Baptiste Gallouédec Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 On 11/26/2019 at 8:41 PM, admin said: feel extreme pride with my design, when the Elementary course on Ordnance and Gunnery from 1845 accurately describes what happened with shallow waters meta in Naval Action. Naval Action is a replication of historical METAs - and we are not balancing gameplay for making basic cutters useful (we did some time ago but *** that time - we were idiots) Sail 32 pdr carronade ships. Do not like it? Good luck (we should allow use of 24 and 32 lb carrons on all light ships) 3 hours ago, admin said: We never said so. Please quote us - if you cannot find a quote please amend your message 1
Malcolm3 Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 I agree, that when you put heavy guns (32pdr carronade is heavier than 9pdr long gun) on light ship there should be some disadvantage from it. In reality they were the following: Larger gun is usually heavier, and more weight means more draught and also less speed and maneuverability and buyoancy (stability also) Larger gun need more crew and that means more space for men operating gun, so larger guns on small ships should have some malus to reloading Larger guns are usually more powerful, so the recoil will stress light timbers much more and after some shots you can make your ships leaky - as example read a part of "Master and Commander" by O'Brien, when Aubrey tries to put 12pdr long chasers in his "Sophie" (small brig). And the last thing was the main reason why many ships didn't have heavy guns though they have place for them on deck. But in NA only disadvantage of having heavier carronades is small speed and hold size reduction due to weight 1
Never Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 4 hours ago, admin said: We never said so. Please quote us - if you cannot find a quote please amend your message Carronades were never superior and had one use - devastating close range broadsides. All ships that can fit 32 carronades due to size of the port received this ability. This is based on the historical book findings that we posted in other topics As a result all ships that can fit (physically) a 32 lb carronade got the ability to carry it If one part of the mechanics is going to be 100% true to reality then the whole rest of the system has to be as well, for it to reach some semblance of acceptable balance. You mentioned it yourself many times, lineships were sometimes and oftentimes faster and sailed better than smaller ships. If that was also part of the current mechanics then long guns carried by such lineships would preserve their advantage over the fully carro fitted small sloops and frigates. Currently a fully carro fitted small ship can just hug and larger ship and blow it to pieces while the larger ship can't do much while waiting to load it's main deck longs. No ship in real history would've done that so carelessly, but because we have no musket fire form the decks or the high points of ships, there's no fear of the crew being decimated by musket and other small arms fire from the bigger ship. 2
admin Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 50 minutes ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said: this quote referred to carronades only. 32pd carronades are better than 18lb carronades. Do not like 18lb carronades - sail ships with 32lb carronades Your statement said we said all guns are useless. We never said so. Please remove your statement
Baptiste Gallouédec Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 12 minutes ago, admin said: Your statement said we said all guns are useless. We never said so. Please remove your statement I talked about you saying 32pd carro were historicaly the superior option, and it's how it is in the game. I just quoted that here. The text you choose as illustration talk about 18pd carro as "paltry pieces" compared to 32pd carro, Yet in game 18pd carro are already a better option than 6pd long, maybe even better than 9pd long. Are you trying to tell me you plan to improve the med&long guns damage input at range ? Cause right now no one would use a canon ship in shallows, and even less after the changes, in shallow, med or long guns at range can be outrepaired, plain & simple.. (+ in group, the kill will always end for the carro ones, even if they catched their prey due to long guns firing at sails) Also the problem everybody point here is that the Snow is so fast & agile right now, that at range it can tank canon damages by angling + repair meta, and when closer it can stern camp + maximise 360 firepower by turning like a spinning top. I see zero people complaining about Mercury with 32pd, lynx with 18pd (i even asked for that and thank you for that!) Nor complaining about 32pd carro being much better than 24pd or 18pd carro.. 2
Chromey Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 if u cant beat em, join em. get those turn mods installed and strap on those 42 lb carros!
Sir Texas Sir Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 On 1/20/2020 at 6:29 AM, Angus MacDuff said: I suspect that because the damage model is fairly close to realistic, the other performances (gun accuracy/Ship speed/manoeuvrability) which are exaggerated, tend to put us in situations where something like a Snow can become a monster. It's ability to cling to the stern of a line ship is very unrealistic and causes continual grief amongst players who have been victimised in this manner. The fact that they were sailing their brand new, shiny line ship as a solo is another game difference from RL. The expectation among many players is that because in real life these tiny ships didn't create the British victory at Trafalgar, it won't happen in our game. Real life use of Line Ships was generally restricted to fleet actions. We do not want to see that in the game, because we all (not me!) want to sail the big boys. Yet they are far too vulnerable when used in game to smaller warships. I think that comparisons within any class are fairly close. You want to know the fastest way to solve the big ship getting stern camp by little ship issue with say a Snow and SOL? \ MUSKET AREA OF EFFECT They said they have it in game but never put it in and it's used in UA:Age of Sails, so why not put it in game? That would stop from little ships getting way to close to a big ship. Boost the crew damage up if some one has musket mods and such. You see those little ships instantly melt of crew. 23 hours ago, Never said: I would like to see the possibility to chose a wider variety of cannon calibers. But if you chose a higher caliber that results in much heavier guns, then that should carry a penalty. Currently there is no penalty for picking 32p carros over 24p carros. Much heavier guns should dramatically affect the handling of the ship. I would love to see 32's on two decks but we don't have any ships with those on the second decks. Would love if I can drop 42's down to 32's which allows me to raise the second deck of 24's to 32's so I have on some 2nd rates two decks of 32's. Have it have limit's of cannons per deck not ship as a whole. 1
erelkivtuadrater Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, admin said: this quote referred to carronades only. 32pd carronades are better than 18lb carronades. Do not like 18lb carronades - sail ships with 32lb carronades Your statement said we said all guns are useless. We never said so. Please remove your statement All ships that can fit 32 carronades due to size of the port received this ability. This is based on the historical book findings that we posted in other topics btw if you really want to go into the "Historically Accurate" subject @admin . Maybe we can also talk about spanish/french lineships equipping heavier armament then 36pd. Obusiers/carronades/poods equippable on cross nation ships. Pirates act as a normal faction. You can transport 100 cannons in your basic cutter, but cant transport 1x good. Cant throw grenades or fire muskets vs closer ships. Swivel guns dont swivel. Unlimited cannon balls. Cant trade in battle. No proper cargo inspection Cant disguise as false flag. These are just some of the top of my head, and i know all of those have been in the suggestion section, i know that all of those are historical accurate. This isnt really to prove a point, but when you want to use your "Historically Accurate" card just as it fits you i feel like someone has to let you know. Btw same series you refer to. Ship classes were usually made with the same material, which would help you balance the game. If anyone wants to read British Warships in the Age of Sail 1817-1863 https://books.google.no/books?id=imFEBgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA214&ots=i9od4xJt-n&dq=when did carronades get standard&hl=no&pg=PR5#v=onepage&q=when did carronades get standard&f=false Edited January 22, 2020 by erelkivtuadrater 4
Slim McSauce Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said: You want to know the fastest way to solve the big ship getting stern camp by little ship issue with say a Snow and SOL? \ MUSKET AREA OF EFFECT They said they have it in game but never put it in and it's used in UA:Age of Sails, so why not put it in game? That would stop from little ships getting way to close to a big ship. Boost the crew damage up if some one has musket mods and such. You see those little ships instantly melt of crew. The solution has always been this. When you're missing a large chunk of periodically correct content, such as small arms, you're not going to find it anywhere else. Balance in an age of sail game requires you too encapsulate, in essence all the common tropes and feature of age of sail. You leave out big chunks of the puzzle like deck fire and you're left with huge gaps in the overarching meta that will be filled with just pure nonsense like a snow glued to the arse end of a Bellona which doesn't pass the smell test, even for a newbie. NA looks good, but is so incredibly impractical and unfinished in it's most core of features which get almost no focus Edited January 23, 2020 by Slim McSauce 1
admin Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 6 hours ago, erelkivtuadrater said: btw if you really want to go into the "Historically Accurate" subject @admin . LIST Historically gun selection was almost always captain's choice usually and he always chose what was best for his ship. In our game captains make this decision. Not you. Historically accurate subjects can be used both ways - everyone knows it. Your list is unfortunately irrelevant. There is no reason to complain about 100 guns in a cutter when you have 1700 t hold for a brig and 4000 tons hold for indiaman If you were to apply realistic holds to ships you would be eaten alive by real players who play real game and do not care about threedecks copy pasta. Not a single ship has realistic hold for gameplay reasons. If players really wanted realistic holds they would complain loudly like @Cetric de Cornusiac organised defense of pve ruleset for pve server. Nobody wants realistic holds. Captains will use what they think is best for winning despite historical differences (even if provided in game). For example despite everyone knowing that 42lb long gun was almost always replaced by 32lb guns in all navies people will prefer 42 lb gun in group engagement for bigger spike damage, bigger leaks etc, despite heavier weight, and more crew for this guns. Gameplay reasons only partly applies to carronades. We actually use the real model and allow carronades only if it could fit the port. Because ships are built on real models and carronades are also to scale - they could have fit those ships in reality. As a result more ships became useful and usable. We know that many new players will enjoy a wider variety of usable ships that this change allows. Carronade changes are here to stay - these changes will shine once penetrations and gun distances are re-balanced as promised in the development plan. 5
Malcolm3 Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 36 minutes ago, admin said: Gameplay reasons only partly applies to carronades. We actually use the real model and allow carronades only if it could fit the port. Because ships are built on real models and carronades are also to scale - they could have fit those ships in reality. As a result more ships became useful and usable. We know that many new players will enjoy a wider variety of usable ships that this change allows. And what about recoil that causes stress on ship's timbers? Heavier and more powerful guns put on light ship can damage it simply by firing. So if we can put gun heavier than usual, we shoud have choice between firepower and safety of ship 3
admin Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 43 minutes ago, Malcolm3 said: And what about recoil that causes stress on ship's timbers? Heavier and more powerful guns put on light ship can damage it simply by firing. So if we can put gun heavier than usual, we shoud have choice between firepower and safety of ship No ship had more than 10 battles. Timber stress from cannons was a non-issue over such short periods of time and should not be an issue in NA. And what about rotting, or fatigue and homesickness and mutinies.? What about them? Most did not care about the wood damaged by firing because, most ships rot within 2 years if were not build from well seasoned salted oak or teak, or had to be repaired for almost price of the ship every 6 months. By the way did you know that (S) stands for salted (not seasoned).. Which was the stamp placed on all well seasoned logs in most european shipyards, because seasoning was using salt. People would sacrifice planking if they wanted to live and survive battle so nobody cared about damaged timbers. People even demasted themselves if they wanted to survive during storm to not capsize. The only reason to not install heavy guns on top decks was ship balance. Heavier guns increased roll and heavy roll was very hard on crew and could unbalance the ship to the point of no return. But 32lb carronades are not really that heavy. There are many realistic and many unrealistic conventions in naval action. All of them are done for the player enjoyment of life. 6
GrubbyZebra Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 16 minutes ago, admin said: And what about rotting, or fatigue and homesickness and mutinies.? What about them? Most ships rot within 2 years if were not build from well seasoned salted oak or teak. Still, the idea of a captain having to make a decision between smaller guns and playing it safe or going big and possible damaging his ship is intriguing and not unprecedented. Many games model such overuse stresses and they add another dimension to the game without adversely affecting gameplay. While the mechanic is different, fundamentally the change is akin to adding leeway to the game (which is coming to your new game, correct)? Such a damage model would also make upgrades like diagonal riders and iron knees have an added dimension, making them potentially more relevant to the overall game. 1
admin Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 10 minutes ago, GrubbyZebra said: fundamentally the change is akin to adding leeway to the game Leeway is already in naval action for maybe 1.5 years. Other sailing improvements like better battle sail mechanics and hull movement from wind will be added as it improves gameplay and does not take anything from players. Gun stress, maintenance, rotting, degrading of ship qualities after of structural damage is not going to be welcomed by the majority - its just too late to add this. We honestly tried it and it did not work because majority of people already like the game and do not like it changed in negative directions and rotting and timber stress will be such mechanics. If they were introduced from the start it would be different. 3
GrubbyZebra Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, admin said: Leeway is already in naval action for maybe 1.5 years. Other sailing improvements like better battle sail mechanics and hull movement from wind will be added as it improves gameplay and does not take anything from players. Gun stress, maintenance, rotting, degrading of ship qualities after of structural damage is not going to be welcomed by the majority - its just too late to add this. We honestly tried it and it did not work because people already like the game (despite some forum whining grannies) and do not like it changed in negative directions and rotting and timber stress will be such mechanics. If they were introduced from the start it would be different. I know, I remember when it was introduced and how the players adapted to it quickly. And, GL seems to like the realism enough to keep it in its new game, as well (which was my point). Leeway adds realism with very little benefit to the player outside of that. No different than stress on timbers from too-large a gun (which has the benefit of being a larger gun). I think we will just have to have different opinions about gun stress, as I think that if don't correctly, it would be noticeable enough to have an effect during battle but not so much to where a few upgrades couldn't counteract it, at the expense of the available slots for something else. It becomes another compromise the player has to make, no different fundamentally than choice of wood is. It would improve depth of gameplay and doesn't take anything from players (how would providing options ever take anything away). Edited January 23, 2020 by GrubbyZebra
admin Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 7 minutes ago, GrubbyZebra said: I think we will just have to have different opinions about gun stress, as I think that if don't correctly, it would be noticeable enough to have an effect during battle but not so much to where a few upgrades couldn't counteract it, at the expense of the available slots for something else. It becomes another compromise the player has to make, no different fundamentally than choice of wood is. It would improve depth of gameplay and doesn't take anything from players (how would providing options ever take anything away). Well. Imagine rusty guns We make iron rust and add bronze guns that do not rust.. What do you think will happen Same will happen with gun stress.. It is just busy work. Nobody really wants it. Do not install riders - replace timbers every 25 shots install riders do not replace timbers ever Its a rider tax - there is no choice here. Everyone will sail with riders and everyone will be upset because choice was actually removed - not added. Now instead of redoutable musket i have to install the stupid riders - stupid devs - ruining my game. Carronades added choice.. Suddenly some ships became better, and the choice is still historical because ships like Pavel did not get 32lb on top deck. THEY DONT FIT THE PORTS! 3
Sea Archer Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 Ok, so the bigger carronades will stay, still the hugging issue has to be solved. Will we get some short range musket defense or even dropping round shot on very close small vessels? 3
GrubbyZebra Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, admin said: Well. Imagine rusty guns We make iron rust and add bronze guns that do not rust.. What do you think will happen Same will happen with gun stress.. It is just busy work. Nobody really wants it. Do not install riders - replace timbers every 25 shots install riders do not replace timbers ever Its a rider tax - there is no choice here. Everyone will sail with riders and everyone will be upset because choice was actually removed - not added. Now instead of redoutable musket i have to install the stupid riders - stupid devs - ruining my game. Do not install riders, you lose a bit of HP each shot (like 1%, something small that will still show a cumulative effect if not addressed), install them, you don't but you use an available upgrade slot. I'm not sure where replacing timbers came from. Everyone won't install them, because they will make a trade between additional battle damage, smaller guns, or using an upgrade slot. Just like now with speed wood/mods, or tanking, or any of the other trades players make when crafting ships. Quote Carronades added choice.. Suddenly some ships became better, and the choice is still historical because ships like Pavel did not get 32lb on top deck. THEY DONT FIT THE PORTS! Great, I'm not saying revert the carro changes. Edited January 23, 2020 by GrubbyZebra
erelkivtuadrater Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, admin said: There is no reason to complain about 100 guns in a cutter when you have 1700 t hold for a brig and 4000 tons hold for indiaman If you were to apply realistic holds to ships you would be eaten alive by real players who play real game and do not care about threedecks copy pasta. Not a single ship has realistic hold for gameplay reasons. If players really wanted realistic holds they would complain loudly like @Cetric de Cornusiac organised defense of pve ruleset for pve server. Nobody wants realistic holds. you keep saying it were historical to mount guns from what the size of the gunport is. Fine, lets go out from that subject. BUT what do you have to say about the british that actually did mount 16x32pd carronades on the sloop class i referred to, but due to combat reasons and safety they had to reduce it to 24pd carronades? The thing is, you keep on adding higher caliber to ships, but there are never any dissadvantages to it. If the heel of the snow increased by x% if you had higher caliber then normal that would be a logical solution to it, but you just simply wont do it. @admin You can literally take an old weight scale and put balance in the middle, if you add one pro to one side, it will tip and become unbalanced, so you have to add one con to the other side to keep it balanced. And besides you answered on 1 of those 10 points i made which were historically accurate. And i still believe you can sort out a much better hold system then whatever we have. Edited January 23, 2020 by erelkivtuadrater 1
Sea Archer Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 It would be nice, if heel is added to the ships stats, as turn rate and speed. It should increase with the weight added to higher decks, so the choice of guns will have an effect. In addition a ship heeling much, has less effective sail surface in the wind and should therefore be slower then a ship sailing upright. With these changes, I would even be happy without any restrictions to armament. 4
erelkivtuadrater Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) @admin its the exact same thing when you decided to add seasoned wood. Yes it makes sense, but they are better in ALL ways, they should historically have less fire and splinter resistance. Due to being seasoned its dried out, yes its ALOT more sturdier and stiffer, but then again it should have some cons to it, so while being dryer and stiffer from the inside the splinters from the ship should be much more dangerous towards the crew aswell as the dry wood should have more risk catching on fire It might seem off topic while its not because its all about balance. Edited January 23, 2020 by erelkivtuadrater 4
Baptiste Gallouédec Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 3 hours ago, admin said: Captains will use what they think is best for winning despite historical differences (even if provided in game). For example despite everyone knowing that 42lb long gun was almost always replaced by 32lb guns in all navies people will prefer 42 lb gun in group engagement for bigger spike damage, bigger leaks etc, despite heavier weight, and more crew for this guns. 1st: In game, spike damages is much more important due to repair meta, something not existing in real life. 2nd: In game, guns weight differences don't impact much the max speed. Also seems to change nothing about turn rate, so in game captains don't consider this parameter. Maybe make it zero weight penalties for equiping a less-than-max caliber idk 2
Sea Archer Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 Increasing heel and speed reduction due to heel, when too much weight is added to the upper decks, will prevent overpowered ships from beeing too fast on some courses, beam reach to close hauled will be very bad then, while they might be fast broad reach to running with the wind. In my opinion this will fairly balance the game. 4
Genevieve Malfleurs Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 3 hours ago, admin said: No ship had more than 10 battles. Timber stress from cannons was a non-issue over such short periods of time and should not be an issue in NA. And what about rotting, or fatigue and homesickness and mutinies.? What about them? Most did not care about the wood damaged by firing because, most ships rot within 2 years if were not build from well seasoned salted oak or teak, or had to be repaired for almost price of the ship every 6 months. By the way did you know that (S) stands for salted (not seasoned).. Which was the stamp placed on all well seasoned logs in most european shipyards, because seasoning was using salt. People would sacrifice planking if they wanted to live and survive battle so nobody cared about damaged timbers. People even demasted themselves if they wanted to survive during storm to not capsize. The only reason to not install heavy guns on top decks was ship balance. Heavier guns increased roll and heavy roll was very hard on crew and could unbalance the ship to the point of no return. But 32lb carronades are not really that heavy. There are many realistic and many unrealistic conventions in naval action. All of them are done for the player enjoyment of life. And one utmost unrealistic convention - the ability to repair a large chunk of a ship in battle every couple of minutes (reminds me of science fiction games) - makes a splendid game almost worthless. That and mods, books, super-woods, latest armament-changes - I write this as a player who generally favours the small vessels! - drove the game away from skill to materialism. May the remaining players gain enjoyment of life from this infantilism while I start to think to close my three british accounts after roughly 4000 hours of playtime. Best wishes Gene 5
Earl of Grey Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Genevieve Malfleurs said: May the remaining players gain enjoyment of life from this infantilism while I start to think to close my three british accounts after roughly 4000 hours of playtime. Best wishes Gene Focus more on your 5 russian accounts? 😆😆😆 Edited January 23, 2020 by Earl of Grey 3
Recommended Posts