Powder Monkeys vs. Magazine Access

[_Masterviolin]

This is something minor, but it is a bit strange. The two "gunnery" perks you can select for your vessel on the testbed server at the moment are Powder Monkeys and Improved Magazine access. However, Powder Monkeys have a -7% reload rate versus Magazine Access at -6% atop increased fire risk. This hence renders Powder Monkeys the clear superior upgrade, both are attainable at the same cost and same fashion so hence Magazine Access would be completely useless.

It is minor yes, but it's worth noting!  Perhaps Mag. Access should have a better reload rate than powder monkeys, to justify the increased fire risk.

Edited April 20, 2017 by _Masterviolin

[Serk]

I would expect an improved magazine to REDUCE the fire hazards, not the opposite.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Serk

[Anolytic]

I guess Magazine access is for when you want to stack them, or when you want a fireship.

3 minutes ago, Serk said:

I would expect an improved magazine to REDUCE the fire hazards, not the opposite.

It's not improved magazine though, it's improved magazine access. Makes sense that the trade off is a higher likelyhood that something could catch fire.

[Serk]

2 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

It's not improved magazine though, it's improved magazine access. Makes sense that the trade off is a higher likelyhood that something could catch fire.

Yeah, it is well known that designing an improved access to anything means making it less safe. 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Instead of three 3 powder stores and the monkey crews running like mad back and forth imagine expanding it to 3 main stores and 3 additional fast access depots, so 3 at stern quarter batteries, 3 more at the bow quarter batteries. More places with powder, more chances of something to go bad. Faster access to powder, faster reload.

Actually any feedback about this is great if anything is not sounding good and proper. And proper means not always only with the positives but also the possible negatives.

 

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

1 hour ago, Serk said:

Yeah, it is well known that designing an improved access to anything means making it less safe. 

yeah... them zippers can be dangerous. 

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

2 hours ago, _Masterviolin said:

This is something minor, but it is a bit strange. The two "gunnery" perks you can select for your vessel on the testbed server at the moment are Powder Monkeys and Improved Magazine access. However, Powder Monkeys have a -7% reload rate versus Magazine Access at -6% atop increased fire risk. This hence renders Powder Monkeys the clear superior upgrade, both are attainable at the same cost and same fashion so hence Magazine Access would be completely useless.

It is minor yes, but it's worth noting!  Perhaps Mag. Access should have a better reload rate than powder monkeys, to justify the increased fire risk.

This is great feedback MasterViolin, and you're absolutely right, with its negatives, Imp Mag Access really needs to be better than Powder Monkeys.  I'd recommend cutting powder monkeys' bonus in half if we're going to keep the total lack of negatives for choosing it.

[Sir Texas Sir]

I actually think it's a good trade off.  You can go the safe route or you can stack them and have a slight chance of BOOM but faster reload.   I have both on this mercury I'm grinding right now and lets just say I catch fire EVERY FIGHT.  Haven't blown up yet, but I"m on fire pretty much most of the fight lol

[Duncan McFail]

It's about the min/max. Powder monkeys is the obvious choice if you wanted a little more reload mixed with other stats. But if you want to max reload you need to take a lesser stat with some drawbacks. This makes perfect sense. 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Fire surely has changed. It is more catastrophic. Testbed with Trincomalee in 9.98, twice on fire, first time went into shock pretty fast, fire was mid ships and spreading fore and aft. Second time was on the stern, under control but kept cooking. Eventually the spanker got fire, and structure was being eaten away.

Is not similar to Live, feels different... more serious. Oh and don't think about turning off survival. It is hell to pay.

[admin]

13 hours ago, Serk said:

Yeah, it is well known that designing an improved access to anything means making it less safe. 

well.. its more open access thus higher fire hazard. You access it faster/easier and so does fire sparks

maybe it should be renames - open magazine access.

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 hours ago, rediii said:

I never went boom because of a fire when i didn't want to (except one time when i forgot to turn survival on). So why shouldn't i take it? I don't see a tradeoff since you also need almost no crew in surv if your ship is on fire

Yah if you have full crew and not having issues.  Fire damages your ship by the way and sails.   It also depends the ship and where the fire starts at.  Though if some one was in a fight and see's you on fire and hits you with a full broad side of grape and puts you into crew shocks how effective you think those crew will be on keeping that fire manageable.  I haven't got to play with that to much, but it could be apart of the risk for the extra reload.   Now if you want to run a ship like a fireship (without the phoenix figurehead) than some one might take this and remove there survival.  By the way why are you even having survival turned OFF?   That should be auto on at all time?

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

3 hours ago, rediii said:

if you play with the fire to keep it on you want to turn survival off.  

I dare you to try that on testbed.. in earnest. try to cook it like in live and see how it develops.

Had two test battles a while ago doing just that for testing. Was interesting to feel the difference.