Patch 30: Combat and boarding feedback

[HachiRoku]

On 3/1/2019 at 10:55 AM, admin said:

6lb guns penetrate ALL ships at the distance of 200m, and penetrate all ships planking with all upgrades at 100m

This might be true on paper but it is false in the real world. @Liam790 did a good bit of testing last night and my 12 pounder top deck guns were bouncing of liams victory at a good angle at 250m?? liam? Maybe 300m Angling still is very very effective. I do not know what players are talking about. 

What build was your victory liam and can you confirm it was 300m? 

Also I have been thinking about what you said about increasing thickness and decreasing cannon penetration. You want 4th rates to do damage on first rates but what are 4th rates guns?

24s,18s and 9s. 50% of their broadside is 18s and 9s. If you nerf the penetration of those calibers and increase thickness of ships you will do more harm than good. First rates broadsides are 75% 42s and 24s. You handicap the 4th rates more. The main reason we have BR fillers was always armour and guns. Hp never mattered. The ocean was meta because her hull is simply better than the santis because of the 3D model of the ship. Masts are not perfect now but I aam 100% sure Long guns are perfectly balanced when it comes to hull penetration. 

I think you should experiment with HP more than guns. Ignore the connie because she is not a 4th rate. Connie, trinco, endy should be in a class of their own but the rating system is irrelevant anyway in this game since BR is what matters. Except for mods but mods are same for 4-5ths

[HachiRoku]

why does it matter if a cutters 6 pounders can penetrate a 1st rate since the first rate can kill it with a broadside of its top deck carronades anyway? 

[Sir Loorkon]

The boarding screen should at least be transparent. It hinders the overview in battle. The old boarding screen was better in my opinion. 

[Sea Archer]

I had three battles with ai up to now. Me in a live oak/crew space frigate, with long 18pdrs on the gun deck and 24pdr carronades on the weather deck.

I fought (in single battles) 1 renommee and 2 cerbs. Due to stupid ai, all battles where parallel sailing with shooting whenever possible. Since the broadside weight should matter now much more, I thought that 18pdr vs. 9 pdr would be easy and with a clear result.

The renommee I killed with 3 and a half broadsides, the first one double shotted. Surprisingly my frigate got damaged by the reno down to 10-20% structure, so nealy sinking. The same happened with the first cerb. Only the second cerb acted as expected and sunk when my side armour was at approx. 1/4.

It seems to be a strange to recieve thar much damage from 9 pdrs. I don't know if ai has secretly changed the guns to carronades, that would be an explanation.

 

I still don't like it, when a ships sinks (even if only a light frigate) after 4 broadsides, with hits only above the water line. I would like to have the damage model reworked, so that sinking may only occur when the ball hit below or close to the water line. I would make it that way, that every second or third leak cannot be plugged during battle, so more men have to be send to the pumps to keep the ship afloat, while side armour only protects crew and increases the strength of the masts. Demasting should be easier without side armour and should occur when there is too much press on the sails for the remaining shrouds.

 

[Angus MacDuff]

10 minutes ago, Sea Archer said:

I still don't like it, when a ships sinks (even if only a light frigate) after 4 broadsides, with hits only above the water line. I would like to have the damage model reworked, so that sinking may only occur when the ball hit below or close to the water line. I would make it that way, that every second or third leak cannot be plugged during battle, so more men have to be send to the pumps to keep the ship afloat, while side armour only protects crew and increases the strength of the masts. Demasting should be easier without side armour and should occur when there is too much press on the sails for the remaining shrouds.

I think we need to accept ships sinking with above water hits.  In RL, a captain would surrender from damage crew loss.  This doesn't happen in our game so we need to simulate.  I feel that our current model is good for game play

[HachiRoku]

Currently ingame the game gives you 4 broadsides of double ball for all ships. This gives mixed deck frigates a huge advantage over full longs. Alot of people including myself choose mixed deck because of this. We get 7 broadsides of doubles + carronades instead if the normal 4. I believe the game should count the cannons on the ship before we start battles and give people the normal intended 4 broadsides. Another thing that could be done instead of complety nerfing carronades as they are atm is to give ships with cannons 6-8 broadsides of double ball. This way carros have the DPS advantage but cannons the broadside weight advantage. 

Either way its bad mixed decks have a double ball advantage. 

[Sea Archer]

49 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I think we need to accept ships sinking with above water hits.  In RL, a captain would surrender from damage crew loss.  This doesn't happen in our game so we need to simulate.  I feel that our current model is good for game play

No, we have to make crew worth something. Since money will be there a plenty, I once suggested to have crew as landmen, ordinary seamen and able seamen. The lower the quality, the slower the work. To be promoted, the crew has to survive battle and with every 20 XP gained in battle one landman will be promoted to ordinary seaman and with every 50 XP gained an ordinary seaman will be promoted to able seaman. You can only hire landmen.

But you can choose how many of whick class shall be assigned to your ship.

This should be an incentive to save your crew.

Edited March 2, 2019 by Sea Archer

[Aquillas]

A fight between ships of the line, with the new damage model (2 l'Oceans vs Santi + Bello)

I think the base damage of guns is a bit too high, this should be reduced (for instance -30% for all guns and carros). This  could add more strategic input in the battles. With present settings, a good focus by 4 SOL on a single one should sink her in the minute.

Edited March 2, 2019 by Eleazar de Damas

[Tac]

12 minutes ago, Eleazar de Damas said:

A fight between ships of the line, with the new damage model (2 l'Oceans vs Santi + Bello)

I think the base damage of guns is a bit too high, this should be reduced (for instance -30% for all guns and carros). This  could add more strategic input in the battles. With present settings, a good focus by 4 SOL on a single one should sink her in the minute.

Indeed it can and indeed it does.

[Jan van Santen]

How is the Solo PvP zone supposed to work on PvE ?

Today eg is Nassau Patrol. SP Patrol ship rank is 6th. So in order to get the medals for exchange at admiralty I am to sail a 6th rate myself and wait till a 6th rated ai ship crosses that SP zone ??

[Cmdr RideZ]

Would be much better without double shots. More double shots you bring, higher change you have to win. You bring more friends, you bring more double shots. This sucks.

Mixed setup is the most difficult to use so I like to see it useful, should be the best option.

SOLs feel too good vs frigates.

[huliotkd]

20 hours ago, Mr Pellew said:

Soo another thing @Privateer can confirm: Muskets/boarding mods in general need a nerf. 

I boarded Privateer in a fight outside MT.

I was sailing an ocean with Marines 15 and Shooting and 1k crew. 

He sailed a Buc with Nassau Fencing masters, Redoutable Muskets, 5 rings, Marines 15 and Shooting 1-3 and about 800 crew.

1st round was me attacking him pressing muskets. I killed about 80 Crew and he killed 350 of mine. 

 

After that I  messed up and forgot to defend but the first round of that boarding shows the strory of rageboarding atm.

 

nope, you weren't prepared for boarding so you correctly died.

Privateer was using 4 boarding mods, you only 2.   so it's correct that you die in 1 or 2 rounds.

17 hours ago, greybuscat said:

You basically broke repairs. Increasing hold sizes would help, but repairs are so expensive already, you should just have repairs give more HP per repair, relative to the recent HP increases.

Devs should reduce allowed repair to only 1 raound for each type...you can still go for endless repair...but devs are going into correct direction

[William Death]

So far in my short testing of the new combat model: its bad. Remove it please. Thanks. Here's my reasoning:
 

Power creep is real. Why, pray tell, should I sail a teak/wo Bellona when I can take my fir/fir Victory that has more HP, way more firepower, and is just as fast? At least pre-patch 30 I could point out that the paper Victory had poor thickness and had a harder time bouncing. Now angling matters a bit less and the HP advantage + firepower makes the light first rates even more appealing. Bad.

Not that I'm complaining for myself mind you (I prefer to sail first rates) but I recognize that its bad for the game.

Masts are all toothpick thin again too. Prepare for the complaints of players who cannot mod their masts untouchable. Doesn't bother me because I'm one of the handful of US-primetime players who can demast reasonably well...but I think the EU timezone players have a few more good demasters sailing the seas. Bad.

 

Repairs are in an even worse spot than before patch 30. As @Wraith pointed out: HP values all got buffed, which means that we need more repairs per use of a hull or rig repair in battle. So that means we have to carry more in our holds. Hold size wasn't increased, which effectively means we cannot carry as many repairs and/or are slower. This is not the way to eliminate the repair meta. All this will do is encourage more ganking and discourage solo/small group OW hunting. Too time-consuming and not worth the reward to sail an hour+, get in one battle, use some repairs, then have to sail all the way back home because you're low/out of repairs. Bad.

Argue whatever you wish about repair meta, the simplest option to fix it has always been to go back to 1/1 repair per battle, coming from a supply of repairs (used to be 20-30 carried at a time) that are refilled in any port you stop in. 

Old boarding system was good. The overlay was semi-transparent, which was greatly appreciated. Hiding the enemy's choice is not good. I don't remember who first said it on the forums, but they were right: "it turns something like 'rock-paper-scissors' into something that is *exactly* 'rock-paper-scissors.'" Sure, you can look at melee or prep values and get an idea....but how many casual players have such numbers memorized, or even know what they mean? I've been in TS with good players who didn't know what melee and firepower numbers meant, but they at least knew what moves to counter what. I haven't tested shooting guns while boarding, but it sounds good on paper (I'll withold my judgement though till I board someone).

 

My suggestions for improvements to the combat model: go back to previous damage model, reduce repairs to 1/1 from the old built-in repair supply like we used to have, go back to old boarding system. 

I gotta say, it feels nice sailing a first rate, knowing I can one-shot pretty much anything that floats....but that is not good for the game. I do feel badly for the players who can't afford to sail first rates or other SOLs everywhere, and I've got a feeling it'll be even worse when everything is wiped and we start fresh. Whichever clan gets a fleet of first rates first will become nearly unstoppable. Players still trying to rank up in frigates and fourth rates will get wrecked by speedfitted SOLs. I don't think this is the game we want.

[Sea Archer]

I would make hull repairs only plugging leaks and repairing vital parts like rudder and pumps. Everything else cannot be repaired during battle. On the other hand rig repairs may constantly be made on everything connected with ropes. Changing sails may take a long time, but during this time the sails may not be available. Same with replacing masts and spars.

It should not be possible to replace the lower part of a mast during battle, it can only be a kind of jury rig. Since every ship carries a set of spare bars with it, I would prefer to have it without repair kits.

[Cmdr RideZ]

Have to agree with almost everything William Death wrote there.

The damage model feels better because repair kits. Going back to old 1/1 repairs would be the best option. Carrying 20-30 at the same time and refill at any port was also better. You were able to defend yourself vs multiple attacks. Always got a change to fight or run, and not this S*t that mass can simply overrun everything.

Also the repair kit meta is incredibly boring. There are so often breaks in the battle when people are not aggressive and run and repair their ships. This system was even built to make people aggressive, and still we have those passive sessions on repairing. Also stupid that all tactics are limited to be aggressive or repair, it is like limiting my movement ability to torsotwist.

 

• Ships of the line will now rule the seas. No longer ships of the line will fear light corvettes.

How many different ships we want to see as good options when we have max rank? Sailing profile changes trashed small frigates and now? Expensive upgrades and ship knowledge trashed all but FOTM?

 

Boarding wont be fixed by simply going back. You can reload and fire your cannons twice in the same time as fully upgraded rage boarder will capture a ship? It sucks. 3 years ago it needed a remake, surprisingly it still needs a remake.

 

Sea Archers repair kits. It would be easier to simply repair after battle. The same way as we have crew. Reason why we have crew like this? Long time ago devs tried to push similar system as we have with repairs now. Players did not like it. It forced you to sail back to port after every battle. As old veterans from the time came to this conclusion, there is a high change that new veterans will follow the way eventually.

[Angus MacDuff]

4 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

 

• Ships of the line will now rule the seas. No longer ships of the line will fear light corvettes.

SOLs should never fear a light ship.  However, they should also never be able to catch a light ship.  The balance has been thrown off by buffing one aspect of the game and not the rest.  We would not see "nothing but SOLs" if they were properly slow in relation to lighter ships.  SOLs belong on the line of battle...not out hunting frigates and traders.

[Zlatkowar]

I don't like the new damage model.

Before patch you could engage a larger ship and still win if you play correctly. Now if you just fail to avoid one broadside, you're gone. And I liked the fact that you were free to choose from a large variety of ships from different rates to go out for a good hunt. Now there's absolutely zero advantage in picking smaller rate ships. Not only there is no advantage in doing that, it has also become suicidal.

Before : Me in Bellona VS Santi = FUN. Me in a Vic VS Ingermanland +11 = FUN. Was it realistic? Hell no. But realism is not always the fun path. Good friendly violent fun should be the n°1 focus, followed closely by variety. I don't see the point of having a so called realistic system where everyone sails 1st rates. That's sad.

I know I don't share the majority's opinion. Whatever happens I will adapt. But I think this change was a mistake. The intention was good, the reason was bad, the outcome is... Meh. Average at best. I am strictly speaking of damage numbers.

GUI upgrades are good, except for boarding with the removal of enemy action, but this has been raised on testbed already and ignored.

[angriff]

Not sure if this has been mentioned the other day I was talking to some clanmates and he was dismayed with the 20 minute open of the light BR side of a battle.  While I like the adder I have not yet had a bad experience. However, here are two thoughts from them.

 

1. If you are sailing one to three Indiaman then you have the higher BR when attacked by a Hercules and the attacking side will allow the mission to stay open 20 minutes for other Hercules to join in  based on this mechanism change that is supposed to lower or ease ganking.
2. You will always now have to attack traders with lower rated ships.  If you attack an AI  trader with a higher BR ship then  other ships with huge BR differences can join in to protect the AI trader.  This happened to one clanmate with a Endymion on a AI LGV.  Suddenly two ships a Le Req and an L' Ocean joined in the battle right next to him even though they had fought way off center of the battle.   A point here this battle is just a real example the fact that the opposition ships could not catch the Endymion is not the point being made but rather the simple fact that the overbalace aspect may not appear to work.

[Iroquois Confederacy]

I think sterns are still artificially protected - by that I mean, there seems to be a threshold where you cannot sink someone through stern rakes.  Just took on a United States in an Endymion, and was able to hug his stern fairly effectively, raking him... a dozen or two times, actually.  First with double ball, then with ball, then with grape since it was apparent there was no way to sink him through rakes.

Essentially, if this damage model is to allow smaller ships to engage larger ones, the larger ones have to be vulnerable to stern rakes.  If you rake them down to 25% structure, but then still have to engage their broadside, it's a no-win scenario - especially with multiple repairs per fight.

[angriff]

7 minutes ago, Iroquois Confederacy said:

I think sterns are still artificially protected - by that I mean, there seems to be a threshold where you cannot sink someone through stern rakes.  Just took on a United States in an Endymion, and was able to hug his stern fairly effectively, raking him... a dozen or two times, actually.  First with double ball, then with ball, then with grape since it was apparent there was no way to sink him through rakes.

Essentially, if this damage model is to allow smaller ships to engage larger ones, the larger ones have to be vulnerable to stern rakes.  If you rake them down to 25% structure, but then still have to engage their broadside, it's a no-win scenario - especially with multiple repairs per fight.

I thought it was the damage to crew model that was fixed.. you cant kill the entire crew with small cannon 

[JDAM]

The battle model is good, just needs minor nerfs here and there, the fact is we had 2 x Bellona sailing line astern formation against 6 pirate frigates (1 was a connie) and they all were sent packing from the fight.  We didn't sink any, but in a few short broadsides they realized they were outgunned and egressed as quickly as the gank fleet formed

[Barbancourt]

23 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I think we need to accept ships sinking with above water hits.  In RL, a captain would surrender from damage crew loss.  This doesn't happen in our game so we need to simulate.  I feel that our current model is good for game play

You could achieve that by removing the zombie rum and introducing morale

 

[Iroquois Confederacy]

6 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

I have killed ships stern and bow raking them.

Do you mean killing an individual ship by raking both its bow and its stern, or killing one ship through just its stern, and another ship through just its bow?

 

5 minutes ago, angriff said:

I thought it was the damage to crew model that was fixed.. you cant kill the entire crew with small cannon 

I believe it still is, but in this case I was going for just structure damage.  (I swapped to grape to go for the board when it seemed like he would not sink through stern rakes.)

[Neads O'Tune]

The "lower BR" reinforcement should NOT apply to the attacking side. If I attack a 500 BR in a 200 BR ship then the battle should instantly close. Other wise it is just open to abuse

For example, I couldn't leave Tumbado in a Indef at one point today because every time I tried, a Russian Herc sitting at the dock put it's sails up to follow so I turned back. NOW I wasn't bothered about the Herc as such (They are easy enough to take care of if you know what you are doing) what concerned me was the fact it had a lower BR, meaning that it was VERY likely that the player's goal was to tag me into battle with the lower BR to enable a much larger ships to join like Bellonas or even speed built second rates.

Edited March 3, 2019 by Neads O'Tune

[z4ys]

1 hour ago, Iroquois Confederacy said:

I think sterns are still artificially protected - by that I mean, there seems to be a threshold where you cannot sink someone through stern rakes.  Just took on a United States in an Endymion, and was able to hug his stern fairly effectively, raking him... a dozen or two times, actually.  First with double ball, then with ball, then with grape since it was apparent there was no way to sink him through rakes.

Essentially, if this damage model is to allow smaller ships to engage larger ones, the larger ones have to be vulnerable to stern rakes.  If you rake them down to 25% structure, but then still have to engage their broadside, it's a no-win scenario - especially with multiple repairs per fight.

Had a fight against a surprise with my privateer. Could rake the surprise only to 2bars left after that no dmg anymore.

@admin with a hardcap how can i sink a bigger ship now even if iam skillfull enough to stay out of his broadside arc?