Hotfix 9.82 Patch notes

[Cpt Blackthorne]

Yesterday we had a 20 attacker vs 25 defender port battle, and we used ramming and boarding to speed up the defending prosess. I do not think it's possible for a attacking force to kill all towers and an equal amount of defenders in 1,5 hours. Imo it takes to long to kill a enemy in a equal sized ship. Yes it's probably historical correct and yes the defender should have an advantage, but this is a game. Games are about having fun, so i find it a bit worrying. Right now the only way to take a port is to find one that's not defended or poorly defended, and that's just boring.

2 nights ago we had a 11v15 deep port capture win that went very fast. Then we had a 15v17 that went to the wire. Last night we had a 6v6 shallow port capture that went the to wire. Yet, also last night we had another shallow that finished in record time. IMO the variety of battles make this game fun and unpredictable.

[Horror]

I see the patch notes and it makes me think: Nothing is to be done about the broken penetration?

Armor on SOLs was reduced pretty drastically. Cannon pen tweaks are on the way.

Are you one of those who demands that a 9 pounder pen an SOL at 250m or they walk? Thats like expecting a rifle to pen a sherman. These ships were 'armored' before ironclads took it to a new level.

[JazAero]

okay, I played the new patch..  here is my observations. mast damage seems to be much better  but damage from chain shot to the sails,Went too far the other way.  Need to cut it back by about 25%.  I like the idea of stopping ships dead in their tracks but in all fairness it's a little op the way it is now.

 

 

[Jerome]

Why is something OP if both players can do it?

[Sire Trinkof]

All good thanks for the quick patch, I however have a question about traders armor that was reduced in last patch, is it normal for a Le Gros Ventre to have slightly less armor than a Renomee ? Also the indiaman seems very weak for what is classified as a 4th rate compared to many 5th rate in terms of armor.

A Belle Poule gets 1cm more on sides than an indiaman, 1cm more armor on bow and the same armor or stern, and essex have the same armor values as the indiaman.

Indiaman on sides gets only 5 cm more armor than a Cerberus, 3 cm more on bow, 2cm more on stern.

I don't know if it is normal or if it's done to help the traders hunter's that had it already easy enough but the traders seems very weak in terms of armor compared to many ships, especially the Gros Ventre and Indiaman, this last one being a 4th rate and having same or less armor than 5th rates.

Well, it seems to me that traders are really getting the low end of the stick when it comes to armor, and seeing the armor the equivalent ships gets it doesn't seems logical at all from my point of view, a LGV is based on a belle poule design, yet the Belle gets 12 cm more armor on sides for example.

I might be wrong and approaching the problem from the wrong side but this doesn't seems logical, nor fair, and seems done to only make traders more easy preys that they were already, are traders fate in game to be only easy preys ?

Thanks.

Merchant ships, Indian man included were built for maximum profit, and much cheaper than warships. For economy a lot less wood was used, and broadside was a lot thinner. Even if looking like a frigate le gros ventre was actually less resistant than a corvette...

So yes : merchant ships are not warships with a hold.... They are just merchantships

French Indian company tried to build dual purpose ships, Indiamen easily converted into small 50-60 guns SOL. It showed disastrous results for sailing qualities as they were large as merchants and heavy as warships...

Edit : I lack English "naval" language to explain why there was so much difference in broadside resistance, but it is mainly due to conception and the "gap between frames or structure part" which was much larger on merchants, thus having far less structural strength.

For example, with imaginary numbers, a warship the size of le Gros ventre would be twice more expensive regarding construction.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Sire Trinkof

[Cpt Blackthorne]

okay, I played the new patch..  here is my observations. mast damage seems to be much better  but damage from chain shot to the sails,Went too far the other way.  Need to cut it back by about 25%.  I like the idea of stopping ships dead in their tracks but in all fairness it's a little op the way it is now.

I do have to agree that the numbers are off just a hair. OP, disagree. However, this finally makes ppl use the sail repair sooner than before. In fact, I've seen ppl keep out running with sails at 70% and waiting to use their sail repairs until 65%. I expect catching such ppl now will be slightly easier...yet maybe a hair too much easier.

[Horror]

okay, I played the new patch..  here is my observations. mast damage seems to be much better  but damage from chain shot to the sails,Went too far the other way.  Need to cut it back by about 25%.  I like the idea of stopping ships dead in their tracks but in all fairness it's a little op the way it is now.

Jaz, did you notice/test if battle sails attenuate said damage accumulation?

[DeRuyter]

Merchant ships, Indian man included were built for maximum profit, and much cheaper than warships. For economy a lot less wood was used, and broadside was a lot thinner. Even if looking like a frigate le gros ventre was actually less resistant than a corvette...

So yes : merchant ships are not warships with a hold.... They are just merchantships

French Indian company tried to build dual purpose ships, Indiamen easily converted into small 50-60 guns SOL. It showed disastrous results for sailing qualities as they were large as merchants and heavy as warships...

Edit : I lack English "naval" language to explain why there was so much difference in broadside resistance, but it is mainly due to conception and the "gap between frames or structure part" which was much larger on merchants, thus having far less structural strength.

For example, with imaginary numbers, a warship the size of le Gros ventre would be twice more expensive regarding construction.

 

+1  - And they normally had much less crew for the size of ship. Crew that were not usually well trained in gunnery and boarding combat.

[Sire Trinkof]

+1 - And they normally had much less crew for the size of ship. Crew that were not usually well trained in gunnery and boarding combat.

Indeed le gros ventre should have around 80-100 crewmen, a trader brig of snow around 30, a trader cutter or lynx, 10-15

[Kanay]

Merchant ships, Indian man included were built for maximum profit, and much cheaper than warships. For economy a lot less wood was used, and broadside was a lot thinner. Even if looking like a frigate le gros ventre was actually less resistant than a corvette...

So yes : merchant ships are not warships with a hold.... They are just merchantships

French Indian company tried to build dual purpose ships, Indiamen easily converted into small 50-60 guns SOL. It showed disastrous results for sailing qualities as they were large as merchants and heavy as warships...

Edit : I lack English "naval" language to explain why there was so much difference in broadside resistance, but it is mainly due to conception and the "gap between frames or structure part" which was much larger on merchants, thus having far less structural strength.

For example, with imaginary numbers, a warship the size of le Gros ventre would be twice more expensive regarding construction.

I understand they should not be as good as warships but right now the armor feels really too weak in comparison to lower class ships, they had to carry a lot of load in weight, and i think they could not be so much thinner than a certain limit to sustain the integrity of the ship during bad weather while being heavy loaded for the ship integrity to remain even if the framing was different, i might be wrong but right now when you compare and test an indiaman or LGV with smaller class ships they really feel like paper made in comparison to lower ranked vessels.

 

 

This said anyone tested the grape now ? Used the snake on a AI gros ventre after removing totally his back armor, under 100m range and taking at best 6-7 crew members, need to test more but anyone noticed something similar ? 

[admin]

 

 

This said anyone tested the grape now ? Used the snake on a AI gros ventre after removing totally his back armor, under 100m range and taking at best 6-7 crew members, need to test more but anyone noticed something similar ? 

 

 

you need to hit crew locations

[Cpt Blackthorne]

Kanay, on 27 May 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

 

 

This said anyone tested the grape now ? Used the snake on a AI gros ventre after removing totally his back armor, under 100m range and taking at best 6-7 crew members, need to test more but anyone noticed something similar ? 

you need to hit crew locations

Indeed. Any commander who would place his entire crew in the castle is rather stupid. I believe the crew kills thru stern was rather high, because grape would not travel the entire length of the deck, however, I could be wrong. Try bringing side armor down half way and see how the grape works. See if you need to wreck the entire side. Works well for me.

[Kanay]

 

 

Indeed. Any commander who would place his entire crew in the castle is rather stupid. I believe the crew kills thru stern was rather high, because grape would not travel the entire length of the deck, however, I could be wrong. Try bringing side armor down half way and see how the grape works. See if you need to wreck the entire side. Works well for me.

 

 

you need to hit crew locations

 

Well like in a previous thread where i expressed myself i don't ask to kill 50 crew members in one single load of grape this was insane, nor for the grape shot in the back to hit the guy standing on the bow of the ship, but if if you have to remove armor on side to do significant damages to crew this brings us back to this ( from another discussion when grape was bugged )  : 

 

 

I had more consistent results using balls than grape yes, it was one or two crew killed but it was working each time, only 9 guns on each side isn't very efficient for killing crew this way, tho.

 

 Sadly if the grape is good only for what you say it renders impossible for ships slightly smaller to engage an opponent slightly superior, don't get me wrong i don't ask for a privateer to be able to ruin the crew of a third rate like it was possible to do pre-patch.

 

If you are in a slightly inferior/smaller ships you can usually count on your maneuverability to do something, harassing him on his back, killing some crew using grape to reduce his crew so at least he will not have his full efficiency.

 

Now in the same situation if you want to reduce the crew and if like you suggest we have to shoot the side to then have grape efficient, this means you have to dangerously expose yourself to get at a perfect angle that may penetrate his armor, and this of course at close range, shooting in a not perfect angle using a low caliber like 6pd's against a Gros Ventre will put you in great danger, a single load of iron and you end up with 3 -4 leaks as the 9pd's he get will penetrate you easily and do a lot of damages while many of your shots may penetrate or not penetrate at all.

 

So in the end now if you want to fight a ship you need to choose an opponent of the same exact class or an equivalent ship having the same guns ...

 

Using tactics to destroy the back armor, maneuver behind him in your more nimble ship to reduce his crew seems for now not efficient at all, using balls with a ship not having loads of guns is also not very efficient, a couple of crew taken out on each pass isn't much, taking out sides seems barely possible with all shots literally bouncing off the hull if you are not at a perfect angle, no matter if you are at a very close range and will be suicidal et even try getting those perfectly angled shots.

 

And again i don't ask for a cutter to destroy a third rate crew easily, I just think that a ship like the snow or rattlesnake should be able using tactics to heavily damage the crew of some of the slightly higher ranked ships.

 

I can just hope it's some kind of bug with grape 

 

A slightly smaller vessel will barely be able to damages the sides of a ship without exposing itself totally as the balls will bounce if angled, to get them penetrating correctly now you need to be aligned even with 2 ships of the same class/guns, here using a slightly smaller ship you will really be in trouble trying to do so, and a single broadside back in your direction can cause enough leaks at once to send you swim with fishes.

 

Took quite some time to reduce the crew of the gros ventre to 201 crew before launching a boarding and grape was mostly inefficient during all this attempt shooting on his back, only a few times it got kills on crew, and 6-7 at once was the best i got, that i noticed at least, with a ship using hammocks and 264 crew the grape should find a few more crew to hit than this on the rear part of the ship maybe, i don't know, will test this more in the next days and see how it goes, i don't want easy mode shoot 3 boardsides of grape and kill half the crew but smaller vessels, with efforts, should be able to do something against slightly superior ships, and i don't speak of a privateer vs a third rate here of course.

 

Thanks. 

[Dala]

Ramming not being historical? what kind of lunacy is this.

Sure, it shouldnt be abused. and ships that ram should be punished in some way..

Perhaps by adding an actual ram (something like assasins creed black flag) that reduces speed by like 20% to make it balanced and reduce the amount of guns the boat can carry or something.

 

either way, Before this patch Went live i put over 25 leaks into a conni (sailing a conni myself) then i rammed him, then i put some more leaks in him then i rammed him again. all within 1,5min. he didnt sink. IF ppl insta sink its becuse they... build their ships like morons or simply becuse they suck.

aka increase the water intake again, so using the wind right has a significant bonus.

[Inkompetent]

aka increase the water intake again, so using the wind right has a significant bonus.

Maybe the time to plug leaks need to be tweaked, but you already gain an advantage by causing a significant number of leaks: You force him to allocate crew in Survival both to plug leaks and to man pumps. It can easily be 20% of his total crew stuck on damage control instead of on sails and guns and boarding crews.

Of course this isn't very limiting if only fighting in one direction, but if needing both broadsides or if needing to maneuver a lot it is outright crippling.

[Pagan Pete]

Sounds good!

Have a rum, Dev team! [_]P

[Inkompetent]

• Ramming leaks are disabled - we considered them unhistorical because ships collide above the waterline and by the time underwater parts hit most energy is lost due to water friction and bow destruction. This also fixed several game breaking exploits like using cheap ships to disable heavy vessels by ramming. They might come back in the future in another form.

Will this not "enable" boarding-rammers, since they now can charge at full speed into enemy ships, slam them into irons and board, and with near zero consequence to their own ship, while before they'd have 200-300 men stuck on repairs (assuming an Ingermanland or Constitution)?

Edited May 27, 2016 by Inkompetent

[admin]

Will this not "enable" boarding-rammers, since they now can charge at full speed into enemy ships, slam them into irons and board, and with near zero consequence to their own ship, while before they'd have 200-300 men stuck on repairs (assuming an Ingermanland or Constitution)?

 

 

The problem of people just ramming heavier ships was deemed to be a bigger problem. 

People were chain ramming lineships disabling them completely.

[Inkompetent]

The problem of people just ramming heavier ships was deemed to be a bigger problem. 

People were chain ramming lineships disabling them completely.

Fair enough. Then at least has been taken into consideration. We'll see how it works out I suppose

[Magnum]

The "close warehouse" is still visible - I clicked on it and got a dialog box saying all goods will be lost, OK? - I really don't want to click on
OK? to test it to see if it really will delete the entire SLRN warehouse.

 

A little help here?

 

Edit: tested on a small ancillary clan warehouse - the first warning takes you to a Fee: 100,000k screen. we offered to pay it and it said "only the clan creator can close the warehouse"

 

So Good, Well done Dev's = thanks for listening to us.

 

And the SLRN warehouse is again jammed to the gunnels with ship parts .

[akd]

To compensate for using high-speed ramming to rage board, perhaps add crew casualties when ramming while in boarding mode (with # of casualties dependant on speed and relative size of ships)? All those men crowded into the bows ready to board are probably not going to fair well in a high speed ram.

For a more mild implementation, simply cause % loss of boarding prep.

[Sire Trinkof]

I understand they should not be as good as warships but right now the armor feels really too weak in comparison to lower class ships, they had to carry a lot of load in weight, and i think they could not be so much thinner than a certain limit to sustain the integrity of the ship during bad weather while being heavy loaded for the ship integrity to remain even if the framing was different, i might be wrong but right now when you compare and test an indiaman or LGV with smaller class ships they really feel like paper made in comparison to lower ranked vessels.

 

 

This said anyone tested the grape now ? Used the snake on a AI gros ventre after removing totally his back armor, under 100m range and taking at best 6-7 crew members, need to test more but anyone noticed something similar ? 

in battle pve,  today, suprise with caronades, killed average 50-70 crew per pass on a third rate... so it works fine I guess

[Slamz]

• Ramming leaks are disabled - we considered them unhistorical because ships collide above the waterline and by the time underwater parts hit most energy is lost due to water friction and bow destruction. This also fixed several game breaking exploits like using cheap ships to disable heavy vessels by ramming. They might come back in the future in another form.

 

We should definitely think about some sort of ramming damage. One thing I thought set this game apart (from, say, POTBS) is that it wasn't "bumper boats". Ramming was a big deal.

 

Maybe it could tend to cause rigging damage, or tend to cause ships to get tangled up (they "stick" together and become hard to maneuver, with Survival crew working to free the tangles). Or planking damage.

 

Definitely shouldn't be a case that two ships smash into each other and nothing really happens.

[Inkompetent]

We should definitely think about some sort of ramming damage. One thing I thought set this game apart (from, say, POTBS) is that it wasn't "bumper boats". Ramming was a big deal.

 

Maybe it could tend to cause rigging damage, or tend to cause ships to get tangled up (they "stick" together and become hard to maneuver, with Survival crew working to free the tangles). Or planking damage.

 

Definitely shouldn't be a case that two ships smash into each other and nothing really happens.

Agreed. Heck, it was even a valid tactic IRL to intentionally get your bowsprit stuck in the enemy's rigging, or his bowsprit stuck in yours, simply to lock the ships together for boarding, but that of course meant that disengaging was very time-consuming and difficult (as you say it'd require a lot of survival-crew).

[Jean Ribault]

Nicely done, and quick responses.  I like that chain shot tuning, makes sense to me.