Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Ravenx

Can we make ship combat a little more real?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, AntonyVW said:

For your info Ive never played Ark and didn't not know about it till I started playing Atlas. Ive not bothered to even consider playing it. My comments were purely based on real ship practice not any game. If that offends you then Im sorry.

Sorry ARK Mentality as in Mentally Handicapped. 

 

The raw range and output dmg of the Large cannon in Atlas is not conducive to its game play.  They (in my opinion) do not belong on the ships and should be designed as anti-ship Fort defensive emplacements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for devs to decide if they want to go steampunk, in which case they should leave us to build freely almost like in Garrys mod, or go classic, imposing rules like strict cannon placement on ships etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with how it is for the time being.  If they plan on adding more cannon options later its quite possible the large cannon we see now is just a placeholder until these variations are released.

Remember this is a EA and many of the things we see now are rushed placeholders to make a playable game.  Many things will be fine tuned, removed or added as time goes on.  Just listen to some of the sound in this game.  Horrendous.  Are my bears shitting into an huge metal container?   What the hell are lions running on?  Are they wearing pants when they do run? 

Edited by DocHolliday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think they need to have the cannons stick to gunports, have some on the upper deck and make front and back cannons. 2 for schooner, 6 for gally on the front and back. Make handling sails have a different usage, so that your turning radius gets smaller so you have the fast ships with wind speeds and ships with handling to get rekking with those starboards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bolognapwny said:

THESE LARGE CANNONS FOR THIS GAME AREN'T MADE FOR SHIPS... FORGOT IM TALKING TO #$@#$@#$ ARK PLAYERS.

no @#$#@$@# kidding there were like 100 different kinds of cannons all varying in size.... holy #$@#$@.

 

I was gonna type more but you legit just pissed me off.

Its not really a discussion when its all one sided now is it? My point was your discussion is pretty one sided for a sandbox game when 99% of the people are not playing or posting because of the wipe that is not going to happen for a month or so.

The ghost ships are not very realistic at all are they?

5 hours ago, Talono said:

The point is that we dont want these ships at all.

Careful with that "we" word your throwing around, although 4 people technically equals a we, it has nothing at all to do with we the majority.

I respect the fact that you have an opinion, but it represents a very small number of players. Kind of like in ARK when "everyone" wanted realism so they came out with primitive plus. So few people ever played it that they never even bothered updating it. Is that what you are after?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Nutcutt3r said:

I respect the fact that you have an opinion, but it represents a very small number of players. Kind of like in ARK when "everyone" wanted realism so they came out with primitive plus. So few people ever played it that they never even bothered updating it. Is that what you are after?

That's usually the problem with realism, it looks cool on paper but it usually comes with shitty playability. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/11/2019 at 5:55 AM, znasser said:

So you want to remove most if not all the options available to customize your ship, in an area where we already have very limited possibilities in the name of realism. 

What sort of customization is there currently when, in order to stay competitive, you have to build a specific way?

7 hours ago, Bolognapwny said:

THESE LARGE CANNONS FOR THIS GAME AREN'T MADE FOR SHIPS... FORGOT IM TALKING TO #$@#$@#$ ARK PLAYERS.

no @#$#@$@# kidding there were like 100 different kinds of cannons all varying in size.... holy #$@#$@.

 

I was gonna type more but you legit just pissed me off.

You really need to relax before you give yourself a heartattack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Talono said:

Completely wrong. We can defend against your dream 100 guns one shot front ugly monster creations....

...by build such a monster creation as well.

The point is that we dont want these ships at all. Try out using the wind as a real sailor for a broadside combat.

Clearly you have to use your brain and tactics to do so.

Not an easy task for teenage one-shot quick gankers without tactical understanding.

Hold on before you put "We" in there, many do want customization. Don't take away from the fact players do want it. A heavy ship 20 cannons can be beaten, dont engage it standard, play smarter. As for being wrong, not really you just have 1 opinion. There is ways the devs cant help us though, or private hive customization's. Official will be rough, they cant even curb the cheaters. First add in more weight on the ship if you have more then 3 large cannons.

Edited by Sneakydude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CazzT said:

What sort of customization is there currently when, in order to stay competitive, you have to build a specific way?

Just curious,  what specific way is that you are talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, znasser said:

Just curious,  what specific way is that you are talking about?

The exact asinine builds you're defending.  The 20+ cannons on the front/back of the ship.  Do keep up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CazzT said:

The exact asinine builds you're defending.  The 20+ cannons on the front/back of the ship.  Do keep up.

I havent been specific about any kind of build but ok.  I defend that people should be able to use those builds if they want.

¿Have you done any kind of pvp in ships in this game? I mean, other than lets get all our ships and lets see if we can gank an idiot from time to time kind of pvp. Because you seem to believe those builds are some kind of unbeatable monster, when in fact, in my experience they are crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Pant said:

I don't think realism equals good gameplay. If you are gonna change game mechanics it should be based on what makes the game better, more balanced or more fun.

Realism can equal good gameplay. Some games benefit greatly from realism. This game would benefit from adding more of it to ship combat, especially when it comes to where cannons are located.

I'd say adding arcs to ships similar to SFC, so say, you have the spot for 6 front facing cannons or something.

image.png.9ebb08fa646cfabc6a040fc8a9ae5d14.png

 

A simple fix would be allow cannons to be placed only on stone and decks. No building sky high bullshit, add a small radius, no 50 front guns.

Edited by gadefence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, gadefence said:

Realism can equal good gameplay. Some games benefit greatly from realism. This game would benefit from adding more of it to ship combat, especially when it comes to where cannons are located.

I'd say adding arcs to ships similar to SFC, so say, you have the spot for 6 front facing cannons or something.

image.png.9ebb08fa646cfabc6a040fc8a9ae5d14.png

 

A simple fix would be allow cannons to be placed only on stone and decks. No building sky high bullshit, add a small radius, no 50 front guns.

Jeez you need help. "A simple fix would be" just get over it. People are going to do creative things that you may not like but that is what people have fun doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the solution is usually never a hard cap. It is almost always better to de-incentivise he placement of heavy cannons through things like the reduced weight while gun ports are closed etc.

Imagine how effective that would be if the cannons actually had an appreciable weight like they should.

how many shotguns would you see if cannons weighed 300kg instead of 100?

I'm guessing a hell of a lot less. If a cannon weighed 300 with the port open and 160 with it closed, most people would have only cannon ports and one pursuit/follow cannon because otherwise they would move like slugs and be unable to actually chase prey.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CazzT said:

The exact asinine builds you're defending.  The 20+ cannons on the front/back of the ship.  Do keep up.

Not if you have 300 large cannon balls with mythical sails they dont. A standard boat build can beat them. Using standard planks against a ship like that is just a fail to happen 1 volly and 2-4 planks go down.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Enki Anunnaki said:

should really just put a cap on on how many large cannons can be put on a boat per ship size class

That is what I call K.I.S.S (Kepp it simple & stupid) 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When my damned opponent has to respect your rules of sail (they are motorboats) with your broadside cannons (they have cannons on top deck with fore/aft angle coverage) - then you can consider limiting my design freedom.  Until then.....nope.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the odd builds, even if they stand out, but I do understand the appeal to realism.  I've honestly preferred broadsiders to fore/aft guns.  Not only can you fit more cannons pointing to either side, but its far more useful as a defensive measure.  If you're a broadsider built for combat, then a forecannon ship is literally sailing straight at you in order to fire their guns, which not only keeps them in range of your guns, but makes them an easy target for your cannons.  You can easily add tons of armor to the sides of a ship, but it's far harder to armor the bow or stern.  Using concentrated NPC auto-fire (right clicking on the enemy) you can focus the entirety of your firepower on their nearly unprotected bow while they're bouncing shots around your armor.

 

However, the topic here is about how to make ships a bit more realistic in design, and honestly, the easiest way to do it would be to auto group the cannons behind the scenes in a manner different to the current auto-grouping function, then put a percentage limit on fore/aft cannon groups.  I'm sure most people have noticed that when placing cannons, they're auto assigned to a group based on their location.  Cannons placed at the front of the ship, regardless of direction, are assigned to "Front Cannons".  The behind-the-scenes grouping would function similar, but with different rules.  The most simple fix would be to assign the groups based on the cannons orientation.  Forward facing cannons, regardless of their position, should be grouped to "Front Cannons".  From there, the Left and Right groups should have no limit to how many cannons can be placed, while forward and rear facing cannons are limited to being within a percentage range of cannons already placed on left or right.

 

To explain it more simply with an example, 20% of the total cannons can face forward or backward.  This means that if you have 8 cannons on either left or right side, you're able to place 2 cannons facing forward or backward (10 total), and can't place any more until the number of side cannons is increased to 12, allowing for a third front/rear cannon (15 total).  In both cases, the front/rear cannons make up 20% or less of the total cannons on board.  On the scale of a Galleon, with 52 side cannons in the gunports, you'd be able to put 13 forward or rear cannons (13 being 20% of the total amount of 65), which is far more accurate and realistic to see on a Galleon.  With this kind of restriction, you're not limited to how much firepower you can have, and you're not limited to where the cannons can be placed.  The only limitation is the orientation of the cannon.

 

Anyways, that's my thought on it.  It would solve the issue presented by fore/aft glass-cannon ships, and the same percentage rules 'could' be applied to side cannons for balancing out side-mounted super-shotgun ships (if those are a tremendous issue).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nutcutt3r said:

Jeez you need help. "A simple fix would be" just get over it. People are going to do creative things that you may not like but that is what people have fun doing.

You know what I find hilarious about the "realism is stupid and uncreative" crowd?

The fact that one shot front/rear loaded ships work out so drastically better then anything else in the game that they push all other builds out of the meta and even out of semi-competency that everyone builds the same thing.

But they argue that takine out the one design so that more designs and tactics can flourish is limiting customization.

It's be like a FPS that had "pink colour items have +100% stats" - more HP or more dmg, so everyone not moronic goes all pink all the time. And then the people who want camouflage to work out better want to see pink buffs removed, and the pro pink crowd argues it will kill creativity since most people will go camouflage (even thought you could go all red just without the huge nerf of not going all pink).

I get why you want front/rear spam to stay, your argument for it is just poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, gadefence said:

The fact that one shot front/rear loaded ships work out so drastically better then anything else in the game that they push all other builds out of the meta and even out of semi-competency that everyone builds the same thing.

That's not even close to be true, we only use two rear cannons on our last brig and none in the front (nothing fancy, just fine bp except a few journeyman cannons), and we haven't had any problems to fight/sink those front/rear designs even with better quality items than us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, gadefence said:

You know what I find hilarious about the "realism is stupid and uncreative" crowd?

I did not say it was stupid, I said that's not what the majority of people want, its a sandbox game for a reason.

 

8 hours ago, gadefence said:

I get why you want front/rear spam to stay, your argument for it is just poor

I really don't think you do, you are so set in what you want that you are unwilling to take anyone else's view into consideration. There are lots of servers out there that most likely cater to exactly what you want, that's why they are there. That does not mean a small number of people can impose their views on others just because they are not here to speak for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nutcutt3r said:

I really don't think you do, you are so set in what you want that you are unwilling to take anyone else's view into consideration. There are lots of servers out there that most likely cater to exactly what you want, that's why they are there. That does not mean a small number of people can impose their views on others just because they are not here to speak for themselves.

The devs are imposing their designs on us because it's their game. Be definition, if they want to make more builds viable, they'll change a few things and one major impediment is the all front load 30 stories side load one shot builds. If/once they decide they don't like that your opinion will be as mute as mine is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention the fact your ship sinks when you shoot down the most highest plank of all 😉 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for slightly more realistic combat.  I don't mean DCS level realism,  but somewhere along the same lines as the realism for the sailing in game. I don't see a problem limiting cannons to a ship's gunports. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...