Reduce the crew numbers on the indiaman

[o Barão]

17 hours ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

The real question should be: why should indiaman (and so LGV) crew count be an issue?

As plainly stated: they are free marks while on any warship.
If they end being not, it's hunter's fault.

 

It is an issue since the devs always wanted the ships to had historical crew values. The problem about the trader been free marks is another issue. Do not confuse things.

17 hours ago, Thonys said:

the indiaman when leaving the harbor where always extra crewed because of the loss of sailors at sea 

so there is no need to nerf the ships.

also, i would rather see that those traders got their 2 slots back to the level of 5 /5.  it are traders not warships, so 5/5 is an honest ship and not a nerfed ship on forehand like we have today .

why do we have to punish everything or have to nerf things, it is all negative behavior for ships...

 

or just give us an honest dutch trader .....the best ships in the world and not that crap we sail in this scenario 

on april first.. i rather see me sailing a dutch clumb and blow up  every foreign ship... 

"the indiaman when leaving the harbor where always extra crewed because of the loss of sailors at sea 

so there is no need to nerf the ships." Please read the comments before talking stupid things.

17 hours ago, Phaserburn said:

 

Dont nerf, please buff or give a 5 slot refit...

Not only that i would like to see the nerfs to trader ships speeds remove. Doens't make any sense a trader Lynx with empty cargo to be slower than a Lynx. That being said a trader with the cargo full would get an higher penalty in speed in comparison to a warship. 

16 hours ago, Le Raf Boom said:

No other problems to solve?

No other post for you to comment ?

[Thonys]

55 minutes ago, no one said:

It is an issue since the devs always wanted the ships to had historical crew values. The problem about the trader been free marks is another issue. Do not confuse things.

"the indiaman when leaving the harbor where always extra crewed because of the loss of sailors at sea 

so there is no need to nerf the ships." Please read the comments before talking stupid things.

Not only that i would like to see the nerfs to trader ships speeds remove. Doens't make any sense a trader Lynx with empty cargo to be slower than a Lynx. That being said a trader with the cargo full would get an higher penalty in speed in comparison to a warship. 

No other post for you to comment ?

5

Don't have to actually

" read the op title "and i have seen it before.....

ps.  "no one has to comment me "

[o Barão]

42 minutes ago, Thonys said:

Don't have to actually

" read the op title "and i have seen it before.....

ps.  "no one has to comment me "

ok i already understand you have some mental problems so i will try to help you.

You said and i quote. "the indiaman when leaving the harbor where always extra crewed because of the loss of sailors at sea "

Of course if you had read the comments before talking shit you would had read the second comment.

"East Indiamen normally carried closer to 120 crew rather than the 380 we see in game. An example would be the EIC ship Ceylon captured during the Mauritius campaign in 1810. Original complement was 90 and in 1810 she had 110."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceylon_(1803_ship)

Now explain where the extra crew justify the the 380 numbers where it was normal to use only 120 ? Think a little, just a little .

[o Barão]

43 minutes ago, Coraline Vodka said:

@no oneonecause gameplay 120 crew indiman would be trash

Yes but i not suggesting to nerf to 120 ( something around 260 would be ok ). what doens't make any sense is why an indiaman have more crew than frigate. Now if is because a question of balance than other aspects should be consider to make traders ship more interesting in battles . But that is just my opinion. For a game developers that insists in implement realism to the game special when we talk about the crew numbers  which ship haves  and because of this there was much salt when players talk about the requin and his crew numbers as an example, doens't make any sense to buff one ship in game to crazy numbers just to balance it when all others ships in the game follow historical values.

As an example lets imagine we have 2 indiaman but they are different.

- One we have the indiaman in game with 380 crew.

- In the other we have an indiaman with 260 crew, with a buff in speed and with 5 slots for use. 

Which one you would choose ? Which one is more interesting to have in battle?

 

So it reallys needs that 380 crew or the devs are so lazy to do what is right to give the ships balance stats?

Edited October 12, 2018 by no one

[Capn Rocko]

In my experience I rarely see 3 ship Indiaman fleets that are fully crewed. For example: main ship will have full crew but other 2 fleet ships will only have 80. I actually attacked someone the other day who had 2 sailors on one of his fleet indiaman. I also see basic cutters towing indiamans a lot too. I would be more happy to see these issues fixed. 

[Christiaen Stelling]

Here is what we are looking for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Abergavenny_(1795)

An Indiaman that was also used as a fourth rate with 330ish crew as a 4th rate and 90 as an Indiaman, the guns match as well. Only thing is, we do not have the 4th rate version in the game, that would mean that we get double the guns (54 total), this particular example also had 2 bow chasers on her forecastle.

So if it were up to me, I'd say keep this version we have now, and lower the caliber of guns to 9pdrs, and lower het crew to around 260; But also make her a refit as a 4th rate as she was meant to be; with 350 - 400 crew (just a bit more that the one I linked to keep reloading doable) and add more guns to her as described on the wiki page. However if she were to be refitted, lower the cargo space drastically.

I also must note that I agree with the idea of in this case having a speed penalty on having more crew on a trader; not on all ships just traders because they were meant to carry as little provisions as possible to go as far as possible before having to make port again. So for example; you can carry 380 crew however 120 is required to sail her  if you so decide to carry more crew it will reduce your speed with:

120 crew - 0%

140 crew - 1%

380 crew - 13%

Basically every 20 crew you carry will decrease your speed by 1%

 

Cheers,

AvR

Edited October 13, 2018 by Abraham van Riebeeck
forgot to put signature in :D

[Tomasso il Fortunato]

On 10/11/2018 at 7:04 PM, DeRuyter said:

I think there is something to what @Angus MacDuff says, there is a gameplay reason behind it. The issue of crew numbers on traders has been raised before. If I remember correctly they did decrease crew on the smaller traders. Here is part of my post on the Indiaman crew from 2016:

East Indiamen normally carried closer to 120 crew rather than the 380 we see in game. An example would be the EIC ship Ceylon captured during the Mauritius campaign in 1810. Original complement was 90 and in 1810 she had 110.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceylon_(1803_ship)

Another example would be in "Two Years Before the Mast" the brig that the author sailed around the horn on had a crew of 10. 

 

Then the indiaman should have better armour for defence , you can't put a ship with small crew what everyone can capture . I think the correct number for naval action is the action number.

[greybuscat]

Not sure what the in-game Indiaman is based on, if anything real, but some of the larger historical Indiamans (Indiamen???) had up to ~350 crew.

And an extra 30-ish over the historical limit isn't exactly a strain on the suspension of disbelief. IMO, it's no worse than Surprise being over-gunned.

[Bluetooth]

20 minutes ago, greybuscat said:

Not sure what the in-game Indiaman is based on, if anything real, but some of the larger historical Indiamans (Indiamen???) had up to ~350 crew.

And an extra 30-ish over the historical limit isn't exactly a strain on the suspension of disbelief. IMO, it's no worse than Surprise being over-gunned.

That's a 4th rate.

[AeRoTR]

Nerf the indiaman so the Le Requin with 300 crew does not have problem rage boarding him. You know as the DD perk is nerfed, and barricades being very effective. We payed for the ship we want to win with the paid ship. 

Like we have no more problems in the game  let's reduce the crew number of indiaman.

[o Barão]

9 hours ago, Captains said:

Then the indiaman should have better armour for defence , you can't put a ship with small crew what everyone can capture . I think the correct number for naval action is the action number.

I think doens't need any buff in the armor. Give the indiaman (all trader ships) the 5 knowledge slots and give a slight buff in the speed and you have a good ship to fight.

[o Barão]

4 hours ago, AeRoTR said:

Nerf the indiaman so the Le Requin with 300 crew does not have problem rage boarding him. You know as the DD perk is nerfed, and barricades being very effective. We payed for the ship we want to win with the paid ship. 

Like we have no more problems in the game  let's reduce the crew number of indiaman.

You understand that in reality the xebecs were trade hunters? But using your idea why not apply that to all the ships ? 

Lets give all trader ships 350 crew just so they can fight the requins a little longer?

Lets give all frigates a minimum 350 crew so they can have better chance the Requins?

You are starting to see why this doens't make any sense?

[Licinio Chiavari]

7 hours ago, AeRoTR said:

Nerf the indiaman so the Le Requin with 300 crew does not have problem rage boarding him. You know as the DD perk is nerfed, and barricades being very effective. We payed for the ship we want to win with the paid ship. 

Like we have no more problems in the game  let's reduce the crew number of indiaman.

Almost 2 days to put in the center the Requin. A record.

PS: no requin, reasonably, would sail with 300+ crew after crew nerf: this would require >= +20% crew bonus, meaning you need Light Hammocks (+5), Very Cramped (+5), Crew Space trim (+5) and hammocks book (+7.5) too for a total +22.5% to hit the top high of... 306. Anything missing will keep you under 300.

56 extra crew paid losing 15 morale (so melee attack value too), no better trim, 1 perm, 1 book, and using subpar planking... Not going to happen anymore.
The cost had a sense hitting 387 total crew (so a super - and totally OP - big +132) previously. Not anymore.

As a sidenote: dont speak about DD nerf: it could be a nerf without crew bonus nerf; with it, simply it's not.
Speaking of full boarders, and Requin and 6-7 rates in particular (those able to get out max bonus from crew stacking), it was far better having +55% max crew bonus and DD at +30% needed crew than as it is now: I am able to insta-board a DDed Surp (240 or Hercules - 200) with a base crew requin (250)... but I'll fight 250v240 (or 200).

But previously too I could board anyway a DDed Surp having 320+... but then fighting 320+ v240 (or 200); that was far better (and faster).

Edited October 13, 2018 by Licinio Chiavari

[Stars and Stripes]

12 hours ago, AeRoTR said:

Nerf the indiaman so the Le Requin with 300 crew does not have problem rage boarding him. You know as the DD perk is nerfed, and barricades being very effective. We payed for the ship we want to win with the paid ship. 

Like we have no more problems in the game  let's reduce the crew number of indiaman.

What are you on about??

[greybuscat]

On 10/13/2018 at 1:50 AM, Crow said:

That's a 4th rate.

When completed as a combat ship. I doubt it would have had 56 guns if used as a merchant vessel, but I could be wrong. Wiki doesn't say, either way.

The in-game Indiaman is massive for a 5th rate, and under-gunned for her size, because she's a merchant vessel and not a combat ship. I'm just extrapolating from that.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

As an example, some 3rd rates were "converted" into indiamans.

But they didn't have all the gun decks. Actually in most of the circumstances they had one and a half at most.

A 74 gun converted, for example to transport nobles to the far east had only 48 guns ready ( this included 1 and 2 pounders extra mounts on the bulwarks ), and none were the heavy guns, as the decks were transformed into cargo hold and lodging.

 

BTW... gun decks were not cargo holds. Think about that when you look to how many slots and weight space a Indiaman has when compared to a 4th/3rd74.

[Christiaen Stelling]

On ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 8:50 AM, Crow said:

That's a 4th rate.

Which is exactly what the Indiaman in game was, only reason it is a 5th rate is because people could not get the slots on the ship, and the fact that it has too few guns.

Cheers,

AvR

[DeRuyter]

On 10/13/2018 at 1:36 AM, Captains said:

Then the indiaman should have better armour for defence , you can't put a ship with small crew what everyone can capture . I think the correct number for naval action is the action number.

That's why I said there was a gameplay reason behind the higher crew numbers. 

[Njord]

On 10/11/2018 at 10:58 PM, William Death said:

I'd argue in the other direction. I think trade ships should be able to open all 5 knowledge slots. Then we'll get crafty players in "helpless trade ships" that are really combat fitted and manned by cutthroat sailors armed to the teeth. 

I want this more than anything and dare to say, that the only people who are against this simply want free kills whenever they find some lone trader.