Proposal - Wood types overhaul

[Alex Connor]

With the new splinter damage mechanics we have an opportunity to overhaul wood types and give them new benefits/drawbacks. Apart from fir, widely considered a lesser choice for shipbuilding because of short lifespan, and live oak which was very well respected for its durability, the rest of wood types we have in naval action were all considered fairly equal. Each had a few benefits and drawbacks, but mostly use came down to availability rather than preference. Perfect considering we now have all these regions with different resources and different characteristics for ships built there.

 

Oak

 

The baseline by which other wood types are measured. Good all round balance of weight, strength and lifespan.

 

Fir

 

Benefits

• Fast growing - harvested at higher rate than other wood types
• Easy to work - less labor hours needed to produce frame timber
• Stiffness - fir ships carry more ballast to make up for light weight fir, lower center of gravity and stiffer.
• Fast upwind - because stiffer, fir ships have improved performance in close haul and beam reach. 

Drawbacks

• Splinters easily - higher crew damage suffered from splinters
• Softwood - hull thickness penalty
• Low durability - expensive to maintain, increased repair costs

 

Mahogany

 

Benefits

• Reduced splintering - lower crew casualties from splinters (based on spanish accounts of mahogany built ships).
• Durable - reduced repair costs

Drawbacks

• Softer than oak - small hull thickness penalty

 

Teak

 

Benefits

• Strength - small hull thickness bonus
• Durable - reduced repair costs

Drawbacks

• Toxic splinters - the same oils that make Teak so rot resistant cause splinter wounds to become gangrenous, reduced rate of crew recovery after battle (this would require a lesser version of doctor perk as basic game mechanic).

 

Live Oak

 

Benefits

• Strength - hull thickness bonus
• Reduced Splintering - lower crew casualties in combat
• Durability - reduced repair costs

Drawbacks

• Very difficult to harvest - low yield from buildings
• Difficult to work - substantially increased labor hour cost to make frame timbers
• Weight - loss of stiffness, loss of close haul/beam reach speed from raised center of gravity (Constitution balanced around live oak = historical performance)

 

Bermuda Cedar

 

Benefits

• Fast upwind - lighter weight, same center of gravity benefits as fir regarding close haul/beam reach speed
• Stiffness - as above

Drawbacks

• Softer than oak - small hull thickness penalty

 

On a semi-related note...

 

Wood, believe it or not, is one of the most important aspects of a wooden warship 

 

So harvesting and working timber should really be one of the biggest costs when building a ship, at least as far as labor hours and weight of hauling go. Could replace the labor hour cost of carriages, would make for a better balance of price as people might be reluctant to "waste" expensive items on a ship made of cheap wood (example, frame timbers for a Cerberus only cost 140 LH compared to the 280 LH cost of carriages for that ship).

[SteelSandwich]

I think you managrd to put in words what many have hoped/dreamed about regarding wood quality.

Good suggestion!

[z4ys]

First time the different wood types effects make sense.

+1

Edit: But I am not sure about fir and splinters. It may be a soft wood but wouldn't the ball just pass through it and make a clean hole?

[Knobby]

Sounds good to me, well thought out.

I think having differences in splinter rate will make wood choice much more interesting than just about speed vs strength, although for balancing reasons (real properties notwithstanding) maybe live oak should not have both strength and reduced splinter properties.

Edited October 25, 2016 by Knobby

[Alex Connor]

First time the different wood types effects make sense.

+1

Edit: But I am not sure about fir and splinters. It may be a soft wood but wouldn't the ball just pass through it and make a clean hole?

 

I think a great deal of over-penetration would be required to produce that effect, there are a few videos of carronades being shot at fir hull replicas and the fir splintering very badly.

 

Under most combat circumstance would consider fir to splinter worse than wood types that have more elastic strength.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

The more elastic a wood is the deadlier splinters will become. Potential energy being released into a flying blade of wood.

 

On the Niagara test one of the Oak splints was as big as a longsword, pretty sure it would slice three crewmen in a blink of an eye.

[Alex Connor]

The more elastic a wood is the deadlier splinters will become. Potential energy being released into a flying blade of wood.

 

On the Niagara test one of the Oak splints was as big as a longsword, pretty sure it would slice three crewmen in a blink of an eye.

 

Niagara has an oak keel, the rest is pine and fir... 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Niagara has an oak keel, the rest is pine and fir... 

 

The Oak tests show even larger blades in tighter groups. https://youtu.be/9NConxlRNwg?t=16m24s

Maybe they are more lethal but affect less area. *shrugs*

 

Some of the rakes in game are horrendous but that's not the splintering for sure but direct iron on flesh.

 

Best so far, discounting the big ships with hundreds of men packed together in the galleries, has been square 90 on a perfect angle rake with 32 pounders carronades from a Niagara into a Renomee. All the shots went clean through the entire length and even damaged the bow.

[Alex Connor]

I cant say I like any of these... as the wording is all wrong.

Fir grants stiffness because it needs more ballast. Uh know, that is not how it works in game sir. Stiffness grants more armor thickness. And currently all of the woods have different hidden qualities.

Like Fir is a soft wood and has less chance of reducing the energy of a shot thus the round will cause MORE leaks by just passing straight through the ship. This will also cause more damage to modules, crew and guns.

But Oak and Live Oak are MUCH harder woods and thus wont have as much internal damage from penetrating hits. Don't believe me test it out for yourself.

Stiffness is resistance to heel/roll, has nothing to do with armour in Naval Action.

Fir built versions of existing designs were lighter, so they carried more ballast because you don't want the ship sitting much higher in the water. Result, lower centre of gravity, stiff ship.

[maturin]

 

 

Uh know, that is not how it works in game sir.   Stiffness grants more armor thickness.   And currently all of the woods have different hidden qualities. 

That's just because Stiffness was given silly buffs to compensate for being stacked up against Speed in the RNG.

 

 

Those buffs should be removed now. The stiffer your vessel IRL, the more vulnerable your masts are, not less.

[maturin]

When I think of a stiff wood ship, I think of hull flex.  This would mean the ships keel would flex causing the planking to buckle slightly allowing the ship to take on water easier in rough seas or harsh sailing. 

That's not the stiffness that's being referred to.

 

It means low center of gravity and thus less heeling.

[Knobby]

Then call it what it is.... improved keel.

Stiffness IS what it's called.

Keel is something else entirely.

 

I guess you're looking for the word heel, which is the measure of how much a ship is heeling over from level. Stiffness is what determines the amount of heel under similar circumstances, a stiffer ship will heel less.

[Alex Connor]

Yeah, stiffness is the period term. Describes the short but abrupt rolling motion of a ship with low center of gravity.