Should Naval Action have 2 time periods, one for Napoleonic ships, another for Golden Age of Sail?

[weirdguy]

I keep seeing people post about ships they want.  A lot of those are very old ships, such as galleons and the latter transitional ships from the late 1600's.

 

I don't think my idea is something that can be done any time soon, but I honestly believe putting in old ships like that against more modern ships you see in the Napoleonic wars seem unrealistic.

 

Yet, there are a lot of older ships that actually have a lot more character and design to them.

 

The only solution I can think of is to have two time periods and don't mix and match between them.  1500 to 1700 and then 1700 to 1840.

 

It will probably not happen, and splitting up the player base might be a silly idea, but it might also be a way for everyone to have what they want.

[Guest raat]

That's an awful lot of work for 1 development team.  I think it would unnecessarily overextend the resources of GL, and you'd end up with 2 mediocre products instead of 1 absolutely brilliant product.  I'd rather they focus, but that's me.

[weirdguy]

I don't think it would happen either, but I disagree with Game-Labs saying that they will use ships from such a wide time scale as they said they would.

 

They have mostly Napoleonic war era ships, and they should stick to that time period.

 

Yet, it is such a shame that older ships like the majority of the Dutch ships, and all of the galleons can't be used.

[Sir Madoc]

All ships from 1600-1810 should be considered.

[Mirones]

this belongs into the general or sugestion sub forum and not here.

or in the allready existing topics about it.

[ingerad]

Another issue that would arise would be server/player population.  Spreading it too thin across two different games could really hurt.

[Dagann]

I don't think it would happen either, but I disagree with Game-Labs saying that they will use ships from such a wide time scale as they said they would.

 

They have mostly Napoleonic war era ships, and they should stick to that time period.

 

Yet, it is such a shame that older ships like the majority of the Dutch ships, and all of the galleons can't be used.

Indeed, i hardly imagine a batlle with 1650's ships and 1820's ships....

 

Another issue that would arise would be server/player population.  Spreading it too thin across two different games could really hurt.

Exactly.

Do not divide a small players community, even if the small communtiy could become a large one thanks to the game's qualities.

[Alex Connor]

Indeed, i hardly imagine a batlle with 1650's ships and 1820's ships....

Yes.

 

Even the current 1670-1820 spread is really too wide, I'd go for 1750-1815 as a general guideline with exceptions only made for older ships if they served into that period, and for newer ships if they were part of a class that started earlier.

[Elisabeth Vissersch]

It would be nice to extend the time period a bit, especially for the Dutch as most of their ships now fall outside of the current time period, obviously there are more famous ships of other countries that cant be used, but the Dutch played a major role during certain wars or even just trading, so forgive if I'm saying that I'm just a tad bit sad that I cant set sail on my favourite ship .

I understand that it would be unrealistic versus the more modern ships but if there is a way to get this working even if I have to wait 1 or 2 years then please do. 

[Brigand]

The title of this thread is a bit misleading; a quick time line of the ages:

• The Age of Discovery starts in the early 15th century and continued till the early 17th century.
   
• The Age of Sail lasted from the 16th to the mid-19th century.
   
• The Dutch Golden Age roughly spanned the 17th century.
   
• The Golden Age of Piracy spans (by its broadest accepted definition) from the 1650s to the 1730s.
   
• The Napoleonic era is from November 1799 till June 1815.
   
• The Golden Age of Sail is generally agreed to be the period in the 19th century, immediately before steamboats started to take trade away from sail.

Cheers,

Brigand

[Kngsbrg]

no, a new era is a specific setting with specific content. I rather have one era with indepth content than two or more eras with lacking content, because someone wanted to be Jack Sparrow. This is not a pirate game, please keep that in mind. The engine screams large scale naval combat and not merchant-sacking by fast, little ships.

 

If you want a pirate game, go play one of the many games out there or wait a little longer, but this game will not do a 180° turn just for you to live some romantic, unrealistic expectation of Long John Silver.

 

TL;DR: rather focus on one era and get it right, gameplay and content wise, new eras are possible down the road, but not prior to 2.x version

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Involuntarily I base all my research upon 1720-1812 interval. This is what I expect.

 

Some 17th century models were still around at this time, especially tradersl

[Brigand]

no, a new era is a specific setting with specific content. I rather have one era with indepth content than two or more eras with lacking content, because someone wanted to be Jack Sparrow. This is not a pirate game, please keep that in mind. The engine screams large scale naval combat and not merchant-sacking by fast, little ships.

 

If you want a pirate game, go play one of the many games out there or wait a little longer, but this game will not do a 180° turn just for you to live some romantic, unrealistic expectation of Long John Silver.

 

TL;DR: rather focus on one era and get it right, gameplay and content wise, new eras are possible down the road, but not prior to 2.x version

 

I don't see any reason to drag the 'pirate' issue into this topic, it has proven to be quite toxic and there is not need to contaminate this thread. There can be lots of other reasons why people would like to sail earlier (or later) ships.

 

I would love to sail some earlier ships, but the game is shaping up just fine in a time period where those older ships would look out of place. Since I would rather see the game be really in-depth on one period, instead of being more shallow in two settings, I would say: to bad for those lovely ships of the 17th century,

 

~Brigand

[sthorup]

hell no, **** no and god no....

[Fennek]

There should ne a strikt limitation on this Timeline! Because of atmosphere!

Its like in other games (like World of tanks, warthunder etc. ) were different vehicles of different Time periodis battle each other!

Thats cool for an Arcade battle game!

But would totally Ruin the Fler and atmosphere in an "Open Sea" and exploration setting.

Just my 2 cents

[Austrum]

Yes.

 

Even the current 1670-1820 spread is really too wide, I'd go for 1750-1815 as a general guideline with exceptions only made for older ships if they served into that period, and for newer ships if they were part of a class that started earlier.

 

I disagree.  Take this ship listed here on the Forums.  

  HMS Mordaunt 1681

 

Ship is from 1681 which is toward to the bottom end of the scale but it is a beautiful ship I would love to see in game and it would have exactly zero issue competing. Handling may or may not be as good as some of the newer heavy frigates but it would still be a great ship and one that I would love to sail in game.

[SerrialKiller]

Rhe regular golden age should have been an better focud the the napolionic wars mutch more ships and they where looking awsome that time frame.

[Brigand]

Rhe regular golden age should have been an better focud the the napolionic wars mutch more ships and they where looking awsome that time frame.

 

The Golden Age of Sail is generally agreed to be the period in the 19th century: 1800 till 1900.

So either you want clippers up to steam ships or you have the name of the era wrong

~Brigand

[Sir Madoc]

Yes.

 

Even the current 1670-1820 spread is really too wide, I'd go for 1750-1815 as a general guideline with exceptions only made for older ships if they served into that period, and for newer ships if they were part of a class that started earlier.

 

The technology for sail boats didn't really change much in 200 years. A 1670 ship first rate can still fight a 1820 ship just fine...

 

1670-1820 spread OR 1620-1820 spread is not "too wide" it's only 200 years and it would allow for a much wider variety of ships to be in the game. 1750-1815 is far to narrow as that's only a 65 year period.

 

There should ne a strikt limitation on this Timeline! Because of atmosphere!

Its like in other games (like World of tanks, warthunder etc. ) were different vehicles of different Time periodis battle each other!

Thats cool for an Arcade battle game!

But would totally Ruin the Fler and atmosphere in an "Open Sea" and exploration setting.

Just my 2 cents

The problem is your assuming all those older ships sunk which they didn't. So it's actually more realistic to include the older period ships into the game if they were still afloat than to leave them out entirely.

 

The Golden Age of Sail is generally agreed to be the period in the 19th century: 1800 till 1900.

So either you want clippers up to steam ships or you have the name of the era wrong

~Brigand

I completely disagree with that. 1800-1900 is more like "age of steam" than "age of sail".

[maturin]

There weren't any steamers in 1800. And steam didn't really make much of a dent in world commerce until after the US Civil War. Most of the time, steamers were just the rickety things that towed sailing ships out of harbors and roadsteads.

 

The Golden Age is usually held to be the few decades of the clipper ships, or of the bulk carrier in the latter half of the 19th century, when square riggers reached their apex in size and strength.

[ingerad]

I should go on the record to say that I completely understand the desire to see some of the old ships in game.  Heck, I think it'd be cool to roll around in say Mary Rose.  However, I also find Clipper ships dead smexy as well.  Unfortunately, for game play reasons it probably wouldn't be the best thing to see them sailing next to each other.

But as I said above, splitting a relatively small and almost certainly niche community (I sadly have little hope of the game becoming something even half as popular as WoT, even if the game play is a thousand times better) into multiple servers would really harm the game.

 

It's the price we have to play for a healthy game.
 

I also second the notion that piracy is irrelevant to this topic.  The average Joe is just as apt to want to be Jack Sparrow in 1580 as 1815.

[Alex Connor]

I disagree.  Take this ship listed here on the Forums.  

  HMS Mordaunt 1681

 

Ship is from 1681 which is toward to the bottom end of the scale but it is a beautiful ship I would love to see in game and it would have exactly zero issue competing. Handling may or may not be as good as some of the newer heavy frigates but it would still be a great ship and one that I would love to sail in game.

Won't disagree with beautiful, but Mordaunt is a perfect example of what I am talking about.

 

By the standards of the time she was built, a good ship. 46 guns is something of an oddity, but slots neatly in between the 40 gun 5th rates and the 50 gun 4th rates of the time in firepower/dimensions and perfectly serviceable.

 

But throw her against Napoleonic ships and 3 things stand out. First, the size. By the late 1700s not only are 4th rates but even the frigates are much larger than Mordaunt. She's a mere 122ft long, even the smallest frigate we have ingame (Surprise) is 128ft, the 18lber frigates and 50 gun 4th rates are now about 150ft long and Constitution is 175ft long. 2nd, armament. 12lb maindeck on a Sol?! 20x12 pdrs, 18x8 pdrs and 8x5.25lb Sakers, this armament would be light by frigate standards and hopeless against anything larger. 3rd, speed. Between her small size, being a 2 decker and the advances made in hullform and rigging during the 18th century, Mordaunt will be pretty slow compared to Napoleonic ships. 

 

How exactly is Mordaunt supposed to compete? Small, slow, weak armament, fits nowhere.

[Prater]

 

The technology for sail boats didn't really change much in 200 years. A 1670 ship first rate can still fight a 1820 ship just fine...

 

1670-1820 spread OR 1620-1820 spread is not "too wide" it's only 200 years and it would allow for a much wider variety of ships to be in the game. 1750-1815 is far to narrow as that's only a 65 year period.

 

The problem is your assuming all those older ships sunk which they didn't. So it's actually more realistic to include the older period ships into the game if they were still afloat than to leave them out entirely.

 

I completely disagree with that. 1800-1900 is more like "age of steam" than "age of sail".

 

There are significant differences in those 200 years in armament and ship design.  A 1st rate from the later 1600s hardly compares to a 3rd rate from the mid 1700s, and that is only because of the amount of guns (30 guns or so).

[Alex Connor]

 

The technology for sail boats didn't really change much in 200 years for sail boats. A 1670 ship first rate can still fight a 1820 ship just fine...

 

1670-1820 spread OR 1620-1820 spread is not "too wide" it's only 200 years and it would allow for a much wider variety of ships to be in the game. 1750-1815 is far to narrow as that's only a 65 year period.

There are frigates built before 1820 that are bigger, faster and not much worse armed than 1670 1st rates, and 1st rates that have almost 2x the displacement and weight of broadside and still sail better.

 

Yes, the underlying technology did not massively change, but there were huge advances in the sizes and armament of different types of ship, new construction techniques, the introduction of scientific ship design allowing ships to sail much faster and handle better, advances in rigging, all these factors combine to make later ships far superior. Even visually there are huge changes and the ships don't look right together. Mixing them is just a bad idea.

[Brigand]

I completely disagree with that. 1800-1900 is more like "age of steam" than "age of sail".

You're mistaking a commonly accepted definition for an opinion here. If your notion term doesn't fit with the commonly accepted one, I can't help you, nor do I see the point of arguing about it.

~Brigand