A full salvo of 14-inch shells does less than 1 heart of damage to a player in full protection 4 diamond armour, whereas a single 57mm shell does around 2-3 hearts of damage to a player with the same protection. This is, quite frankly, ludicrous. First off, a warship is much more expensive and valuable than a 57mm cannon, therefore its damage should reflect that. Second off, a 14-inch shell is over 6 times the diameter of a 57mm shell, with a 4-inch shell being nearly twice the diameter, so that damage deficit on the naval shell's part makes no sense. Naval/coastal forts currently have the disadvantage of already being easy to drill via warship with no real way to counter players other than the forts' own turrets, and no feasible naval fort has nearly enough turrets to deter players camping the banner.

Here are the following damage ideas that I have, and this is per shell:
- 4-inch 1-2 hearts
- 9-inch 3-4 hearts
- 12-inch 5-6 hearts
- 14-inch 7-8 hearts

Similarly the radii for the actual damage for these shells need be increased so that the damage is actually dealt, not simply if they hit a player DIRECTLY, otherwise this whole suggestion is basically useless.

Counterarguments to common arguments against this:

- Anyone can use a ship against a fort and its banner, so both the attackers and defenders can utilize a warship's high damage to their own advantage.

- As mentioned before, a warship is much more expensive, valuable, and harder to operate than a simple turret or a fort-defense gun, so again, its damage output should reflect that.

- A warship shelling the banner would be pretty easily distracted away from shooting the banner if it is attacked by another warship, so it's not an ultimate, unkillable superweapon against players on the banner.

This last part is my main argument for those who wish to complain that this suggestion would make warships overpowered: understand that if, as an attacker, you do not have the navy capable of defeating warships defending the fort, then sieging the fort in the first place was a strategic failure on the attackers' part. Similarly, if, as a defender, you do not have the navy capable of defeating warships attacking the fort, then creating the fort in the first place was a strategic failure on the defenders part.