DeRuyter

First thing I did was cap an LGV - Got 10 units of trade goods within sight of a consuming port - about 10k profit.

This ^^ And spawns are too close. While I understand that part of the pre-battle maneuvering is done in the OW (tagging), increasing spawn distance in battle would help and allow more in battle maneuver to avoid the one broadside and it's over problem. (Given relatively equal ships of course).

IRL LRQ never carried carros only 8 lb long guns (should be 9 lb in game).

Please don't nerf carronade damage too much or you will remove one of the reasons small ships carried them. They allowed a ship-sloop or brig (Rattlesnake/Niagara) to carry much more weight of shot than their size would allow at the expense of range. Some larger ships had them on the QD for close range work and loaded them with shot and grape to clear the enemy decks. Several thoughts: 1. A carronade should have a similar damage output to a long gun of the same caliber. Reduce medium range accuracy and damage. 2. Limit availability to ships that used them especially on main gun decks - ie; large frigates, LeRequin (that also balances LRQ with other 6th rates).

This seems to be a recurring theme with respect to ship balancing and rating in game. 🤔 On the LRQ you are absolutely right - 6th rate, even 3 decks has it in French no less!

Just leaving some stats from Three Decks here: USS Constitution 1812: 881lb broadside (32lb carros). USS United States: 888 (42 lb carros). 1576 tons burthen. 175' on the gun deck. HMS Agamemnon 1794: 678 lb broadside. 1383 tons. 160'. (only 8 carros on QD) HMS Bellona : 781 lb. 1615 tons. 168' (no carros) HMS Ajax, a large 74 gun 3rd rate. 865lb. 1953 tons. 182' (no carros) HMS Indefatigable: Razee (64): 437lb (26x24lb 6 32 carro). 1384 tons. 160' So yes US 44s as large as a 3rd rate and throwing a comparable close range broadside with the caveat that the 74 has no carronades (historical). But not designed as a line ship nor designed to fight one, rather to run from one. Of course in game a LW/WO Connie would be easily caught and sunk by an Oak (or worse Fir) Bellona armed with poods. In the end though they are still frigates and as @Banished Privateer noted there are unintended consequences with books when uprating them from 4 to 3rd rate. Le Requin was classed as a 5th rate in the French navy. Exactly. This is the issue with using historical ratings in game since we have ships using carronades and poods that never used them or never had them on the main gundeck. That and the timeline which is why correct BR is important. But I think BR should also reflect mods and armament used in a dynamic way. Also IMO we should reevaluate carronades and poods and limit their use to more historical levels. I understand the gameplay balancing to allow older ships, like Ingermanland to mount them, but 42 lb carronades as the main battery on the Indy really changes the balance.

Looks good!! I clearly see army building and technology elements of UG:CW in there. @sterner Can you give us any idea of when alpha/beta testing will start? oops - just saw your response in the other thread - thanks!

Do I understand rare woods correctly: 1. One port always has it, so if your nation owns that port you can harvest it. 2. There will be one or more random ports that will have that wood type until the supply is exhausted. A clan can pay for a mission to go to one of those random ports and pick up that wood. 3. AI traders may have it and you could get a lucky drop.

"Old Wagon" was the RL nickname of the United States because she was slower that the other two 44s (maybe it was the 42lb carronades or the damaged keel from the botching launching). Really this is a minor issue though, in game the stats are identical so it doesn't matter whether you call them both "Connie". Aesthetically it is a nice addition.

On the testbed there was a timer - you had a number of in game days to complete the delivery.

I am with @Angus MacDuff on the Port and Starboard language - it is a naval game. Left and right should stay on land. 😎

First hour in NA - OW, what OW - just a blue and grey queue waiting for small ship battles in Sea Trials. Trying not to get rekt by the Brigs and Snows!

Ideally we would have individual ship drafts and a hydrographic map. That would prevent craziness such as a 1st rate sailing right up to the beach! One reason IRL pirates, privateers and blockade runners preferred shallow draft vessels was to get into the areas where the large warships could not get them. (They don't necessarily sit higher in the water, rather they draw less, ie; 6 foot draft instead of 12 ft or more). But in the absence of a hydrographic layer adding another depth level is a good idea. 👍 Wouldn't have to be in just one area either.

That's a good question. As I understand it the AI has fixed routes sometimes ending at a port sometimes in open sea as in the map posted by admin below. I have seen them just turn around in the OW in the middle of the sea - and go through land but that's a different problem. But I think each ship or fleet is separate and doesn't change based on player interaction on the OW. At least I have not read on the forum that fleets are generated based on a ship that a specific player is sailing. If that were the case there would be less people complaining about not finding a ship or fleet to attack.

Ask yourself this question: If it was based on ship size why would a Bellona plus a fleet spawn then? That would be a BR mismatch for sure. Possibly the Agamemnon passed out of visual range and the Bellona sailed into it as you were leaving port. Just saying because I just did this several times on the test server - saw a target for the Vic, jumped into port to change, came out and the same ship was still right there sailing as before. As I understand it the AI fleets on the OW are not dynamic as you suggest.

Nice find. 👍 I have a couple Willis' books ("The Fighting Temeraire"). He has put together a good synopsis of sources here. Your compass rose illustrated that even a generous angle of 60 degrees would be playable and lead to more "realistic" tactics. It is important to note that some ships, in particular longer ships did not wear well. Some ships were noted to be "good in stays" on their sailing reports as well. (I believe Endymion was one of these). Also we shouldn't forget about boxhauling - which was mostly done when a ship missed stays or failed to tack. Of course the weather had a big effect on whether a fleet or ship for that matter tacked or wore to change course. Tacking was very risky in high wind and heavy seas for example. Being caught aback could have dire consequences for the rigging! No worries about this in NA so carry on.

Maybe so as it applies to lineship battles, although there were tactical benefits to the lee position as well. Widening the "deadzone" as @admin noted may have beneficial effects as well, like ship variety. There has been a lot of hand wringing over everyone sailing in a 1st rate or a fir/fir Bellona, well this is one way to fix that since frigates are much more handy in stays than line ships as well as being faster close hauled. It would also benefit the schooners of course. Something to test, at least increasing the angle in battle instance to reflect the importance of maneuvering, in particular when each broadside is more important now.

This is a point that needs to be addressed then. I wonder what the maximum sustained speed the RL Victory logged? 🤔 I am going to say it was much less than 14knts at her best point of sail. Slow and ponderous would be the trade off description (that's how I view sailing an unmodded T/OW Vic on the testbed). Sailing solo in a 1st rate may just mean that everyone runs away and you get no pvp. There's a reason not everyone will be sailing them. In a group you'll need fast ships to tag, ie; frigates, the eyes of the fleet, and that's pretty historical. Maybe one group might run into another group doing the same thing and we'll get one of the old school Trafalgar style battles (alright maybe that's wishful thinking. 🙂) That's a pretty general statement and not always the case. Sure if a small ship was caught by a ship with overwhelming force then they surrendered. Merchant ship usually surrendered unless opponent was a small privateer. Battles between equal sized ships could be quick or take up to several hours with many broadsides being exchanged. A well trained crew could put out 3 broadsides in 5 minutes or that was the rule of thumb anyway. Remember that we have much better accuracy at longer ranges where IRL a full broadside may result in only a few hits. Even once ships were at close action an SOL could take a number of broadsides before high casualties and guns out of action forced surrender (Battle of the Nile is a good example). The prime example of a quick battle would be Chesapeake v Shannon where there was no maneuvering and the ships went directly to close range. Shannon's crew was well trained and poured in 3-4 quick broadsides - one a rake, that pretty much decided the battle due to officer casualties, but surrender came only after a boarding. Maybe that type of battle is what you are thinking of. IMO Getting into position and maneuvering is part of the battle and can decide the outcome. In game that can mean a combination of the OW tag and maneuvering once in the battle since we start out so close in the instance.

It depended on the wind conditions. Stronger winds and as you note seas that we don't have in NA. Of course there is a situation where the heavy seas work against the 74 forcing her to close the lower gun ports losing the heaviest guns from the broadside. Again not replicated in NA. Without that frigates should be faster and more maneuverable than SOL.

A few points based on testing and others' observations in this thread: First I agree with the goals as stated by admin. However many people have brought up unintended gameplay consequences and a "realism domino effect" as it were which must be addressed. @Wraith brought up the mod meta possibility of a speed fit 1st rate or lineship catching and destroying frigates. So in essence who would sail 5th rates then. So with the new DM mods will need to be reviewed. Should we have a Victory made out of fir going 14.5 knts in game? IMO absolutely not. Could a line ship catch a frigate or small ship - yes if the wind was strong enough - but we don't have wind strength in game. (that's OT though). @Hethwill Suggests more realistic sailing profiles. Yes bring it in battle instance only. Square rigged ships did not sail less than 60 degrees to the wind. Tacking should be a slow process for the really large ships, ie; 1st rates. I have sailed on smaller square rigged ships that could tack in 5 minutes, schooners even less. Again as admin suggested the subject of another thread but still relevant to the overall combat model. Accuracy must be adjusted. With a more realistic damage model we need a more realistic accuracy model. That should also help with mast sniping. Dismasting is a bit too all or nothing. Too easy to take out a whole mast without first taking out some structure. If we see damage to structure or sides as also damaging standing rigging then it should be easier for spars to fall as damage accrues. For some reason we are not seeing the upper spars and topmast falling as much as we should be. @Sea Archer post on this subject and that of the damage results had merit and is worth looking into. Massive crew casualties as a abstraction of morale for example. @Wraith post on this subject and damage effects on rigging is similar and worth considering as well Line ships did travel alone on occasion 74 ships in particular as admin noted. Often they were travelling to a station rather than hunting but in the Caribbean you did see a squadron lead by a single 74 or 64 for example. The 74 being found to be a very cost effective ship that could be used in a variety of roles. However it did not replace frigates and 6th rates (sloops) as the eyes of the fleet, convoy escorts and raiders. We need to find a way to keep these roles alive in NA. Lastly @Portuguese Privateer I also tested 6th and 7th rates. One standout was with carros - example Rattlesnake with carros vs. Pickle 4 hull hits and Pickle in shock. Although at close range carros should hit small ships hard. Overall the results are less extreme than with the larger ships. BTW - still getting hieroglyphs after starting boarding. Not every time though.

Well it depends. One of the balancing problems in NA is the long timeline. So before say 1760 most frigates carried a main battery of 12lb long guns or 9lb guns and carros had not yet been invented. By 1800 the 18lb armed frigate was the standard with a few exceptions for 24lb armed heavy frigates. Also instead of 6lb guns on the QD&FC they now had carros either 24lb or 32lb.Just off the top of my head most smaller merchant ships and privateers would be armed with 6lb long guns or a mixture of 4lb, 6lb, 9lb and 12lb for larger ships. I am not counting Indiamen in that though. Pirates and privateers relied more on large crews for boarding than weight of broadside shot. BTW most of the frigates in game never ran full carro loadouts. The big exceptions are the Surprise and Essex. The Captain of the Essex protested the rearmament of his ship with mostly carros and he was right in the end. Just go to the Wiki entry for the USS Essex and you'll see the downsides. Usually only small 6th rates ran a main battery of carro because it really increased their firepower.

As a casual with limited time I don't mind shortening battle times really - repairs used?

TBF the testing has been with a 1st rate. Needs more testing and tuning ofc. Are you saying that a Vic can be speed fit to go that fast?

HMS Agamemnon while sailing alone took on 4 French frigates including a heavy 40 gunner (think Endymion). They got away because the Aggies rigging was too shot up to continue the fight. Captain skill and maneuvering did play a part - Nelson vs. 4 uncoordinated French ships but still. Off work today Vernon? How about 3rd vs. 3rd and frigate vs. frigate testing?

FYI - Still getting the hieroglyphic text during and after boarding.