Crew-Management

[Earl of Grey]

O7 Captains,

can we discuss a little bit about the crew on our vessels?

I have some thoughts:

Do we have to much crew on our ships? Correct me If im wrong, but with crew Bonus 4 (probably the most Important Bonus) it seems that i can load both broadsides of almost every ship and still have enough men to manage sails ... some ships can full crew all guns and sails and even get some crew in boarding prep.

For me it feels like taking away some depth of the game. Sailing with undercrewed ships showing me, that Crew Management in Battle can be really fun!

And from a historicall view: wasnt it a big problem for a captain to fully crew His ship? In many naval novels i red that ships were almost ever undercrewed ...

For this reasons i suggest to lower crew amount of all ships by 20% ... but would be interested in other opinions ...

 

An other Point: 

Maybe we should give the crew some loading weight. 100 men not only weight around 8 Tons, they need water and provisions and they will use cargo space ...  So maybe it should be some difference If i sail my indiamen with 400 or 160 men crew?

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2019 by Earl of Grey

[Beeekonda]

Your life will never be the same without +8% crew and +4 crew transfer speed

[van stiermarken]

6 hours ago, Earl of Grey said:

O7 Captains,

can we discuss a little bit about the crew on our vessels?

I have some thoughts:

Do we have to much crew on our ships? Correct me If im wrong, but with crew Bonus 4 (probably the most Important Bonus) it seems that i can load both broadsides of almost every ship and still have enough men to manage sails ... some ships can full crew all guns and sails and even get some crew in boarding prep.

For me it feels like taking away some depth of the game. Sailing with undercrewed ships showing me, that Crew Management in Battle can be really fun!

And from a historicall view: wasnt it a big problem for a captain to fully crew His ship? In many naval novels i red that ships were almost ever undercrewed ...

For this reasons i suggest to lower crew amount of all ships by 20% ... but would be interested in other opinions ...

 

An other Point: 

Maybe we should give the crew some loading weight. 100 men not only weight around 8 Tons, they need water and provisions and they will use cargo space ...  So maybe it should be some difference If i sail my indiamen with 400 or 160 men crew?

 

 

 

Fair and realistic would be - full sails and one broadside - so that you always must switch from one side to the other. And btw. the reload time is a way to fast?!

[Angus MacDuff]

6 minutes ago, van stiermarken said:

Fair and realistic would be - full sails and one broadside

Don't ask for too much realism...if you get it, it will suck.  They really didn't require a lot of sailing crew in actual battles because you don't need much unless you're changing your sails and they didn't do that very often in battle.  Generally, you would set your battle sails prior to the fight and leave them...going 2 or 3 knots at best, rarely if ever tacking.  If you needed a sail change, yes you could use the unengaged side to do it, but then they would go back to their guns.  We are a lot more active in our "game" battles and if we want to continue with that (I do!), then we need the unrealistic crew abilities.

[Earl of Grey]

On 12/18/2019 at 6:42 PM, Angus MacDuff said:

Don't ask for too much realism...if you get it, it will suck.  They really didn't require a lot of sailing crew in actual battles because you don't need much unless you're changing your sails and they didn't do that very often in battle.  Generally, you would set your battle sails prior to the fight and leave them...going 2 or 3 knots at best, rarely if ever tacking.  If you needed a sail change, yes you could use the unengaged side to do it, but then they would go back to their guns.  We are a lot more active in our "game" battles and if we want to continue with that (I do!), then we need the unrealistic crew abilities.

Battle Constitution vs Java, Source Wikipedia

On 12/18/2019 at 3:23 PM, Beeekonda said:

Your life will never be the same without +8% crew and +4 crew transfer speed

In fact every ship without at least crewbonus 3 is almost useless for pvp. I habe scrapped purple DLC Ships for Not having Crew bonus. And dont forget the repair Bonus that is included ...

Btw: would be nice If we had an Upgrade that works Like Crew bonus If your ship dont has Crew bonus ... but dont give Bonus If the ship has already Crew bonus 4.

Its one of my greatest fears: redeem a golden Rätt without crew Bonus XD

Edited December 20, 2019 by Earl of Grey

[Angus MacDuff]

4 hours ago, Earl of Grey said:

Battle Constitution vs Java, Source Wikipedia

(slow clap)…..Yes, there is always specific examples for a counter-argument.  Speaking in generalities, Most battles were fought from one side of the ship at a time and the other gunners were available for other duties.  Again, in general, captains planned for this when crewing their ships.  That realistic approach is not valid for us, because we change our sails more often than an F1 driver changes gears.  We also have less than realistic crew needs due to our damage control, manoeuvring, reload times and engagement length.  Don't even get me started on Trader crew sizes!  I'm not saying your OP is necessarily a bad concept, just that I don't think it is something that needs to be addressed or that it would improve the game experience.

[Earl of Grey]

1 hour ago, Angus MacDuff said:

(slow clap)…..Yes, there is always specific examples for a counter-argument. 

Dude, seriously, you say they almost dont move. I Bring an example they do move. You say thats Just an exception ... 

Bring some source ... cant see why the Constitution-Java-Battle should be a great exception? Dont use the maneuverbility of a floating vessel in Battle seems me dumb and a waste and i dont think our ancestors were dumb ...

Edited December 20, 2019 by Earl of Grey

[Angus MacDuff]

7 minutes ago, Earl of Grey said:

Dude, seriously, you say they almost dont move. I Bring an example they do move. You say thats Just an exception ... 

Bring some source ... cant see why the Constitution-Java-Battle should be a great exception? Dont use the maneuverbility of a floating vessel in Battle seems me dumb and a waste and i dont think our ancestors were dumb ...

I never said they don't manoeuvre, I said that they don't change sails OFTEN.  When they manoeuvre, the off-side gun crews are available to work sails...or all of them if the guns aren't firing at a particular moment.  Our game battles pace is many times that of real life and I'm just pointing out that we don't need real life crew activity.

[Earl of Grey]

2 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

[...]

Yeah, Well that's just like, your opinion, man ....

[James Cornelius]

@Earl of Grey This is a very nitpicky argument, and if you start saying that we should have exactly precise crew amounts, then there are a lot of other changes that need to be made as well. First, every  warship sized light frigate and above must have dedicated marines aboard it. Second, you'd need the ability to actually send ships you take in battle directly back to port again to simulate where most of your missing crew has gone. Third, you might as well fight each battle in complete real time so be prepared to set aside a couple days whenever you want to have a fight in Naval Action.

 

This game has already made too many ridiculous "compromises" between hardcore and recognizing that it's a game people want to play in their spare time. The game is not called "19th Century Naval Officer Career Simulator" (though it might as well be). If people continue to get the sorts of things that you want, it's only going to make it even harder to ever have more than 500-700 people playing it GLOBALLY. That's absolutely foolish.

 

I started playing the game at the very beginning of 2016, literally the day it was released on Steam. I loved it. I have over 1100 hours in it - less than some, I know, but more than most. In the name of "realism" it has made it almost impossible to play without having 4+ hours at a sitting. Most people don't have that kind of time. It's been made even worse by the increases in "realism", despite at the same time catering to a very small crowd who want practically fictional nations, insane changes in the rating system of ships, and "mOrE hArDcOrE" playing.

 

Of all the things that need to be changed to help this game, crew size is about the last thing.

[Farrago]

Perhaps ships with “Crew Space” should automatically get the Crew port bonus at a 3 level.

[Sea Archer]

A good start would be to remove the "crew repair" and the high amount of hull repair in battle. 

I understand that holes can be plugged during battle and rigging can be replaced to some extent, but far away from our game mechanics. 

I would prefer to see ships with too less crew surrendering, and sinking should happen only, when too many leaks where in the hull, so that the crew cannot pump out the water fast enough.

This also means, that 1/3 of the leaks cannot be plugged.

[BoatyMcBoatFace]

Doing that will just make people even more scared to take ships into battle. Is this what you want, because that is what you will get! 

 

If you couldn't repair that essentially means you have a 100% chance of death in any battle. Why have a battle then? Yes it is unpleasant when somebody bails their ship from the verge, but at the same time, its nice when you do it, isnt it... repair management is just another aspect of battle. The bigger issue is the repair bonuses that sometimes can get a bit overwhelming. 

Edited December 31, 2019 by BoatyMcBoatFace

[Nooop]

On 12/20/2019 at 10:01 AM, James Cornelius said:

It's been made even worse by the increases in "realism"

Realism was increased? Are you referring perhaps to things like the addition of the GPS ship icon on the map?

[Angus MacDuff]

4 hours ago, Nooop said:

Realism was increased? Are you referring perhaps to things like the addition of the GPS ship icon on the map?

(slow clap...) Well done pulling three words from an entire post and then misrepresenting them.  Yes there are unrealistic aspects of the game.  They make it playable for the vast majority.  You don't have to use the sextant.  Crews are fine the way they are and I would hope that the Devs focus on other areas that need tweaks (Weather!!).  If anything, I would like to see the sail handling crew vary as you give sail orders.  We can assume that the ship is always "cleared for action".  Make it so that the sailing crew is very low if nothing is happening.  If you give an order to change sail, the system takes crew from the gunnery section.  Unless you have one side turned off, it will slow down reload.  This would give the Captain a very hands on feel to his crew.

[MrOkieDokie]

53 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

(slow clap...) Well done pulling three words from an entire post and then misrepresenting them.  Yes there are unrealistic aspects of the game.  They make it playable for the vast majority.  You don't have to use the sextant.  Crews are fine the way they are and I would hope that the Devs focus on other areas that need tweaks (Weather!!).  If anything, I would like to see the sail handling crew vary as you give sail orders.  We can assume that the ship is always "cleared for action".  Make it so that the sailing crew is very low if nothing is happening.  If you give an order to change sail, the system takes crew from the gunnery section.  Unless you have one side turned off, it will slow down reload.  This would give the Captain a very hands on feel to his crew.

This. All of this. Much yes.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

On 12/20/2019 at 7:00 AM, Earl of Grey said:

Is a interesting one to point out regarding the need for crew ( rotation system was and is used in all aspects of warfare )and the casualties in the end ( aside realism of actually surrendering to save face and lives ). A ship listed 350 hands doesn't mean all hands are at all times at a station, even during battles. Gun crews for example, can be listed as 16, but only 8 are manning a gun at one time, others are ready to take over casualties and switch whenever officers see fatigue settle in.

Question (kind of off topic but related to in game mechanic): Why didn't the Java or the Constitution 'anchor' themselves dead into the wind, like we do in game, and fight it out making sternway 'esses' ? Hmmm... maybe it would be the worst option in reality, as opposed to be one of the best options in game. Look at the times, passing the 90-65 degrees into the wind takes 10 minutes to go to the eye of the wind ( even if we go 1:5 scale would be 2 minutes in game ), now imagine the Java would abort the tack through and reverse back through the eye of the wind... would be how many minutes without any wind to spare ? ( she is dead on the wind ). Alas in game we can do that in perfect harmonious fashion. Actually it is the preferred method of many gamers.

Back to crew management...

Gun crews could be used on deck to pull cables, was pretty straightforward work. But to go aloft and do all the rigging work was the "sailing crew" job. Same deal with manning the guns, pushing cables of the carriages is easy and sailing hands can be used but the rest of the reloading and firing process was the "gunnery crew" job.

In game we can reduce both "crews" to zero, by turning off focus, and ship still keep operational levels, especially in sailing. ( sails must always be kepts, fiddled with, they can't simply be left on their own with 0 crew looking after them ).

Like in the example above, the Constitution gained enough separation to proceed with repairs. She wouldn't be able to do that carrying that much sailing procedures. She needed space and time to let go some of the crew aloft to help with the repairs.

So, is there a change needed at crew management? Not really. At best ( or worst ) there would ALWAYS be a minimum crew in all stations representing the true "rigging crew", "guns crew", "marines".