Why is Naval combat so broken?

[xzar_monty]

-> says naval combat is broken

-> has only experienced a portion of naval combat

 

Shooting at a ship addresses your complaints about why you can't steal a ship or why it disappears.

 

I very clearly defined the extent to which it is broken. In that area, it is.

 

How does it address it?

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My original point remains: naval combat is broken to the extent that you cannot acquire new ships by boarding them and wringing them from the cold, dead hands of their previous owners. It is also somewhat unfortunate that after a boarding situation, the other ship simply disappears from the game universe -- it looks clumsy, feels unrealistic and doesn't really win the game any marks. The first time it happened, I had a bit of a WTF reaction, as it was such a negative surprise, but more recently it's become a ho-hum kind of thing.

 

Now, this is not a big issue, and it doesn't ruin anything, but it does render naval combat less interesting than it could be. I am almost certain that this blemish on naval combat is a result of the question discussed before: Obsidian had bigger and better plans, but for one reason or another (was it lack of time?), only some of them were implemented in the game. I'm actually fine with it -- I only wish it had been better.

 

 

 

Being able to acquire ships by boarding would 

 

1) completely break the game's economy

 

2) require dramatically limiting the number of available ship combats

 

3) require dramatically changing the UI to handle the flood of ships you'd have in your inventory.

 

Short version, if you could acquire ships by boarding they'd need to only have like four or five total ship battles or else you'd blow up either the UI, the game economy, or both.

 

It's not "broken," it's a design choice. It might be a design choice you consider unrealistic. It might be a design choice you don't like. That's fine.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[xzar_monty]

I agree the economic side of this would be problematic, and could indeed be a reason for why stealing ships is not possible.

 

The UI argument is a non-starter, however, because you'd realistically have at most two ships in active use at any given time (the one you stole, and the one you stole it with), with the rest (if any) in dock. The game can easily handle an endless amount of inventory items in your stash, so a large number of ships also wouldn't be a problem -- except, as you rightly point out, in terms of game finances.

 

It could be a design choice, yes.

[xzar_monty]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My original point remains: naval combat is broken to the extent that you cannot acquire new ships by boarding them and wringing them from the cold, dead hands of their previous owners. It is also somewhat unfortunate that after a boarding situation, the other ship simply disappears from the game universe -- it looks clumsy, feels unrealistic and doesn't really win the game any marks. The first time it happened, I had a bit of a WTF reaction, as it was such a negative surprise, but more recently it's become a ho-hum kind of thing.

 

Now, this is not a big issue, and it doesn't ruin anything, but it does render naval combat less interesting than it could be. I am almost certain that this blemish on naval combat is a result of the question discussed before: Obsidian had bigger and better plans, but for one reason or another (was it lack of time?), only some of them were implemented in the game. I'm actually fine with it -- I only wish it had been better.

 

 

 

Being able to acquire ships by boarding would 

 

1) completely break the game's economy

 

2) require dramatically limiting the number of available ship combats

 

3) require dramatically changing the UI to handle the flood of ships you'd have in your inventory.

 

Short version, if you could acquire ships by boarding they'd need to only have like four or five total ship battles or else you'd blow up either the UI, the game economy, or both.

 

It's not "broken," it's a design choice. It might be a design choice you consider unrealistic. It might be a design choice you don't like. That's fine.

 

 

Btw, my thinking around this question is almost certainly influenced by a classic of the genre, a true gem of a CRPG in its time. In that game, you could sink enemy ships with your cannons, and you could also board and steal them. However, this could not break the game economy, because you could only (realistically) sail one ship at a time, and even if you went to the quite ridiculous trouble of bringing two ships to port, there was nowhere you could actually sell them. There were places where you could buy them, however.

 

So, in all probability, I was thinking along these lines: "They were able to pull it off quite beautifully in the 1980s, so why not today?"

 

I am obviously talking about Ultima V. The seas were a similarly important side feature of that game, too, but conceptually the implementation was better. In all other respects, of course, Deadfire beats it hands down.

[Trogdor]

I'm not perfect on my history but I don't recall ship stealing really being a thing that went on mid-ocean, usually more in port....

 

Plenty of ships captured in the age of sails, just check out this list for an incomplete but massive list for a single century. So its just better to ignore this part.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_captured_in_the_18th_century

 

Anyway, I noticed that I overall took less damage closing and boarding the enemy ship than taking it out with cannons, since the game system lacks a proper way to maneuver to avoid enemy fire (at least when I played it a month after initial release).

 

My dream would have been that this part of the game was similar to Sid Meier's Pirates! where you can capture, sell, sink ships in a more exciting combat system. I think the game would have been better served with a graphical representation of ship to ship combat. Make it turn based or real time with pause based.

[Nssheepster]

 

I'm not perfect on my history but I don't recall ship stealing really being a thing that went on mid-ocean, usually more in port....

 

Plenty of ships captured in the age of sails, just check out this list for an incomplete but massive list for a single century. So its just better to ignore this part.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_captured_in_the_18th_century

 

Anyway, I noticed that I overall took less damage closing and boarding the enemy ship than taking it out with cannons, since the game system lacks a proper way to maneuver to avoid enemy fire (at least when I played it a month after initial release).

 

My dream would have been that this part of the game was similar to Sid Meier's Pirates! where you can capture, sell, sink ships in a more exciting combat system. I think the game would have been better served with a graphical representation of ship to ship combat. Make it turn based or real time with pause based.

 

Looking through just the first part of that list, and what do I see? People stealing ships IN PORT. Captured by FULL NAVYS who have EXTRA CREW. Which is what I was saying already. Stealing ships in the middle of the sea, and retaining your existing ship that GOT you to the middle of the ocean? Not seeing that on this list, noooooooo.

 

At no point will the Watcher be realistically commanding a full navy to steal ships from an established port in Deadfire. What, you gonna murder Furrante and Alys, then somehow get the Principi to follow you, act organized, and steal ships that they won't actually have a use for and can't sell to anyone because they're pirates and nobody trusts them. It doesn't make gameplay sense, it doesn't make game economy sense, and it sure as hell doesn't make lore/historical sense, either in Eora or in the real world.

 

IDK where people have gotten this fantasy of pirates stealing ships and keeping their own ships, somehow profiting from having a second ship around that they can't reasonably sell or use... But that's just not realistic or reasonable. Keep in mind, you'd be sailing weeks, with angry, tempermental people, shoved in close quarters, on tight rations, just to GET to a ship... And then stealing it. There's no real GAIN, because despite the fantasy, 'pirate fleets' really wasn't a thing. But you do all this and steal a ship anyways, just to have it, and hope that none of your violent criminals get pissy about this and screw up the plan, organize a mutiny, or wait for the second ship to be taken and dump their captain off the ships to die....

[InsaneCommander]

It could still be done, but in a different way. Maybe it would be a bad idea to keep the ships for yourself (two many people to pay in the crew, plus risk of them stealing your ship when you are not there, etc).

 

Captured ships could be given to the faction you are supporting for a reward and if you are not supporting anyone then you wouldn't have the support to keep more ships.

[Cartoons Plural]

xzar there's a game called sid meier's pirates! you should play it instead if you were hoping for fun on a boat

Edited January 20, 2019 by Cartoons Plural

[Trogdor]

(I never get why people get so angry posting on these boards....  )

 

Nsshepsters, I simply showed that capture of ships in the open ocean did in fact occur countless times. This was also done by privateers. The list actually shows that, but for some reason you refuse to see that. I will not debate this point, as the volume of evidence speaks for itself.

 

Capturing your own ships and using them for own profit is actually one feature I think is lacking in this game. You come  as the Lord of Caed Nua, even having your own coat of arms. You should be able to (If you want the micro) to finance and build your own faction, appoint captains and merchants, set up trade routes and have your own little merchant marine. I just think the whole naval aspect of the game was a missed opportunity to be expanded upon.

[xzar_monty]

xzar there's a game called sid meier's pirates! you should play it instead if you were hoping for fun on a boat

 

But that's not my point, not even close. That completely misses what I'm talking about. I'm not interested in boats as such, I simply think it's a bad idea and not at all realistic that the moment you've boarded a ship, it blinks out of existence.

[xzar_monty]

At this point he's actively ignoring large portions of my reply in order to make an argument for a game feature we're never getting that really wouldn't have added to the game at all. If anything, it would have detracted in some ways. Shrug. Some people are just like that.

 

Name one point of your reply I'm ignoring. Just one, please.

[xzar_monty]

Capturing your own ships and using them for own profit is actually one feature I think is lacking in this game. You come  as the Lord of Caed Nua, even having your own coat of arms. You should be able to (If you want the micro) to finance and build your own faction, appoint captains and merchants, set up trade routes and have your own little merchant marine. I just think the whole naval aspect of the game was a missed opportunity to be expanded upon.

 

It was a missed opportunity, but to be fair, there have been quotes on this forum from Josh Sawyer (if memory serves) that essentially the naval (combat) side of the game wasn't finished to anyone's satisfaction. I totally agree. There were plans, but at some point they went out the window.

[Nssheepster]

(I never get why people get so angry posting on these boards....  )

 

Nsshepsters, I simply showed that capture of ships in the open ocean did in fact occur countless times. This was also done by privateers. The list actually shows that, but for some reason you refuse to see that. I will not debate this point, as the volume of evidence speaks for itself.

 

Capturing your own ships and using them for own profit is actually one feature I think is lacking in this game. You come  as the Lord of Caed Nua, even having your own coat of arms. You should be able to (If you want the micro) to finance and build your own faction, appoint captains and merchants, set up trade routes and have your own little merchant marine. I just think the whole naval aspect of the game was a missed opportunity to be expanded upon.

 

Except the link your provided specifically didn't show that, which I openly stated in my previous post. Stealing in port =/= stealing at sea. Also, Privateers... Are also known as government-sponsored pirates, who work with the existing navy to cripple the enemy navy.... Usually by sinking ships, or boarding to steal all their stuff and then leave the ship there. You've proved no such thing, if anything you've proved my point far more than yours, that being that stealing ships in the middle of the ocean is just not reasonable, efficient, or at all a good idea to DO, unless you intend to replace your own ship.

 

"Lord of Caed Nua"... Lord of the barren earth that was once Caed Nua, and all corpses that lie upon it, because you were the only survivor. You have no resources, no money, and any political pull you might've had means nothing in the Deadfire or to any of the factions that you interact with. You are basically an aristocrat with nothing whatsoever backing that, because Eothas ruined everything. Even before that, you weren't lord of very much, and you were only the lord because a now-deceased duke backed your choice to effectively squat in an abandoned fort. You weren't much of a lord anyways. As far as politics go, you have nothing whatsoever to work with, even before Eothas pops up.

 

I agree that the naval combat could be better. This 'Build your own faction', 'steal ships somehow even though it makes no sense', and 'manage all this ****e in a non-management game'..... Yeah no. Hell no, even. This isn't a city manager game or anything of the sort. That's a very different type of game, and expecting them to make a game within a game, of a very different genre, is just massively unrealistic.

 

TLDR If you want to manage a faction of pirates, this is not the game for you, nor would it ever have been expected to BE that type of game given what you were informed of about the game and the knowledge of the game's predecessor.

[xzar_monty]

I also think it would be taking things a bit too far if you were starting to build your own faction. It would be a different type of game, then, no longer a fantasy CRPG, really.

 

(I understand there's plenty of kingdom building in Pathfinder: Kingmaker, but I have no idea how it works.)

[InsaneCommander]

Capturing your own ships and using them for own profit is actually one feature I think is lacking in this game. You come  as the Lord of Caed Nua, even having your own coat of arms. You should be able to (If you want the micro) to finance and build your own faction, appoint captains and merchants, set up trade routes and have your own little merchant marine. I just think the whole naval aspect of the game was a missed opportunity to be expanded upon.

 

It was a missed opportunity, but to be fair, there have been quotes on this forum from Josh Sawyer (if memory serves) that essentially the naval (combat) side of the game wasn't finished to anyone's satisfaction. I totally agree. There were plans, but at some point they went out the window.

 

I'd love to build my own faction and I'm sure there would be ways to implement this in a satisfactory manner. But as xzar_monty said, the devs ended up focusing on other things. It is a big game and I can totally understand that.

[Trogdor]

The way I see it, managing your own faction would have been similar to managing your Keep / Stronghold, but a more involved affair. The level of commitment you'd put into it would of course come down to the playstyle of a particular player. It might be a personal preference but I always liked these sandboxy aspects of these games, where you get to shape your corner of the world. Its no big surprise that I rather like this part of Pathfinder:Kingmaker as well.

 

----

 

As for the link I provided, it does show ships captured at sea. Its a bit odd for certain posters to claim not a single ship on that list was captured at sea, but all at port. Well, he did admit to being "not perfect" on his history, so I suppose that can be forgiven.

 

Just a quick look at the first ships on the list shows that has a link and sufficient information, show that they were captured at sea, not port: 

 

HMS Salisbury, HMS Falmouth, Auguste, HMS Blackwell, HMS Pendennis... etc

 

Thanks for a constructive debate, @InsaneCommander, @xzar_monty

[Cartoons Plural]

 

xzar there's a game called sid meier's pirates! you should play it instead if you were hoping for fun on a boat

 

But that's not my point, not even close. That completely misses what I'm talking about. I'm not interested in boats as such, I simply think it's a bad idea and not at all realistic that the moment you've boarded a ship, it blinks out of existence.

 

 

>complaining about minor "realism" quibbles in fantasy crpg

 

how come you guys never have avatars

[Nssheepster]

 

As for the link I provided, it does show ships captured at sea. Its a bit odd for certain posters to claim not a single ship on that list was captured at sea, but all at port. Well, he did admit to being "not perfect" on his history, so I suppose that can be forgiven.

 

Just a quick look at the first ships on the list shows that has a link and sufficient information, show that they were captured at sea, not port: 

 

HMS Salisbury, HMS Falmouth, Auguste, HMS Blackwell, HMS Pendennis... etc

 

Do I have to specifically restate every time what I've already stated?

 

Unless you are intending to abandon your own ship, or have double crew, stealing a ship at sea is just not workable. I've said this before, haven't I? I just went back and double checked your link and the ships you specifically mentioned.... And you know what I see? Me being proven correct, again, because when multiple ships capture one, they have enough crew to spare to crew the ship.

 

 

Seeing as I have already stated, multiple times, that the only reasonable way to steal a new ship and maintain your own, is to have excess crew that Deadfire doesn't allow you to have.... I really didn't think I needed to constantly RE state it. I figured I could expect a modicum of common sense, that the other commenters would either recall, or be able to see, that I had already said such a thing repeatedly, and thus the qualifier was no longer needed. Clearly that was incorrect, and I'll have to qualify again, and again, and again.

[xzar_monty]

 

Thanks for a constructive debate, @InsaneCommander, @xzar_monty

 

Likewise. Constructive debate is always appreciated. It can sometimes get difficult on forums like these, but there you go.

Edited January 21, 2019 by xzar_monty

[Soybeanarson]

Thank you to everyone who responded. I was unaware that hold position had effects on accuracy, so thank you for that, ill try it. I also saw someone mention that you could opt out of naval combat? How is that done? Is it an option for a new game, something you can turn on/off mid game? How does it work, do you just go strait to the boarding action, or is there no fighting on the seas at all with this option? I would gladly turn off the combat portion, but boarding fights are my favorite in the game