Game balance vs. Historical Reality

[Garbad]

Imagine a situation -- a 44 gun heavy frigate against a 32 gun smallish frigate.  The 44 gun ship hits harder, hits further, takes far more punishment...and in reality, handles almost exactly as well.  With two equally skilled captains, the 44 gun frig wins every time.  This is exactly in line with reality -- the 32 gun ship is simply outclassed, to the point where it probably doesn't even matter how well he sails -- he will always lose.

 

Right now, as I see it, NA is firmly in the historical camp.  The heavier ship will always win.  It may well be this is what people prefer, but I think its worth discussing.  What about gameplay?  Its bad gameplay if a supership always wins, even if they are much less skilled.  Why would anyone sail anything OTHER than the most OP ships?  It also would make the game more boring.

 

Different games handle this in different ways.  For example WOT magnifies the difference between old/weak medium tanks and more modern ones and created a tier system.  But this still makes it so a T-34-85 often has to fight a much more modern tank against which it has almost no chance.  EvE handled this by making large ships struggle to hit smaller ones, but small ships struggle to put out enough damage to kill large ones.  This makes it so ships are largely compelled to fight their own size targets only.  PoTBS tried a third route -- small guns have high dpm, but less accuracy/penetration, so both might work better depending on tactics.  Likewise, heavy ships would have better armor and higher max speed, but smaller ships would have better turning/acceleration, so theoretically the heavy frigate could win playing like boom and zoom aircraft and the lighter ships might win by stern camping or otherwise outsailing them. IMO, PotBS is clearly the best system of the three.

 

What do you think?

[Flip]

I think it all comes down to the open world. In battles where ports are on the line I would expect to see the big boats come out and play. That said I *think* it will be rare to see a 1st or 2nd or even 3rd/4th rate sailing alone on the open sea. That said its not real life and some captains are very bad and will lose to a smaller ships every time for some reason whether it is terrible accuracy, terrible sail management, or just bad battle sense.

 

Plus smaller boats will most likely always be able to outrun a bigger boat but how escape timers will fit into a game where the speed difference is 1 or 2 knots and you hopefully spawn at some distance in the instance is unknown but a major issue imo.

[Illusive Tabby]

I would like to see as much historical accuracy as possible, and I do maintain that a smaller frigate can win against a larger frigate with proper seamanship. I do not expect a Lynx to win against a Constitution or a Surprise to beat a Bellona, however. And In the open wourld, I wouldn't expect a skipper in a Lynx to go up against a frigate at all, anyways.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Win = put out of commission

 

At least in my book.

 

Sinking is not winning all the time. Obviously a schooner will never sink a heavy frigate, but can put it out of commission by superior seamanship and gunnery.

 

This being said there is no need to reduce the historical credibility of the game mechanics towards the artificial "skill" of balance.

[Illusive Tabby]

Skill, to me, sounds more like "activate this to turn faster for X seconds". I really, really hope skills that effect a ships performance are not seen ingame. Seamanship, however, is ones ability to sail. I think. Opinions and all.

[Galileus]

Why are "all realism" and "all arcade" the only options? These are the worst options...

[Larkis]

Another idea where running costs. On a Lineship you nead massive Money for your crew, foot, powder, medicals ect. A schoner don't need that much.

 

So if Lineaships cost a lot on the sea, they will always start when they know there would be a big fight like attack of a fort. But they woudl stay in port for normal jobs.

[Garbad]

Why are "all realism" and "all arcade" the only options? These are the worst options...

Obviously we all want both.  But if a decision has to be made, where do you stand?

[OTMatt]

Obviously we all want both.  But if a decision has to be made, where do you stand?

 

Probably arcade, all honesty its an unfair poll. Even the admins used tweaks to the ships loadout but that doesn't make it completely unhistorical.

[Wimbley]

Full realistic isn't fun. A lot of things can be on the realisitic side, but you still need balance and fun gameplay. Nobody is saying a row boat has to be as powerful as the Constitution though. But if a guy is AFK at sea, why shouldn't a ship with cannons not be able to just park next to him and fire shots into the lower end of his hull? If you want a big, reliable community you need a balance of the two. Create the feeling that you are sailing a real ship, on the real ocean with a lot of risks and stuff is fun. If they go the route of factions, or anything that locks you into a side it should be balanced. 

 

Look at any game, and people always swarm the OP stuff.

[Galileus]

Obviously we all want both.  But if a decision has to be made, where do you stand?

 

Decision does not have to be made. And honestly, if it had to be made, I would drop the game.

[Rutger Van Hoorn]

I'm hoping for:

3. Historical Gaming -- I want the game to be as realistic as possible, while fun and balanced, so that in some (obvious) situations some ships have no chance against others, but so that skilled players can win in unbalanced match setup as was historically sometimes the case.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

I think it all comes down to the open world. In battles where ports are on the line I would expect to see the big boats come out and play. That said I *think* it will be rare to see a 1st or 2nd or even 3rd/4th rate sailing alone on the open sea. That said its not real life and some captains are very bad and will lose to a smaller ships every time for some reason whether it is terrible accuracy, terrible sail management, or just bad battle sense.

 

Plus smaller boats will most likely always be able to outrun a bigger boat but how escape timers will fit into a game where the speed difference is 1 or 2 knots and you hopefully spawn at some distance in the instance is unknown but a major issue imo.

 

A quick thought - most larger ships historically can outrun the smaller ones, depending on the wind and direction of sail.

 

As mentioned above, you likely don't use the largest ship possible due to cost.  You use the ship you were assigned by the Navy, or if not a Navy Captain, you use the ship you can afford and own that best suits the task you're at.  While losing shouldn't be blameless, Admin has indicated that they want to encourage people to fight in the spirit of the time.  If you have to strike to a superior ship/force, you do so, that's the way it worked.  We don't need to "balance" everything if the mechanics of winning/losing/ship replacement are done well and with good fun/challenge in mind.

 

ETA: That's not to say that replacing a lost ship should encourage YOLO play, but you also shouldn't feel like the entire world is beating you down if you strike to a superior ship/force.

[Leviathan]

I'm hoping for:

3. Historical Gaming -- I want the game to be as realistic as possible, while fun and balanced, so that in some (obvious) situations some ships have no chance against others, but so that skilled players can win in unbalanced match setup as was historically sometimes the case.

To me, this is exactly what we have right now.

[Brigand]

Hmm, we already have this poll:

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/506-arcade-or-simulation-the-poll/

~Brigand

[Johny Reb]

Just another poll for something we have already polled. And the arguments go round and round.

[Grim DeGrim]

Decision does not have to be made. And honestly, if it had to be made, I would drop the game.

Keeping johnny's comment in mind, as I probably was not here... I still need to bite on 1 comment:

Why are "all realism" and "all arcade" the only options? These are the worst options...

What is the alternative? Purely by design, the game has to gravitate to some mixture of the 2. I am curious about your thought process, as you seem to have a different vision in this.

[Grim DeGrim]

My personal bias: if the route to victory is to have the larger ship (generally, broadsweeping statement where this is fact more often than not).... Then not fun gameplay.

As it stands today, you can predict the outcome in most matches purely based on ship comp. (exception being very large ones... Matches under 15 ships, typically not a hard guess).

Voted for gameplay.

[Galileus]

What is the alternative? Purely by design, the game has to gravitate to some mixture of the 2. I am curious about your thought process, as you seem to have a different vision in this.

 

This is exactly the alternative. A mixture of the two, and the mixture being an interesting question. If the game is either "all realism" or "all pro mlg skillz", I'm out. And these are the options in the pool ^^'

[Guest raat]

Ha!  I love that the admin voted "unsure".  Hats off to you, admin, hats off. 

[Grim DeGrim]

This is exactly the alternative. A mixture of the two, and the mixture being an interesting question. If the game is either "all realism" or "all pro mlg skillz", I'm out. And these are the options in the pool ^^'

Sounds good. You are more, historical ships with some elements of gameplay value adjustments. In order words, Potbs.

We are in agreement with each other (though the poll is a little more black & white than that).

[Grim DeGrim]

Judging the pole to date, Be prepared for the arms race... And a count of ships for outcome. Keep that in mind, that realistic cannot be so black & white.

Game play balance does not equate to arcade or dumb downed sailing mechanics.

Only the largest nations will benefit from such a system so rigidly braced in the realistic.

[Dagann]

I dont want NA to become a new WOT.

In the name of balance and gameplay, the wot devs make the worst compromises.

It is ok for an arcadish game, not for an historical game.

Or course we can not avoid compromise such as time compression or sailing simplification.

But ships fantasy stats which will be changed every patch for the sake of balance, no thanks.

If criticized, devs can rely on historical facts cause the are solid facts , but can not rely on fantasy datas.

[Praesus Lecti]

IF the game ends up being a purely episodic experience, that meaning one battle is completely disconnected from the next, ala World of Tanks/War Thunder then go for balance.

 

IF, however, we really do end up with player owned towns with ports and harbors that we design/build, privateering, trading with the 'old world' nations so we can amass wealth and truly own a piece of this open world then stick closely with historical capabilities.  I'd definitely want that 1st rate sitting there in my harbor as a visible 'Beware of Dog' sign to anyone thinking of causing problems in my waters.  I also want historical accuracy when I'm moving a shipment of gold/silver/goods back to the European markets and want to get there fast as possible.

[Jeheil]

The poll is a bit wonky, the topic is good.

 

I lean to gameplay over historical (but nor 100% instead of).

 

Should a cutter be able to sink a santi....no...never. Indeed even arcade games dont let this happen...a level 1 MMO toon cannot kill a level 100 toon.

 

A level 1 tank/plane cannot kill a level 100 tank/plane. Distract, annoy yes. Kill no.

 

I would like them to pander to gameplay without stopping sim-lovers from loving.

 

Some basic examples :-

 

Fast Travel : Yes. But if I want to manually sail from portsmouth to sydney and have 12 weeks to do so...then let me do it. I am mad. And I love my madness.

 

Magic Teleporting Escorts : Yes. But if I want to actually hire escorts in a local port who are around when I am, then let me. Dont force me to use magic/teleporting escorts.

 

Ship tinkering (repair kits etc), in say PvP Arena, then yes, in open world less so.

 

Auto captain YES...but allow me to manual steer.

 

This general approach is the ying/yang that will cater to the more casual/fun seeking person while at the same time feeding the sim-fan.