Balancing the ships in the game

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=156611:date=Aug 5 2006, 07:19 PM:name=Pieter Boelen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pieter Boelen @ Aug 5 2006, 07:19 PM) [snapback]156611[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I'm sure it's not the new models/reskins that are not liked. It's the sailing characteristics that the problems lie with. And I can imagine that there are several new ships in the game that don't have as realistic or well-balanced sailing characteristics as they maybe should have. But as soon as the sailing characteristics are balanced properly, all those ships will work great in the game. Right? <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":?" border="0" alt="unsure.gif" />

Note about Pirate ships: There are two types of pirate ships: Pirate ships that are being named Pirate ship in the ships_init file (such as the Pirate Corvette) and the Pirate design versions of the ships that are being generated by the game itself. There is a structural difference between these two types of ships. Theoretically you could encounter an English design Pirate corvette (if she was set to CanBuy/CanEncounter).

If you buy/encounter a ship, the ship will have a nation of origin. Based on this nation, the sailing characteristics are different. I think these variations are being generated by the function SetRandomStatsToShip(aref chrship, int idx, int nat) in PROGRAM\Ships\Ships.c, but I don't understand entirely how it works.

It appears that if you set refShip.unique for a ship, the stats will not be modified by this mod. Maybe this should be set for the unique ships by Petros, such as the Pirate Corvette. Then you know for certain that the statistics for that ship ingam are the same as they are in ships_init.c with no variation.

I hope that somebody can explain exactly with which version of pirate ships he has a problem and please also say what this problem is exactly. I'm sure something can be done abot it that is not removing pirate ships out of the game entirely. I wouldn't want to remove them from the game entirely, but we might be able to figure out how to make these types of ships less good.

The Privateer has cannon MaxCalibre set to 12. Is that too much?

Who is working on balancing the sailing characteristics? Can you please post a list of all changes you propose?

BTW: It doesn't really matter if the size of the crew members is correct or not, because we can't really change it. Or maybe we CAN change it, but it will be very hard and not really worth the effort. The problem is that if you resize the crewmembers, you also have to resize the animation and editing animation is something that nobody really seems to be capable of doing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Thanks for the lengthy explanation. Btw, as an aside, the Aug 3 update link is down.

What i meant when reffering to historical ships and the models ingame, is that the ingame ships are somewhat off - many small ships have far too much armament - even a yacht has some 12 cannons - yet the only non-trade ships with 20 or more are frigates, corvettes and brigs. The large xebecs and so forth that existed in reality are not present, and the choice is very limited.

Now the problem with the models is that they have guns physically on them. Thats why there are so many reskins that 'add' guns by painting on gunports, but not a single one that removes a gun (without leaving it on the model).

Hence, you cant really scale down the number of guns on a lugger to more realistic levels. Likewise, noone has modelled a large xebec.


On the issue of sailing characteristics - i think the balance is very good overall, but unfortunately there are people who want to introduce 'special' ships, which are in fact unbalanced, and make obsolete all other ships of that type for no apparent reason. These are far less extreme than in previous builds (i remember when the xebec barbarossa was 5 knots faster than the norm), but they still sneak in.

I might be picking on the privateer, but lets face it - it sails as well into the wind as a sloop, its faster and more maneouvrable than a brig, (which is also a sloop of war) and has cannons as large and as numerous.

The critical question when you see a ship like that is - 'how?' - and unfortunately, when the model IS that of a brig, you assume it IS a brig. Its rigging is certainly not that different to justify completely different qualities.

Lets go a step further, and assume it has different rigging, giving it these advantages on a brig hull - why dont other brigs have this rigging? If this 'miracle' rigging allows it to tack like a sloop and sail with the wind like a corvette, why is it not widely adopted?

Essentially, the privateer OBSOLETES all other brigs, a fact that really is without foundation in either history or the logic of the game. If you are going to give it realistic advantages because of its rigging, give it realistic disadvantages that the different rigging would cause.


As for my grievance with 'pirate' versions - its simple - ive already located how the ships_init.c file works - some unique pirate ships have been added, and the modders on these have generally given them one class larger guns - once again, totally unbalancing everything and rendering the normal ships obsolete.

But the normal ships are also subject to being built by the 'pirate' nationality, and subject to its multipliers - and lo and behold, the pirates get a ship with 1.5 times larger cannons. Which could work, but ive tried it, and its just not balanced. See, the disadvantages dont even-out the massive advantage of larger calibre guns. So that means, that once again, the pirate version is THE version to have, and all others are made somewhat obsolete.


My main argument is stupidly simple - the addition of privateers, gaff rigged xebecs, pirate super frigates etc, render all other ships of that type pointless, and thus LIMIT, rather than EXTEND the choice available, unless you refuse to use them - in which case you will often encounter them using their advantages against YOU.

They therefore do not fit or help gameplay, and should be modified.

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=156631:date=Aug 5 2006, 08:09 PM:name=Hook)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Aug 5 2006, 08:09 PM) [snapback]156631[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--quoteo(post=156608:date=Aug 5 2006, 05:55 AM:name=irR4tiOn4L)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(irR4tiOn4L @ Aug 5 2006, 05:55 AM) [snapback]156608[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Making those changes to the fast schooner had an interesting side effect - it became a slow schooner. No matter where i was sailing, my companion would significantly outpace me.

How does the 'best' variable work?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The "fast schooner" *should* be slower than a normal schooner, because of the square rigged sails being less efficient. The ship might sail faster if the wind is coming from directly astern, but don't count on it. Brigantine refers to the rigging type, not the ship itself. And this thing is brigantine rigged.

The best variable is mostly abstract, and feeds a complicated equation. There's no way I could describe it properly without resorting to a lot of math. Basically, just take the closest number and add 0.5 to it. I'm not sure what might happen if you vary much from that number.

Hook
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Umm hook, i dont think it follows that it should be 'slower' - it should be 'different' - faster downwind, and therefore with a greater top possible speed (as square sails catch more air while travelling downwind), but slower 90 degrees or thereabouts off the wind, and certainly not as capable of tacking into the wind.

But the values i chose were in relation to this fast schooner compared to the 'brigantine' that we have ingame - that ship has much more square sails, a larger and less efficient hull and many more cannons - it also doesnt have as many triangular sails, or those 'parachute' type sails that the fast schooner has inherited from the schooner - at the end of the day, the fast schooner has just three or four sails differing from a schooner, and only two or three of those are traditional square sails.

It really wouldnt be fair to give this schooner the same limitations as the semi brig 'brigantine' we have ingame. It should be somewhat of a compromise.

Thats why i argue for values closer to the schooner than the brigantine.


Anyway, i suspect those values didnt work because i reinitialised after buying the ships already, and that messed them up for some reason - weird. Ill test properly.




Also, does anyone know how to get more people running around on deck? Theres some 10 there now, i think 30-50 would be good.

 

[LarryHookins]

If you want to tweak the values for the fast schooner, then make the closest point slightly lower, but higher than the schooner. Add 0.5 to closest point to make the best point.

The best point is defined as the point at which your ship will sail the fastest, but it doesn't work for sloops and schooners. Those ships sail fastest with the wind on the beam because of the way the speeds are calculated in-game.

Hook

 

[Pieter Boelen]

I moved these posts into a seperate thread. I hope nobody minds. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/whistling.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="whistling.gif" />

As for the topic at hand: It is indeed important to make sure that no ship really makes the other ships superfluous. That would be a shame. So we need to decide on a good way of balancing the game without losing any ships or features.

I think we should decide on a couple of classes of ships. All ships in each class will be just about as good as the other ships in it's class. However, there should be some variation. And ships in the same class should be able to have big differences, as long as they remain well-balanced with the other ships. For example:

<b>Class 1 (or 2):</b>
Yacht: Reasonable calibre cannons, reasonable speed, bigger cargo hold [useful for people wanting to do trading missions]
Barque: Higher calibre cannons, lower speed and maneuvrability [useful for people wanting to sink enemy ships]
Lugger: Less calibre cannons, better speed and maneuvrability [useful for people who like boarding enemy ships]

All variations of the yachts should have similar values, but some variety can be added.

As for national versions of the ships: I want to keep all the nationality's versions, but maybe balance them against each other in a better way.
English: Bigger cannons, less maneuvrability and speed
Dutch: More cargo space, less calibre cannons
Spanish: More cargo space, less crew
French: More crew, less cargo space and less calibre cannons
Portuguese: Everything well-balanced (similar to the settings in ships_init.c)
Pirate: More maneuvrability and speed, less crew, less calibre cannons, less cargo space

I also think that pirate versions shouldn't exist of all types of ships, but only of the ships that pirates are likely to use and/or build: Xebecs, Schooners, etc. So there should be VERY few pirate versions of Corvettes, Battleships and Manowars. After all, pirates would never build these, but they might modify some of them to their liking after they captured them. These should not be sold though, but should only be encounterable at sea.

So: Small pirate vessels are sold at the pirate shipyards. Large pirate vessels can only be encountered at sea and would be VERY rare. The unique pirate ships by Petros should, of course, remain in the game as pirate versions. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen1.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="icon_mrgreen1.gif" />

Note: The above are all suggestions on how things could be handled. I'm sure there are some good ideas in there, but it needs to be worked out more thoroughly. Once we have some ideas everyone is reasonably happy with, we can try using these settings in the game. Any comments on my suggestions are MORE than welcome! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/w00t.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="w00t.gif" />

BTW: Some input from people with some historical knowledge is required, I think. We don't need to have 100% historical settings, but history can help in this. "Fantasy" ships that never have existed in real life would also be welcome in the mod, as long as they are well-balanced and don't work as super-ships.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

<b>Important idea (I think):</b>
There is a basic principle that I think we should use to balance everything in the game: Player game style. There should be several options available for the player, each of the options being good for a different game style. The options are pretty much equally balanced, but their differences make it so that there is a different option for each gameplay style. So to balance the game, we should first begin to inventarise which gamestyles the player might have. Then we should try to ake sure that there is a good option for each of these game styles.

For example:
1) Player who wants to sink everything he encounters
2) Player who wants to board everything
3) Player who wants to have a bit of everything

There are many more factors that could be considered for the game style. For example: The range of the guns, reload time, amount of crew, usage of ammunition (hit the hull, crew or rigging), capturing ships vs. sinking them, etc. If we decide on a couple of default game styles for the ships, but also for the blades, guns and cannons, then we can use that to balance the game. Of course, as the game progresses, new ship classes will become available, better blades, etc. But all ships in the same class should be balanced according to game style, so that there will always be a ship that works for the player and there are no real super-ships, only ships that work better for a different game style.

Of course the difference between classes of ships is important. In a fight between a class 2 ship (Corvette) and a class 7 (Tartane), the Corvette would be an ubership, because a corvette is, just like a Tartane, fast and maneuvrable, but it also has many guns and crew. But there should be no uberships in the same class. And there should not be a case where there is one ship that is best in the game. The best ship should depend on the player who uses the ship.

I hope I have given some useful ideas that will help in balancing this game. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

 

[dendee]

Pieter,

I like the idea of dividing by playstyles very much. Just a note on that, I think that rather than dividing it as you proposed (want to sink everything, want to board everything... they are the same playstyle, i.e. f**k everything that moves), we should make a solid division between arcade playstyle and realistic playstyle. I don't mean "realistic sailing" and stuff. If it is at all possible to boil it down to a single cathegory (which I doubt), I'd say I mean MONEY as the final criteria. Since, to use potc2 movie phrase, "i'm afraid currency is the current currency in the archipelago", we should strive to make a distinct difference between easy arcade mode when everything you do is incredibly profitable, and the more realistic approach, when you actually have to put a lot of sweat into making your ends meet. This is a fairly global task, it covers about every aspect of the game. Apart from that, there will of course be "realistic/arcade world", as in sailing, cannons etc.

Just brainstorming here.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

For the amount of money, we can use the difficulty setting: The higher the difficulty, the lower the amount of money you get. So players wanting to play "arcade" can play at the lowest difficulty level, which is the same as the highest, only much more easy. The players who don't want to play arcade can play adventurer or something like that. The added plus of that is that the player can switch between difficulties halfway into the game, so he can play an arcade opening, then switch to adventurer.

There should be no need to make two completely different games: One realistic, one arcade. That's much too complicated, I think.

I think that tomorrow I will make a new topic about balancing the game in general. There we can try to figure out which parts of the game need balancing, then we have to do some brainstorming on how to tackle the balancing and finally transfer our ideas into a working game. I hope we can make the brainstorming work in a structured way, so that we can get the best results in the shortest possible time.

Of course, we will need some coders to tweak the game in the end to conform to the results on our brainstorming.

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=156675:date=Aug 5 2006, 11:16 PM:name=Pieter Boelen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pieter Boelen @ Aug 5 2006, 11:16 PM) [snapback]156675[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<b>Important idea (I think):</b>
There is a basic principle that I think we should use to balance everything in the game: Player game style. There should be several options available for the player, each of the options being good for a different game style. The options are pretty much equally balanced, but their differences make it so that there is a different option for each gameplay style. So to balance the game, we should first begin to inventarise which gamestyles the player might have. Then we should try to ake sure that there is a good option for each of these game styles.

For example:
1) Player who wants to sink everything he encounters
2) Player who wants to board everything
3) Player who wants to have a bit of everything

There are many more factors that could be considered for the game style. For example: The range of the guns, reload time, amount of crew, usage of ammunition (hit the hull, crew or rigging), capturing ships vs. sinking them, etc. If we decide on a couple of default game styles for the ships, but also for the blades, guns and cannons, then we can use that to balance the game. Of course, as the game progresses, new ship classes will become available, better blades, etc. But all ships in the same class should be balanced according to game style, so that there will always be a ship that works for the player and there are no real super-ships, only ships that work better for a different game style.

Of course the difference between classes of ships is important. In a fight between a class 2 ship (Corvette) and a class 7 (Tartane), the Corvette would be an ubership, because a corvette is, just like a Tartane, fast and maneuvrable, but it also has many guns and crew. But there should be no uberships in the same class. And there should not be a case where there is one ship that is best in the game. The best ship should depend on the player who uses the ship.

I hope I have given some useful ideas that will help in balancing this game. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



I think your getting somewhere with this, but i dont think SHIPS should be balanced according to OVERRIDING THEMES of player STYLE. That seems like two completely different worlds, and totally removed from the actual ships.

Instead, it seems obvious that the ships should be balanced with regard to what it would have been designed for, which really does extend more into the historical context of trade, piracy, smuggling, warfare etc, not the current whims of the player. Let them choose an occupation instead. That means that balance should take into account:

First, the actual functions a ship would have been designed for, which were numerous and extensive. Each function should have predefined characteristic traits or needs, and each ship a predefined set of functions - a ship designed with a single minded purpose would be the most efficient at that function, but inflexible - a ship that combines functions must necessarily balance them.

Second, this should be both tendered AND randomised with historical example and primarily engineering and practical efficacy - arguably historical example and engineering sense go hand in hand. This means that the REASON a ship cant perform a function perfectly, or the REASON a ship combining two functions cant do each as well as two ships built to do each one, or even the REASON one ship is just so good or that much better than the others, MUST LIE with the design, physical limitations, characteristics and tradeoffs inherent in the building methods of the day, the ship, the practices of the day, the demands of the function or application for the ship, and the social context in which it might have been designed and built (for example, the glory of the nation mandated rather nonsensical stern galleries).

For example, a smuggling ship, mandating a shallow draft, cannot be built heavy and heavily armed. A warship designed to overpower any small ship cannot have a draft as shallow as the smuggler - a combination of the two cannot best either one in power or draft. These are rudimentary examples, but history provides real and solid tradeoffs encountered over the entire age of sail. We dont need to look at player's desires - just look at real world applications for these ships.

Third, it must not be discounted what effect any individual design would have on the world at large - if a nation invents a superior warship, it follows that fairly soon all nations (with an economy and interest in the carribean strong enough) will adopt similar warships.

If a certain small ship gives pirates and smugglers the ability to outfight or outrun any ship, it follows that the navies (if they were well organised and funded) would develop a ship to counter it, or they would militarise it and outlaw its civilian use (such that only a pirate might acquire one, with the caveat that it is illegal).

So in this sense, the world would be in constant transition to find a status quo, a scissors paper rock type equation, but change is not instantaneous and the will of peoples to adapt not unlimited - and in that sense we must capture the social situation, the status of the transitions, as might exist at the time due to various developments.

In other words, were filling in a history - thats why its good to take the easy option of borrowing the real history.


Players are not supposed to operate with total freedom or be catered for - they are to choose what combination of risk/reward or vice/virtue of any particular occupation appeals to them, and likewise for the ships. The player style will take care of itself if the ships are well balanced across occupations - no one occupation should dominate the game, even if each occupation might have a dominant class of ship.

All ships should also have their achilles heels, or drawbacks - for some that might just be being average. That in combination with an equal distribution of equally important traits will ensure no one ship dominates a class - but it is more fun to use a ship that doesnt quite fit the bill, giving it character, than one perfect for the purpose. This is especially true for piracy, which had no purpose built ships at all - only retrofitted.



This is the ideal - however, it has one drawback - it mandates that the simulated world also simulates the reasons ships were built the way they were - for smuggling ships with shallow drafts, that means providing shoals you can escape over.

Unfortunately, that might not be possible for all functions, so you have to abstract these reasons a little - if you cant provide shoals, youll have to provide something else to replace the function of those shoals (and in turn the shallow draft) - that might be an ability to tack or speed.

In this sense, we will have to replace historical limitations that cannot be simulated with other limitations in the game.

Given that there are not all that many, it will inevitably boil down to a simpler formula, such as speed vs meanouvrability vs ability to tack, or speed vs durability vs cargo.

Either way, it would really help to put down a concrete list of occupations and their necessities - determine which of those can be simulated and replace those that cant with other requirements of ships, then write up a list of ships and what occupations they want to fulfill, and thus what tradeoffs they will have to make, and finally give the whole thing a coating of believability and coherence by applying history, engineering principles and extrapolating what would happen and what has happened in the world.

If the game is flexible, each ship can end up quite unique.



Now all this sounds incredibly complicated, and thats just cause its written that way. But most of that work has already been done anyway! - What remains to be done is to take the currently overpowered and currently useless ships, give them purpose(s) and character, and balance them with other ships designed for that purpose(s).

That means - give a reason for the yacht, the barque, the tartane, the lugger, the galeoth (i like your suggestion of a slow gunship, a fast but fragile boarder, and a balance. Perhaps also introduce a smuggler (galeoth or lugger) and an inflexible warship (gunboat that operates by using just a very big gun).

Same with the slightly larger ships - give a reason for a sloop versus the schooner, the xebec versus them both (perhaps slower but much tougher, but also able to sail upwind better than them both, on account of its triangular sails?) and also, give a reason to the poor cutter! Give a purpose to the fast schooner, as a variation on the schooner (faster, but not as flexible because its best speed cannot be achieved 90 degrees off the wind, which gives great flexibility, but closer to the wind, and also it cannot tack as well - but at the same time it shouldnt be just the brigantine or privateer).

Balance the brigs to be more of a warship, and having a more clear cut purpose compared to these ships - war schooners are currently very powerful due to their hull, mobility, number of cannon and size of cannon. The brig is unremarkable in many ways, not to mention some dont have working bow cannons.

Somehow, fit the gaff rigged xebecs and privateers of the world in there.

Thats about it i guess. I agree with most suggestions you brought up.

 

[Izzie]

I really appreciate Pieter's approach to keeping in mind player style. Although it may seem difficult at times there really is a need to be able to combine styles as well. Just because I chose a more arcade style in some things doesn't mean I want it in all things.

I agree with Den Dee that the economy needs some work. But I disagree with the idea of totally eliminating the buying of certain ships. If you want that for yourself...go for it. I don't for myself since constant fighting as a way to search for ships isn't something I want to do. Keep in mind that the main quest REQUIRES you to take a fort. I have no desire to sail all over looking for the ships I will need to do this.

irR4tiOn4L keep in mind that the current game is not really ideal for occupations. Although with tweaking you can make money playing a merchant class it takes far to much fooling around and many restarts to adjust for that class. As far a smugglings goes, this is something I know alot about, there is NO WAY IN H*LL I'm doing it in a freaking lugger. The cargo space is to small, it's too slow, and the ship can't defend itself.

As I read the many posts on this subject I can see that there seems to be 2 camps going. Those who want it as real as possible and those who don't think it's as important. Unfortunatly I also see a lack of respect at times by both concerning the other. I personally don't have a real opinion about which is better, but I am all in favor of choice.

I would also like to point out that many people tweak ships to their own taste any way. If what your really looking for is a standard to use without personal tweaking then I would suggest you keep in mind this: The ones that would play the builds only adjusting the build/internal settings would be non-modders.

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=156706:date=Aug 6 2006, 03:31 AM:name=Izzie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Izzie @ Aug 6 2006, 03:31 AM) [snapback]156706[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I really appreciate Pieter's approach to keeping in mind player style. Although it may seem difficult at times there really is a need to be able to combine styles as well. Just because I chose a more arcade style in some things doesn't mean I want it in all things.

I agree with Den Dee that the economy needs some work. But I disagree with the idea of totally eliminating the buying of certain ships. If you want that for yourself...go for it. I don't for myself since constant fighting as a way to search for ships isn't something I want to do. Keep in mind that the main quest REQUIRES you to take a fort. I have no desire to sail all over looking for the ships I will need to do this.

irR4tiOn4L keep in mind that the current game is not really ideal for occupations. Although with tweaking you can make money playing a merchant class it takes far to much fooling around and many restarts to adjust for that class. As far a smugglings goes, this is something I know alot about, there is NO WAY IN H*LL I'm doing it in a freaking lugger. The cargo space is to small, it's too slow, and the ship can't defend itself.

As I read the many posts on this subject I can see that there seems to be 2 camps going. Those who want it as real as possible and those who don't think it's as important. Unfortunatly I also see a lack of respect at times by both concerning the other. I personally don't have a real opinion about which is better, but I am all in favor of choice.

I would also like to point out that many people tweak ships to their own taste any way. If what your really looking for is a standard to use without personal tweaking then I would suggest you keep in mind this: The ones that would play the builds only adjusting the build/internal settings would be non-modders.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Izzie i am totally in agreement that 'arcade' should not be equated with 'easy'. Both the 'realistic' and 'arcade' camps want a challenging and engaging game after all.

As for trading - well i dont understand what the problem is. Ive done it on many occasions and its perfectly profitable, especially with a galleon or so.

In terms of smuggling and the lugger - well that was just an extension of Pieters idea. Im not sure it should be the lugger or the galeoth, but either way these are just beginning ships, not choice ships.

May i also point out that its totally ridiculous how you can smuggle in this game - a galleon load of goods would surely not slip under the radar, and a galleon sure as hell wouldnt be a suitable smuggling ship - it would get searched and boarded easily because its so slow and obvious, and it certainly couldnt run, nor could it access sheltered coves due to its massive draft.

But as you point out, unfortunately none of that is modelled, and were stuck with a galleon being perfectly good as a smuggling ship.



In the end, a treatise on how ships ingame should reflect their real roles is pointless in such a limited game. Pieters idea of 'player styles' is a lot more practical and achievable in the circumstances, however, with two reservations -

First, such a system will inevitably undermine the engineering sense of the ships, or their historical accuracy. If you use the 'fun' approach where you approximate, alter and take creative license to create the most fun game possible, its a great idea. But if you want a world that is as historically sound and internally consistent as possible, I dont think you can just take liberty with ship designs. In that scenario, i think taking a page out of the real ships is a good idea.

Second, reducing the 'role' of any ship to just one out of several categories is an 'oversimplification' and in some instances will limit and reduce the choice available, rather than increase it.



The issue seems to be that some ships right now, in fact most ships, are utterly useless to the player once they have a better ship, and provide no merits of their own. It only remains to be done that these ships are altered to provide some sort of benefit or fit some sort of application.

We already have ships suited to piracy - the sloops and schooners - ships suited to warfare - corvettes and bigger - ships suited to trade - galleons, fleuts pinnaces, and most all of these are good at smuggling.

Frankly though, some special ships, such as the 'pinnace of war' or 'white waller frigate' just dont follow any of these conventions. They are not merely 'warships' - they are designed to escort trade ships while being a trading ship themselves. They are like heavily armed versions of the traders.

As is right now, these ships are being forced into a more 'warship' type role - theyve been made to follow the conventions of corvettes, frigates and warships, and have been made much quicker than their original type of ship. With this approach, they would certainly just be made as cheap, do-it-yourself warships, without any special role or use - if youve got a lineship, these are now useless.

Thats not a desirable approach. Fact is, apart from the white waller frigate, those ships are meant to escort other ships of their type (galleons, pinnaces and fleuts), and their use is that role. They are not just cookie cutter warships.


Other ships that are currently useless include the tartane, yacht, barque, lugger, galeoth, cutter and xebec. Who even uses xebecs? Yet these were very well armed, quite fast and very meanouvrable and nimble against the wind - great smuggling ships and piracy ships alike.

These ships are entirely supplemented by the sloops and schooners as ships of choice. The cutter, traditionally a ship able to outrun what it couldnt outfight, is totally inferior to the sloop and schooner. The fast schooner is just a fragile schooner.

These ships need some sort of purpose within the game - have a look at the barque or yacht - those should have a lot more cargo space then they do - certainly more than a schooner or sloop would have. The tartane might just be a gunboat - one very large calibre gun.

The cutter really should be one of the fastest and most capable ships against the wind. It should definitely be more meanouvrable than a sloop, being so small.

The galeoth and lugger are the odd ones out - not sure what to do with those.

The xebec should be the predominant small warship - far deadlier than the schooner or sloop.


As we move up, we realise that the whole 'brig', 'brigantine' and 'privateer' category is unbalanced - the brigs armed with 9 pounders are obsolescent when compared to their 12 pounder cousins, except for the brigantine - which though having 9 pounders, has two working bow guns, which the other brigs dont, in eseence making it 22 gun compared to 20.

The Privateer obsoletes all these other ships.

Then we have all those smaller brig like ships - like the Shnaya, 16 gun and 20 gun brigs. These are just totally without character - the Shnaya's are like schooners with the sailiing disadvantages of a brig, the 16 and 20 gun brigs provide no advantages over the bigger brigs, or the smaller (but more flexibly rigged) sloops or schooners.

Even a 22 gun 12 pounder brig or privateer is not a significantly better warship then a 20 gun war schooner, which is arguably its only purpose (as a small corvette), since it has such a disadvantageous rigging and slow top speed (compared to a schooner or corvette).

The bigger warships, like the corvettes, frigates and bigger, with the exception of some confusing ships like the light and heavy frigates and super frigates, are balanced fine, as are the trade ships - except in terms of cargo space, which might require some adjustment.

The 'british frigate' is a standout example of how national differences should be handled - faster and more nimble than the normal frigate, it has 4 less guns and one smaller calibre. As a result, it has its own 'niche' and is still a good ship to have - because of its advantages in speed.


The main thing is that the ships have to make 'sense', in terms of other ships in the game, the design of their hulls and rigging, their physical size (which would determine their cargo and crew capacity - the light frigates dont make sense here, since they are just the corvette model with double the crew) and the role they are supposed to fulfill, or 'player style' they are to suit, if you will.

Its also important that each ship has something interesting or characteristic about it, a niche, something to like, even if it is still completely outclasses. If half your smaller ships are cookie cutter things that youd rather avoid, it wastes all those good models.

A good example of this is the lugger VML - great model, but unfortunately the ship is so unremarkable that there is simply no excuse to use it!


What is NOT needed is to fit all ships within a limited 3 or 4 'styles' - inevitably you will miss some.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

I think that my and irR4tiOn4L's ideas are not nescessarily opposed to each other. Actually, I think our ideas can compliment each other really well.

irR4tiOn4L talks about player occupations. I talk about player gameplay styles. These two things are just about the same things. I am sorry for not explaining my idea as good as I should have done. I agree with irR4tiOn4L's ideas for the most part. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/yes.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="yes.gif" />

 

[Izzie]

The ships like the character textures have just piled up over the years. Once something goes into a build it is rarely taken out unless it's done so by the creator. The problem isn't just making the ships more real but possibly taking out older ones. That I could see putting time into. The game as a whole is bloated. This is adding to load times. I can't believe how long it takes now to load or reload the game. As far as the make it real stuff, the real ships, how they function, and what they were commonly used for is usefully creating or tweaking ships. But keep in mind the whole game from the very begining is filled with unreal elements. You have to draw the line someplace.

I used to spend a great deal of time taking out stuff from the game I know I will never use. But if an update comes out that rewrites that file I had to do it all over again. With so many coming out now it became pointless.

Form and funtion may be a better starting point to decide what to fix or remove rather then just if it's historical or not. I just hate to see people get hung up on something that in games as a whole really is trivial. Things like smuggling, the ships that were used, and how it was treated by the authorities varied greatly by area, country, & time period. They really were far more relaxed on this in the new world as a whole. Unless you want to add bribes and even commissioned goods it might be best to leave that to the in game functions as they were intended.

Also form, function, play style and reality aren't really the same thing. I don't envy the people that will do this. It's a huge task and people are hard to please. But the game as a whole is suffering from bloat and not just with ships.

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=156808:date=Aug 6 2006, 07:25 PM:name=Pieter Boelen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pieter Boelen @ Aug 6 2006, 07:25 PM) [snapback]156808[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I think that my and irR4tiOn4L's ideas are not nescessarily opposed to each other. Actually, I think our ideas can compliment each other really well.

irR4tiOn4L talks about player occupations. I talk about player gameplay styles. These two things are just about the same things. I am sorry for not explaining my idea as good as I should have done. I agree with irR4tiOn4L's ideas for the most part. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/yes.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="yes.gif" />
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Lol actually near the end of one of those posts i said something to the effect - these ideas are actually very similar, i like Pieter's suggestions a lot - i apologise for the excessive rambling posts.

The only thing i want to add is that youve got to be careful to maintain historical, engineering and gameplay consistency - you dont want really want to see manowars outturn a frigate or galleons of war outrun a sloop. If the ship design doesnt allow it, it shouldnt be stretched too far. Keep it historical.

Also, you have to be careful that you dont end up restricting people to just a few styles. Each ship should try and fill some niche.

<!--quoteo(post=156823:date=Aug 6 2006, 09:27 PM:name=Izzie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Izzie @ Aug 6 2006, 09:27 PM) [snapback]156823[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
The ships like the character textures have just piled up over the years. Once something goes into a build it is rarely taken out unless it's done so by the creator. The problem isn't just making the ships more real but possibly taking out older ones. That I could see putting time into. The game as a whole is bloated. This is adding to load times. I can't believe how long it takes now to load or reload the game. As far as the make it real stuff, the real ships, how they function, and what they were commonly used for is usefully creating or tweaking ships. But keep in mind the whole game from the very begining is filled with unreal elements. You have to draw the line someplace.

I used to spend a great deal of time taking out stuff from the game I know I will never use. But if an update comes out that rewrites that file I had to do it all over again. With so many coming out now it became pointless.

Form and funtion may be a better starting point to decide what to fix or remove rather then just if it's historical or not. I just hate to see people get hung up on something that in games as a whole really is trivial. Things like smuggling, the ships that were used, and how it was treated by the authorities varied greatly by area, country, & time period. They really were far more relaxed on this in the new world as a whole. Unless you want to add bribes and even commissioned goods it might be best to leave that to the in game functions as they were intended.

Also form, function, play style and reality aren't really the same thing. I don't envy the people that will do this. It's a huge task and people are hard to please. But the game as a whole is suffering from bloat and not just with ships.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I do agree. I used smuggling more in the sense that we CANT do anything about it, and thus we should NOT try and create historical smuggling ships - they will be redundant.

Instead, a smuggling ship in this game should utilise a good hold, speed and a method of escape to replace the shoals - sailing close to the wind.

At least that would give some purpose to ships like the cutter.


Overall i would prefer not to take ships out, but instead give them some sort of purpose or niche - something that is special about them, so that someone might conceivably use them.


There is nothing worse for variety then when you have two ships that look very similar, cost similar amounts with the same number of cannons and rig type and characteristics, but while one has a speed of 15, meanouvrability of 40, crew of 100 and calibre of 12, the other has a speed of 17, a meanouvrability of 45, a crew of 130 and a calibre of 18. That just makes you an idiot if you choose the former.

The yachts and barques of the world are useless at least partially because the schooners and the sloops have as much cargo space and all other stats superior.

That shouldnt be so.

 

[Izzie]

<!--quoteo(post=156834:date=Aug 7 2006, 12:43 AM:name=irR4tiOn4L)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(irR4tiOn4L @ Aug 7 2006, 12:43 AM) [snapback]156834[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Overall i would prefer not to take ships out, but instead give them some sort of purpose or niche - something that is special about them, so that someone might conceivably use them.


There is nothing worse for variety then when you have two ships that look very similar, cost similar amounts with the same number of cannons and rig type and characteristics, but while one has a speed of 15, meanouvrability of 40, crew of 100 and calibre of 12, the other has a speed of 17, a meanouvrability of 45, a crew of 130 and a calibre of 18. That just makes you an idiot if you choose the former.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Well what you describe really isn't that far off the mark. I'm one of those people that tend to either give or throw away things I don't use. I would just plain toss out that first ship rather then spend time trying to figure out what it's good for. Keep in mind the original game had 50 ship textures now we have 320. That is over 6 times as many.

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=156870:date=Aug 7 2006, 02:24 AM:name=Izzie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Izzie @ Aug 7 2006, 02:24 AM) [snapback]156870[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--quoteo(post=156834:date=Aug 7 2006, 12:43 AM:name=irR4tiOn4L)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(irR4tiOn4L @ Aug 7 2006, 12:43 AM) [snapback]156834[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Overall i would prefer not to take ships out, but instead give them some sort of purpose or niche - something that is special about them, so that someone might conceivably use them.


There is nothing worse for variety then when you have two ships that look very similar, cost similar amounts with the same number of cannons and rig type and characteristics, but while one has a speed of 15, meanouvrability of 40, crew of 100 and calibre of 12, the other has a speed of 17, a meanouvrability of 45, a crew of 130 and a calibre of 18. That just makes you an idiot if you choose the former.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Well what you describe really isn't that far off the mark. I'm one of those people that tend to either give or throw away things I don't use. I would just plain toss out that first ship rather then spend time trying to figure out what it's good for. Keep in mind the original game had 50 ship textures now we have 320. That is over 6 times as many.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

True, but most of those textures are just the same ship with a different paintjob.

I wouldnt want to throw out a different paintjob - that has real tangible benefits


Theres another dimension to the example i presented - while the first ship had a lot of thought put into how such a design should perform, the second design is really just a carbon copy that has established no norm or paradigm except to slightly improve on all the values selected for the first.

In other words, the first ship had the proper foundation work done, but the second just copied it and added an extra edge of fantasy performance.


Therefore, in the metaphorical sense, i would rather take out the SECOND ship, which did not have the proper analysis carried out to determine its stats, rather than the first.

I would describe the second ship as 'the first ship made uber', and i would prefer to remove these uber ships, rather than to remove the ones they were based on.


While i prefer to change rather than remove, I think that ingame youll find that an entire stack of well balanced ships is made obsolescent and pointless by a single 'uberised' ship - for example, all the brigs are made redundant by the privateer, and all the frigates by the 'super frigate'.

Now you COULD take out all the brigs and just leave the privateer, since you COULD argue thats the 'only ship i use anyway, and all the ships i dont should be removed', but i would argue that removing this single ship itself, the single ship that you DO use (because its uber) would open up all the other ships as a balanced, valid choice.

That seems the most efficient and logical way of balancing to me.

 

[LarryHookins]

Or make it a quest ship that's difficult to get. I don't find the privateer all that uber. Last one I had, I sold it and bought a schooner.

The Fearless is supposed to be an uber ship. Any problems with that one?

Hook

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=157014:date=Aug 8 2006, 12:37 AM:name=Hook)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Aug 8 2006, 12:37 AM) [snapback]157014[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Or make it a quest ship that's difficult to get. I don't find the privateer all that uber. Last one I had, I sold it and bought a schooner.

The Fearless is supposed to be an uber ship. Any problems with that one?

Hook
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Not sure which one the fearless is. Is that the British frigate? Hard to describe it as uber when it has less guns of lower calibre than a normal frigate.

Last i heard, the privateer had the sailing characteristics of a sloop. More of a bug i guess. Either way, its not so much about it being 'uber' so much as it is unwarranted.

Oh and as much as i love schooners, they are pretty overpowered when compared to a brig (or privateer). Mainly because they are so damn fast, and have the same number of cannons.


EDIT
Looking at the stats of FEARLESS (SHIP_WARSHIP_PIRATE), i dont spot anything out of the ordinary, compared to a normal warship.

 

[LarryHookins]

I've given up schooners in favor of sloops since then.

I finally encountered the fast schooner in the game. I was sailing the 74, going 6 knots, it was going 16 knots. So I used Instant Boarding. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> I should have kept it around as a study specimen.

The Fearless has been described in glowing terms. It's one of the original game ships.

Hook

 

[irR4tiOn4L]

<!--quoteo(post=157121:date=Aug 8 2006, 12:13 PM:name=Hook)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Aug 8 2006, 12:13 PM) [snapback]157121[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I've given up schooners in favor of sloops since then.

I finally encountered the fast schooner in the game. I was sailing the 74, going 6 knots, it was going 16 knots. So I used Instant Boarding. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> I should have kept it around as a study specimen.

The Fearless has been described in glowing terms. It's one of the original game ships.

Hook
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As much as i like schooners, they are a little TOO good for a sailing ship.

The fearless - what ship IS it? I dont remember a ship named 'fearless'. Is it a lineship, warship, frigate, battleship?

I knows its there of course, i just dont remember which one.