Missnaming ships?

[Eliza Creststeel]

Perhaps, I should have given a more detailed response. This topic has obviously brought out some passion in some. And that passion, though well-intended, may be missing the point.

First, I personally wouldn't mind a more realistic basis for the vessels being used. But, as has been stated - they would become unweildy and too complicated for many non-gaming PCs to handle with all their details. Who wouldn't love to be able to go below decks? Etc. However, many players don't have the big 1g monster video card

But, that does not mean that the hull designs and so forth could not have had more historical believeablity. To address that argument though, I would say this. If the ships were more realistic that would look a lot more alike. The current configurations are very easy to discern. 'That's a sloop, that's a galleon'. You might be able to tell a Brigandine from a Clipper or a Sloop of War, etc. but many would not.

The basis for the current ship classes is more about elementary elements (guns, cargo or speed) than actual hull types. Any more options begin to muddy the waters. Though a few in between would not be bad (Ex. Clipper - some cargo, some speed or a Brigandine - some guns, some speed, etc.) The more you add, and the more they look the same - the more difficult it might be for younger players and of course a much larger work load for programmers.

I love the world of POTCO, but I know its not a real version of the late 1600's to early 1700's. Bruckheimer's production crews did a fine job of making a nicer, cleaner looking Caribbean from that time but even that was too much for Disney Online and our version is even more sterile, etc. I take the ships as part of that.