• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Excellent

About Rouleur

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman
  1. I don't think it matters how nations can get hold of key resources only that its possible and not overly onerous. What is clear is that some regional builds have greater utility than others in particular circumstances, as does the type of wood. Port battles are dominated by live oak and strong hull. In the OW frigates tend to be more speed orientated - cedar and mahogany with differing regional builds - crafted traders generally made for speed. I like the regional build system and there will always be optimal choices for particular tasks. The idea we can move the materials for regional builds to any port where we craft makes a lot of sense. Obviously we need to get the resources to build and the difficulty should incentivise controlling the ports with them, so we fight over strategic resources, but not exclude a nation from building any bespoke ships at all.
  2. Devs - please stick to your long stated commitment on XP for rank and crafting. Whilst the grind is much better now - I don't want to do it yet again. The server issue only arises because many people currently on PVP EU 1, who have mostly been there since the start are being told to choose between EU port battle windows or global and have to sync in order to move. I assume we all get the same crafting blueprints regardless but clarification would be welcome.
  3. I have been on the EU server since the start and before that in Sea Trials. I live in the UK - more stereotyping - thank you!
  4. It helps and it crossed - however, you can be certain that some people won't know about the need to sync until after the event and will redeem only to discover there clan etc has moved servers after the event. I am also expressing the view that the split is mistaken and has wider consequences than stopping night flips, which included some offensive nationalism.
  5. Thats wonderful Eric!
  6. I am glad I can sync the xp for any possible server choice, but I don't feel I should have to be doing this. Like the majority I am on PVP 1, However, if I don't copy my xp to PVP 2 I could be at risk of losing it if I prefer to play on Global post split. Seems to me that those who have lobbied for and secured an isolationist server should be making the active choices and not the rest of us. There are a large number of players who will come back but will discover they have potentially lost there xp as a result of the server split imposed on them. I don't know a single British nation player intending to join the EU restricted server. Given the published player numbers by nation on PVP 1, the majority appear to be beholden to a minority. The split is just bad and the implications are far reaching.
  7. Sorry for my lack of knowledge here - I don't have a character on PVP2 or PVE - do I create the same name on each and then do a battle on each to sync?
  8. The server split is a real issue with this. I would prefer to be on Global, but lets say it turns out there is no-one left to play with or the ping is unplayable and I have used the redeemable xp, I can only play on the other server by starting out again making the decision to split even worse. The player population is split and effectively can't come back together again.
  9. Does this mean you can sync the same xp on both servers or on only one?
  10. Thanks for original post I agree with the analysis - the current "live" server damage model is the best so far by some margin. With regard to chain, accuracy/dispersement is too good as suggested, although I would be intersted to know what ranges were expected for chain. Intuitively, a slightly lower fall off in range to double shot would seem about right. However, ball damage to rigging and spares was very common and not necessarily secured at close quarters. There are plenty of records indicating that ships closing in the van of fleet actions where often damaged at range - one of the reasons many actions had been indecisive. At the moment we have sail and/or mast damage. A more dynamic model whereby spares are disabled or our ability to turn a mast is impaired (as with rudder damage) would add flavour as would the need to cut away masts and debris to restore control.
  11. Comment was not about distances but how tagging is actually done and that signaling really does not protect players by allowing reinforcements. BR is distorted by AI being tagged by gankers to catch players or players only being tagged when AI will get included to ensure no reinforcements can arrive. Exclude AI from BR calculation and maybe it becomes useful.
  12. How does signalling help when almost every gank includes loads of useless AI blocking out any worthwhile assistance?
  13. The distances proposed might need adjusting but its an interesting idea
  14. Not suggesting an extended open timer helps but signalling and BR equality are often almost meaningless - almost every tag involving an offensive fleet in home waters or near free ports derives from tags on AI fleets or including AI fleets to catch players in the full knowledge the AI are almost irrelevant to the outcome or purpose.
  15. Sometimes more 3rds than 5ths sometimes less - broadly similar numbers would be a reasonable statement. As one of the very first 50th level crafters in the current OW I would like to see crafting rewarded. The first left the game because blue prints were no longer crafting rewards. Now we have perks/labour hour contracts etc that make progress much faster and easier. Extra planking, reinforced masts, copper bottoms etc should all be ship build choices available to crafters - the idea that any of these is a captains' earned perk derived from sailing/combat experience does not make sense - they are related to the build or refit. Maybe an extensive choice of outfit/refit (post build) options is the way to go - better ones for higher level crafters!