Dibbler (Retired) Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said: IMO wrong. Especially now you need it being starting boarding easier. Or you want your shiny bellona stopped by a p.frig and then catched by a bunch of other ships working your side while still stopped? To be honest you very rarely get boarded when you have more crew anyway, DD was overpowered but now is so diluted is questionable whether i will use. Doesn't matter if you have DD if enough ships tearing you down anyway, delays inevitable unless fast enough build to escape. Personally i won't bother with DD mostly now, but is down to peoples choice and same for all. Edited September 19, 2018 by Dibbler
z4ys Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said: So your point is that ships need to be stopped before boarding is initiated? I agree completely! admin said that ships cannot become entangled due to fps issues we would otherwise encounter. Therefore allowing boarding while moving is a simplification the game has to do. Otherwise we would just see boarding by ships with no sails and masts. IRL entangled ships would stop because they would both destroy their rigging - again game simplification that we are allowed to board while we have speed Ontop the speed our ships have ingame + the gamey feature to be able to run full sails without penalties or benifits for less sail makes it necessary to allow boarding during highter speeds than irl Edited September 19, 2018 by z4ys 1
Liq Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 If devs wanna see less ship sunk and more captured / surrendered, buffing boarding at speeds of 8 kts is IMHO not the way to go. There needs to be a bonus in surrendering over getting sunk. Not too sure how that bonus might look like. Back when we had officer lifes it was used a lot. But now with dirtcheap crew there is no real reason to surrender. Benefit of this would be that more "pvp fitted" ships remain on the market, making them cheaper and more affordable on the long run. 2
Angus MacDuff Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 9 minutes ago, z4ys said: admin said that ships cannot become entangled due to fps issues we would otherwise encounter. Therefore allowing boarding while moving is a simplification the game has to do. Otherwise we would just see boarding by ships with no sails and masts. IRL entangled ships would stop because they would both destroy their rigging - again game simplification that we are allowed to board while we have speed Ontop the speed our ships have ingame + the gamey feature to be able to run full sails without penalties or benifits for less sail makes it necessary to allow boarding during highter speeds than irl That's kinda the root of the argument. What speed is reasonable for the game. IRL, it's basically zero speed. The Chesapeake/Shannon example you used had the ships making almost no speed when they entangled and stopped. Yes, we fight at higher speeds in the game, but really, 3.5 is really okay for us, even though it's crazy fast for real world. 8 knots is ludicrous and will hurt a lot of the game play. 3
z4ys Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said: That's kinda the root of the argument. What speed is reasonable for the game. IRL, it's basically zero speed. The Chesapeake/Shannon example you used had the ships making almost no speed when they entangled and stopped. Yes, we fight at higher speeds in the game, but really, 3.5 is really okay for us, even though it's crazy fast for real world. 8 knots is ludicrous and will hurt a lot of the game play. the number 8 can be changed in no time. But the idea of allowing boarding this way is great. 3
Licinio Chiavari Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Liq said: There needs to be a bonus in surrendering over getting sunk. Not too sure how that bonus might look like. Back when we had officer lifes it was used a lot. But now with dirtcheap crew there is no real reason to surrender. Benefit of this would be that more "pvp fitted" ships remain on the market, making them cheaper and more affordable on the long run. Good points. Ships with the usual 3 perm (for something really permanent, like copper plating or different rigging - spanish, French,...). *The perms being crafted and quite expensive like now. Then like 3+? books as gear (very easy to un lock) that can be easily swapped (muskets, hammocks, sights) that stay with the ship model as unlocked. *These swappable perms still requiring some craft, getting lost with the ship but quite cheap (the extra muskets sinking or being looted and to be produced again for the next ship). Then like 3+? "Books" as crew experience (better reload, better boarding training...) that are bound to the crew of that ship. If you lose the ship you lose crew experience. If you surrender (and/or) not lose more than a % of crew (like 50% - the more some slot lost) you keep crew experience slots. On the contrary you'll sail again with... A rookie crew. *Added= That way we could get an incentive to strike colours to save (in the example) the last 50%+ of the crew and having not to retrain a new one. Edited September 19, 2018 by Licinio Chiavari
Vernon Merrill Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 Lets remember that ships are never really "stopped" given the fact that the *average* deep-water ocean current is approx. 1.5 m/s, or 3 knots. Hmmmmm….. I wonder if that is close to the number approximated for leeway, with a static wind factored in...? Soooo.... Many.... Numbers.... 1
Angus MacDuff Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said: Lets remember that ships are never really "stopped" given the fact that the *average* deep-water ocean current is approx. 1.5 m/s, or 3 knots. Hmmmmm….. I wonder if that is close to the number approximated for leeway, with a static wind factored in...? Soooo.... Many.... Numbers.... Lol, don't get me started on large vessels in close proximity who are theoretically stopped. I've seen some hairy episodes. (Submariny stuff. If I told you, I would have to kill you...) Edited September 19, 2018 by Angus MacDuff 2
Licinio Chiavari Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Angus MacDuff said: large vessels in close proximity who are theoretically stopped. I've seen some hairy episodes As usual: when theory hits reality 😂😂😂 1
Cabral Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 4 hours ago, Banished Privateer said: Players should be also carrying marines, it was a common practice for almost every warship in Age of Sail to have marines! So if was common practice and almost all warships had marines, why is not a automatic option from start? Why we must lose a slot for a thing that was common and wouldn't interfere with broadsides reload times during battle? Atleast the minimal percentage of marines should be a passive knowledge. Even the AI traders in this game have marines 😄
William Death Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 5 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said: Lets remember that ships are never really "stopped" given the fact that the *average* deep-water ocean current is approx. 1.5 m/s, or 3 knots. Hmmmmm….. I wonder if that is close to the number approximated for leeway, with a static wind factored in...? Soooo.... Many.... Numbers.... Drifting then, if "stopped" is too specific for you. Drifting...together. Relative speed between the two ships when they are not actively sailing, not actual speed relative to the bottom of the ocean...or to the sun...or to some other galaxy...or to any other type of "fixed" point (fixed in relation to what?.... hehe) we can expand the frame of reference all you like: The earth is spinning at roughly 869 knots at the equator, but we don't tack that speed onto our speedometers But speaking from a practical standpoint: being on a vessel, engine out of gear; next to another vessel, also at neutral....both vessels can be said to be "stopped" because neither is moving under its own power. Thats when you can throw grapples and pull the vessels together. Not when one is sailing 3 knots one direction and the other is sailing 2kn in a different direction. Not when one ship is stopped and one ship is sailing 5kn in the opposite direction. Not when two ships are sailing in opposite directions at any rate of speed, period. An argument can be made for the possibility of locking yardarms and boarding while sailing the same direction, but even that would be subject to (roughly) similar deck heights, similar speeds, trusting the ability of tangled rigging to hold the ships together, etc. I believe Admin stated this can't be modeled in NA because we would cook our GPUs. (Imagine a 25v25 where no less than 10 ships have locked rigging...oh the FPS drops). 4
Licinio Chiavari Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 14 minutes ago, Cabral said: So if was common practice and almost all warships had marines, why is not a automatic option from start? Why we must lose a slot for a thing that was common and wouldn't interfere with broadsides reload times during battle? Atleast the minimal percentage of marines should be a passive knowledge. Even the AI traders in this game have marines 😄 Even if I could agree that a basic marine complement (I would say like marine5) should me standard feature (on warship, not traders) what in the hell bans you devoting a single book (out of 5) to boarding defense?
sounthernrebel78 Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) It all boils down to this. They hello kittyed up the boarding mechanic for what ever reason. Something that complete caught the player base off guard. The devs new what kind of back lash this would cause so they only posted the patch notes on steam and didn't start a new topic for this patch on the forums. This patch was more than likely and half assed attempt to fix the Requin but all it did was make it more of a problem. They have stated they would choose balance over realism every time well this is not balanced, the requins crew is not balanced. The devs have chosen to side with earning money of the DLC. Nothing wrong with them wanting to make money. The problem with trying to make as much money as they can quickly means one of two things they have admitted (to themselves) the game is dyeing and will no longer support development {Ubisoft had this issue with silent hunter online} or they only care about making money and the game takes a path similar to that of PoTBS which is very similar to that of Naval Action as it is the super arcade version and is completely pay to win. The first one doesn't mean certain death however the second one does mean certain death for NA at this stage of development. side note.... the auto correct for curse words is pretty funny. Edited September 19, 2018 by sounthernrebel78 1
Forbin Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 8 knots boarding ?????? Really ???? This time, after 3 years, I'm OUT of this "game", can't stand how it's turning into a massive mess.
Capn Rocko Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 @sounthernrebel78 game is not pay to win. DLC ships are easily killed by normal ships and even more easier now with this patch. 1
HachiRoku Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 21 hours ago, Havelock said: Did you see my post today from the Nassau patrol fight? I repaired at least 6 (!!!) times that battle, without the repair system this fight wouldve been a joke with way less skill involved. Utilizing repairs to tank damage and return it accordingly with better focus plays an important role in modern NA fleet engagements and i like it way more. We will never agree on this subject man but I do not like the way we are able to turn away and come back into the fight. Its just not the way things were done. 4
HachiRoku Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 17 hours ago, Banished Privateer said: Multi-repair system will be much better soon when Devs fix mod stacking (including repair mods). Old vets remember officer perk giving second repair for like 8 points? It was a game changer and with repair mods veterans were going rampage. it wont, havelock and my duel involved 1 repair mod on each ship. Combat carpenter. We still could have dueled for 3 hours if we really wanted.
Archaos Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 2 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said: Kinda like this? (Cape St. Vincent) I can guarantee you that none of those ships were doing anywhere close to 8 knots. 2
HachiRoku Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 9 hours ago, admin said: In terms of in game availability.. Both ships will remain in game, old USS constitution model has some sentimental value as it is one of the first 3 ships that appeared in game. Rename the old Connie and change the color of it. Maybe even a poll with names 1
Archaos Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 51 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said: Lets remember that ships are never really "stopped" given the fact that the *average* deep-water ocean current is approx. 1.5 m/s, or 3 knots. Hmmmmm….. I wonder if that is close to the number approximated for leeway, with a static wind factored in...? Soooo.... Many.... Numbers.... I think your figures for average ocean currents are a bit exaggerated, yes some of the major ocean currents can exceed 3 knot in places but in general in the open sea currents are a lot lower than that and given that we are talking about relative speeds here it does not really matter what speed the current is going. 1
sounthernrebel78 Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 18 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said: @sounthernrebel78 game is not pay to win. DLC ships are easily killed by normal ships and even more easier now with this patch. I did not say it was pay to win only that was a path in which could happen. Until there is a 1st or 2nd rate DLC the game will never be pay to win.
sounthernrebel78 Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 18 minutes ago, HachiRoku said: We will never agree on this subject man but I do not like the way we are able to turn away and come back into the fight. Its just not the way things were done. I remember the old days where you got one repair per battle. Those days a lot of skill was need to decide when to pop your repair and how to not take less dmg then you could give. Now battles are based on repair timers and trying to take advantage the cool down. The upside to the repair system is that it allows for longer engagements which does have its bonuses as well as its drawbacks. Arguing about the repair system is mute at this point. Its most likely here to stay.
Fenris Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 Wth...Boarding at 8kn speed? Lol.... Another reason to make another break from NA 2
Cabral Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 The devs want to end the possibility of a Hercules hug a Santi and wreck her to pieces with carros, and we are thankful for that, but opened other problems. It's the dance of one step foward and one back.
Capn Rocko Posted September 19, 2018 Posted September 19, 2018 5 minutes ago, Wraith said: And worst of all, this will come at the expense of lowering the diversity of PvP-viable ships. I predict it will be a race to the fastest, most-crew-heavy, boarding fit ships. Lighter ships will disappear once again from PvP setups which is a huge shame. For the most part, yes. I still think brawling setups are still a viabale option. I'll be experimenting.
Recommended Posts