https://tenor.com/fGW1ncEOmbc.gif

I found a copy...

First draft:   Naval Combat, Crew Experience, Boarding, and Ship Progression in 0 A.D.   1. Three Layers of Naval Combat   The naval combat system should be divided into three interconnected layers: the base crew, embarked combat units, and naval officers.   Layer 1: Base Crew   The base crew consists of the personnel required to operate the ship, including rowers, the helmsman, and other essential sailors.   These units do not necessarily need to fight individually. Their contribution can be represented through global ship statistics, including:   - Speed and maneuverability. - Ability to maintain course during combat. - Propulsion efficiency. - Operational performance.   If the crew suffers casualties, the ship should lose some of its capabilities.   Layer 2: Embarked Combat Units   These are the hoplites, swordsmen, archers, and other combat units transported aboard the ship.   Their composition, statistics, experience, and upgrades should determine their effectiveness during naval engagements.   - Hoplites provide a defensive line and resist enemy boarding attempts. - Swordsmen specialize in close-quarters combat. - Archers and other ranged units can inflict casualties before ships make contact. - Specialized units may provide additional advantages depending on the situation.   These units should play a decisive role in determining the outcome of boarding actions and fighting on deck.   Layer 3: Naval Officers   Naval officers include the commander, helmsman, chief of rowers, and marine officer.   Their role is to improve the performance of the crew and embarked combat units rather than replace them.   For example, the marine officer could improve boarding effectiveness, while the commander could provide a general leadership bonus.   2. Global Ship Statistics   When two ships engage in combat, their outcomes should depend on several factors:   1. Statistics: determine each ship's overall combat capabilities. 2. Crew and troop composition: determine the strengths and weaknesses of each vessel. 3. Experience and upgrades: improve combat performance over time. 4. Controlled randomness: represents unpredictable events, tactical opportunities, and battlefield confusion.   If two ships have identical crews, combat units, experience, and upgrades, neither should have a permanent advantage. Both should have comparable chances of victory.   Randomness should remain limited by the ships' actual capabilities. A significantly superior ship should not routinely lose to a much weaker opponent simply because of random chance.   3. Crew Experience and Progression   Every naval engagement should provide experience to the participating crew, regardless of whether the ship wins or loses.   Two separate experience systems could coexist:   - Crew experience: represents collective coordination and naval proficiency. It could improve maneuverability, coordination, and overall naval performance. - Individual soldier experience: represents the combat experience of embarked units and improves their fighting abilities.   An optional third system could provide experience to naval officers, allowing them to develop specialized leadership bonuses.   Ship upgrades should remain distinct from experience. They could improve structural durability, speed, or other permanent characteristics.   Experience gains should depend on meaningful participation and the difficulty of the engagement. Repeatedly fighting insignificant opponents should not provide an easy way to accumulate unlimited experience.   4. Capturing Enemy Ships   Captured ships should have strategic value beyond simply removing an enemy vessel from the battlefield.   An important design question is whether experience belongs to the ship itself or to its crew.   One possible solution is to preserve part of a vessel's accumulated naval experience when it is captured, while introducing penalties or an adaptation period for its new crew.   Capturing a veteran ship would therefore be rewarding, but it would not automatically provide a perfectly loyal and fully integrated crew.   Boarding actions should also award experience to the units that participate in the fighting and successfully capture the vessel.   5. Experience for Capturing Buildings   Capturing buildings should contribute to unit progression.   - Units participating in an assault should receive experience for their combat contribution. - Units completing the capture should receive an additional capture bonus. - Defenders should gain experience for fighting attackers and successfully defending or recapturing the building.   To prevent players from exploiting the system by repeatedly capturing undefended buildings, bonus experience should depend on the objective's importance and the resistance encountered.   A similar principle should apply to capturing ships.   6. Loot and Rewards   Successful captures could provide a small amount of loot, representing recovered supplies, equipment, or requisitioned resources.   Loot should be an additional reward rather than the primary purpose of combat.   For naval captures, the amount of recoverable resources could depend on the condition of the captured vessel and whether it survives the engagement.   7. Health, Casualties, and Recovery   The system should distinguish between ship health and crew health.   - Ship health: represents structural damage and should require repairs. - Crew health: represents injuries and combat exhaustion among individual soldiers and sailors. It should recover gradually over time.   Crew members should not necessarily recover all their health at the same rate. Structural damage should generally require repairs at a port or through a dedicated repair mechanic.   This would give retreats strategic importance and make ports valuable logistical assets.   8. Possible Implementation Models   Two principal approaches could be considered for implementation in 0 A.D.   Option A: Global Naval Combat   The statistics of both ships determine the engagement and its casualties. Embarked units influence the outcome through their numbers, composition, experience, and bonuses.   This approach would be comparatively straightforward to implement and would support large naval battles.   Option B: Individualized Naval Combat   When ships engage in boarding actions, soldiers physically fight on deck using individual animations, attacks, targets, and casualties.   This approach would be more visual and tactical but would introduce significant technical challenges involving unit movement, navigation, and combat on moving platforms.   Hybrid Approach   A hybrid system could combine global calculations for most naval engagements with individualized combat during decisive boarding actions.   This would preserve the importance of embarked combat units without requiring every naval engagement to simulate a complete land battle on a ship's deck.   Provisional recommendation: use global ship statistics as the foundation of naval combat, while reserving individualized combat for boarding actions. The final implementation should depend on the capabilities and limitations of the existing 0 A.D. engine.   9. Main Design Question   Should hoplites, swordsmen, and ranged units visibly fight individually on the deck, or should their statistics determine casualties while animations merely represent the engagement?   This decision will determine much of the technical architecture of the naval combat modification.

Two concepts can form a new one.

I'm currently reading about the topic and looking for appearance.   First, I'll do a basic implementation — I'll probably use Greek or Hellenistic ships as the standard. For the first implementation, I'll only use the crew's controls. That's the thing I mentioned. Also, in theory, they should give bonuses to the ships. The boarding combat simulation will be important. It probably needs to render some troops as virtual, without a 3D graphical existence like their ground counterparts.   It would work like an inventory system in RPGs; if you change something, it will change the ship's stats.