller battles and as you note landing marines. Look at Bunker Hill - about 3000 troops per side so you represent smaller formations as units. Using the scale in UG:CW you would only have a couple of units for each side. They do have the opportunity to represent individual companies on the battlefield in this game which IMO is a good thing if done right.

Not likely. Look at the Bunker Hill scenario - units are company or equivalent with 100-300 men. AWI battles were generally smaller as well. Units in UG:CW are essentially brigades of up to 2500 men.

Do you mean Naval Action or Ultimate Admiral? This is the UA forum.

The website timeline shows EA release in 2019. The caveat is that development timelines often get stretched. So hopefully 2019!

Except that this thread is posted in the Ultimate Admiral forum. @sonnypemberton did you mean to post here or are you referring to Naval Action?

Sometimes it is just bad timing. One day sail out and there are lots of AI around, but the next day sail out to finish mission and nothing. It is a big map you might sail to freeport and see nothing, then pop out and there's three enemy players. Although I have never sailed for 2 hours and not seen at least some ai around.

Waiting for the Steam Holiday sale.

Also when the source mentions speed and maneuverability of a 74 or even frigate wind speed and weather conditions have to be put in context. Maybe the source references wind speed @Serk like the British sea trials log. Constitution's log shows over 14 knots for a short time in ideal conditions, etc. I would suggest that the constant wind speed we have in NA is not the conditions that would allow a 1st rate or a 74 for that matter, to overhaul a frigate.

Preorders maybe?

@adishee You have made a great point about campaigns and the necessity of conserving troops. Many if not most games whether vs. ai or player fail to get this right. I would analogize it to playing a table top miniatures game as a standalone scenario vs. playing it as part of a structured campaign. You find exactly the situation you describe - players will withdraw to conserve troops for the next battle rather than play an artificially high army morale break point.

Welcome to the game and good luck! FYI - You can repair your rudder in battle. Key 5 then 4. I would also recommend trying some of the tutorial exams. The second to last one will give you some rewards. Check the forum and on You Tube for videos on how to pass the final exam as well.

Actually a square rigged ship won't be sailing closer than 60 degrees because you can't brace up the yards any further. So it is the inherent design of the rigging that causes the limitation, a hard limit, more practically 65-70 degrees. In general I agree with your point that certain SOLs usually 74s could run down frigates "in their best conditions" and there were certainly recorded instances of this happening. But @Wyy makes a valid point that those conditions were not always present. Frankly in the wind state represented in NA no SOL would get near hull speed and a frigate should easily be able to escape. One point he made was about windage which was a factor on large ships with high freeboard, ie; multiple guns decks. I disagree with the point that they were better in every way though even setting aside cost issues. Logistically it was more efficient to send a frigate on patrol or commerce raiding than a line ship. Frigates were more maneuverable and could go places a line ship could not. 5th and 6th rates were used for every duty except fighting in the line of battle, and they even did that on occasion. They were just more versatile. At the end of the time period the trend was to build more larger spar decked frigates. For example the British did not send 74s to hunt down the big US frigates, rather they razee'd several 64s and 74s and built a new class of single gun deck 50 gun ship (HMS Leander, Newcastle) in response. I do agree with your suggestion since we won't be getting variable wind strengths (something I have been posting about since 2016 along with actual ship drafts).

I understand, but it still should render as you see how close he got during the battle.

It should have rendered at the distance in the screenshot. At least I hope it would have that looks to be in range of the forts guns.

Fluffy I don't disagree with your assessment amazingly enough, but to be fair she did have some unique, or unusual if you prefer, design elements. Diagonal riders, framing spaced more closely than normal which gave her hull additional strength and prevented hogging for example. The mission she was designed for was also different than those earlier ships you mention in particular in the first half of the 18th century. Frankly at one time there were two decked "frigates". The US 44s were designed to fight anything equal or smaller and run from anything larger which primarily meant British 64s and 74s. So here we have her in game classed with 74s a ship class that she was never meant to fight. People have mentioned the disadvantages already, also the modules category shifts to 1-3 the most expensive. In the end I agree - 4th rate is best fit.

Or the later version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Leopard_(1790) More famous because of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesapeake–Leopard_affair