Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

Seafaring and ship combat

JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
edited November 2012 in The Golden Dais of Creation
Disclaimer: This is a long post and there is no tl;dr version.
I also tried to find other seafarers to check this with, but there really aren't many seasoned ship combat veterans out there these days.


I know that I made a few of these threads during the many incarnations of the forums, however I felt that these forums needed a thread for general seafaring & ship combat ideas. Things that may or may not be fully fleshed out, but still a place so people with ideas can get feedback and decide whether or not to put more thought into it.

Here are classlead submitted ideas that I like: 52, 57, 58, 63 (see below), 108, and 109 (solution 2).


I added this one down here because it's actually the biggest problem with ship combat right now.

Report #63
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by: Kinilan        Status      : Submitted
Skill       : Seafaring      Ability     : Fireweapon/weaponaiming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem:
Weapon accuracy even under ideal conditions feels very very low. Given the high cost of ammunition 
the low firing rate and overall damage output of ship weapons, the high number of defensive ship 
abilities and the ease of escaping ship combat all together I feel that accuracy and damage values 
neef to be adjusted
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solution #1:
Raise overall weapon accuracy and/or damage in all conditions
Solution #2:
Reduce the balance cost of loading and firimg a ship weapon as well as the weapon's own balance time
Solution #3:
Adjust Weapoinaiming to give much better accuracy over range and speed while increasing the weapon's 
balance cost aming the choice to use weaponaiming much more tactical
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If both ships are moving, you will miss 9/10 times regardless of rank in the skill. This means that you will not sink a ship, no matter how much ammunition you waste on it unless the captain doesn't know how to order repairs or put out fires. I have some ideas on how to fix this problem that I posted on one of the older forums, but the numbers themselves are just ideas that I'm throwing out there, not exact 'this is how it should be' numbers. Unfortunately, due to game mechanics, the way seafaring is, we can't just get close and broadside another ship like they would centuries ago in the real world.

First, take into consideration the rank in weapons for accuracy, it only makes sense that someone that has spent more points in weaponry should be able to use it more proficiently. 

  • Rank 1 being a base accuracy of 10%. This would be pretty much the same as it is now.
  • Rank 2 being a base accuracy of 20%.
  • Rank 3 being a base accuracy of 30%
  • Rank 4 being a base accuracy of 35%
  • Rank 5 being a base accuracy of 40%.

This means someone at rank 5 in weapons would have a 40% chance of hitting another ship (at close range).

Next, take more consideration into distance. Allow the weapons to be fired at long range (but keep extreme out of the mix) and have an accuracy modifier for each distance.
  • Extreme is out of range
  • Long has a -70% accuracy modifier.
  • Moderate has a -30% accuracy modifier.
  • Close has no accuracy modifier
  • Adjacent has a +10% accuracy modifier.
  • Stopping either ship adds 10% to each modifier.
  • Stopping both ships adds 20% to each modifier.
  • Grappling increases accuracy to 100%.
So, someone rank 5 in weapons, firing at long range has about a 12% chance of hitting, while someone at rank 1 has a 3% chance of hitting.



Finally, make weapon aiming give a 10% bonus to the base accuracy of each rank that has it (rank 3 and up).

  • Rank 3 would become 40%.
  • Rank 4 would become 45%.
  • Rank 5 would become 50%.


Finally, weather should play a rather large role in it as well however, they should only provide negative modifiers or no modifiers at all. There are 9 (I-VIIII) known weather statuses: glassy, smooth, calm, choppy, whitecapped, rough, stormy, tempestuous, and raging.

  • Glassy: no modifier.
  • Smooth: no modifier
  • Calm: -5% modifier
  • Choppy: -10% modifier
  • Whitecapped: -15% modifier
  • Rough: -30% modifier
  • Stormy: - 50% modifier
  • Tempestuous: -60% modifier
  • Raging: -80% modifier
This would make it so that completely clear weather would allow someone at rank 5 at close range with weaponaiming up to fire at a moving ship from a moving ship with 50% accuracy while that same person firing at the same ship in raging seas would have an accuracy of about a 12%.

Combined with distance, the weather would be computed first and then distance would be computed off of the remainder. So, that 12% at long range would be 3%


The numbers themselves don't have to be so large, nor do the ranks have to have to jump so far, however a change like this would create a necessity for a much more strategic battle plan for ship combat. It would stop being solely about who can grapple who and become more about sailing ability.

There may be something I'm missing here, but I think I covered the vast majority of it.


If you have suggestions or whatever, please post. Sea conflict, I feel, is one of the most sorely lacking aspects of the game and any ideas you might have could possibly make seafaring as a whole more fun.



Edit: some of my numbers were wonky.

(Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

Xith

Comments

  • XithXith Posts: 2,602Member @@ - Legendary Achaean

    I bet @Kresslack will have words on this. And I can't dissect the numbers like @Sena will, but on the surface it sounds like you're probably onto something. But ships are big lumbering things and I don't want them to become too sinkable in too short a period of time. So if accuracy goes up, speed or damage have to go down.

    Gonna like your post just for the disclaimer, because I should have included it in the topic I just finished.

    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    Well as I said, the numbers themselves are just some random ones I threw up for the sake of having numbers that I could compute. Ship speed and wind direction/speed should also play a role in the whole thing. I can understand the issue coming up with fleeing ships being sunk because the dogging ship just sits at close range and fires, but I couldn't really think of a good solution, other than making ship size also play a role in accuracy (which just occurred to me, actually).

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    This has been discussed a few times in the past, and it was basically explained that there are many things that affect accuracy: weather(such as rough seas), moving targets, manovueres(both offensive and defensive), and a few other things. This would make ships too easy to be sunken, and it's already not that difficult. 

    From my experience, you don't miss 9/10 times if both you and your target are moving, but naturally it's going to be a bit difficult to accurately hit a ship you're not right next to.


  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    I will add that perhaps either the accuracy or damage levels of denizen vessels should be reevaluated, as they're currently very high. I understand the need for a challenge, and I always like a challenge which is why I seek these out, but I ran into one near Lothos recently that had a full hull down to about 40% in about a second frpm two shots. Engaging wasn't even an option, it was turn and get the hell out of there.


    Jonathin
  • KinilanKinilan Posts: 1,250Member, Seafaring Liason @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Accuracy is only one aspect of average DPS, missing is fine, plugging away at a sitting ship for 5 minutes is not.

    As for sea monsters and the like, that is a whole mess that doesn't deserve to be looked at until the PvP end of things is solidified.
    Jonathin
  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    No tl;dr version.

    @Kresslack:I know it's been discussed in the past. It's not difficult to actually sink a ship if you can manage a grapple, but it's just not feasible to sink a ship by sailing around it and firing endlessly (unless the captain of the other ship never puts out fires or repairs (because I can stay ahead of fires if I maintain the hull)).

    I certainly haven't delved into every single aspect of ship combat (although I've hit 99% of them) when it comes to stopping a ship- whirlpool for example is something that I haven't had a chance to try because of logistical reasons in Shallam at the moment.

    @Kinilan: I agree completely.

    I basically just want the ship combat aspect of the game to be more tactical and strategic. What I posted above basically takes the existing system and makes the increases/decreases to accuracy more dramatic. Right now they're just too subtle for ship combat to be fun for most people. 

    I had someone that was manning weapons say to me "yeah, I can see it already. My job is going to be 'are we grappled yet? No? -sigh-". 

    That statement in itself is a bad thing for ship combat on the whole because he's probably not the only one that feels that way and it could and probably does deter people from pursuing it.



    This also coincides with other seafaring issues, like the rewards being negligible at best. The ship trading system has the potential to be an amazing facet that leads to both more people on the seas and thus more ship combat, but even if the trading system gets some buffs, ship combat will need some reworks as well.


    ETA: Also, someone mentioned that it'd be cool to be able to target the rudder. I agreed that it would be cool if it could be added in with the ability to target different parts of the ship like the hull in general, the water-line, the rudder, the different masts, etc. That is something that I'm not particularly hopeful for though.

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    One shouldn't expect to be able to sail circles around another moving vessel and nail it accurately. If the target isn't sitting still, how would you expect to accurately aim and fire a large ship weapon?


  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Fair enough point, but you'd still think that someone rank 5 while aiming at low speeds on glassy water would be able to hit more than 1/10 (with the occassional 1/5).

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    The other ship could have Helm skills active, and I imagine the wind may play a small role. I've not had any issues hitting a ship when both of us are stationary and within 4-3 rooms of each other. And I hit about half of the shots I make when they are stationary and I am moving around them. Distance, movement, and evasive skills play the biggest roles in accuracy as far as I've noticed.


  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Yeah, that's the thing though. That's not ship combat, imo. That's more like lolpk-ing someone that's standing afk in the central wilderness with a bow. Try doing that when another ship is actually fighting back and trying not to be sunk and you'll see my issue more clearly.

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

    Wynedere
  • AerekAerek East Tennessee, USAPosts: 1,813Member @@ - Legendary Achaean

    Kresslack said:
    One shouldn't expect to be able to sail circles around another moving vessel and nail it accurately. If the target isn't sitting still, how would you expect to accurately aim and fire a large ship weapon?
    Well, realistically speaking, you fire a few salvos to find range, and your shots become more accurate as you adjust from the misses to compensate for the target's speed, course, wind, and distance. During the WWII era, (before most ship-to-ship munitions were guided, anyway) accurate fire between two ships moving in different directions at high speeds (25+ kn, 30+ mph) up to 25,000 yards (Nearly 15 miles) was expected of naval gunnery crews. Obviously, our classical-era ships don't have the technology for that manner of range or accuracy, but the principles are the same. Shoot once, miss, adjust, shoot twice, miss, adjust, and so on, and you grow more and more accurate as you fire at the same target.

    Anecdotal facts aside, ship combat should prioritize fun over realism, and "running" battles are more fun than "sitting still and whaling on each other" battles. I agree with the folks that say the dismal accuracy between two moving ships is worse than it needs to be. Ships don't need to be so accurate that they can easily sink a target who is just trying to escape, but it doesn't need to be as bad as it is, where one or both ships have to stop to actually sink each other.


    -- Grounded in but one perspective, what we perceive is an exaggeration of the truth.
    JonathinKresslack
  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    @Jonathin: I did try that, it was with 4 Hashani ships firing at my one ship at the same time, while we targerted one of them.

    @Aerek: Realistically speaking, we're not talking about WWII battleships with metal hulls and cannons. We're talking about old fashioned wooden ships with wooden weapons, which IG aren't really 'adjustable'. You shoot, and if you miss, you get closer and shoot again. 

    I don't agree that 'fun' should be a priority in ship combat over realism, as quite a few of us find the realism quite fun.


  • AerekAerek East Tennessee, USAPosts: 1,813Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    Err, negative. Many classical seige weapons such as catapults and ballistas, though certainly not pin-point accurate, could be aimed and adjusted very carefully. Medieval trebuchets were more accurate than most cannons until rifled barrels came along. Specifically relevant to naval warfare, Alexander the Great used catapults mounted on galleys during his siege of Tyre, and Roman quinquiremes had aim-able catapults and ballistas used to kill crew and rowers so the target ships could be caught and boarded. These weapons were not fixed, nonadjustable weapons in real life, and the fact that our IG weapons can be fired in any direction regardless of our movement says that they are not fixed, nonadjustable weapons in-game, either. If our IG weapons cannot be aimed or adjusted, how exactly does WEAPONAIM help?

    Also, we launch "living boarding decks" that we cut from our own hulls at ships to magically teleport to them, while they conjure waves to escape and whirlpools to get in our way. We summon rainstorms to douse fires and can repair hull damage and sail damage at the same time without ever leaving the ship's helm. We can even become "part of the ship" to magically reinforce our hulls and sails, or summon magical shields to prevent all damage to us, entirely. There's really not that much "realism" in our current system, to begin with. Realism is immersive and I enjoy it as well, but the game's combat is based around balance and fun. Unless you want to start asking questions about how we can out-rift and chew herbs while paralyzed and not fall down with two broken legs, I wouldn't get drawn into that realism vs balance debate.

    I'm arguing that ship combat should be more harrowing and engaging by making ship fire more accurate so that ships can shoot at each other while on the move and actually achieve results, which I think would be more fun than slowing to a crawl and pounding the hell out of each other until one sinks like we do now. That's like two pre-traits Troll Knights pounding each other with untargeted DSLs, and is about as much fun. I even offered some real-world examples from classical warfare about how an accuracy boost would make "realistic" sense.

    You're arguing against that, saying that our IG weapons should not mirror their classical and real-world counterparts (which is not realistic) and then arguing that realism should take precedence over fun, when there is very little about our sailing system (aside from the authentic naval terminology and jargon) that is realistic, and very little about Achaean combat that is realistic, in general. I admit that I don't know everything there is to know about ship combat, so if you have a balance concern or a reason why better accuracy would be detrimental to ship combat, then let's talk about it, but right now you're kinda contradicting yourself.
    -- Grounded in but one perspective, what we perceive is an exaggeration of the truth.
  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    No, I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that there is very little about our sailing system aside from nautical terms used that are realistic, simply because there are some non-realistic elements. You're right, you don't know everything about ship combat, or seemingly how the mechanics of it work. 

    I'm not saying that better accuracy would be detrimental to ship combat, so don't make that assumption. I'm saying that currently, it's unlikely to change because there are numerous things which contribute to accuracy, which would probably result in an overhaul of seafaring. I did mention a few of the things that contribute to accuracy earlier, if you care to scroll  up and read it again. 

    Considering how buggy Seafaring still is, it's unlikely that something that would require nearly every aspect of the function to be tweaked, will be worked out as it requires a major change. 

    As far as realism,I'm not sure how much you pay attention to a ship when you're sailing (if you do). Realism is having a working crew, leaving a dock, order oars to be lowered and sails to be raised. The realism is in navigating the ocean terrain without getting lost, keeping the ship repaired, and then when you get back to land docking and securing the ship so it doesn't drift out of port. 

    There is quite a bit more 'realism' to Seafaring that I have seen, than there is anything of a 'magical' nature. You mentioned that things such as ballista were easily adjusted to account for better aiming. What you seem to have failed to account for is the factor of mobility. There's a significant difference from adjusting and aiming a ballista that is set in one location, pointing in one direction compared to a ballista anchored to the deck of a ship which is bobbing and turning and pitching around.


  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    At this point, Kresslack, you're arguing to see your own words in the thread. Your arguments aren't very cohesive anymore and you are in fact contradicting yourself. Just because you to order rowing, setting sails, etc., doesn't mean that it's realism, it's more like common sense. If it were any other way you'd just do "sail to zanzibaar" and your crew would probably just automatically cast off, set sails, row, turn, etc. 



    Also: @ 4 ships firing on you: Yeah, that's the point. 4 ships firing on you at once should be able to sink you pretty quick.

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

    WynedereKresslack
  • AerekAerek East Tennessee, USAPosts: 1,813Member @@ - Legendary Achaean

    Kresslack said:
    No, I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that there is very little about our sailing system aside from nautical terms used that are realistic, simply because there are some non-realistic elements. You're right, you don't know everything about ship combat, or seemingly how the mechanics of it work. 
      For a second, I thought we might have a civilized, productive discussion, but I suppose we can't have that.
    Kresslack said:
    I'm not saying that better accuracy would be detrimental to ship combat, so don't make that assumption. I'm saying that currently, it's unlikely to change because there are numerous things which contribute to accuracy, which would probably result in an overhaul of seafaring. I did mention a few of the things that contribute to accuracy earlier, if you care to scroll  up and read it again. 
    So you're saying the idea of better accuracy is a bad one because it might not happen soon? This would not require an "overhaul of seafaring". It might require an overhaul to one, specific aspect of seafaring: weapon accuracy. Even if it did require an overhaul to the accuracy equations, why would rebalanced hit tables be a bad thing?

    You did mention variables such as weather, distance, speed, and helm maneuvers in your post. So did Jonathin in his opening post. No one is forgetting those variables in the accuracy equation. The crux of the issue is that some of us contend that accuracy, after factoring in all of those variables, is unreasonably low across the board. Yes, when you reduce distance and speed to 0, you hit reliably, but that's boring, and an indication that the penalties for distance, speed, weather, and/or helm maneuvers are too great, and should be lessened or re-optimized to allow "run-and-gun" fights that are more exciting than what I've participated in, so far.
    Kresslack said:
    As far as realism, I'm not sure how much you pay attention to a ship when you're sailing (if you do). Realism is having a working crew, leaving a dock, order oars to be lowered and sails to be raised. The realism is in navigating the ocean terrain without getting lost, keeping the ship repaired, and then when you get back to land docking and securing the ship so it doesn't drift out of port. 
    I do pay attention to all of that when I steer a ship, and while I man weapons. It's all very realistic flavor, and I enjoy it. The Tekura katas are also very realistic flavor for learning martial arts, but they have no relevance when discussing issues with Tekura's combat balance. Likewise, we're discussing ship combat balance, and so arguments of how it should be realistic over fun is a mistake, because that's not how Achaean combat balance works. The vast majority of the "unrealistic" aspects of seafaring are all combat-related, because realism and flavor is fun, but they take a back seat to the mechanics of combat. Since combat is what we're discussing, realism arguments need not apply.

    Besides, we're trying to buff accuracy so we can accurately shoot at each other while moving, as real ships do and have done since the first Greek sailor pimped his ride with a ballista on the bow. Rebalancing accuracy would be more realistic, not less.
    Kresslack said:
    There is quite a bit more 'realism' to Seafaring that I have seen, than there is anything of a 'magical' nature. You mentioned that things such as ballista were easily adjusted to account for better aiming. What you seem to have failed to account for is the factor of mobility. There's a significant difference from adjusting and aiming a ballista that is set in one location, pointing in one direction compared to a ballista anchored to the deck of a ship which is bobbing and turning and pitching around.
    I have not failed to account for that. That was the sole reason for my anecdotal notes about actual, historical naval warfare, if you read them. Is it harder than aiming a ballista on land? Yes, but navies have been leading targets and doing it reasonably well for thousands of years. Do some research. The advent of ship-mounted catapults in the classical era made the traditional fast, maneuverable ships of the day obsolete. That's because the catapult and ballista fire from Roman-era ships was accurate enough to quickly kill the oarsmen that powered the smaller, faster ships, even while they were well underway. Your claim that ship-to-ship fire should be terribly inaccurate against moving targets is just factually incorrect when you look at naval history, so you can't play the realism card.

    We're not asking for 100% accuracy, here, we're advocating for a boost or a revision to the accuracy tables to make ship combat more dynamic. Should firing a weapon from a moving platform at another moving platform be easy? No. Should it be as abysmally inaccurate as it is, now? I don't believe that it should. Again, if you disagree, let's talk about why, as long as it's from a game balance perspective, and not a "realism" one.
    -- Grounded in but one perspective, what we perceive is an exaggeration of the truth.
    JonathinSena
  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    @Jonathin: "Just because you to order rowing, setting sails, etc., doesn't mean that it's realism" <-- lol that's a juicy contradiction.


    1) I didn't break the mold of a civilized, productive discussion.

    2) I never said adjusting the accuracy would be a bad thing; you're putting words in my mouth again, as I mentioned in my previous post. : "I'm not saying that better accuracy would be detrimental to ship combat, so don't make that assumption. I'm saying that currently, it's unlikely to change because there are numerous things which contribute to accuracy, which would probably result in an overhaul of seafaring. I did mention a few of the things that contribute to accuracy earlier, if you care to scroll  up and read it again. " At this point...it's just sounding redundant.

    3) "Likewise, we're discussing ship combat balance, and so arguments of how it should be realistic over fun is a mistake, because that's not how Achaean combat balance works. " 

    Again...I never said that realism should be placed over fun. I said that some of us like the level of realism that is currently present, and find it fun already. 

    4) "Besides, we're trying to buff accuracy so we can accurately shoot at each other while moving, as real ships do and have done since the first Greek sailor pimped his ride with a ballista on the bow."

    Except...the ballista were not heavily relied on upon the Greek triremes. Why? Because of their accuracy. The Greek sailors relied on boarding parties, using grappling hooks and boarding decks, and ramming a ship (which is something I've been wanting to see for a while now).


    5) "Your claim that ship-to-ship fire should be terribly inaccurate against moving targets is just factually incorrect when you look at naval history, so you can't play the realism card."


    I'm not sure what research you're getting your information from, but I haven't in the past, nor recently been able to find much reference of naval warfare using much of any ballista or mounted catapult. They relied on ramming, boarding, and manouveres. If you have a source that shows otherwise, I'll certainly read it. 

    I'm not saying that the accuracy isn't really low. I'm saying that the chances of it getting changed anytime soon, same as much anything regarding seafaring, are relatively low since there are so many factors that contribute to accuracy. I've been saying this the whole time, yet it just gets interpreted as: "He's saying increasing ship weapon accuracy would be bad and it's not real enough for him." It's a game, yes I'm aware, and there are a lot of things that don't make sense in regards to 'realism'. But it is what it is.



  • MannimarMannimar Posts: 973Member
    I think that firing accuracy needs an increase... The probability of sinking a ship with an aware captain ready to run is improbable at best. One of the first things I think should be addressed is an incentive to stay and compete in battle, but I'll hold off on that unless this thread is more than accuracy adjustments.
  • AerekAerek East Tennessee, USAPosts: 1,813Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    @Kresslack I'm confused. The arguments in this post are the same arguments that I specifically refuted in my prior post. I'm especially confused when you say that you don't know where I got my information, since I put a link in my post with that information.

    I think the debate has run its course, but in the interest of scholarly discussion, here's more links talking about catapults and ballistas in naval combat, excerpted because the articles are long. Your link is dated 800BC, before the catapult was even invented, so it naturally wouldn't mention use of naval artillery. Ballistas and catapults were invented in 399BC by Dionysius of Syracuse, and really came into use naval use during the Roman era. Yes, ramming remained a major tactic, but ship-borne catapults and ballistas meant changed the nature of the game. (Boarding remained a major tactic even up to the Age of Sail, so I'm not debating that.)

    First, the one that I posted already and you apparently missed:
    Wikipedia says:

    A change in the technology of conflict had taken place to allow these juggernauts of the seas to be created, as the development of catapults had neutralised the power of the ram, and speed and manoeuvrability were no longer as important as they had been. It was easy to mount catapults on galleys; Alexander the Great had used them to considerable effect when he besieged Tyre from the sea in 332 BC. The catapults did not aim to sink the enemy galleys, but rather to injure or kill the rowers (as a significant number of rowers out of place on either side would ruin the performance of the entire ship and prevent its ram from being effective). Now combat at sea returned to the boarding and fighting that it had been before the development of the ram, and larger galleys could carry more soldiers.

    One that talks about why catapults and ballistas were effective:
    The Scientific American Magazine says:
    This rise in the status of the engineer rested on a strong demand for catapults. They became a part of every up-to-date fortress and siege train, and gradually they began to be deployed in the more mobile warfare of the battlefield. At sea they may have played a role in the naval arms race that led from the trireme, with its three banks of oars, to huge vessels with as many as 40 banks. Evidently the underlying assumption was that catapult fire could decimate the enemy boarding force while their ship was still too far away to grapple or ram. The larger the ship was, the more catapults it could carry and the more stable its firing platform was. This interpretation, then, sees the catapult superseding hand-to-hand warfare at sea as the cannon did 2000 years later.
    And one that gives an account of their use by smaller ships to defeat bigger ships, instead of boarding as was usual:
    Military History Magazine says:
    [Marcus] Agrippa's biremes maneuvered close to [Marc Antony's] drifting quinqueremes and with onboard ballistae, or crossbows, launched flaming pots of pitch and charcoal at the ships. Historian Dio Cassius wrote later that crews tried to quench the fiery projectiles with water, but "as their buckets were small and few and half-filled, they were not always successful. Then they smothered the fires with their mantles and even with corpses. They hacked off burning parts of the ships and tried to grapple hostile ships to escape into them. Many were burned alive or jumped overboard or killed each other to avoid the flames." Thousands perished.

    I wish I knew how to do spoilers to save on space.
    -- Grounded in but one perspective, what we perceive is an exaggeration of the truth.
    Tvistor
  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    Mannimar said:
    I think that firing accuracy needs an increase... The probability of sinking a ship with an aware captain ready to run is improbable at best. One of the first things I think should be addressed is an incentive to stay and compete in battle, but I'll hold off on that unless this thread is more than accuracy adjustments.


    It is, it's supposed to encompass more than just accuracy. Aerek, Kresslack, and I are all just arguing over accuracy at the moment.

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    @Aerek: All my text shows up as white, even links, so that's probably why I missed it. 

    In any case, your references in your previous post only lend credence towards ship weapons being used to take out crew, and not actually damage the ship with accurate hits, which I see as the point of this thread. Besides firing flinging burning pitch at a ship, there appears to be no real offensive ship-to-ship combat purpose other than preventing boarding that these weapons played during the time periods you referenced. 

    In your last reference, the first line points out what we already have in ship combat: close quarter attacks between slow moving/stationary vessels.

    "[Marcus] Agrippa's biremes maneuvered close to [Marc Antony's] drifting quinqueremes and with onboard ballistae, or crossbows, launched flaming pots of pitch and charcoal at the ships."

    Besides that, Jonathin mentioned this was to be about more than accuracy, so I'll provide another part to the discussion. Who will this affect? Currently, few people venture out to sea for more than fishing and trade runs, with the presence of pirates and the rise in triton activity. Making it easier to sink ships will probably see a significant decrease in seafaring activity(though I hope it wouldn't).

    So we need to consider that if this change were to come about, how would it be implemented to allow it to be fun for Everyone, and keep people on the seas? I've tried training people IC'ly in ship combat, so that they could be prepared on the seas. Most of them just don't seem interested, they just want to fish or dive or do trade runs. 

    So how do we make a big change like this, and keep everyone happy and willing to venture out onto the seas?


  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    Honestly, I think we've all made our points and it's pretty obvious that none of us are going to agree about ship weapon accuracy or concede. So let's just agree to disagree and let the admin sort it out.

    I'll be back a bit later to respond to your other point, Kresslack.

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

  • JonathinJonathin Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 3,254Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2012
    I apologize if this post is a little disjointed. I just woke up.

    In response to your other point @Kresslack:

    There are, obviously, more things than ship weapon accuracy that needs to be looked and and tweaked. However, this would affect every single person that captains a ship because while I don't attack unwary fishermen or trade vessels (except those of Ashtan and Mhaldor), other people do. If accuracy is increased, so do people's reasons for coming out need to be increased. However, I'd rather each change comes with time instead of all at once and that the latter is changed before ship weapon DPS. The benefit to dumping 300 credits ($100US), 5k, an hour or two for marque, and hours (depending on if you're going to Ilyrean too) for specialization is actually really low right now.

    Seafaring isn't and shouldn't be a marginalized skill like galvanism, constitution, etc. It isn't a miniskill after all and the benefit to actually transing it out is pretty much at the level of a miniskill.

    Also:
    It's not really that difficult to get enough people in a city interested in combat if you are enthusiastic and do more than just announce that you're going out to patrol for enemy ships. Most people also have absolutely no idea what ship combat, or even seafaring entails. In the first 5 or 6 years of me being in the Navy in Shallam, I've already got a good number of people that are pretty enthusiastic about sailing and ship combat.

    On another note:
    Can we get the deckhand specialization teacher moved somewhere a little closer to one of the main ports? Even Minos, Umbrin, or Colchis would be better than Ilyrean. While it's not difficult for me to sail up to Ilyrean, it just takes forever compared with the others. I can sail from Shastaan to Clockwork and then back down and over to Tapoa in the amount of time it take to get to Ilyrean and back.

    (Mudlet Clan): Nylian says, "Mosr's on the case. Fix incoming."

    Tutorials and scripts  The Repository

  • KresslackKresslack Florida, United StatesPosts: 5,639Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    "It's not really that difficult to get enough people in a city interested in combat if you are enthusiastic and do more than just announce that you're going out to patrol for enemy ships. Most people also have absolutely no idea what ship combat, or even seafaring entails. In the first 5 or 6 years of me being in the Navy in Shallam, I've already got a good number of people that are pretty enthusiastic about sailing and ship combat."

    Yes, this is easy enough and Ashtan has more than enough interested sailors. However, over time, these are going dormant and my goal has always been to keep an somewhat steady interest in city seafaring. Most people just want to fish/trade, however.


Sign In to Comment.