Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/14/2018 in all areas

  1. 19 points
    This is a Tribunal Request for clarification on the spirit of in-battle Green vs. Green blocking and keeping a screening fleet from pursuing the enemy by blocking "friendly" ships once we joined in the battle. The situation is this (which raises other significant ethical and gameplay issues which should be discussed elsewhere): At the port battle for Somerset today the attacking Danish fleet [BF] sailed out to the battle with a friendly national fleet composed of Pirates [RUBLI] and Swedes [HRE] and [FRC] clans. Knowing that the wind was going to be very difficult, and contributed to by a very long sail to attack the Bermuda ports, the attacking fleet and their buddies decided to use "Tow to Port" when within distance. The wind just prior tot he port battle start looked like this: The attacking fleet and their other national allies appeared at the Somerset docks with the wind directly against them and several full 25-man screening fleets waiting for them just outside the shallow inlet (around Circle C). We had positioned ourselves there knowing that if they towed in they would be trapped. Once they saw the screening fleet in place the Danish tagged in their Pirate friends to start a battle just to the east of A. The Swedes joined, followed by 1st rates from one of our screening fleet: As you can see on the "Pirates" side, [REDS], [VCO] and [F11ME] had a sizable portion of the fleet in place to pursue the Danish port battle ships that were inside the battle with us. Immediately, the friendly ships on the "Pirates" side crashed into and blocked a large portion of our screeners from pursuing the [BF] port battle ships. Video evidence showing [FRC] Friedus blocking of my path to pursue is available here, though this behavior was not limited to him: The question at hand, is blocking green/friendlies from pursuit of the enemy illegal Green vs. Green action? All other exploitative and ethical issues aside of towing to port with friendly fleets that can be tagged into battle to avoid legitimate screening aside, it feels like the damage caused and the ability to pursue taken away by [FRC] Friedus and others should be punished under the no Green vs. Green rules.
  2. 9 points
    blocking friendlies and friendly fire is not allowed. @Ink will investigate. Captains who block or shoot friendlies on purpose (there must be a report from the person who was blocked) will be punished by demotions. Please @Anolytic ask players on video who were blocked or fired upon to make a short statement here.
  3. 7 points
    As this was intentional blocking with the explicit purpose of allowing a fleet to evade screening, the players involved violated the steam EULA by limiting others from gameplay. Please see the prior precedent set by @Ink here. Furthermore the use of the pirates and swedes with the intentional purpose of filling up slots on the opposing fight of a screening battle so the attacking forces would face zero opposition inside and out of the battle is extremely grievous and a serious blot on the image of Naval Action. This type of behavior should be severely punished in a manner at least similar to the judgement of those involved in the cap francaise battle earlier this year. @admin issued a statement earlier this year that " the person who enters the battle should fight in it.." It is clear that the RUBLI players, HRE and various other swedes had no intention of fighting the battle and were actively blocking and restricting the gameplay of others who intended to fight the battle. I feel this is 100x worse than sailing into battle with no guns on your ships. I challenge @admin to issue punishments to issue all parties involved in actively taking away slots and blocking others inside battle similar to the ones issued to SORRY earlier this year who committed a far less detrimental abuse of game mechanics. Will do you the right thing here.....or do only SORRY members get punished in this game? These players need to be down ranked immediately The mechanics of today's battle were just straight up ugly and a real black spot on the game overall. Shame on those who participated in it. I hope if there are any new players out there reading the forums before purchasing, they don't see the actions of today.
  4. 6 points
    So group of us were doing this very long hunt. Just PvP up the coasts just having some fun. When we got to the Florida Keys however our journey was interrupted by a message stating we are about to run into about ten Prussians that were watching the stream I set up to see if anyone intercepts us in-game. Told everyone to stop and unexpectedly ran into a fleet of Espana heading to Jobe. Took us absolutely by surprise since just minutes earlier they were fighting on the other side of Cuba with Danish and Great Britain. Well they came upon us out of the fog and got us in a battle. The fleet us Poles were in was not meant to handle anything of this nature and voted to attempt to make a break for it. The Two Ingermanlands were too slow however since the Spanish ships were all very light builds. Could have been probably a very bloody battle if surprise was on the Poles side with Espana fleet being made up of very light ships but that was not the case. Both Ingermanlands were lost, Surprise and Endymion made it out safely to attack an Espana Snow that left the battle early, and Espana did not lose any ships just had some significant damage on the Wasa, Constitution, and the Wappen. Great fight guys thanks for making the evening eventful and fun @Jorge
  5. 6 points
    "is even against Steam EULA (limiting others from gameplay)." another point of view and some more people "losing control of their shit" and "tacking" conviently into rus ships jon snow lets go and dron441 are also accused this didnt happen back when owning ports mattered less.
  6. 5 points
  7. 5 points
    All of this shows clearly how broken the system is. This kind of mess didnt happen as when we have a working diplomacy mechanic where the distintion between friends and enemies was there.
  8. 4 points
    Port Battle for Cartagena: And then the battle between the PB fleets in open world at Barranquilla:
  9. 4 points
    Actually thats true. And it needs to be dealt with.
  10. 4 points
    Swedish vassals fail to take Somerset. Swedes hire criminal pirate fleet to support them. All criminals got sunk by Russian forces. Pirates lost ten First Rates. Several Swedish captains catched using pirate flag. Sentenced to death by hanging. Executed immediately. Sweden panics Russian punishment for war crimes. Danes accuse Swedish admirality lack of support. Swedes showed up in small ships only to keep losses small.
  11. 4 points
  12. 4 points
  13. 4 points
    Attacking friendly "enemies" to hide in battle has been deemed legal by devs. Filling up the other side of the battle to prevent real enemies from joining is quite another issue though. It was always the case with pirate outlaw battles that at least if there were screeners in the area then they could jump into the battle and keep the hiding fleet tagged or try to kill them. In this case we were prepared for Danes to hide in battle and had scouts and screening fleets spread out to be able to jump into the battle that they would be hiding in. The enemy used the 25 player limit per side to block us from doing that. The most serious issue however is the intentional green-on-green done to the Russians who jumped into the battle. Devs should check the logs from the battle to see who did the ramming. Almost all of the players that jumped into the battle reported being rammed and prevented from giving chase to the Danes that were hiding. Ramming as green-on-green violation is established as precedent in the tribunal from past cases:
  14. 4 points
    It's fine. Just another day in the life of Naval Action.
  15. 3 points
    HAHAHHA, its not even us. Global players have merged peacefully, its the EU side who is abusing the timers to avoid fights with EACH OTHER. Get your own guys straightened out, look at the US coast, all US timers because we don't try to game the system to avoid fights (for the most part)
  16. 3 points
    It is pretty funny. I joined Prussia at about the same time XOXO was started, and it's been funny to see the perception of Prussia change. Luckily people that aren't interested in real PvP and action won't survive in this nation, because we only operate out of contested ports, and won't look for or defend ports that won't provide more action. So without safe ports and safe zones, people will either improve and learn to fight, or will switch to a easier nation.
  17. 3 points
    I find it funny how barely anyone ( except some carebears ) bothered to join prussia when they introduced it and now that they took some ports, kicked some ass and had some of the better PvP players join it, everyone is switching to prussia to be in the "winner" team.... people are pathetic. Anyways, nice job taking those ports XOXO. Kudos to the lads from the old ROVER clan, who have been there since day 1. Keep it up!
  18. 3 points
    Are you serious? You're ignoring the U.S.-based players of VCO and all of the U.S. (sleeping/untrained giant) and British.
  19. 3 points
    Ramming players inside battle causing green on green damage to intentionally block players from engaging the other side is a tribunal offense. Filling up slots and not actively fighting inside a battle was also deemed an offense by admin. This is was with prior precedence in other tribunal posts. Both types of this behavior was witnessed at Somerset today. Where is your fake outrage towards that? British EU clans were the first ones to actively set timers to US primetime to avoid being taken by the daytime Russians. Selam and ports in Panama were the first ones since the merge. Why do you only care about Russian timers. Where is your fake outrage towards them? ------ Russia has an evening population that can operate in the times that were set. So does France, so does GB, so does the US and so it seems, do the Prussians (as we saw them screening for the french the other night). Russia is also getting attacked 4 v 1 right now during the daytime. 5v1 if you count the French attacking us in the evening. We are protecting our interests within the limits of the game's mechanics. We pay extra for those timers, as was intended. Tell me with a straight face that game mechanics intend for there to be green on green and "buddy" nations filling up battle slots so the enemy can't join and engage them. Today's PB shenanigans only upped the ante. If you aren't disgusted with what happened today, you should not be making posts about Naval Action ethics. We'll play fair when everyone else does.
  20. 3 points
    The agreement you have with the British, in what has benefited you? The answer is ... Nothing. You have surrendered your ports of the Bahamas for nothing, while the pirates and the Prussians continue to raze your shores and your ports. And while the British, from their ports congratulate themselves for having rid of an uncomfortable enemy at least for the timers and number of players. In short, a treaty that you do not profit from. Personally from my point of view those who have voted yes this agreement should withdraw from political life and continue to doing trade and PvE in the protection zones of Charleston.
  21. 3 points
    Somerset 1st fight last fight (summary)
  22. 3 points
    The green-on-green shown in the videos is aggressive and intentional. And this blatant disregard for the rules was streamed and broadcast, just like when @Lord Vicious streamed the infamous Cap-Francais PB.
  23. 3 points
  24. 3 points
    I get it. But what is a small nation suppose to do. That is why it will not get anything done to it. Battle it out in the port battle and win. If you can't put a competent PB fleet together to always secure a win. That sounds like it might be more of a problem.
  25. 3 points
×