Just watched "Michiel de Ruyter" and started reading on the subject. What surprised me is that, despite De Ruyter hailed as a great admiral, almost none of his victories were anywhere close to decisive in terms of enemy losses. With the notable exception of Medway Raid, of course. Really strange to read about huge fleets struggles, resulting in losses of 1-3 ships out of 220 on both sides.
My first guess would be underdeveloped artillery technology of the period compared to quite advanced shipbuilding skills. But even taking this into account, I'd assumed, that some ships would take damage to sails/rigging and would be unable to flee. Is this the main/only reason or were there other factors at play?
The main reason that's been postulated for this is the formalism of naval actions at this time -- it was the high-water point of line-ahead combat, with severe penalties for captains who broke out of the line of battle and gave chase individually. While the line worked to limit damage to one's own fleet, by presenting the enemy with a unified broadside front and making penetration and raking shots difficult, it also limited significantly the damage fleets could do to one another as it limited melee combat.