Testbed Feedback - Battle UI, Localization, Patrols, Delivery quests

[Sir Texas Sir]

20 hours ago, Cabral said:

 Maybe the problem is not the heavy damage the cannons have on testbed, the damage is not far from real life damage. The problem is the extreme accuracy of the cannons, nerf the stabilizers and make use of battlesails for a stable gun platform. We get realistic turnrates and battles will last longer than 5 mins.

There should be a reason we use battle sails over anything else, I say make guns less accruate at full sails (remove the stupid laser stern guns).  Maybe give ships a bit more structure HP or mast HP so they don't come down so fast.  I'm sorry if a 5th rate or below took a full 1st rate broad side to the mast it/they should come down.  

[Barbancourt]

If damage is going to be done much faster it would probably be good to get rid of the "prepared" perk. 

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

Am i the only one liking the new dm model a lot ?

Ofc if everyone test in redeemable double shot victory 1vs1 ai this can look easy, (as it is already on live server to be honest, just lineships have to see their hp / thickness balanced between each others)

 

This weekend, i've done a few pve test:

 

Pavel (tek/sab - nav struct - full med guns)  vs Bucc =

The Bucc firepower felt overwelming (felt like fighting a 1st rate), i fully destroyed one of his side, but sank before finishing him as i lost a mast and all my struct by stern shots while looking for a 4st repair. Fight was hard mostly as bucc turned so fast with cannons shooting at improbable angles.

Cerb (sabicu/cs- carro ) vs Hermione =

Fight was intense, raked her two to three times (seems like their is still a cap to the rake structure dmg ?) Battle was very intense, had to repair once, could have escape but i tried to finish her, her last broadside broke my mizen mast and 1 tic struct, but i landed my last broadside to finish her last struct tic, she lost her foremast, she sank faster than me (i think i had brake pumps) so battle ended as a win for me.

Cerb vs LeGrosVentre =

Raked her two times with no masts down, her broadsides left my port side with 1 & half tic, boarded her after she lost her mizzen mast by hull shots. I feel like a player in Lgv could represent a bigger threat.

Agga (wo/wo - nav struc - basic powder - long cannons) vs Agga =

Repaired once, closing in is harder as tanking with bow seems nerfed, the fight again ended as a close call

Agga vs Hermione =

Here a screen from my first broadside fully landed at start (from nearly this distance) She was helpless and i bounced most of her shots, pretty onesided yet again it's an IA, and that was not a 2 broadsides kill.

 

Agga vs Cerb+BellePoule+Essex=

Ended the Cerb in two broadsides i think, Got the BP by boarding (my fault, got stuck there too long with essex shooting at me) then sunk the essex quite simply, but boarding could have been lethal to me.

Edited February 11, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Marquês do Bonfim]

Finally! People were usually testing out the 1st rates and the trinc, but nobody tried to go against other frigates, smaller frigates and the LGV. I'm probably the only player in this whole thread that actually started from a Basic Cutter fighting against Navy Brigs and Privateers and actually got to see the damage model working wonders on smaller ships. Now you came in with different experiences and feedback and I hope people appreciate it because it gives everybody a new and different perspective into the damage model itself. It's not every ship that gets a 1 broadside kill and definetly not the only ship that gives you a challenge when battleing few higher numbers or bigger ships than you.

People need to start testing out other methods and definetly get out of the trincomalee ~ 1st rate test outs that already got heard by admin and criticized on this thread.

Thank you.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Portuguese Privateer

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

My feedback now :

1- As we can now fire broadsides when engaged in boarding, it's even more frustrating to win a boarding but our adversary sink before having time to explore it, it seems like i looted regular kill rewards, not boarding rewards.

2- Could we have a key binding for chase broadsides ? ( so we can use during boarding) i use the arrow from my keyboard personally so it could be easily done.

3- Please remove the last structure tic producing fatal flooding (full crew required at pumps faster than crew transfer): as now structure fall faster from broadsides, zero structure should still allow for a comeback by starting repairs or urgent repairs.

4- Prepared (& double shot) now seems to procure huge advantage vs someone without. PvE multiply the effect as we can control the tag and spawn side to side, in pvp it could be less decisive, yet, i think every one should start prepared and the perk removed. (maybe the same for doubles)

5- Mast should maybe fall from sails dmg too as they fall from structure. A <30% sails ship would have rigging too damaged to support full sails out without critical mast loss. Make it maybe just topmasts first etc.. => this could balance a little the solo lineship vs frig as frigs could focus on sails while trying to stay out of broadsides, a 1st rate may be able to one shot them, but with damaged masts, it will be more vulnerable to rake and frigates could escape.

 

 

And few suggestions :

 

A- Why not tie the masts strenght to the speed setting - Full sails being the weaker/stop the stronger/ battle sails the sweet spot.

  (Historically, captains while in combat reduced sails surface so less forces are applied to the masts, thus improving their resistance. And setting full sails on a damaged mast was very risky)

   The ideal would be that a player with damaged masts can preserve them longer before they fall by using battle sails mode. But if about to lose a mast while in battle sails, going full sails without repairing give great chances to loose a mast. But that last part may not be that interesting in term of gameplay as it can reduce chances to escape if damaged, but it also reduce the kite possibility from a ship damaged in the masts.

 

B- Rename ( or not )structure HP bar as "combat ability" (abstraction to represent ship structure + ability/will of the crew to pursue the fight), while keeping the same mecanism, just make that when the structure bar reach zero, the ship after a small countdown is marked as a kill/defeated & lootable but not capturable anymore (ship is reduced into an unrepairable/unrecovarable wreck ,  just lootable). Sails are folded and ship strike the colors, count as a kill like now and only sink if scuttled after loot, if not, it stay there so loot can be done whenever the survivors want.  

Last % of Combat ability / structure hp can maybe be regained by urgent repairs (captain using his charisma to motivate his crew into a last effort) just enough to pass from zero structure to enough to stop the flooding to death / countdown. If enough crew is then at pumps and no damages taken , ship can wait his next repair.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Sir Texas Sir]

5 hours ago, Intrepido said:

Another Battle:

 

Victory vs Santisima.

You definitely can not tank with the bow or the stern anymore. I almost sank using the old tactics.

I was able to reload shock with doubleball one time at the begining, then I switched to always ball.

 

Surprisingly, a quite tough battle between ships of the same rate due to high firepower of the santisima.

 

On my last char to do the 25 kills I put that Bow/Stern mod on my ship that pretty much puts them at the same armor rating as the sides.  It honestly made a big diffrence then when I played the more tanked out builds of LO/WO or CAR/WO compared to the Teak/Wo with Elephant.....It felt like i wasn't looosing so much crew and structure to random bow/stern hits cause some would actually bounce.

I haven't done a true 1st rate vs 1st rate fight, was planing to do that with two alts to see how they handle as AI isn't always the most predictable cause we don't know the build of AI ships.

[Koltes]

19 hours ago, admin said:

Mast thickness is not updated on the test bed (uses old parameters) and hull as well. It will be hotfixed on monday, after data review. We will tune the thickness for ships which will update the mast to all distances and values. We are even thinking of increasing mast hp a bit which will reduce mast sniping even to lower level than on current live servers making it so that new system is preferring the demasting through rakes.

The increased speed commented on by @OjK is caused by change of structure damage calculations

Previously structure was damaged ONLY if your planking was low. Creating cases where you had low planking on both sides but almost full structure
we tuned it - because structure IS planting + frame, we start to damaging it early, Thats why battles are 20-30% faster (if you shoot into correct places). To bring them back couple of options exist and we will post them on monday.

 

Sorry I must have missed a lot, can someone just in couple of words explain me what this new system is? Thanks in advance

 

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

Yes carro balls should probably loose speed faster, making them loose a lot of pen past medium distance. Also they feel like as accurate as med guns, while i feel they should be even less accurate at distance.

Also i note a display bug in battle instance, the hud still show me the double balls ammo option  as available (clear blue) even if it didn't let me load them on carro.

[Marquês do Bonfim]

I always thought carros couldn't load double shots. 🤔

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

They can't, it's just a display bug i noticed.

[Sir Texas Sir]

16 minutes ago, Portuguese Privateer said:

I always thought carros couldn't load double shots. 🤔

They can’t unless you are AI, they been caught doing so.

[huliotkd]

new damages are ok. now some correction

AI: reduce all the bonus they have due to new damage inflicted, they still have too much manouverability, acceleration, turning.

1st rate/2nd rate : more expensive to craft, and more thickness. the new historical penetration of guns must be matched with historical thickness, i don't know if we are already using the correct thickness. we need just a little bit more of thick , not an exagerated buff, cause structure can be damaged from the beginning of the battle reducing speed too much. the idea is ''1st rates must be a slow battlestation, but moving''. if we are already using historical thickness...well, it's a new fitting game to study :D .

3rd rate: i still have to redeem a bellona to fight with but the AI i managed to sink (in Vic) are really dangerous now cause 32pd inflict a lot of damage to a 1st rate and they have more speed and manouverability than a 1st or 2nd rate. finally, their role of ''lone pvp hunter'' seems to be reached. thickness should be correct as it is now, no buff needed.

4th rate: their role is to form small hunting group. 2 4th rate can be also a 1st rate killers , due to 24pd new damage. good turning, speed , maybe a very little buff to thickness. good 5th rate killers

5th rate : finally soft as they should be. correctly fast, and dangerous with carro loadout until 4th rate but don't think they can sustain a close range battle with the Wasa or 3rd rate. bellona will wipe them fast, as it should be. Indefatigable should be switched to 4th rate, it's too tanky to be a 5th rate...i sank one in 3 full broadsides of Vic with long guns, mybe with medium could be 2 and an half but still too much to be a 5th and it is also too slow to be a 5th.

6th rates : not tested yet but they are strictly connected to boarding.

Boarding: boarding is now more vet-friendly due we can still see the change in enemy preparation and new players doesn't have that experience nor they can acquire anymore. now the ships can fire guns also, so boarding must be changed to a faster ending/resolution cause it could be no more profitable to do... you board, receive new damage from victim, new damage from it's friend, new damage from F8 reinforcement so even if you win the boarding you lose the ship.  

a new boarding could be based on the rule of board fitted palyer VS not board fitting player that have to end in 1 or 2 round kill to give a meaning of boarding gameplay and reducing the sure death of gun fire during rounds. BUT, to give a balance to new system, the player with Marines cannot use the gun fire in boarding;  so, if your purpose is to resist boarding sinking the boarder with guns, you must risk to die in 1 or 2 round by the marines of the attacker...the other way, if you want to kill everyone with boarding you have to risk your ship.

obviously, nerf Barricades and buff again muskets and grenades

 

REDUCE STATS OF F8 REINFORCEMENT AI AND EPIC EVENT AI!!!!   i suppose it will be a bloodbath for every skilled palyer :D

 

[jodgi]

15 minutes ago, huliotkd said:

if we are already using historical thickness...well, it's a new fitting game to study

I think many ships in-game have a higher thickness, for game-balancing purposes, than historical values. It's been a long while since we had that discussion, so take it with a grain of SALT.

[Archaos]

2 hours ago, koltes said:

Sorry I must have missed a lot, can someone just in couple of words explain me what this new system is? Thanks in advance

 

Basically, now the masts go down to the keel so raking shots through the bow or stern are likely to hit masts with more likelihood of losing the foremast when raked through the bow and mizzen when raked through the stern. Broadsides into the hull also have a chance of demasting too.

[Tom Farseer]

@admin

From what I could gather from feedback here and videos posted, it seems to me that masts will fall a bit too quickly at the moment. Take this with a grain of salt, I have not the time for extensive tests at the moment, due to RL...
The problem I see with masts as it is right now is that they only get damaged by direct hits with ball/double/charge. That model is in itself a bit weird, if you ask me. A cylindrical piece of hard wood with a diameter of over 1m will shrug off almost anything... Even direct hits with a 42 pd cannon will probably only take of a few splinters. The reason masts fell in reality was mostly due to the standing rigging (shrouds, stays and backstays) being damaged by chain shots or their anchors to the hull (deadeyes) being destroyed by incoming fire.

Changing from a mast hitbox system is arguably too complicated to get fast results.

Therefore I suggest the following adaptation

1. Buff mast properties to the point where ball will only be a danger to tops and topgallants, but not the main sections (except for maybe 42pd at less then 100m with reduced damage or buffed mast HP).
2. Couple those stats directly to sail HP and Structure. Let mast thickness go down with sinking hitpoints (much like the armor thickness).

 

The effect will be that only once a ship is sufficently shot up (eg. damage to structure and rigging) the main section of a mast becomes more vulnerable.
Because every mast is connected to all other masts via stays and to hull via shrouds and backstays even the mizzen can fall more easily when for example the main-topmast is gone. So there is no need to differentiate rig damage any further. Just the overall percentage will be enough.

Also while we're at it I would greatly increase the amount of ship notes and resources people can redeem on testbed. the idea is to sink stuff to test things. No need to have ppl grind up resources just to keep testing.

 

Edited February 11, 2019 by Tom Farseer

[jodgi]

49 minutes ago, Tom Farseer said:

The problem I see with masts as it is right now is that they only get damaged by direct hits with ball/double/charge. That model is in itself a bit weird, if you ask me. A cylindrical piece of hard wood with a diameter of over 1m will shrug off almost anything...

We've grown used to looking at it as an abstraction for general rigging damage leading to failure of the support and the consequent falling of masts. There are masts and sails in the damage model, but not supporting rigging.

[Sea Archer]

Maye we can simulate the shrouds by deviding the side armour in as many parts as masts are on the ship. You will damage only the part you hit. If the bow-section is down to 50% you have a chance to demast the lower section of the foremast. The chance increases by reducing the bow section armour points further, but only when shooting the mast from the side with the damaged armour or from forward or back, not from the undamaged side. Topmasts may be shot away by balls without armour damage.

[Marquês do Bonfim]

New Structure HP + Thickness status ships:

1st Rates:

L'Ocean = TE/WO Sides +853 25227

Santíssima = TE/WO Sides +813 24069

Victory = TE/WO Sides +725 21445

 

2nd Rates:

Bucentaure = TE/WO Sides +650 19230

St. Pavel = TE/WO Sides +547 16185

 

3rd Rates:

Bellona = TE/WO Sides +501 14841

3rd Rate = TE/WO Sides +501 14841

 

4th Rates:

Connie = TE/WO Sides +439 12994

Ingermanland = TE/WO Sides +285 8454

Agamemnon = TE/WO Sides +327 9687

Wapen = TE/WO Sides +306 9071

 

5th Rates:

Belle Poule = TE/WO Sides +181 5359

Cerberus = TE/WO Sides +126 3731

Endymion = TE/WO Sides +281 8325

Essex = TE/WO Sides +178 5279

Frigate = TE/WO Sides +152 4512

Indiaman = TE/WO Sides +273 8073

Le Gros Ventre = TE/WO Sides +198 5856

Pirate Frigate = TE/WO Sides +166 4923

Rennomee = TE/WO Sides +146 4332

Surprise = TE/WO Sides +135 4010

Trincomalee = TE/WO Sides +252 7463

[dark arisen]

@admin

I understand that you do the best on your abilities to make the game more enjoyable and realistic, I agree that players should try to find and kill 1st rates while hunting on Hercs and Snows, beating an L'Ocean in a Snow should not be possible.On the other hand I find some of the changes that were made overshouting what was needed, therefore I would like to point some things I belive will take it to this direction based on my recent experiance on the Testbed server

 

first of all, masts fall down way too easily from destroying structure. I understand the idea that ships structure keeps the masts together but I belive that in order to demast a ship by hitting its structure you need to hit the masts many times through it. That would need a hitbox under the mast that would have the same, if not more HP than the lower masts section. 

2nd, structure damage from bow and stern is too much. I agree with the idea that you cannot be tanking broadsides from a large ship by showing your stern or bow but you shouldnt be able so sink faster that way. And while on a frigate you should be able to lower the incoming damage by showing your bow to an enemy frigate. Sniping the stern of a ship to damage the structure from more than 500 meters should be much harder if not impossible. 

I belive that the way game is now, making boarding an other vessel easier would be for the benefit of the combat module. My suggestion is making boarding possible when the relative speed it less than 3.5kn for speeds 0-3.5kn with 0 damage on rigging (that means that If we sail with 3kn in opposite directions you cannot board me), relative speed of 2kn for speeds 3.5kn-7kn with engaging on boarding causing some damage to the rigging of your ship (as stopping the enemy vessel with ropes attached to your rigging will be harmfull for it), and 1kn relative speed for speeds from 7-10kn with great rigging damage. (speed limits are for the faster ship) 

I dont write on the forums a lot so, taking the opportunity I would like to comment on something else. Having a lot of crew on a ship should affect the total weight of the cargo as provisions and crew have some mass. there should be a voloum limit as well on ships. It is much easier to fit in a room 100kgs of iron than grain. These changes may seem out of context but I belive that ballancing ships this way would lower the need of doing it through the combat module

lastly, based on the general direction the game is going I would like to suggest that.  It is understandable that a skilled player on a very small ship should not be able to take on a new player on a very large vessel, but making the game "largest ship wins" is not enjoyable from anybody and will make frigates more useless than they should be and everybody will be sailing on line ships. I agree that there should be a large andvantage on the large ships side, but not large enough for somebody to be unable to overcome it with his skills as a captain.

I hope my points were valid and I thank you for your time and your hard work, I really think you have done a great job with this game.
with respect. 

Dark Arisen

[Marquês do Bonfim]

Live Oak/White Oak is even more dangerous now with those new structure hp points and thickness. They definetly did increase with the new patch this morning, if I'm not mistaken or am I the only one thinking that 20k side hp is a lot compared to the live server status right now?

[Grundgemunkey]

37 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

First I assume @admin will need more feedback on the new damage model before its release to live servers.

What I dont understand why not more people are testing it and giving reports of their experiences. If you dont like something now it is the best moment to say it. 

i dont like it at all ... i dont see how it improves anything apart from those that like pve.. it will speed up pve battles ... it will ruin pvp and rvr ... i havent commented before because it was a negative experience ,,,

frigates never sank lineships in real life because lineships never sailed alone so there wasnt a case of a frigate v 1st rate 1v1 ,,,, NA  is different ppl sail 1st rates alone all the time ...so to stop them losing their ship make it impossible for a frigate to sink it

ithink they are fixing something thats not broken and maybe breaking it while doing so ...

 

[van Veen]

In my opinion, ship-to-ship combat is the best working part of the game. The existing damage model is good. Sure, minor stuff needs to be tweaked, but it has a nice overall balance. 

Instead of wasting resources on something that is working, I would have expected focus on those subjects that badly need overhaul: the currency, inflation, useless bots instead of AI NPCs, NPC traders, raids/plundering towns, ROE tweaking, faction wars, town economy. 

The big problem of this game is low player retention. New players go away quickly (too hardcore?), but also veteran players leave (bored?). THIS needs to be fixed. 

OK, you really want to fine tune the damage model? Then do it with a different approach. Throw some veterans in an arena and let them fight it out. Make a set piece and iterate quickly. Take small steps. These big development steps which cannot be made undone easily tend to take you out of the frying pan just to toss you into the fire. 

Disappointed. 

[admin]

38 minutes ago, van Veen said:

Instead of wasting resources on something that is working

The problem is that the damage model is working but not for all. It should be supporting the historical patterns and general in game progression.
If it is not supporting the progression it is making average players feel that they are wasting time. 

I personally believe that the combat model is one of the drivers of retention. And should support the historical mental patterns. Of course this is very important for new players as old players (those who are left) are very fine with the current model. But looking at data. 

I will repeat the previous comparison

Old model

• Average player spends up to 30 days to level up to a ship of the line
• Average player spends immense resources and time to get the ship of the line
• Average player takes the ship of the line out
• Average player sinks to 3 frigates and whenever he hits them
• Player then finds out that DPS of light guns is 2x higher than DPS of heavy guns and gets told to learn to play
• Comparing this to the historical mental model (frigates avoided ships of the line) he is disappointed and blames the game

In new model

• Average player will despatch 3 frigates with ease. 
• Average player will still sink to other skilled heavy lineships
• This fits his historical mental model and he will be dissaponted a lot less
• He will feel amazing power of the ship of the line compared to a smaller vessel and will as a result consider his time and money investment worth it

TLDR version
Ships of the line were not kings of the sea in the old damage model. 
But in the mental models they are.
Games must fit the mental models or CANON otherwise they its just pissing against the wind (losing customers) - that's why you wont find shooters on PC that do not use WASD for example. Because its already canon. And you wont find an MMO or any progression based game where DPS progression is reversed. 

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

Veterans are the one liking and mastering the combat model as it is right now, and always adapting to the lasts different meta we had, why be so afraid in returning to a time when attacking a lone constitution with 6 snow was suicidal, (a time when server was full), at the moment, it would be suicidal for the constitution only due to side hugging + agility bounce meta. And all forum vets seems ok with it, so maybe we should not listen to them only.

I don't tell econ & RvR should not be a priority before DM. 

Edited February 11, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[erde_m]

So the goal is: Everybody wants to sail first class ships as King of the Seas - this will drive away the last lot of "old" players