WIP Level of boarding enemies

[KillPhil]

Boarder HP bonus should also take affect when one crew has way more size than the other IMO.

Boarder level is ok if its completely loose from player level. If you are a lowlevel, you have to trust your crew to help you, I think this is a good concept.

ATM I am tweaking the captains rank formula a bit. A rank 40-50 captain for navy ships is maybe realistic, but it is a long way until the player gets even near a level to stand against those. I reduced it now, tier 1 naval captains should in my formula about 25-35 (I made a higher random factor, so you have the chance to get weaker enemies, so the player actually sees some progress in his leveling). It is still a very high level with around 300-400HP, but it does take the player half a time now to be able to compete naval captains.

Merchants now have rarely levels over 10-15 - This is really necessary, because if a player chooses to be a pirate/privateer at the beginning, his main goal in the first time is fighting and boarding merchants to get fortune and fame. This is quite difficult if you can't fight any (merchant) captain until you are at level 15-20. And the player hasn't really any other option at the beginning

 

[KillPhil]

Did I say that? I thought I said several times that I agreed things had to be changed.
I even said how it should probably be changed.

I only meant captain levels here But, as I say in my post above, I now agree with you, that captains should have no link to the players level at all, though I still think they need to get weaker.

 

[Tingyun]

Captain level should not be heavily restricted based on keeping the HP of a possible dual down--captain level is too central to the sailing abilities of the captain in question. Especially the above suggestion of limiting even the highest tier merchant captains to levels 10-15 would hurt gameplay in sea combat, aside from being unrelaistic (the best merchant captains in giant ships should be very good captains).

If Captain HP is too much of a problem, it should be dealt with directly. Remove the HP bonuses they get (I think merchant captains get +20 base and +2 per level).

Or Reduce their fencing importance, which will cause them to take less combat perks and have less melee skill.

Basically, there are direct tools available to manage the challange posed by captain duals, trying to do that with heavy restrictions on captain level will have unintended results elsewhere, and especially the sea combat ability of the AI does not need a nerf, given their general incompetence there compared to the player. Maybe some moderation of captian levels, by changing the *7 to *5 is justified by the upcoming addition of AI officers, but that should be balanced primarilly against sea combat performance.

Also, a player should be able to beat AI captains with 3x their HP or more as soon as they are high enough level to have purchased all the fencing perks and aquired a good block sword. The idea that player level needs to be similar at all to enemy level to compete with them in combat is not correct at all--a moderately skilled player will almost always be blocking when the AI attacks, while the AI will generally not be blocking when the player attacks.

Because of this, the AI captain probably needs several times the player HP to have a shot of competing, once the player understands the block-counterattack-block-counterattack pattern. Otherwise, there is no challange at all.

Finally, remember one more change I made before my current sabattical: I gave landlubber difficulty a 50% reduction in damage recieved from enemy swords. Meaning, if a player has not yet learned how to block-counterattack, then they should be on landlubber difficulty, and they will effectivelly have 2x the HP shown, because they take half damage.

So with that landlubber change handles the player who has not yet learned to fight, and players who have learned the basics of blocking and counterattacking will handle captains with 3x their HP as long as they have purchased some fencing perks.

 

[KillPhil]

You need enough HP to withstand the time of the fight - no block is always 100% save and if the enemy pierces with a critical hit you immediatly go very low on HP - and thats why I want to either reduce the base HP of enemies (side-effect: quicker combats), or increase the players health.

But I agree - I didnt think of the other things reducing the rank will do. I will try to reduce the HP base bonus and per level a bit.
Now did drastically reduce the hp base and level bonus on captains - I will look how this affects the game now.
I will watch if my reduced ranks are too low now - but I think since captains have a importance for sailing skill, it shouldn't affect it that hard.

 

[Tingyun]

I agree @Pillat with a lot of what you say-- I think the problem is focussed on the low hp player who tries to dual captains at low level (like you did at level 3), and that seems to agree with some of the recent experiences shared here, where players feel vulnerable at lower levels and capable at higher: Unbalanced "Boss"enemies | Page 5 | PiratesAhoy!

Basically, there is a difficulty cliff in the game: when the player can be killed with one hit at the beginning, and he lacks the sword skills, then the Captains are impossible.

Once the player hits around level 8-10, purchases swordplay professional, aquires a good block sword, it becomes unlikely at the AI pierces his block, and the player has the HP to absorb a couple of times where that unlikely event happens. At that point, captains can have almost as much HP as they like, they are largely helpless against the player.

One option is the landlubber 50% reduction in damage player buff I added: any player who wants to tackle challanges beyond them from the beginning can turn on landlubber and enjoy that protection. And we don't then lose the challanging later game duals when the enemy needs the hp advantage.

EDIT: just saw your edit addition: how much did you reduce levels? I think making the *7 into a *5 multiplication factor would be justified by the fact captains pick perks better now and will have officers soon, but I'd be wary of lowering it any further.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Boarder HP bonus should also take affect when one crew has way more size than the other IMO.

Already included in my suggestion under "number of boarders", which is the variable where that makes by far the most sense.

Potential issues with that:
- Player gets officer support, while AI does not (UNFAIR!)
- There is a "cap" to prevent fights from being too one-sided (skipped on the highest difficulty)

So maybe indeed this isn't enough. But having a combined effect does make the logic more fuzzy and confusing.
My recommendation is therefore to first stick with "one thing affects one other thing" and not complicate it too much at the beginning.
If playtesting indicates that some additional complexity is required, that can be arranged later.

Boarder level is ok if its completely loose from player level. If you are a lowlevel, you have to trust your crew to help you, I think this is a good concept.

In that case, enemy and player sailors would be evenly matched in a fair fight.
But the player would either be weaker or stronger in comparison and the same applies to your officers.
I'm not sure how that would work for gameplay. It might indeed be OK.

ATM I am tweaking the captains rank formula a bit. A rank 40-50 captain for navy ships is maybe realistic, but it is a long way until the player gets even near a level to stand against those. I reduced it now, tier 1 naval captains should in my formula about 25-35 (I made a higher random factor, so you have the chance to get weaker enemies, so the player actually sees some progress in his leveling). It is still a very high level with around 300-400HP, but it does take the player half a time now to be able to compete naval captains.

I reckon that, at the very least, AI captains should have enough Sailing and Leadership skill to be allowed to command their own ship.
This is based on the Realistic Game Mode logic where you get a penalty if you assign too low-level captains to your companion ships.

Merchants now have rarely levels over 10-15 - This is really necessary, because if a player chooses to be a pirate/privateer at the beginning, his main goal in the first time is fighting and boarding merchants to get fortune and fame. This is quite difficult if you can't fight any (merchant) captain until you are at level 15-20. And the player hasn't really any other option at the beginning

This should really depend on the size of the targets you pick.
If you are extremely inexperienced in the early game, even a sizeable merchant should, of course, be too much for you.
Ideally, players should stick to tiny targets until they're actually ready to pick on the larger ones.
That applies to navy ships, of course, but also to merchants.

Basically, if you have a Tier 7 ship yourself at the start of the game, you should probably be able to deal with other Tier 7 ships, especially merchants.
But an inexperienced player in a Tier 7 ship against a Tier 3 merchant should still be a recipe for disaster.

Captain level should not be heavily restricted based on keeping the HP of a possible dual down--captain level is too central to the sailing abilities of the captain in question. Especially the above suggestion of limiting even the highest tier merchant captains to levels 10-15 would hurt gameplay in sea combat, aside from being unrelaistic (the best merchant captains in giant ships should be very good captains).

Agreed. Captains should NOT be balanced based on the duels. If the problem is with the duels, then the solution lies with the duels.
My thinking is to only trigger those duels later in the game, once you've gained some fame.
By that time, you're probably ready for them as otherwise you wouldn't have been able to gain that fame in the first place.

So no need to make the duels easier in the early game; we just make them not trigger AT ALL in the early game.
Seems like a much better solution to me. You need new challenges later in the game; at the start, staying alive is enough of a challenge as it is.

Or Reduce their fencing importance, which will cause them to take less combat perks and have less melee skill.

Indeed that makes a lot of sense for captains; after all, it is Sailing and Leadership that should be focusing on for starters.

Of course if high level captains get high level weapons and those are vastly different from the low level ones, then that is an additional inbalance.
By that logic, having less difference between high and low level weapons might actually be a help.
Then you really notice that especially merchant captains would not be good at fencing, because they've been focusing on their primary job instead.
That does sound like it makes sense to me.

 

[Tingyun]

@Pieter Boelen I agree, note though thst sometimes you will get a captain dual anyway if the enemy doesn't surrender all the way to the last cabin, but then I think you get crew help in the fight (back up and your crewmen will double team the captain), and merchants tend to surrender.

I do think the landlubber 50% reduction in damage player buff I added really helps here (contrary to popular perception, I've done as much to lower difficulty in the game as raise it). If players don't want to have to use discretion in picking their targets, they should be on landlubber.

As far as late-game player being able to handle duals, late-game effectively starts at level 8-10. Seriously, even on swashbuckler, once the player can purchase all the fencing perks, it's over for the AI having any chance in a one on one fight. The block-counterattack-block-counterattack is just really easy for the player to dominate even against opponents with many times their HP.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

@Pieter Boelen I agree, note though thst sometimes you will get a captain dual anyway if the enemy doesn't surrender all the way to the last cabin, but then I think you get crew help in the fight (back up and your crewmen will double team the captain), and merchants tend to surrender.

True, though that isn't really a duel, but part of the regular boarding process.

I do think the landlubber 50% reduction in damage player buff I added really helps here (contrary to popular perception, I've done as much to lower difficulty in the game as raise it). If players don't want to have to use discretion in picking their targets, they should be on landlubber.

Makes sense to me.

While my preference is for the gameplay to make some measure of realistic sense (e.g. an early game Tier 7 captain cannot capture a Tier 1 ship),
it is fine by me if this IS possible on the lowest difficulty. As long as it is ONLY on that lowest one.

As far as late-game player being able to handle duals, late-game effectively starts at level 8-10. Seriously, even on swashbuckler, once the player can purchase all the fencing perks, it's over for the AI having any chance in a one on one fight. The block-counterattack-block-counterattack is just really easy for the player to dominate even against opponents with many times their HP.

Quite true; the 1 on 1 duels are not much of a challenge at all.
If you can stay alive, then you can also win.

 

[Grey Roger]

This should really depend on the size of the targets you pick.
If you are extremely inexperienced in the early game, even a sizeable merchant should, of course, be too much for you.
Ideally, players should stick to tiny targets until they're actually ready to pick on the larger ones.
That applies to navy ships, of course, but also to merchants.

Basically, if you have a Tier 7 ship yourself at the start of the game, you should probably be able to deal with other Tier 7 ships, especially merchants.
But an inexperienced player in a Tier 7 ship against a Tier 3 merchant should still be a recipe for disaster.

True, not least because that tier 3 merchant won't be a pure merchant - the only trade-capable ships at that tier are "versatile" types such as the pinnace of war and maybe one or two of the big Spanish galleons in earlier periods. On the whole, I'd say you should have a reasonable chance against something one tier up from your own, so that you can gradually work your way up to bigger ships. Two tiers higher should be a serious challenge; and going up against a tier 3 pinnace of war while you're in a tier 7 lugger should indeed be near suicidal.

Of course if high level captains get high level weapons and those are vastly different from the low level ones, then that is an additional inbalance.

Not really, the reason being you'll probably have a high level weapon as well by that time. Whether by finding one in a dungeon or by being high enough level and rich enough to buy one, you ought to have something decent by the time you're taking on big targets. Anyway, a high level sword does not guarantee victory, which is why another way to get high level weapons is to take them from those captains, or for that matter from random bandits who also sometimes have good swords.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Not really, the reason being you'll probably have a high level weapon as well by that time.

I was referring to going up against a high-level captain while in the early game yourself.
If the captain has weak fencing skills, but a sword that is hugely, notably better than your own, then that stacks the odds further against the player.

But that isn't necessarily a bad thing. After all, it does make a whole lot of sense.

 

[Tingyun]

Just as a note since weapon assignment is being discussed, under the experimental version with expanded weapon selection high level captains will still generally have high level swords, but with a chance of getting a mid or lower level one. Of course, they now have a chance of getting armor, scaling up with level, so the two effects combined should on average maintain balance in captain challenge (avoiding the difficulty increase if captains suddenly got armor without other changes)

The tightened weapon tiers component is mostly an effect applies to the lower level swords (the high tier ones generally left alone), so usually it won't affect the power of a captain's sword, except ensuring he still has somewhat decent performance if he happens to get unlucky and roll a terrible sword (ie, allowing the above two effects to balance).

 

[Grey Roger]

I was referring to going up against a high-level captain while in the early game yourself.
If the captain has weak fencing skills, but a sword that is hugely, notably better than your own, then that stacks the odds further against the player.

But that isn't necessarily a bad thing. After all, it does make a whole lot of sense.

If the captain has weak fencing skills and you can keep blocking and counter-attacking then that sword may soon be yours. Your main problem when going up against a high-level captain early in the game is if he doesn't have weak fencing skills - you do, which means he's probably going to kill you even if he just has a basic cutlass.

Anyway, before going after ships, visit a dungeon or two, and then visit a blacksmith. If an enemy captain has a sword which is hugely better than yours then you haven't been doing the basic preparation.

 

[KillPhil]

You really made some points here - I have to agree with that. I probably was blended by my previous game expirience where you could quite easy board and kill all on a tier 5 or 4 ship with a lugger, if you sailed smart.
If you change the surrender-dialog this will actually probably possible again, if you can avoid cannonballs and have good wind.

I also didn't take into account that fencing skill (now) apparently has a large influence of melee fights (I didn't notice much of this in earlier versions).

 

[Levis]

Moved this to the brainstorming topic again. Might be interesting to read again and see if anything needs to be changed here or if it's okay now?

 

[Grey Roger]

I'm happy with boarding the way it is, and I do a lot of boarding!

 

[Pieter Boelen]

I did like the ideas we had about this to clean up the logic, but definitely something to be postponed until after Build 14 is released.