NYGM and GW - Ship Damage FAQ

Keelbuster · 05-11-06, 08:55 PM

First: I love you modders. Thank you for all you've done for us regular gamers.

Second: Criticism:

In NYGM TW, the ships act like they are empty - no cargo. I imagine that the allies would have filled ships to their maximum safe level. This can't be a whole lot more than the buoyancy required to stay afloat. Torpedoes damage, and the flooding of compartments, should doom a fully-loaded ship. In the current setup, they act as if they are empty - you have to compromise almost every compartment. This can't be realistic. It seems like there's a sense (among H-core modders) that we (H-core gamers) should be sinking a certain amount of tonnage (consistent with historical values) and to meet this constraint, modders have done two things - made ships unrealistically difficult to sink (e.g. too much overall buoyancy) as well as making their tonnage value unrelaistically low (e.g. 8000 tns for a T3).

In NYGM TW it's very hard to sink a ship if you damage it such that if takes on water on an even keel - you can torpedo/shell almost all compartments, and it won't settle because of some buoyance issue (i guess). The only efficient way that I've found to sink a ship is to destroy it's fore-fore bow compartments (bow tip), but leaving the engine compartmanet and all aft compartments intact! This way it drives it's bow down and that kills the boat.

Why are we so concerned about historical tonnage values? There is probably a way to normalize our values if we want to compare to historical values.

I don't think a C3 cargo should take 3.5 torpedoes on average. It really _feels_ like these ships are EMPTY. We end up killing them by hitting max HP anyway - if they settle on an even keel then they will not likely sink due to flooding. They have too much buoyancy for ships that are moving important materiel across the ocean.

That's my comment. It probably echos many others.

Cheers,

Kb

05-11-06, 08:55 PM	#16
Keelbuster Ace of the Deep Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: BA 72 Posts: 1,092 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	First: I love you modders. Thank you for all you've done for us regular gamers. Second: Criticism: In NYGM TW, the ships act like they are empty - no cargo. I imagine that the allies would have filled ships to their maximum safe level. This can't be a whole lot more than the buoyancy required to stay afloat. Torpedoes damage, and the flooding of compartments, should doom a fully-loaded ship. In the current setup, they act as if they are empty - you have to compromise almost every compartment. This can't be realistic. It seems like there's a sense (among H-core modders) that we (H-core gamers) should be sinking a certain amount of tonnage (consistent with historical values) and to meet this constraint, modders have done two things - made ships unrealistically difficult to sink (e.g. too much overall buoyancy) as well as making their tonnage value unrelaistically low (e.g. 8000 tns for a T3). In NYGM TW it's very hard to sink a ship if you damage it such that if takes on water on an even keel - you can torpedo/shell almost all compartments, and it won't settle because of some buoyance issue (i guess). The only efficient way that I've found to sink a ship is to destroy it's fore-fore bow compartments (bow tip), but leaving the engine compartmanet and all aft compartments intact! This way it drives it's bow down and that kills the boat. Why are we so concerned about historical tonnage values? There is probably a way to normalize our values if we want to compare to historical values. I don't think a C3 cargo should take 3.5 torpedoes on average. It really _feels_ like these ships are EMPTY. We end up killing them by hitting max HP anyway - if they settle on an even keel then they will not likely sink due to flooding. They have too much buoyancy for ships that are moving important materiel across the ocean. That's my comment. It probably echos many others. Cheers, Kb __________________