Trafalgars, Pavel & Repair modules and crew

[oleski]

Hi, i have proposal to make battle timer to 90 min when BR its Higher then 15000 or 20000. Becouse now in Trafalgars we have not to many time to fight(all going very slowly)

 

Next proposal its to make pavel a little bit biger cannons, becouse now he its exactly like bellona just with smaler guns and more crew(and i think a little bit slower and agility).

Now a lot of people preffer playing with bellona then ii pavel. Its easly win in bellona vs pavel. Its useless.

 

And whats else: I think we need to make surgery and repair modules like repair armor and repair sail (like in 1 battle you can use 1 surgery or 1 repair modules)

Becouse when you in smaller ship(bell vs vici) you need to shotting at sail or/and back armor to destroy his ruder, crew(to make him slower) then keep shoting when he is out or keep shoting at the back to kill crew and boarding. Now when we have unlimited repair for crew and modules its unenforceable...

 

Waiting for answer

 

Ragnar

Edited August 11, 2015 by oleski

[akd]

Next proposal its to make pavel a little bit biger cannons, becouse now he its exactly like bellona just with smaler guns and more crew(and i think a little bit slower and agility).Now a lot of people preffer playing with bellona then ii pavel. Its easly win in bellona vs pavel. Its useless.

I like Pavel. She's really not a 2nd rate and doesn't need to be "better" than Bellona. Embrace the variety that will come as the ship set expands and don't fall into the trap of artificially balancing ships against each other in such a limited line-up. Anyways, you of all people should appreciate all the additional crew she comes with! Go board some Victories.

I agree entirely that there should be a time extension for battles over a certain BR, however some of the time issues with our impromptu Trafalgars are also due to setup involved and the artificial conditions (nothing is really at stake so we probably don't push as hard.)

[maturin]

Bellona should only carry 18-pounders on the upper gun deck. Putting 24 pounders there should make her heel like Trincomalee and ruin closehauled speed. That would make Pavel a bit more attractive.

[Balsafer]

or at least add slightly bigger guns than what 9lbers on the deck and the one below it

[DazednConfused]

The pavel is fine i think. the difference is the same between the vic and santi - both 1st rates and each with their pros/ cons.

 

Same with pavel and bel - both of which are 3rd rates. ones faster, ones tougher. know your ship and you can win a duel with either.

 

Agree about having increased timer if certain BR triggers are met.

[Guest raat]

Agreed on the timer, not on the Pavel.  I think if BR goes above 5000 per side then the timer should go to 90 min.  If it goes above 10000, then the timer should go to 120 min.  I think the people who want the big battles also want them to be more conclusive and are ok with a 2 hour battle.

[mouse of war]

I suggest that a vote is taken at the next Trafalgar with players moving their ships into a '1-hour' area or a '2-hour' area according to preference

[Alex Connor]

I haven't owned a 1st rate in Open World, but they're still just as massively over-gunned as in Sea Trials?

 

Was 42/32/24/18lb on the Victory if I remember, which is absolutely crazy. Between Victory and the 2 copies built after Trafalgar (Boyne and Union) there were 3 major armament layouts, 42/24/12/6lb or 32/24/12/12lb, or 32/18/18/12lb. That last layout was used on the 2 copies and is the best, same broadside weight but you have 3 decks of heavy guns useful in a SoL fight.

 

These 3 armament options all weigh about the same. The royal navy was known for overgunning their ships slightly, they had good experience to know exactly where the limits where before you would ruin the handling of a ship due to excessive topweight. So just because larger guns might fit onto the deck does not in any way make them a practical option, 42/32/24/18lb would absolutely cripple Victory's handling/speed and even put her in danger of sinking in bad weather.

 

You can't stick an extra 100 tons or so of iron onto the ship so far above the waterline and expect it to behave like you're carrying that added weight in the hold (which is what the current system does).

 

That's why Pavel is not performing well, that ship is realistically armed and the other SoL are slightly-to-massively overgunned.

[oleski]

 

 

And whats else: I think we need to make surgery and repair modules like repair armor and repair sail (like in 1 battle you can use 1 surgery or 1 repair modules)

Becouse when you in smaller ship(bell vs vici) you need to shotting at sail or/and back armor to destroy his ruder, crew(to make him slower) then keep shoting when he is out or keep shoting at the back to kill crew and boarding. Now when we have unlimited repair for crew and modules its unenforceable...

 

Waiting for answer

 

Ragnar

 

And what about this?

[SteelSandwich]

Alright, on the topic of making Trafalgar battles longer:

I am sincerely wondering if some of you understand the condition that a first rate is in after 50 minutes of frontline duty?

Of course there are going to be battles where you are in better condition than the rest, but in general you are shot to pieces.

 

The suggestion that Raatha makes is interesting, although 2 things pop in my mind that make me hesitant to agree with this.

First of all, we have to overhaul the repair system if you want to have 2 hour-long battles. Also there has to be a repair system for a 90 minute battle.

Since i sincerely doubt that many of you had more than 1 repair left after 40 minutes in last Trafalgar.

 

Second of all, in case you are fighting a small fleet of NPC's, and some players join (asuming you want to run from them), you would potentially have to flee for not 60 minutes max but 90 or 120 minutes max.

 

P.S. It's not a breaking point for me, but historically fights weren't last man standing. After a good fight sides would withdraw and prepare for another day of fighting or leave.

[Prater]

In my opinion, the Pavel is already better than the Bellona.  I will probably very rarely sail a Bellona from here on out.  Agreed on the timers.

[oleski]

 

 

Second of all, in case you are fighting a small fleet of NPC's, and some players join (asuming you want to run from them), you would potentially have to flee for not 60 minutes max but 90 or 120 minutes max.

 

 

When im wanna to flee then i gona make more distance wait 1:20min and then flee, just so simple.

 

And I have 1 more proposal to make leav in battle like when you have 800m distance and then make 1:20s to leav the battle. Becouse i have a lot of fight earlier when im just need time to reload my dobule (or i just missed) and enemy just left battle 100m next to me. Its just bullshiet when i have enemy beside of my and I dont have any guns to shot to make timer wipe(like pavel have no front guns to wipe timer).

[Guest raat]

Alright, on the topic of making Trafalgar battles longer:

I am sincerely wondering if some of you understand the condition that a first rate is in after 50 minutes of frontline duty?

Of course there are going to be battles where you are in better condition than the rest, but in general you are shot to pieces.

 

The suggestion that Raatha makes is interesting, although 2 things pop in my mind that make me hesitant to agree with this.

First of all, we have to overhaul the repair system if you want to have 2 hour-long battles. Also there has to be a repair system for a 90 minute battle.

Since i sincerely doubt that many of you had more than 1 repair left after 40 minutes in last Trafalgar.

 

Second of all, in case you are fighting a small fleet of NPC's, and some players join (asuming you want to run from them), you would potentially have to flee for not 60 minutes max but 90 or 120 minutes max.

 

P.S. It's not a breaking point for me, but historically fights weren't last man standing. After a good fight sides would withdraw and prepare for another day of fighting or leave.

 

I understand your point about historical accuracy.  And I can't believe that I'm about to say this, but...this is one instance where I think because it's a game, it should break from historical accuracy a bit. ( ugh, I feel dirty now)

 

I think because it's a game, it's more fun to have a clear winner.  Yes, at the end of 60 mins. in those Trafalgars, we're beat to sh*t.  Half the team is usually nearly crippled, while the other half has probably 1 repair left at best.  But....there's usually only a handful, at best, of people that have sunk.  And unless one side gets really outplayed, it's usually a draw (even if one side seems to be winning).

 

A longer timer would allow for a more decisive battle.  The crippled ships would likely still be able to save their ships because they would probably just fall so far behind the battle that they could leave with the 2 min. timer.  While having one side have more people sunk or flee the battle would show which side ultimately won the battle.  And no one usually plays a game to have a draw.  People want winners and losers.

[SeamanStaines]

For now why not just count escapes as losses to encourage people to fight until the battle is declared over.

[oleski]

For now why not just count escapes as losses to encourage people to fight until the battle is declared over.

For me its ok becouse now its like 30 min chasing somthing and do nothing

 

Or just make like 1000m away and 2 min timer

[Booyaah]

Yes I agree with larger BR = longer battle timer.

 

admin keeps saying 'oh you just need better focus fire better', but both teams know how to block and run away, and stay on the safe outskirts for the rest of the match.  It is not a hard concept to learn.  The only way to sink 1st rates against a good team is to cycle through all the 1st rates 3 repairs, but that pretty much takes around an hour to do when you have 20v20 or larger...