Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 07/11/2015 in all areas

  1. 11 likes
    Yarrr !! OK now i have your attention.... Every pirate started their life as a National (Somewhere!) British, Spanish, Native Indian, Portugese etc. When you join the game you have no reputation, Good or Bad. Only through in game actions should you remain an honourable member of your Nation or through smuggling or piracy become known as Captain Crankey the Notorious British Pirate etc. Piracy was a label not a Nation. Players could Have Naval Rank earned through grinding and pvp against your Nations enemy shipping, Merchant standing earned through trading. Piracy would be a label of notoriety/lawfullness. Honour/Notoriety/Infamy earned by acts within the game, smuggling and piracy would give you bad notoriety and eventually earn you the title "Of ill repute","The smuggler","The Blackguard", "The Pirate", whilst intercepting pirates or smuggler activity would eventually earn you the title "The Honourable", "The Upstanding" etc Players with bad repute, would be limited to visiting Neutral(I prefer Unaligned) ports and National ports where the level of 'policing' would be sufficiently low enough for you to enter with a simple bribe to the harbour master to enter you as Captain 'Smith'. False papers, would give you a chance of appearing to be law abiding while on the high seas or entering ports.(Depending on the quality these could perhaps fool OW players into believing you are neutral or friendly at the very least law abiding, but if your papers fail then you are flagged as wanted or pirate to the investigating players ship who can then engage you. I would suggest the more notorious you become the harder it is to deceive without using the very best falsified signals or papers(Cost associated). Neutral Ports and Nation?? Players should choose their birth Nation. If not one of the main 8 then at least offer some viable 'others' with the odd port dotted around. I also would prefer to align all ports on the map to either the larger nations or perhaps little known local 'self styled governors/warlords' (Guild ownership possible perhaps at some point?) Even the meanest little hamlet would have been claimed perhaps tenuously at some point by one nation or another albeit 100 years earlier without seeing a uniform since. Neutral just sits badly with me. Everyone wanting to be a trader will just roll a neutral toon Yeuch EDIT: As I have made some sweeping statements above or put forward an idea without going into detail, I have been replying to different queries or questions regarding my ideas within the thread to clarify and expand on my OP. Already seeing some very good interpretations and suggestion to expand my initial thoughts
  2. 9 likes
    Hi All I have, over the past months noticed a concerning flaw in the instance. Scenario 1. The 1v1. Two players are in an instance. For whatever reason one of the players decide they need to bug out. To do this they either juke away and run at best speed, or are straight out faster than their opponent. To escape two things need to happen. The runner needs to put distance between him and his enemy and he cant get hit or the escape timer resets. He escapes. Scenario 2. 2v1 . 2 players have managed to tag a solitary ship due to teamwork (or the cunning solitary ship has allowed them to) the battle ensues. As one of the team is closer or is the more dangerous target the solitary guy decides to focus on him first. Due to good positioning and skill the solitary ship succeeds in killing the greater threat, he turns to engage the other ship. It promptly teleports out of the battle. Eh? Scenario 3. Fleet Battle Lets say its a 5v5 SOL battle. SOL's are now sluggish to turn and can get very slow with some sail damage. If one team focus fires on only one ship, then as long as the other team holds fire they can teleport out. Or a player resets his position in the battle by pulling out and sailing upwind unnoticed to attack from another vector. since he hasn't fired due to poor shot angle he can jump out of the battle if the tide turns on his mates. My problem with the 2nd and third scenario is the ships jumping out of the instance have not escaped. They are perfectly within range of the ships around them, but for whatever reason they have escaped fire. You should not be able to leave an instance in the middle of an engagement. My solution is simple. you should need to satisfy two things to be able to leave an instance. 1. your escape timer runs out. 2. you have sailed 1000m away from enemy combatants. I think this is entirely reasonable. Discuss
  3. 5 likes
    This is probably a familiar feeling to any PvPer... You beat the crap out of an enemy, trash their hull, tear up sails. Suddenly they pop repairs and take off, your ship can't run them down so they escape and you are robbed of a deserved kill. Why can they do this? Because the damage system for masts is not realistic. Right now, you shoot masts until they break. Up until that point where a mast falls, there is no problem for the ship being attacked A new concept. Instead of the mast working fine till its hp are depleted, we consider force on the mast (sails spread/angle to the wind) vs strength of the mast (hp) The more sails you have spread, the more force on the mast. If the force on the mast exceeds it's battle damaged strength, the mast falls. So you fight an enemy, you're doing more damage to them and have hit their lower masts more times. They decide to run, go to full sails ... and their foremast cannot take the strain, goes over the side. The enemy is trapped and you finish them. Or they might be fine when they go to full sails, but you fire a broadside and under strain the mast just breaks, they are a lot more vulnerable when running away damaged. For this system to work correctly, masts should have at least equal hp to present, but the damage model for masts should extend down to the keel like the real mast. The damage model for rigging is 2 part, the masts themselves (separate pieces, with hp based on diameter, topmasts and mizzen masts have considerably less hp etc) and standing rigging (shrouds, might require new damage box). The two work together to keep the mast up, combined strength vs strain, although it's still possible to outright shoot a mast away by dealing enough damage even if the ship is stationary. Damage to the masts should not be repairable while the masts are under strain (moving or in combat). The standing rigging yes, but not the masts themselves. Losing a mast should an important event in combat, something that might change the course of battle, not just "enemy pops repair, mast reappears", or "enemy pops mast rep, heals up all their damage which puts them at risk of losing a mast and runs away" which would make the whole system useless. At the start of the fight, not much danger of losing a mast, even under full sail. Masts aren't weak, for example a 1st rate mast is 3ft diameter where even a 42lb cannonball is only going to put a 7in hole in it. Once your in the fight, using battle sails reduces the risk of losing a mast (but at cost to speed/maneuverability, it's a bit of trade-off). Might be an idea to have some sort of warning (masts creaking?) when they are in danger of breaking, although of course you might go straight to a broken mast if you put up sail too quickly. Overall, much needed, it's very frustrating when you win a fight but the enemy can just easily run away and deny you a hard earned victory.
  4. 5 likes
    I would imagine that the engine is capable of making the sails much more realistic, I'd like to see the sail and rigging damage model just as complex as the hull model. This is a testing environment, I want to test a more complex system, I don't want it ruled out without testing, throw it on us.
  5. 4 likes
    I have extensively worked on an accurate map for Naval Action and recently TDA members have started to help me. I have poured close to a hundred hours into it (it has been quite fun) but I am wondering how much the land is going to change before we continue on this project. I like the changes from the last few patches, what Game Labs has done recently to spruce up the map is absolutely awesome in my opinion, but there are rumors (that are probably completely off based and made up) going around that Game Labs isn't sure if the Caribbean will be in the final game world or even if the final game world will be real world. I don't know about anyone else, but there is an educational value attached to having to study old historical maps, and it is fun. A historical fiction world is perfect. Having a fantasy world is not ok in my opinion. Whatever world Game Labs releases on game release, it should at least be a real world area for a historical fiction setting and the Caribbean is the perfect setting. Having a fake world that has been made up that doesn't correspond to any real place or the old historical maps is just dumb in my opinion, and if that is the case, we can drop the whole historical stuff and just start having whatever floats your fantasy, like steam punk, or medieval, or Renaissance stuff and ironclads all mixed in with Napoleonic era stuff, along with the Age of Exploration. Please Game Labs, at least keep going off the old historical maps. The world you are designing right now is perfect. You can create fictitious islands, just keep most of the land masses historical. Make tiny secret islands around the gulf, in the Atlantic south of Bermuda, and in the middle of the caribbean south of Hispaniola, etc. The Patrick O'Brian and Hornblower novels are awesome, and I think most people who play Naval Action would agree. They are historical fiction. It is fiction that is believable and immersive, and it is based on a historical setting that is perfect for Naval Action. Right now Naval Action has this perfect setting. Let's please not change this perfect setting. WIP pictures This area has recently changed. Hanover Bay is now MASSIVE (the gouge into the Yucatan above Belize)so I will have to redo it Islands around Cuba are not 100% accurate in this one Almost 100% accurate map of the Bahamas as they are in game, not quite finished with them yet though. I'm trying to get every little island. Still very WIP. I don't think the islands in Providence channel belong there and I need to remove them. I haven't completely sounded out the channels through the Bahamas for the shallows yet. Redid Hanover Bay due to changes
  6. 4 likes
    To confirm i don't want a visible 'ring' around an enemy that you must escape. The ring in sea trials was a looong distance away and took some time to sail to. If we put 1000m rings around everybody it would look like an abstract art painting in no time. No. All i would like is the 1000m distance from any enemy combatant before being allowed to gap it. You could even have fulfilled the time requirement before you reach that distance and leave immediately. While the distance meter hovering above people is still there you can still know with reasonable accuracy when somebody will leave but hopefully that will be taken out in one of the coming patches. 1000m is pretty reasonable too - longs can still reach past that to mabie 1500m but don't do much at that rg.
  7. 4 likes
    I am not against a distance requirement for exiting, but that and a ring, a visual ring, even if it can be turned off, are two different things and it is a massive visual and mental immersion killer. The old instances with the islands, where it gave you a feeling of movement and a dynamic OW battle, were the best. Those months with the ring were the worst.
  8. 4 likes
    Adding or removing nations is not a problem at all. We have it covered in code. Current goals are different so lets keep it this way for a while. Major areas that we want to improve at this stage Rules of engagement Ganking New features: better boarding, port battles and crafting.
  9. 4 likes
    ... if the Unity engine allows it, so that there is more room without overlaying the game window. and... then show the chat channels as separate side by side columns, like a newspaper, as an option in addition to the tabbed view.
  10. 3 likes
    1 mod is enough if it lets you run down unmodded Surprises and Mercuries against the wind, or Trincs downwind. I don't want to de-rail the topic from our righteous condemnation of magical, non-permanent, post-construction speed mods... but I thought I'd sketch out how such a feature could work. This would require a lot of extra coding, but I think it would really bring the vessels (and crafting) alive. Basically, ever vessel stat should be randomized by 5% of its base value when the ship is built. The proportion of bonuses and penalties is regulated so that you never get a super ship or a pure pig (e.g., about half your stats will be positive, half will be negative). However, crafters can use better quality materials and produce Mastercraft or Exceptional vessels that might have 65-75% of stats enjoy a bonus. Common and Basic vessels would have a majority of slightly lowered stats. Lastly, crafters could choose to use Experimental or Conservative lines. The former would randomize stats by 10%, with the possibility that you get a vessel with more noticeable unique abilities. The latter would restrict stat randomization to only 50% of characteristics. In support of this system, I would like see some extra vessel properties added: Upwind turning (Higher if vessel was considered ardent or a griper by historical captains) Downwind turning (If vessel was slack or quick to wear) Magnitude of manual yard bonus (IHigher if vessel was quick in stays) Magnitude of roll Speed penalty in OW/instanced storms (Mostly dependent on vessel size, but based on seakeeping abilities and pitching behavior) Repair costs (Higher for lightly-built ships, or vessels with violent pitching and poor seakeeping abilities) 'Pinching' polar setting (Vessels that were considered leewardly should lose speed more rapidly when closer than 75 degrees to the wind) Best point of sail for square riggers should vary between 170-110 degrees, not just always 135. If there are speed mods at all, they should be applied at construction. Historically, a designer could alter the lines of a vessel to make it more extreme, but a tangible speed boost was far from assured. For reasons of both realism and newb-protecting balance, I would argue that certain fast or heavy vessels should be considered 'perfect' designs, to which speed mods cannot be applied. Trying to make the likes of Constitution or Trincomalee any sharper, for example, would probably make them dangerous and too finicky to carry their usual caliber of guns, and in ways that are difficult to represent in-game. On the other hand, pokier vessels like Cerberus could be made faster, with nominal drawbacks such as more heel, high repair costs, etc. As a final aside, there is no place in the game for copper plating as a pure speed boost, at least not if it gives any more than a quarter of a knot. If we want copper plating mods, than ships with low durability should become slower, and copper plating counteracts this.
  11. 3 likes
    I like your ideas and thoughts as to the idea that pirate or other not so law abiding captains wernt so easily picked out for what they were. I agree that except for a few small exceptions of very rare occurrence pirate towns werent all over the place like 7-11's. More commonly were small towns that just honestly either looked the other way for a few coins, desperate for commerce or didn't have the necessary force to deter so in reality didn't have much of a choice but allow docking and interaction to take place. Also as I understand it not often did pirates go about sailing with a giant flag waving saying lookie here i'm a pirate chillin da most. But I also understand some concessions have to be made for the sake of game play and balance. Not sure what the real answer is but the PotBS model is definitely IMHO not it.
  12. 3 likes
    A better system would have some variation in base speed around an average (current base speeds) resulting from ship construction choices, e.g. medium-built ship as is, light-built ship plus small amount of speed, heavy-built ship minus small amount of speed. The only other speed mods would be based on the captain's decisions about how to trim the ship, similar to current speed trim v. turn trim mod decision, but perhaps with some other trade-off options, e.g. gain speed on a particular point of sail but lose it on another.
  13. 3 likes
    I don't like the speed modules right now. Especially on larger ships. I think they should improve top speed by at most 5%. Paying some gold to have your hull scraped for temporary speed would also be better imo.
  14. 2 likes
    So, I've been thinking about creating a variation in how Nations perform, based on ships and upgrades availability, the idea is the following... There would be several not rated ships available for all nations, like the smallest ones, up to the Mercury, but each nation would have their own rated ships for purchase... of course, an US player could have a british ship, but he would need to capture it... For instance, using the ships available right now as an example: The Victory, Bellona, Trincomalee and the Surprise would be only available for British players to purchase. The Santissima would be only available for Spanish players to purchase. The Constitution would be only available for US players to purchase. And etc.. Disclaimer: This should only be implemented when EVERY nation has the equivalent ships... The US should have a Ship Of the Line somewhat equivalent to the Victory, a 74 gunner equivalent to the Bellona, and a frigate equivalent to the Surprise... The same goes for French, Spanish, Dutch, Norwegian, and all future nations... The Pirates could follow a diferent system, for instance, some people suggested that pirates should only be able to capture ships... That could work... The idea is that each nations should be stronger in a certain class... say for example "The Brits have awesome frigates, while the Spanish have really strong ships of the line", but still having somewhat equivalent ships... And I think upgrades could vary in cost, while all upgrades should be available to all nations, maybe a british player would find speed upgrades for chaper money than the spanish, while the spanish player would find cheaper crew upgrades... This could be based on history, so , say the real french ships had better armor, armor upgrades would be cheaper to french players.. I think this would be the best way to give each nations pros and cons... While sticking to history...
  15. 2 likes
    Simple and straight forward: If you sell a ship with canons on it, they should be sold with the ship instead of being discarded. Currently the canons are discarded and you wont get any gold for them. Keep in mind people who capture ships to get money fast, it would be nice if they don't have to disassemble the canons before selling. To be clear: The pop-up with 'carefull you are about to sell a ship with canons' should stay. Any thoughts? *All the credits to Dutch Dutchery for this idea*
  16. 2 likes
    Просматривая один из обзоров про Elite Dangerous, приятно в нём удивила и заинтересовала такая функция, как голосовое управление кораблём (в данном случае космическим), там это делается при помощи программы voice attack смотрится очень атмосферно видео поскольку у нас тоже корабли, то выглядеть должно не менее атмосферно "Поднять паруса!" "Полный вперёд!" и т.д. поэтому предложение с прицелом на далёкое будущее включить в игру функцию голосового управления
  17. 2 likes
    Very true, you have brought up some stuff that i didn't think off and i'm 100% with you on this one. We don't want the actual ring back. Instead, we want a distance requirement of some kind. - I'm against the "ring" so to speak. - I'm all for a distance requirement of some kind.
  18. 2 likes
    I absolutely loathed that ring. I can speak for 20 TDA members who all breathed a huge sigh of relief when it was removed. Dazed has brought up some real issues, but please no, not the ring, that's not a solution. Didn't we have a poll that overwhelmingly showed that the ring was unpopular? Please, let's not bring that thing back.
  19. 2 likes
    This just encourages people to high-lee kite even more. As good as it sounds, people will just stay at distance pumping ball into his sails, knowing that if they get closer they might not escape. And with mast falling down, being such a 'battle changing event' they will be even more determined to take it off you, preferably with you being unable to respond effectively. If you want this to make it work you need to also make demasting only viable at close range. At long range balls should lose enough energy so when they hit a round object that is a mast, they should just bounce off.
  20. 2 likes
    I don't think has nothing to do it the game being a strategy game or not, it is only a way to make factions more unique, and to give players a reason to choose between nations, other than by simply "preferring" one or another, or because of port locations. I don't see why a player would be pissed of by it, as a lot of players already tend to capture instead of buying, just because right now ships are really expensive. I see your point about the Trincomalee, and that is really something to think about, I'm aware that not always one Nations navy would have its own design style, and I don't particularly know how that would work that case. I really don't see the point about the amount of ships, I can't see how a lot of ships would be a problem, ships are content, and having a lot of content is rarely a bad thing... About how the Constitution was unique, that is true, and thats an historical example of diference between nations back then, the americans were the only ones to have such heavy frigates(If I'm not wrong there were more frigates of that class). So it is not impossible to imagine that for various reasons diferent nations would have diferent navies. Other than that, we could find dozens of examples of games were diferent factions have diferent characteristics, so yeah, I'm not taking that out of my head at all, and in most cases this is actually very positive. I think that the point I'm trying to make is that, there should be diference between nations, and one should consider those diferences when choosing a faction.
  21. 2 likes
    Install a profanity filter. 2 problems solved. Those with sensitive dispositions don't have to read it and the free speech champions don't have to start countless threads about free speech infringement.
  22. 2 likes
    Here are two ways you could handle the buying and selling of goods in ports. EVE style market where players set the price of the goods they're selling and leave them there until they're sold. They look through the list of goods available and buy whichever they want at the prices they're willing to pay. Think of this like the eBay 'buy now' for players unfamiliar with this kind of mechanic. This system creates a very life like, organic trading system that players with an interest in trading and economy can run wild with. It is however a little long winded for those without the desire for too much inventory management. Each port has one trader and he has a stock value for each commodity in the game. A player can buy his stock and sell him stock. The buy and sell price change according to how much of each commodity that port has in stock. If port A has 1000 ton of sugar he will sell low and buy low. If port B only has 1 ton in stock they will pay far more and charge far more also. You would ideally buy from A to sell to B. An example of how this would look. This way prices are regulated by the system, it makes everything safe (no scams) for the players and streamlines the whole in port trading process for those players wanting a quick in & out of port experience. Goods like food, wood, livestock are consumed by both the player the port itself (towns people purchasing them). Certain ports generate stock in found in that location while they rely on import of others, generating regular trade routes for players to run. Certain ports consume more of some resources, turning them into another, example Port A go through grapes faster than others meaning they're often in short supply and usually pay a handsome price. The same port produces a surplus of wine from the grapes, so this can be bough relatively cheap and sole elsewhere creating triangle trade for merchants. I think adjacent to both system players must be able to trade directly with each other. This can be implemented with a sort of dual drop box system. I add my goods for trade (can be money, wood, food, crew etc.) in the box and lock in the offer, the other party does the same and then both can confirm the transfer should they be happy with the offer. Kind of like the system used in Runescape.
  23. 2 likes
    Deep breath... Without industry and manufacturing, 'trading' is just shuffling widgets around a map for little profit and no purpose. It's just a time-killing exercise with no strategic goal. A ship should have ship's stores (for repairs), ship's provisions, gunpowder, water, cannonballs, rum, and then the leftover space could be used for cargo. We need industry and manufacturing. We need a full line of trader-specific ships - from trader's brigs (or smaller) to enormous East Indiamen. We need agricultural and geological resources to be spread over the map. We need the ability to create plantations, rough manufacturies (where raw materials are turned into basic products) and industries (where basic products are turned into finished goods). We need shipyards (a level of construction beyond industry) that can be improved and enlarged, trading docks and auction houses that likewise can be improved, a reputation system that permits the construction and improving of all of the above. We need a system based on reputation that allows for the installation and improvement of harbor defenses, and trade density should determine population which will determine availability of non-player made goods and services. Once a system is in place with agricultural and geological goods placed across the map, with areas of production and trade hubs - then you will see play evolve into logical patterns. Captains will make decisions based on time, effort, and profit as to where they build and improve industry, where they build ships, where they make port improvements, etc. Players should be making everything - ships, modules, cannon, ammunition, ship's stores, ship's provisions, barrels (for water, rum, molasses, sugar, etc) as well as ships and their modules. NPC-supplied or created items should be of only basic quality. Ship durabilities should be reduced drastically or removed altogether. Once they are gone, the demand for ships and modules will drive the industry and the game will have a very robust and complicated economic model. Exhale.
  24. 2 likes
    I like this idea. It's adds that element of extra surprise when someone from your own nation attacks you and turns pirate.
  25. 2 likes
    Master Brimstone, while I agree with your assessment on the frequency of Pirate ports we all know that with the frequency of 14yo Pirates with Mommies money to spend on video games there will never be a realistic equilibrium. I think it best to accept it and acknowledge that we shall have a respite from the Pirate menace when school resumes in two months time. I Sir remain YMOS, Para.
  26. 2 likes
    I want there to be small differences between our ships. I want one version of a ship to be faster than another version of the very same ship. How much/little doesn't really matter to me. I just feel like it's an option that should be there. That said, i support the idea of "small numbers" since we don't want it to be a "must".
  27. 2 likes
    There needs to be supply and demand. Right now resources don't do anything. If they were connected to goods that are used by npcs or players, then the economy will make more sense. Make each port require different goods and resources to progress in prosperity levels. This creates supply and demand. Different levels of prosperity require different amounts of resources and goods. More prosperous cities also produce goods from resources that are required in other ports to progress prosperity levels. Prosperous cities will have bigger and better and more ships and modules and cannons. Ships sold by the npc shipyard could take resources (say for now oak and iron). Cannons take iron (and coal?). Modules take whatever resource makes sense. This would be too much for player involvement, especially right now, so npc traders could now have resources and they take part in the economy by moving resources around. There will have to be more traders. And more trader types. Make trader lynxes, cutters, and pickles. Ports would have to have resources and goods that they produce. American ports along the coast could produce a ton of pine and oak. These could be shipped from dozens of US trader AI to ports all over the caribbean. Some places will produce coal and iron. Other places gold, etc. Several ports around the caribbean should be designated major trading hubs where resources come in from Europe and the East Indies. Goods not originating in the game world would enter here. Like Teak. These ports would be good places for players to sell items that are going to Europe or other places. Tobacco produced along the US coast could be brought to a trading hub and sold for a better price as it gets shipped to Europe. Oh, and if a port produces resources or goods, nearby ports will buy those items from the player (if they don't produce them theirselves) at a far lesser price than a port that is very far from ports that produce those resources or goods. Say Charleston produces iron. The port next over isn't going to buy iron for as high a price as Somerset, Bermuda if no iron is produced in Bermuda. Just my thoughts, might be too complicated.
  28. 2 likes
    Devs, how advanced do you want the economy to be? Are we talking Potbs type of econ or more simplified? Do you want resources and their production to be realistic? propose improvements for current systems Questions: -Are we going to have only gold currency? No copper or silver? (GEMS) -Do you want player / NPC trading? -Do you have artists who can start creating game icons? We need icons for materials, loot, upgrades etc... (You will need 100s of icons for Trading post and other sections of the game). propose ideas for new resourcesPlease list current resources, so we can see what is available right now. Here is what you will need: 4 sections -Logs and Lumber - (Basic and Premium wood types, explorers who find forest and wood types, basic and premium structures and recipes to build them. Wood refining and final wood materials.) -Agriculture and Textiles - (Basic and Premium agriculture types, explorers who find land and new agriculture types, basic and premium structures and recipes to build them. agriculture processing and final materials and textiles.) -Mining and Metal Working - (Basic and Premium raw metal types, explorers who find mines, basic and premium structures and recipes to build them. Metal refining and final metal materials.) -Shipbuilding and Provisioning - (Basic and Premium ship ingredients, basic and premium structures and recipes to build them. Packaging provisions and combining everyrthing together with recipes to build ships.)
  29. 2 likes
    Change how items are carried in cargo. Each item should have an m3(Volume) and weight(Ton or kg). store as much and as many items as you wish in your cargo until volume or weight reaches the ships maximum cargo capacity. Get rid of this ship has "X" number of storage slots (its very 1980's rpg). Each ship should have a realistic Cargo capacity split into a few key areas. General Cargo, Magazine (Prepared Supply), First Class Passenger Cabins. Second Class Passenger cabins/deck. Third Class Passenger deck ? Livestock. Captains Stores(Personal Equipment & Trade Items(Often important dispatches or small high value items stored safely away from prying eyes). All cargo could be stored thrown in the cargo bay, but this may not give the most efficient therefore most cost effective way to store items. A ships capacity should never be increased beyond its crafted maximum. But perhaps there is always a 'wastage' amount of the capacity depending on how general its design is for various cargo. General cargo space could perhaps be maxed out at 80% of its volume and or Tonnage to represent ill fitting cargo items taking up space and gangways between it, left open for access. Perishable , livestock, passengers etc may reward higher gains by having particular storage available. Modifying cargo bays was a normal practice by ships officers when considering their cargo. But may have a small price associated through the expenditure of materials with a gain of being able to carry more of the specific item. Have basic raw resources available from realistic ports located around the Caribbean. Availability + Port infrastructure to provides 'x' amount per day of resource (Port infrastructure could be player driven/supplied) better the availability and infrastructure the more would become available as a trade good. Potentially only player driven with no ai assistance apart from possible initial seeding levels. As well as raw materials have the following. Short voyage trade goods. Island hopping. Suitable for small nimble vessels to trade fairly locally with perhaps perishable goods. Food supplies, Livestock, Medicines, Mail, Passengers etc. None Perishables could be available for long or short jpourney reward/trading. Missions. Player created 'contracts' or AI created contracts. Carry item X from Port A to Port B. Could be volume and or speed of passage restrictions. Missions, Collect for me from port X, items Y within Z time Missions, Carry player captain from 'this port' to his outpost 'x' in real time the player is 'moved' on the ocean to target port(Interdiction and capture or sinking of the ai vessel(Or player vessel) results in delay of carrying the player whilst new arrangements are made he is placed into nearest neutral or friendly nation port. This player could have offline orders for his captain to automatically obtain a new passage contract until his arrival at his final destination. (This would not carry his ship, and any goods he wanted to take could be limited to 'personal items' carryable in a small sea-chest perhaps) Have a few ports historically correct for gathering materials generally shipped to distant markets (Eastern major hubs of the Caribbean). Have AI traders prepared to buy at flexible prices depending on recent player supplied volumes. Have European and other distant market AI goods available at these ports for purchase and trade amongst the Caribbeans other ports. I'm sure I can think of more but thats a good pagefull to begin with
  30. 2 likes
    Here are mine. hope this works
  31. 1 like
  32. 1 like
  33. 1 like
    Я бы все-таки сделал катру с метками. Т.е. если ты проплыл по морю, увидел остров и еще исследовал его, то почему ты не сделал карту? Почему ты должен догадываться, что это за остров и что там за города на нем? Ведь есть карта. Еще лучше, если будет автоматом дорисовываться карта. Т.е. начал с французской столицы, поплыл на юг и потихоньку у тебя карта обновляется по мере открытия карты. Если просто проплыл, увидел города, то один уровень карты. Если обплыл, замерил все глубины (образно), мели, острова, то другой уровень карты. Опять же принадлежность городов к той или иной нации, нужно оставлять на момент проплытия-захода в город. Либо покупкой информации, если город захватили другие силы. Тогда карта будет реально интересной. Если ставить маршруты торгашей, то можно будет некое понятие где грабить корованы. Если будет "Золотой флот", то можно отмечать маршруты движения. Ну если застал конечно его. А заморачивать народ секстетами хорошо, но бесполезно. Карты гугл есть, все знают расположение суши. И взять направлене S-SE от острова А к острову Б, научится каждый. И е... мозг лишними трудностями, хотя и интересными, мало кто будет. Мое мнение.
  34. 1 like
    This isn't a strategy game, so there's no point pissing players off in pursuit of diverse factions. Especially if it sextuples the number of ships the game needs to be viable. Not to mention, Trincomalee was largely a French design, so it would be strange to limit it to the English. There's nothing special about Bellona, and the there were other heavy frigates that carried 24-pdrs or 30 guns in the main battery like Constitution. Nations were always capturing each other's ships, refitting them in their own navies and copying the designs. Frankly, the idea has no merit.
  35. 1 like
    I have suggested a supposed form of Notoriety/Honor, however implementation of this is admittedly susceptible to abuse and manipulation if not implemented properly: Notoriety, Infamy, "Heat" and Bounties There should definitely be fewer Pirate ports in some locations, but I think it is a need to avoid a high concentration of pirate ports, not so much the overall number. I also think that pirate ports should be more like temporary havens: If a Nation feels the need to run out some Pirates, the pirates will simply pick up and set up somewhere else. Pirates aren't the stand-and-fight type: An Approach to Piracy I am also in agreement that Neutrals should go (I swear it looks like their towns are surrendering to me but I cannot enter to formally accept it!) Instead, have all ports belong to a nation or pirates, but have varying levels of "security". Depending on the port's importance/size/etc. security can be heavy or light. Ports with light security will be easily accessible by pirates, smugglers, and traders of warring nations. The higher the security, the harder it will be for pirates and non-national traders to gain entrance to the port. Also, port owners could even put up a type of reverse blockade: no ships can enter the port except for those of the ports owner; i.e. only English ships could enter Nassau, Spanish to San Juan etc. (I believe Spain did something like this in South America where only Spanish traders were allowed to trade at Spanish ports)
  36. 1 like
    Alternatively, pump some rounds into their sheets, damage their sails and run like hell. It's worked for me a couple of times, including a Lynx fleet gank that 9 vs 1 (I was the 1). I was raving mad when they pulled me into combat, but 30 minutes of white-knuckle sailing later, felt like the king of France. I now have found a quieter spot (away from any capitals) where I can still prey on fat British traders, with a nice neutral port nearby for repairs or holing up when things get hot. No, I'm not telling you where I'm at :-)
  37. 1 like
    If you really want to be a trader, how about not becoming a pirate in the first place? "Yarr lads! This day we be taking 1000 tons of hides to St. Augustine! But we be going unarmed, and there will be no fighting or plundering, jest trading all quiet like. Now be on yer best behavior!!!" I can't see a pirate crew taking to that plan one bit.
  38. 1 like
    As Prater says above, supply and demand is key. The trading system we have now is a good start, but it needs production and consumption to really work. In addition to resources needed for crafting, there should be commodities (sugar, tobacco, manufactured goods, rum, luxuries, etc.) and food. Each port should produce something, and each should have demand. Food, manufactured goods, rum, and luxuries will always be in demand, with the amount of demand depending on the size of the port. These commodities would be consumed by the population, so that the stock would decrease daily and need to be resupplied. Demand for resources for crafting would depend on the presence of foundries, shipyards, etc. A foundry, for instance, would need a supply of coal, iron, limestone and clay and could cast cannon. Players could commission a ship from a shipyard, but it could only be built if all the necessary resources were present in adequate quantity. If they were not sufficient, the player would have to either wait, or gather the resources himself, or hire a merchant to do it for him. Not every port would have crafting facilities (at the beginning of the game, they should probably be rather uncommon). Players should be able to build plantations, foundries, shipyards, distilleries, etc. once they have gathered sufficient materials. The cost should be high. This would give guilds an opportunity to build up a small port into a major base, and to defend it against raids by other guilds. Some ports (the capital?) should be designated as the trading route to Europe (at least until a Europe map is added in the future). They would have a high demand for sugar and tobacco and be the source of manufactured goods. Perhaps there could be regular convoys between these ports and "off map" which would give players an incentive to protect them or raid them. Since the 18th century was a time of mercantilism, not free trade, there should be restrictions on trading with the ports of another country, even an ally. But there should also be a well developed smuggling system with very high profits for those who take the risks.
  39. 1 like
    Neutrals should be able to access pirate ports. Yes, they are natural enemies, but the trader with the balls to get in and out of pirate ports should receive the benefits off being the only ones with access to their markets.
  40. 1 like
    Resource types are going to depend very much on what we, the players, and/or ai, are crafting. The list for shipbuilding items for example was never finalized as far as i know? Trading and supplies will very much depend on what crafting is going to be in game, surely start at the top work back? Can you give us some idea on what items will we be making and then we can tell you what we need to make them.
  41. 1 like
    To be honest, when I think about merchants in game I ask myself who will want to play as one and what do they want from the game? They aren't going to be PVP players looking for the nearest port battle. To my mind they'll want a huge range of 'tradeable goods, they want to make link between ports and crafters, they want to balance risk/reward in the amount of cargo they carry and the fittings of their ship but mostly, they want to make money, they're econ players, finding fun in inventory management and looking for opportunities in the market. As such their progression should be financial and possession based. If I can make a ton of money hauling cargo from A to B, enough to buy the biggest Indiaman in game, I couldn't care less if I'm getting XP for it or not, the money is the reward and making money is enough grinding too. I just don't see the point or benefit to having XP ranks on merchants and explorers (who obviously just enjoy the exploring) Re:crew progression: Age of Pirates 2 had the most obvious, logical system, it's what this game is crying out for. You recruit crew and have to pay them wages which are taken automatically with the passing of time. As they sail/fire guns/board enemy their experience goes up and they get better. When they're lost for whatever reason you recruit new ones of varying degrees of experience depending on where you get them (recruited in ports/pressed from other players/converted prisoners taken from enemy). So you take a crew to maximum XP levels, half die in action, you recruit new crew with no experience whatsoever and your crew XP is now half XP levels. This means their lost is felt, especially to an experienced crew so surrender is now considered over fighting on and losing all your crew. The experienced crew is a commodity, like you suggest and can be traded or stolen in battle.
  42. 1 like
  43. 1 like
    Да хрен бы с этими бурунами, валунами и кильватерными следами. Пусть лучше сделают адекватный абордаж, ремонт, крафт и прочий геймплей. А уже потом доделают все эти красивости. Тем более им по любому нужно будет доводить оптимизацию игры до ума.
  44. 1 like
    From wiki: The Polish Navy has its roots in naval vessels that were largely used on Poland's main rivers in defense of trade and commerce. During the Thirteen Years' War (1454–66), this small force of inland ships for the first time saw real open sea combat. At the battle of Vistula Lagoon, a Polish privateer fleet defeated the Teutonic Knights Navy and secured permanent access to the Baltic Sea. The Second Peace of Thorn (1466)acquired for Poland the strategic naval city of Danzig (Gdańsk), and with it the means of maintaining a large fleet on the Baltic. In 1561, following a victory over Russian Naval forces in the Baltic, the Polish Navy acquired a second key port at Riga, in modern-day Latvia. At that time, as the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania became involved in conflicts in Livonia, Polish king Sigismund II Augustus organized a Sea Commission (Komisja Morska) operating in the years 1568-1572 and supported the operations of privateers, but that met with opposition of the Poland's primary port, Gdańsk (Danzig), which saw them as a threat to its trade operations (see Hanseatic League).[3] This led to the development of a privateer port in Puck.[3] Defeat of Swedish naval forces,Battle of Oliwa, 1627 Around the start of the 17th century, Poland became ruled by the House of Vasa, and was involved in a series of wars with Sweden (see also dominium maris baltici).[3] Vasa kings attempted to create a proper fleet, but their attempts met with repeated failures, due to lack of funds in the royal treasury (Polish nobility saw little need for the fleet and refused to raise taxes for its construction, and Gdańsk continued its opposition to the idea of a royal fleet).[3] During the reign of Sigismund III of Poland, the most celebrated victory of the Commonwealth Navy took place at the Battle of Oliwa in 1627 against Sweden, during the Polish–Swedish War. The victory over Sweden secured for Poland permanent access to the Atlantic, and laid the foundations for expeditions beyond Europe. The plans for the independent fleet fell through shortly afterwards due to a badly executed alliance with the Habsburgswho in 1629 took over the fleet.[3] The Commission of Royal Ships (Komisja Okrętów Królewskich) was created in 1625. This commission, along with the ultimate allocation of funds by the Sejm in 1637, created a permanent Commonwealth Navy. Władysław IV Vasa, Sigismund's son and successor who took the throne in 1632, purchased 12 ships and built a dedicated port for the royal navy called Władysławowo.[3] The Fleet, however, was entirely destroyed in 1637 by Denmark, without declaration of war.[4] Support for this navy was weak and it largely withered away by the 1640s; the remaining ships were sold in the years 1641-1643, which marked the end of the Commonwealth Navy.[3] Small privateer navy was also created by Augustus II the Strong in 1700 during Great Northern War[5] The Duchy of Courland, by the time a fief of the Kingdom of Poland and the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, had a strong navy: it established colonies on Tobago island in the West Indies (named New Courland) and on the estuary of Gambia River. The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, although the dominant force in Central and Eastern Europe during the 16th-18th centuries, never developed its navy to full potential. The proportionally small Polish coastline and the limited access to the Atlantic never allowed for a massive buildup of naval forces, especially not to the level of colonial powers such as England and France. The Partitions of Poland at the end of the 18th century brought an end to the independent Polish Navy. And here: The Commonwealth Navy was small and played a relatively minor role in the history of the Commonwealth.[1] Despite having access to the Baltic Sea, neither Poland nor Lithuania had any significant navy throughout their histories. Vasa's plans for fleet creation[edit]At the turn of the seventeenth century, Poland became ruled by the House of Vasa, and was involved in a series of wars with Sweden (see also dominium maris baltici).[1] Vasa kings attempted to create a proper fleet, but their attempts met with repeated failures, due to lack of funds in the royal treasury (Polish nobility saw little need for the fleet and refused to raise taxes for its construction, and Gdańsk continued its opposition to the idea of a royal fleet).[1] During the reign of Zygmunt III Waza, the most celebrated victory of the Commonwealth Navy under command of Admiral Arend Dickmann took place at the Battle of Oliwa in 1627 against Sweden, during the Polish-Swedish War. The victory over Sweden secured for Poland permanent access to the Atlantic, and laid the foundations for expeditions beyond Europe. The plans for the independent fleet fell through shortly afterwards due to a badly executed alliance with the Habsburgs who in 1629 took over the fleet.[1] The Commission of Royal Ships (Komisja Okrętów Królewskich) was created in 1625. This commission, along with the ultimate allocation of funds by the Sejm in 1637, attempted to create a permanent Commonwealth Navy. Władysław IV Waza who took the throne in 1632 bought 12 ships, and built a dedicated port for the royal navy (Władysławowo).[1] Władysław IV and plans for Navy expansion[edit]The 58th article signed and sworn by king Władysław IV Pacta conventa announced creation of a war fleet "according to needs of Commonwealth". Władysław, taking the throne after his father Sigismund III Vasa died in 1632, was in favour of expanding and modernising the Commonwealth military. One of his plans was the expansion of the Commonwealth Navy. Despite his attempts he did not recover ships taken by Swedes in Wismar and Travemuende. Władysław decided to build a new fleet and created a "Naval Commission" with Gerard Denhoff as a chairman to fulfill this task. The choice of other members of this Commission was not random, it contained wealthy king supporters, like the merchant and owner of a merchant fleet from Danzig, Georg Hewel (Gdańsk, Jerzy Hewel). Because the Sejm (Polish Diet) was at best reluctant to pay for new ships and royal chest was permanently empty it was due to Hewel that the new fleet was created at all. He gave to the king's disposal 10 ships, a few of them were carrying small caliber cannons. These ships had to be modernized in order to allow them to carry heavier cannons. Additionally the king wanted to build a few Galleons in Danzig and Puck and because of long construction times, also to purchase a few ships abroad, but those plans were not realized (except of purchase of one Danish ship - requiring quite serious repair). Thus the new 'Polish fleet' consisted of 10 ex-merchant ships: "Czarny Orzeł" (Black Eagle – 420 tons, 32 cannons), "Prorok Samuel" (Prophet Samuel – 400 tons, 24 cannons), "Wielkie Słońce" (Great Sun – 540 tons, 24 cannons), "Nowy Czarny Orzeł" (New Black Eagle – 24 cannons). Four smaller ships "Biały Orzeł" (White Eagle), "Charitas", "Gwiazda" (Star) and "Strzelec" (Saggitarius) had 200 tons and two the smallest "Święty Piotr" (Saint Peter) or "Fortuna" (Fortune) 160 tons and "Mały Biały Orzeł" (Small White Eagle) 140 tons and 4 small caliber cannons and additionally one small galley. Command of the newly created fleet was given to rear admiral Aleksander Seton. The King did not forget to ensure a safe base for the newly created fleet. The Harbor in Puck was too shallow for the biggest ships and the usage of Wisłoujście (a fortress near Gdansk) was constantly plagued by difficulties from the Danzig Patricians (afraid that a king with a strong naval arm would step upon their "liberties", control tolls, exert taxes etc.). The royal engineers Friederich Getkant (Fryderyk Getkant), Jan Pleitner and Eliasz Arciszewski selected a location for two new fortifications with naval bases on the Hel peninsula. They were quite impressive and raised in record time (finished in 1634, consisting of strong wooden (oak) palisades, earthen walls, trenches and moats). These fortifications were named after the King and his brother: Władysławowo and Kazimierzowo (the small town of Władysławowo still exists on the Hel peninsula nowadays - the fort was more or less on its current edge). Additionally about 500 Cossacks under Konstanty Kołek with their small boats (Chaika) were brought. It is uncertain if they were used at all.[2] Their main goal was to plague Swedish communication and supply lines near Piława and on Zatoka Wiślana (Vistula Bay). There were plans to use Cossacks in their light but very fast boats against Inflanty (Livonia) and even to raid the Swedish shore (to burn, pillage, capture merchant ships etc.). Cossacks were known from their plundering raids on Black Sea (they even burned suburbs of Istanbul once or twice). Because of the overall tonnage and armament difference between Polish and Swedish naval fleets even before (in 1620s), the main role of the Polish fleet was to disrupt Swedish communication and supply lines, to capture merchant ships bringing supplies for the Swedes (even if they belonged to neutral powers, for example ships belonging to the Netherlands, England or German duchies/cities were captured and sequestrated). The king's plan never had strong support from Polish nobles (szlachta): high costs and reluctance to strengthen the king's power were always crippling Władysław's plans. Thus not even all the king's expenses for the modernization of those ten ships were fully repaid. Unfortunate international alliances (with Denmark and Muscovy) did not allow him to mount any offensive actions and the majority of the wars he participated in were defensive ones (like the Smolensk War with Muscovy in 1634). A new armistice with Sweden signed in Stumsdorf (Sztumska Wies) knocked the last argument out of the king's hand. After that the king wanted to use his ships to organize the first Polish merchant company (with help of Hewel), however Hewel's death stopped even those plans. Finally the ships were sold. The built fortifications were salt in Denmark's and the Danzig Patriciate eyes[clarification needed] and under their pressure were destroyed in 1640s. The Swedes were without king after the death of Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden and lost battles in Germany. The Polish nobles did not want to fight a new war so when the Swedes returned most of the lands they captured in the previous war, a new armistice for 35 years was signed. The cost of the Polish preparations for this war was comparable with the costs of the king's relief of Smolensk in 1634 and his campaign against Muscovy. Commonwealth fleet after 1630s[edit]The Fleet was destroyed in 1637 by Denmark, without declaration of war.[3] The remaining ships were sold in the years 1641-1643, which marked the end of the Commonwealth Navy.[1]
  45. 1 like
    This is an alpha. If you don't want to test but want a complete game, come back later. It is a WIP. Work in Progress. This means things are added slowly and changed slowly towards the complete product. Have you ever made something significant that takes hundreds and hundreds if not thousands and thousands of hours? That takes thousands of different small iterations to complete? No? Then that explains your post. And they have said that they will fix bouyancy, so I'm not sure why you are posting that pic.
  46. 1 like
    Annoyance: Click to Hail. I'm not sure of the reason to click a ship/battle in OW, then separately click "Hail", unless its a placeholder for a future mechanism. I'd rather see an updated description of increasing accuracy as the target gets closer, like this: Click on a distant ship hull down over the horizon, and the display shows: "1, maybe 2 ships", a little later it updates to "1 ship, fore-aft", a little later the description updates to "1 French Privateer" A more involved example: "Battle, 5-8 SOLs" "Battle, 5-8 SOLs, some English" "Battle, 3 English SOLs, 3 Danish, 1 sunk" or "1 ship, likely trader" "Trader Snow, with Escort" or "Fleet, 10-15 SoLs, Possible French" "French Fleet, 14: 3 74's 10 Frigates, 1 Brig" With some effort I bet a reasonable algorithm could be designed.
  47. 1 like
    "Durability" as the overall concept for ship replacement is abstract to the point of being silly. Perhaps use insurance as an ongoing cost to players in game gold (if they want to purchase it), after all, insurance has been around for a very long time, close, but not the oldest profession... Then gradually have successive replacement ships replaced with older more worm-eaten ones (lower 'health'/performance with each replacement) to keep that 'durability' as a ship-loss mechanic, so players do not have perpetual access to SOL's. Yes, it should mean something when you get sunk, it should hurt some... AND perhaps we could have these as less-intrusive subtitles??? What do you say guys...?
  48. 1 like
    After Playing Several Battles i mean like 30 after the patch. please just remove AI fleets from the game totally. ( sorry edited to clarify i mean player purchased AI fleets)
  49. 1 like
    Hail All! BobW (Muttley), curently hove to in Bristol, Rhode Island. USN retired. Gawd I love this game (even if testing - grind, reset, grind, reset.) Casual player tho, 'lest I anger Amphitrite, otherwise known as the wife of Poseidon (and my girlfriend) - who will smite my wee vessel with hordes of angree sea creatures and banshees if I play this game too much. Only got to Victory before OW and a late invite. But I digress... I've seen a few of you online already - current status: - Lynx (still) - One Outpost - Mimbres - Had 2600 gold but squandered 2K on 18 pd carronades which I can't fit on the Lynx and can't sell back. Grrrr. Costly lesson learned - won't repeat. Been mostly operating out of Bahia Honda - grinding Trader Brigs for coins to level up. Better options? Qs: 1. Best first purchase? 12 pd carronades for Lynx? (have useless 18 pd carronades for later) 2. Best second purchase? [Weigh in please - your insights greatly appreciated] 3. Are any of you finding Trader Brigs closer up the US coast? Or are we far better off working the Caribbean? 4. Tips with the bots? (AI seems brutally accurate gunners, even in smallest armed vessels - repeatedly getting sunk) 5. Is USA Online chat the best place to ask Qs or here in the forums? (Don't want to be annoying or get snapped at, but the [pet peeve] endless answer in game HELP chat to even easy questions of 'just watch RAM's videos' - with all due respect to his not-insignificant efforts - is IMHO a painfully inefficient way to learn a simple game item, like 'How do I know what guns fit my ship?' I fully realize that some my Qs might seem silly (or lazy), but I only get a few hours to play/test per week. With no game user guides or help available yet at this stage, I'd rather spend those hours playing then slogging through long drawn out youtube videos to find answers to simple Qs. Hopefully, my fellow US sailors won't find that arrogant or impatient. If so, my humblest apologies. See you in game. Let me know whenever or however I can help. Open to teaming up on bot fleets, other countries. It's a long, slow slog... I'm still at the Lynx and can use all the help and advice I can get. Regards all, Bob W (Muttley) Bristol, RI "Fair winds and following seas"
  50. 1 like
    I corrected your spelling into proper Englanderese for you. After all, I would hate for you to be turned down for entrance into Oxford or Eton or some other foppy English school for lack of enough 'U's in your writing.