Are you asking me? The rule is in the guidelines at the bottom of your screen. "Don't post generated text or AI-edited text. HN is for conversation between humans."
I see trivial variants of your comment on almost every long-form article or comment posted to HN. They're so repetitive that it raises doubt whether they're written by humans.
There's a vague correlation between wind direction and sailing speed, but there's nothing real here. The mechanics of sailing upwind, downwind, or the cost of tacking are interesting mechanics that aren't explored here whatsoever. The dead angle on a ship with a square rig should be massive. This ship goes upwind like it has a motor.
Decades ago, Sid Meier's Pirates had a more realistic sailing model, which made you feel the difference between triangular and square sails, in a game where the player had a lot of other challenges to master. And Meier is a designer who always put fun and playability above realism.
He has heart in the right place but questionable methods
I guess nowadays anyone can support their skills with AI and make a game in weeks vs months so he should copy paste ur idea with his mechanics and see which one gets more popular. See who will win.
There are plenty of sailing simulators (e.g. Windward), just none featuring large square riggers. In any case, my beef is more with the misleading headline.
If a game advertised "real weapons handling", and it turned out to have infinite ammo with no reloads or shell drop, wouldn't you feel a bit lead on?
It's not fun to spend an hour going zig zag against the wind? What about an hour doing it with a boat full of precious materials that can't go through the portal while you're being chased by some ungodly horror from beneath the waves?
The use of a ship's wheel to steer is also a little much. The manipulation of the sails had far more impact. The wheel was for fine tuning. Comming about took far more planning than simply spinning the wheel around. A realistic limitation would see a several second delay between large direction changes. And most ships during the golden age of piracy would not have had wheels, not until the 1700s.
Always trying to find a balance of realism vs arcade feel on the gameplay. Let me know how you would handle sailing upwind/downwind instead, always love more suggestions!
At no point should you (nor would it be physically possible to) set the yards in the direction of the ship. At most during sailing they would be turned maybe 45 degrees which would correspond to "close hauled" at which point you may be able to reach about 60 degrees from the wind direction.
Thus, a simple linear function that would show the optimal angle of the yards as a function of the wind direction (0 = wind straight ahead, 180 = wind straight from behind) could be something like f(x) = -3/8 x + 67.5.
And as a slight visual cue, please show the mast when it would be visible before the sails as well. I found that I was often confused whether I had the yards sheeted all the way one way or the other way.
Also I think it would be clearer to show the yard position indicator as 0 degrees when the yards are squared, that is perpendicular to the ship. Then sheeted to the maximum would be 45 degrees either way from 0.
Thank you so much, that function is so simple! I’m going to be updating the sailing realism in a future patch and will be sure to update the sail turning constraints.
I do this to a certain extent for galleons on the Spanish map but should update the rest too
I had the same mindset about wanting to be good at a lot of things, working on myself, not "wasting time", but now in my mid thirties I figured that if I really wanted to do something, I'd be actually doing it, and a lot of these goals boil down to "it would be cool if I was good at X", and aren't actually things I care about.
To who? There's no immediate benefit of holding a stock that doesn't pay out beyond voting rights, or a fraction of company assets. As parent said, you're just hoping to sell it to somebody down the line for more. It's speculation. The market is liquid, and a lot of people believe these stocks have value, but it's still speculation.
Every time I try to explain this to people I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall. Even more frustrating to hear, otherwise reasonable, market analysts say that "dividends don't matter because the stock value goes down on payout". What doesn't matter is how successful a company is if they don't share their profits. You're literally buying a Pokémon card just with a lot of liquidity until the illusion of value bursts, hoping that somebody will buy you out because P/E improves or whatever.
It didn't already happen. As you pointed out, people who funded the purchase of Twitter hold SpaceX shares, and this IPO is how they get their money back.
Europe is dealing with the US, just not via empty threats on social media. Things take time when you have a functioning democratic system with checks and balances.
reply