Breaking Down the Numbers - a Ship Comparison

@galactic-geek
Sorry, but I refute this method.

When sloop is faster it's only by a bit, IMHO the differences in speed should be taken into consideration instead of a multiplier that is just taken out of thin (sea) air.
Use different multiplier and you will get different results.

It should not be number of scenarios you can have the winds either, as sidewind isn't twice as common as the other two individually.

Result would be the same though - Want speed ? Use a brig !

@galactic-geek

If you want a general comparison on speed:

• Brig best
• Galleon second
• Sloop third

I agree with @lem0n-curry here though that such a huge generalization means very little. What speed discrepancy is achieved is just as important to the fact that one is quicker and the timeframes to reach these values. If you want to have a real numerical breakdown these should be considered and placed in a multiplier of sorts.

@cotu42 Wind dependent.

With:
Gal
Brig
Sloop

Against:
Sloop
Brig
Gal

ANYTHING NOT DIRECTLY BEHIND OR IN FRONT OF YOU AND IS 98% OF THE TIME TO THE SIDE:
Brig
Gal
Sloop

@awsmstaccntname

Read the original post man... before you start bashing people. Nobody is disputing it is dependent on wind and the directions you are facing or the chart that was mentioned.

It is which ship is overall better based on speeds... jeez...

@cotu42 I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing the wind.

@awsmstaccntname

You are calling me out on something that isn't even the point of the discussion or that I am disputing... Why are you tagging me?

Well because you gave a general response, even stated in your response. I was just replying to your post. A reply isn't a bash.

@awsmstaccntname said in Breaking Down the Numbers - a Ship Comparison:

Well because you gave a general response, even stated in your response. I was just replying to your post. A reply isn't a bash.

It is a general comparison being made by @galactic-geek I literally added that to indicate I agreed with his assessment even though I disagree with his generalization of the data, our conclusion is the exact same and yet your are tagging me instead of the one opening the discussion. Like I stated read the Original Post.

Once again, why are you tagging me?

Once again, why are you tagging me?

Why are you tagging me? I did not tag you in my previous post.

I do agree to some degree... but with a proper crew the brig can pretty much catch and sink any other ship. But the key thing here is you need an experienced crew, as a fresh crew can easily get sunk as the brig sinks very fast.

Side note:
In our crew the helmsman, handles speed and turning in battles (also works on galleons). He also keeps an eye on the water level (as he can easily see the situation through the hatch on a brig.) The other crew members handle cannons, repairing, navigating (using the map table) and if needed boarding. In pursuit the crew members handle one sail each, and if the harpoon is needed the back sail is left to the helmsman. The helmsman also tries to keep an eye on the ladder, and generally shouts out orders on where to shoot and similar stuff. Especially on a galleon the helmsman usually has the best overall view of the situation in battles.

@awsmstaccntname said in Breaking Down the Numbers - a Ship Comparison:

@cotu42 Wind dependent.

Are you trolling now?

@cotu42 No but it seems as though you are because I have no idea where this conversation is going other than you replying defensively and I'm not really giving you much ammunition.

EDIT: I've answered your initial question so I am assuming that it did not suffice?

@awsmstaccntname said in Breaking Down the Numbers - a Ship Comparison:

@cotu42 No but it seems as though you are because I have no idea where this conversation is going other than you replying defensively and I'm not really giving you much ammunition.

You tagged me, I don't understand why? Explain what your point is, because you are not making any sense. Nobody is disputing the fact that wind determines who is quickest in that moment, it is about the general overall assessment of the ships.

@galactic-geek even provided a picture to illustrate the situations of different wind locations and based on that information provides an analysis. My post is about that even though we have the same conclusion based on the data of the game, a numerical breakdown that is to be undisputed should consider all aspects that are related to speed to determine the best ship. Even if the outcome is going to be the same.

You are just being a troll or do not even understand the topic at hand or you are addressing the wrong person.

@cotu42 I see that you lack a sense of humor from the first post I made. I get it, technical discussion is being had so I'll just bow out.

@awsmstaccntname said in Breaking Down the Numbers - a Ship Comparison:

@cotu42 I see that you lack a sense of humor from the first post I made. I get it, technical discussion is being had so I'll just bow out.

I don't know you, how am I supposed to know you are making a joke and what does this joke have to do with anything I stated?

You can state I don't have a sense of humor, but maybe you have to make better jokes if that was the intent. Also, not sure why you then address me to be the pun of your joke?

@galactic-geek

The seas are not a drag race, where you always have full max speed in that set direction. The wind will shift or the map will require one to change direction, how quickly does the ship adapt, how much distance do they now have to make up for etc. are determined by the acceleration and speed differentials between the vessels in play. If you want a proper analysis of the overall speed of the ships in comparison to each other, you cannot base speed only on the category maximum speed and then hard cut it based on position 1, 2, 3. You do not pick one of the situations and that is it, it is about the shifting from one to the other and how the ships perform in all of them (assuming perfect sail management etc. and even eliminating turn rates). It is not a race that is simply won or lost, if you want to showcase the speed comparison.

Have an exaugurated example:
Ship A is 1st in 2/4 (X) situations at 4 m/s, 1/4 (Y) situations is 2nd with 3 m/s and in 1/4 (Z) is 3rd with 2 m/s
Ship B is 2nd in 2/4 (X) situations at 3.8 m/s, 1/4 (Y) situations is 3rd with 2.7 m/s and in 1/4 (Z) 1st with 10 m/s
Ship C is 3rd in 2/4 (X) situation with 2 m/s, 1/4 (Y) situation is 1st with 4 m/s and in 1/4 (Z) is the 2nd with 3 m/s

Even though A beats B and C in most situations, ship B most likely is still overall the quickest as the difference between them and the others in the situations where it loses is less large than the others when they lose and blows the others out of the water when it wins.

The fact that a ship is quicker in situation X it isn't identical to how much quicker their opponents are in situation Y. Speed is a accumulated factor between acceleration, maximum speed and speed differences with your opponents. The wind will not always be in your favor and before you can consider maximum speed you need to consider how quickly you get there, as all these factors calculate into the distances created.

Hope I clarify my position, I am not going to do the math it is to much effort as I think we all can agree on the order. Yet if you want the numbers to accurate depict how much better ship A is over ship B and over ship C... you need to consider more variables. You aren't breaking down the numbers, you are using a very inaccurate model and over generalizing.

Simply stated: If you win by a landslide or a picture perfect finish, that is important in such a comparison.

@galactic-geek

Eliminating variables is great and all, but you want a pretty overall comparison to be made. If you want to test specifics, and narrow down the conclusion that you draw, then you can simplify the variables used. Yet you seek to consider the variable of each wind direction, therefore the factors that come into play are required to be taken into account. Over simplification of the situation is not going to result in an accurate model of reality, as showcased by my example.

I get why you don't want to do the math, but you cannot claim to have a numerical breakdown indisputable objective model with this approach. You cannot grab a subset of the data and their conclusions to then reflect that upon the broader question.

@galactic-geek said:

In an experiment, you need to eliminate as many variables as possible - by testing in a vacuum, so to speak. That's how you get proper, actual data... but I don't have the time, inclination, or patience for [multiple variables]

This is the second time you've said something to this effect in the forum, and last time I called you out on it, you replied you were just joking all along.

In an experiment, it's good to have controls in order to "eliminate" certain variables, but you shouldn't outright neglect variables that would influence the outcome, just because you don't have the patience for it.

In drug studies, they can eliminate variation between species by selecting only one animal model. But within that model, you better be testing the effects of a compound at different dosages, for different sexes, at varying ages. Otherwise, you'll have insufficient data to make conclusions about the compound.

If you don't have the time, inclination or patience to conduct proper testing, I don't have the time, inclination or patience to take any of your findings seriously.

Let's just say that we all know what wind direction is the best and worst for each ship and what that means for actual gameplay. No need to overcomplicate the matter as if this were some sort of hardcore E-sports tournament.