Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 03/13/2018 in all areas

  1. 22 likes
    Captains. Patch was deployed today. Important fix of the battle entry bug fixed. You should now see the join button at all times. if you see a battle between enemies you will be able to join one of the sides If you national joins the battle on one of the sides you will only be able to join the battle on his side Port timers costs are now properly applied Visuals of the selection circles around ships were made a bit more elegant.
  2. 19 likes
    No thanks. I like the 1 dura ships.
  3. 19 likes
    Captains, at this stage we can only say that Battle XP, Crafting XP and ship slot xp are not going to be wiped. Assets (ships. gold, resources) wipe will only happen if significant changes to economy are going to be added.
  4. 17 likes
    Ok, so the loss-induced propensity to bring big ships, friends and pile on the winning side has cast a shadow over the patrol missions. BR limits will help and maybe even fix it? The intention of the patrol missions is that players should feel free to bring an un-modded and cheap ship, do as best they can, sink but get enough rewards to make them not care about their loss. The big groups of big ships piling on makes it hard for smaller ships to do enough damage to farm rewards, at least enough to make the experience equally frustrating to a normal gank anywhere in the OW. Sandboxers love to gank. They will tell you they love their freedom, role-playing, war-game or “playing it smart”, but they simply love to gank. Even reasonable guys are quickly turned to the dark side when the lizard brain kicks in and tries to avoid loss at all cost, yes, even to the point of having less fun. There may be something we can do to counteract this, or give the lizard brain something else to knee-jerk to. We’ve talked about this loosely in the past but it’s never been tried: BR based multipliers. We could have variable multipliers applied to xp, cash, marks, damage or all of them but for the purpose of patrol missions I guess most players are grinding the damage thresholds. The idea is to let the gankee get something from it while at the same time making ganking a truly inefficient way of farming rewards. Let’s start with an example where one ship is ganked by three ships and two late joiners come in to, um, secure the win. As it is today all damage is logged for all ships and rewards are based upon said logged damage. In my illustration the B-C-D gankers know they will have to share the damage but one of them is getting the kill rewards and it will be over quickly enough for them to go find a new victim. The victim will struggle to do enough damage to make it feel worth it, he will soon lose the ship, get sent back to port to buy a new ship, guns and repairs. Let’s say we put a tag on all incoming damage. Ship A would have damage tags from ships B, C and D. The gankers would only have damage tag from ship A. Then we could make damage or reward multipliers based on those tags: A multiplier: sum(BR-B, BR-C, BR-D)/BR-A = 450/200 = 2.25 B, C and D multiplier: sum(BRtags)/BR-B = 200/150 = 1.33 Notice how the gankers are even being rewarded for ganking in lower BR ships than their victim. It’s even possible to actively pulverize the gankers rewards by using the tags to indentify the gank, but it would get more complicated and I suspect it’s enough to give the victim a consolation price. The late joiners, though inside the battle instance, don’t factor in as they didn’t get close enough to put a damage tag on the victim. If they did get some damage in they would get precious little for it while bolstering the victim’s multiplier: 1050/200 = 5.25. If you want to enjoy your freedom and gank the shit out of people like a true sandboxer you can go ahead until blue in the face, but you will let the victim run off with all the rewards. If you are motivated by rewards you’ll have a strong tendency to join the outnumbered side to get damage done and farm those damage tags.
  5. 17 likes
    Upgrade storage has one goal - to have enough upgrades to quickly fit your ship for fighting in any place of the world. It is one of the features that does not look good on paper (how could you have them everywhere), but works great in reality. Removing it will be hated by many.
  6. 17 likes
    Dear Captains The goals of NAL were to: Remove the open world (with all its negatives) Remove the gear fear (with all its negatives) Remove the unbalanced battles and ganking (with all their negatives) Remove time wasting and hunting Provide the pure unspoiled experience of pure combat. 10,000 captains tried Naval Action Legends. Approximately 7000 of them got to the second level ship. 6 Captains have reached the Santisima Trinidad. Numbers usually do not lie and despite being a theoretically better game on paper, it did not have player retention compared with Naval Action with all the ganking, sailing, unbalanced fights, and complete lack of UI. It just could not keep players, forcing those who stayed to fight with bots, repeating the situation with the original sea trials. As a result, Naval Action Legends idea is temporarily put on hold. Several best ideas from the NAL will be brought into Naval Action in the future: specifically tournaments, challenges, the seamanship experience, and officers. Learnings from NAL will be applied to NA; with the main overreaching goal - fill the world with players, remove gear fear, and reward players for action (not only for kills). Inexpensive limited feature edition of NA will be introduced in the future that will increase the amount of players in the world, giving the NAL experience of non stop battles against players, in the world filled with players. PS. Regarding the new game type that was prototyped. Testing shown that all game types that could keep players would revolve around new content and adding that new content to 2 games is wasteful. Adrenaline, the feel of the hunt, or being hunted gives a lot more spice to battles and our current plan is basically give this NAL feeling (ability to quickly jump to combat and recover losses quickly) in one game without splitting the audience in two.
  7. 15 likes
    Now that money for port upkeep is getting more and more important with the new timer cost and it's influence on RvR, it's time that we finally get some proper clan management and finance tools. Problems: There is no convenient way to see even the most basic financial stats of a clan. Like total income and total cost. It's ridiculous that we either need to click every port in town management tab and manually write down costs and income, or write an external script to pull it from the api, to get this most basic of information! Another feature that is sorely lacking is basic bookkeeping on the clan warehouse. We don't even have 'total money put in', 'total money taken out', 'total spent on upkeep' etc. To take CABAL as an example, we seem to be managing paying for our massive upkeep, but nobody really knows how we're managing, because all we have to go on is final clan warehouse balance. @admin you really need to address this stuff before finalizing the UI.
  8. 13 likes
    With the recent buff of liveoak thickness meta is back with all the nice things like not penetrating on more than 50m away from eachother with 24 pounders. With 42 pounders you penetrate but yea ... Thicknessmeta is a pain together with multiple repairs. I liked the battles without it but now it gets fubar again.
  9. 13 likes
    As the title says. You use more hull repairs to repair in OW (when damaged on multiple sides) than in battle. This is really annoying and a reason why players stay in battles and repair in battle instance often. Sometimes to repair one ship in OW, it consumes 70-100 hull repairs... or even more. Wondering why no one has reported that issue yet.
  10. 13 likes
    all knowledge that you learnt will be kept unless that particular skill book will change
  11. 13 likes
    You don't understand one thing Game need players more than advanced mass tax tools Amount of players interested in mass tax tools is extremely limited compared to players interested in the tutorials and new player experience. If game ratings improve we can expand the scope of things we work on, but until then our hands are tied.
  12. 12 likes
    Ever since pvp marks were introduced we see more and more larger ships in open sea and less small frigates like surprises, renommes etc I was in a battle with shallow water ships yesterday and got 1 kill and 5 assists. I got 5 pvp marks for that battle. This is a joke imo and the last time I will pvp in a shallow ship because its a waste of time. I suggest a system that gives you marks based on how big the ship is compared to your ship. An example would be if it were a 1v1. 50BR vs 50BR = 7pvp marks 100BR vs 100BR = 10pvp marks 250BR vs 250BR = 15pvp marks 500BR vs 500BR = 20 pvp marks 500BR kills 100BR= 5pvp marks 100BR kills 500BR=30 pvp marks I think people get what I'm getting at here. Another good system is an overall battle bonus mark multiplier to punish gankers and encourage fair fights. 5000BR vs 5000BR = pvp marks x1 5000BR kills 10000BR = pvp mark x1.5 10000BR kills 5000BR=pvp mark x0.5 I get at the end of the day it is cheaper to farm alts but for the majority of players better overall. It also gives new players more rewards for pvp in small ships and doesn't force people to sail wasas and bellonas around all the time.
  13. 10 likes
    Captains, Patch was deployed today. Redeemable clearance. Unused ships, items, cannons, mast upgrades, XP for ship slots (merged from Global PVP) and forged papers were removed from the redeemables box. For more information please check this announcement: What's new: Tired rewards added to patrol missions: 1st tier: 5000 damage - 3 PVP marks 2nd tier: 20000 damage -10 PVP marks 3rd tier: 70000 damage - 20 PVP marks 4th tier: 200000 damage - 30 PVP marks 5th tier: 500000 damage - 50 PVP marks Next tier unlocks automatically once previous tier damage threshold is completed Current damage done can be checked either in a port or on the map (by pointing out on the mission's swords) Players can only take one patrol mission per day. If you claimed a reward you can take another patrol mission only after next maintenance. Players passing by through patrol area without active mission will be warned that they are in patrol area. Other changes: Epic Events fleet composition rebalanced to provide increasing variety in ship types. Visuals of the selection circles around ships were additionally improved. PVP drop only works if ships sink - so after you boarded an enemy and sank the ship - check the loot it might have an upgrade in it. Fixed bugs: Fixed bug that allowed dismantling of permanent module by exchanging own ship with a fleet ship Outside Battle Zone Timer now works correctly if player reconnected to patrol instance.
  14. 10 likes
    thank you Norfolk all active players/testers for NAL will be remembered. We learnt a lot - thank you for your support! Just like you said we found it very taxing on the team to work and market 2 games. We would chase 2 rabbits. Lets launch NA first and take it from there.
  15. 10 likes
    The bug is found, fix in process
  16. 10 likes
    Here is another sad example of a captain who has obvious problems showing a respectable attitude to other players. Ingame-Report was sent. Cheers Donjuan
  17. 10 likes
    Update on Patrols What we found is that players in patrol zones prefer to join the bigger side which is underlined by the no-exit fight to the death rule. This results in most battles to end up (25)vs(1-5) players. To solve this we will implement the following feature for testing. Patrols will have an individual BR limit - a-la port battle limit. For example: Nassau Patrol: 1200 BR limit Patrol area battle will start as is, if you have 25 players in a pull circle all will be sent to a battle BUT… once battle starts additional players will only be able join the side that has not exceeded the limit. Thus only weaker side will be able to be reinforced, resulting in more interesting diverse experiences, increasing variability of ships.
  18. 10 likes
    Portbattle of Samana Prussia attacked Sweden Swedish commander: traschiii Prussian commander: rush B loool ? After the fast fight in Cap-Francais Sweden decided to join in bigger distance to get more time to line up and to wait for the first wind change. Soon after the first engage the fleets split up pretty fast. The Prussians sank within the first brawl and had heavy Problems to damage the swedish titanium 1st rates. While the swedish fleet just secured the circles the Prussians got some kills on seperated Swedes. Battle went over the full duration. Sweden won after the time ran out. During the whole battle every Captain noticed severe shouting from the Prussian Mortar Brig, which Crew ended up keelhauled at the end of the battle
  19. 9 likes
    Turning Speed - 25% Sail HP - 30% Armor HP - 30% Hull thickness - 30% Gun Reload - 30% Gun dispersion (both horizontal and vertical) - 40% Speed - 15.5 knots
  20. 9 likes
    sorry for off topic we will fix it. br limits will be introduced for patrols.
  21. 8 likes
    impossible to do in a short time frame. there is just another better way i think. Our design idea IS and WAS the following. You should be able to penetrate any ship with any gun at close range at 90 degrees With increasing distance or angle you will need a better and better gun A 42lb long gun with double (standard) charge should penetrate any ship at 90 degrees at 1km (which is only possible from the wind side if the enemy ship is heeled - because due to ballistics your cannonballs hit a target at angle) To deliver on this design goal we just need to buff short range pens for all guns bringing them historically closer together, keeping the angle influence. This will allow faster resolutions of combat if you conserve the shots and wait for the right moments. This will finish the combat model giving the option to reduce damage by angling or heeling. And will still provide the option to inflict damage and penetrate anything if you aim properly at proper angles. This will also make frigates great again.
  22. 8 likes
    I also have to say that determined defender is too much with 30%. Should be 10% max
  23. 8 likes
    "NO, THIS IS A GAME." - every player that has a life
  24. 8 likes
    Time and time again we have seen that PVP events simply act as a bandaid for a crafting/econ system that does not inherently promote OW PVP. After a while the events die down because they simply act as a centralized location for gank fleets to hang out. Day 1 and 2 of the patrol zones was fun, but now it seems that it is basically just a gank or be ganked situation. Elite PVPers seldom fight other Elite PVPers, as seen with RUBLI joining the prussians or the Prussians joining BF battles in the gank zones. This wolf on wolf fighting is basically a myth. Prior to the PVP zone Prussian players would sail up the US east coast around the same time RUBLI and the pirates would and instead of fighting each other they would just join up and sink noobs for EZ marks. There are of course exceptions, but they're limited. The PVP events are only ever going to be a quick fix to a broken system. People need to be given reasons to leave the safety of their capitals. Small fixes to the game in the form of crafting regions or something similar would promote an increase in RVR and push players outside the zones, but for some reason they are not considered. If a character can craft virtually anything in their home capital with zero risk, why should they leave the zones? Alts can get whatever woods they want. Still no reason to leave. The reason the PVP events last time they were introduced seemed to have more staying power was because of the paints and the blueprint drops. They also didn't occur during the entire day. Right now we have a zone that lasts all day, gives bountiful marks to various players....but they there is almost nothing to purchase with those marks. No paints, no special items. Just the same tired of PVP store that's been in the game for months. If you're going to create a zone based around rewarding marks as the primary incentive for PVP in a MMO, you perhaps need to have the ability to cash those marks in and buy rarer items. The zones are already starting to lose steam and it hasn't even been a week. The game needs proper mechanics fixes and less relying on easy to code crutches.
  25. 8 likes
    Problem The moment you capture a unique port, eg. Cartagena, alts start to appear in your nation. They end up increasing the price to the one set by a global market, and you don't have any profit from capturing the port. This is actually good, since if only one nation had access to eg. Cartagena, it would have too high advantage over others. There's a neater solution for this though, which makes economy matter again. Solution Clans should be able to set how big percentage of all goods produced in ports can be bought by : Clan members Nation members Other nations In most restrictive settings other nations should still get eg. 25% of goods, and other clans in this nation 25%. In least restrictive settings, it should be free for everyone. If we have a solution for this, resource wars will start to matter. In the same time it won't break economy of nations which are not doing so well. The most important part though - new players without alts or friends in other nations will not be blocked out of upgrade economy - everyone will be able to sail to any port as a smuggler and set a contract there (it will just fill up slower). For this to work tough clans should be able to attack each other ports in the same nation, to have a way to prevent monopolies and unfair treatment. @admin ps. it shouldn't be possible to craft an upgrade in a port it's unique resource was bought in.
  26. 8 likes
    Why did you think it sank? Pretty obvious to me.
  27. 8 likes
    I started playing again, no names no chat no salt no hiding behind names pure combat.
  28. 7 likes
    There is one thing in particular I've noticed in this game, or at least in GB and that is the propensity for players to opt to enter into small and medium sized clans. Now, their independence isn't the problem until you consider the long term and RvR implications of this trend and I believe it could be solved in a fairly simple way. So a bit of a history lesson from my experience and what it boils down to is a decision made early on in the game which is to either 'expand warehouse' or create a clan and get a clan warehouse. When I first started the game I joined a clan and clan taxes were paid and we carebeared merrily at Belize. The problem of course was that they were a bunch of commies and wanted everyone to jointly build ships etc, and because of the system in place for warehouse management it meant that they were forced to deny my request to be promoted to officer so that I could use the clan warehouse. This of course led to a choice, stay in the clan and not use the warehouse and pay a ridiculous sum to expand the warehouse or create a clan and get the clan warehouse for a fraction of the cost. In addition to that it has all the search function etc... Now the difference between myself and other new players to the game is this, I started playing from day one in a clan and they did not meaning that they just opt to create a one man clan and that's where many of them seem to stay. This small problem creates several problems as far as I see it. Firstly, a skill deficit. Players who play in isolation of others are rarely good players; they cannot PvP competently meaning they cannot compete with players who can tap into the pool of experience you can find in larger clans. I would like to think that I'm somewhat competent in my favourite ship, the snow, whereas there are others in my clan who excel in 5th rates. We teach other and learn from each other which allows people to gain experience more quickly thus allowing them to create content (that dreaded word) for the whole community. Secondly, a lack of co-ordination negatively impacting RvR. Players outside of large clans find it harder to get involved with RvR and particularly in GB where you can throw a stone and hey presto there's another different clan. This is due to the lack of communication methods built into the game. Clan chat, nation chat and global means that for port battles, the primary focus for discussion will be in clan chat as we're not idiots and know that alts and people with loose lips are on nation chat. If they're not able to talk to those who are organising it means that there is less chance of them attending port battles which obviously means less port battle players which means less content. Thirdly, the game incentivises disunity. The point of the game is to have fun, if someone wants to keep players long term in their clan, they expect to have access to the clan warehouse, on the other hand, those in charge don't want to micromanage their clan warehouse. Clan owners are here to have fun, not spend time micromanaging the contents of a clan warehouse. The problem is that everyone wants the benefit of a clan warehouse, but no-one can be arsed to take responsibility for managing it. It's easier to do that in a one man clan which then negatively Potential solutions. Compartmentalised warehouse (similar to Star Trek Online) - Allow clans to create an 'extension' so that individual players may effectively create their own area in the warehouse that they can use, similar to the main function, the main compartment is then used for all interclan stuff. Hell, you could always let members "rent" slots in the clan warehouse. A log - Create a log so you can see who takes what out and who puts what in. A minimum in the clan bank - Allow the clan leader to set a minimum for the clan so that members can't take out money below that limit. Let's say I put 20 mill is the limit. No-one but I and taxman can make it go below that level. Allow clan leaders to give partial access to members to the warehouse without promoting them to officer.
  29. 7 likes
    Game has gone back to "be as tanky as possible, live oak super thickness extra HP 1st rates" in PvP events in Reinforcement zone battles as those stay open for the whole time aswell Aswell as in port battles again it seems. Little to no room for frigate engagements in OW. sad.
  30. 7 likes
    Pirates should be like Prussia, Russia and Poland.
  31. 7 likes
    Tested that, noone liked afk sailing - meeting players randomly in the open sea just doesnt happen -> thus created less pvp sigh.. You can get from Mortimer to KPR in about 10 - 15 minutes in OW. in a battle instance it'd take you several hours (probably half a day). Now tell me, how is it realistic for players that were not in rage of an engagement to join the action? 3 minute join timer simulates that only ships in range are able to join, as it should be, if you want to be realistic. (This is due to the huge differencein Speed / Distance coverage in OW and battles). Other points I mostly agree with (except masts, I think they're at an OK spot now).
  32. 7 likes
    Next time link the copper plating in the chat and watch him explode
  33. 7 likes
    Battles in zones should be open for 2-3 min for anyone to join and then after that the BR limits should apply
  34. 7 likes
    We should be able to cherry-pick what we want to take. I don't want to loot garbage for trading that has no use or purpose for me but weights 1000 cargo.
  35. 7 likes
    Unfortunately Admiralty clerks demand Captain's presence to transfer the reward
  36. 7 likes
    You have a fundamental misconception that's snowing you under: That you know best. Don't be so patronizing. People play games for a lot of different reasons, only some of whom (probably a minor fraction in most MMOs) who are playing to get their teeth kicked in and "challenge themselves." Many more are doing it to feel like they are bossing shit around and when you try to push them out of their comfort zone they'll be either looking for the cheat or looking for the exit. All you need for evidence of this is the number of threads in the tribunal having to do with alt farming vs. all other offenses in the last six months. You can't force people to play the way you want them to play. And based on the precipitous decline in player population the last 4-5 days I'd say the answer is pretty clear how this is all going. Now, being a sometimes-wolf, sometimes sheepdog I can certainly feel sympathetic to the plight of the hardcore PvP'er in this game, but not that bad... Because the real loser in all of this, over the last 12 months and most of the design decisions being made, are the casual players. Without those casual players you have an increasingly niche game with salty old timers who have nothing better to do than go out and duel their buddy in an arranged battle and then tell other players how they should be playing the game. Without those filthy casuals you have a sterile game world with no one to hunt. Without those casuals you lose the critical mass of a player base (maybe 1500-2000) that maintains this game and the world becomes a lonely, husk where you have to have silly PvP zone crutches to facilitate player interaction in any reasonable amount. Now can you have a hardcore battle simulator that also appeals to casuals? Absolutely. It requires content, quality of life, and a diversity of PvE and PvP content that focuses on player-generated modes. But this is hard work and to this point we've seen an abundance of taking the easy way out and finger pointing when it comes to the player community and the developers.
  37. 7 likes
    We got a solution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  38. 7 likes
    Sorry @admin, but it is you who doesn't understand. You have built an MMOG. The core defining characteristic of such a game is mulitple players, and tons of them. In order to attract and retain such requires in-game social tools (chat, dm, and most importantly, clans). If you want large, active, healthy clans to fulfill the core characteristic of the genre, they must have access to in-game tools to manage the clan. Warehouse and member activity logs, quick-look and single screen financial tools, and a functional two-way all-clan communication system. Instead you continue to trivialise clan tools and actually go so far as to remove social mechanics in a social game! People may come for the combat, but it is the community that keeps them logging in. Time to fix it.
  39. 6 likes
    I have a dream....that one day all ships will be created equal and all captains will be judged not by the mods on their ships, but by the skills of their captains. That over powered ship mods creating thickness metas, repair metas, speed metas and all metas .... will die away. I have a dream that the only mods on your ship are the ones that can be crafted in port....by any captain. Special trim types like strong hull or build strength will return and be the only limiting factor in terms of PVP or RVR. That ports and regions on the map will matter again and players will be rewarded with additional upgrade or mod slots in exchange for crafting outside of safe zones.....that PBs will matter again... I have a ....
  40. 6 likes
    I've saved this for the right occasion, today is that day. Nah... I'm just scared. Will somebody please hold my hand?
  41. 6 likes
    The new idea is that an active pvp player should be able to get everything from the government. Crafters can just give you this content faster and cheaper, or give you access to ships of the line, but the rest should be available from the government if you sink enemies of the state in patrols or elsewhere.
  42. 6 likes
    You already have artificial limitations - eg. 25 ships on each side. BR limits simply make it more fair and make battles more engaging.
  43. 6 likes
    I would prefer to keep 1 Durability too, however if you feel like you should get something in return the best way i see doing it is like EVE. By insurance now i'm not a fan on the whole idea of getting a whole ship back but insurance for some materials back used to make the ship would be better. So for example Teak/WO Victory sinks you get Whiteoak and Teak back from insurance, to make it a tad easier rebuilding it next time around.
  44. 6 likes
    It's weird how these old "attack everyone" privateers here posting about no ship names and more "immersive" game play very rarely pop up on combat news with kills. Funny that. As with the removal of ship coordinates, hardcore grinding and even more hardcore ship knowledge tree, often suggestions by these veteran players who feel like they need to relive their first months in naval action and all it's immersive newness.....just seem to affect the casual player base and keep diminishing it further. A player base that is is sorely needed and makes up the bread and butter of MMO style games. More often than not these players suggest hardcore features of the game, enjoy them for a time and then piss off to other games while still suggesting further inane ideas that further remove ever slimming category of features this game has that fall under "quality of life" perks. Honestly it gets old. The removal of ship names isn't a huge change, but it's a change that only benefits a small amount of veteran PVPers who didn't really give a shit who they were attacking anyway. rediii and his gangbang fleet of swedes that have been roaming the PVP patrol zones en masse this past week are going to attack that one pirate or prussian regardless of whether or not they can see his name. I find the removal of something as trivial as the names of ships as another kowtow of the admin catering to this small base of PVPers that have been trying to steer this games development into a game they want to play rather than a game that will continue to grow and most importantly, add new players. Removing quality of life features, regardless of how big or small, only really hurts the casual player base. A base this game seems to constantly be losing. A quick glance at the negative reviews will tell you that most new players find this game difficult to pick up, find a very steep learning curve, it's UI lacks intuitiveness and the game lacks basic quality of life features that are found in most MMOs. For some reason all that negative feedback is dismissed as being "haters' and we just keep steaming on with development that plows forward in a direction that most players who have purchased the game.....don't care for. Removing ship names is just another brick in a ever growing wall that new players need to hurdle in order to acclimate to this game. but ya know what, screw the haters right. Personally I've enjoyed the game less since the removal of ship names. I like sailing around and selectively solo hunting. I like to know who I'm sailing towards and I like them to know who is sailing towards them. I like to o7 a friendly or cordial face I see on the water and then decide to not tag them or run into a dude I haven't talked to in a year. I don't like to attack everything and everyone, I don't like sinking new players. Maybe I'm out there to just sink a certain brit clan I dislike while letting other clans go. I like having that option. Now it's been taken away from me because all these "hardcore" pvpers think it makes the game more immersive, despite most of them are only hardcore on the forums it seems. Most of the players I talk to hate the change. Unfortunately most of them are not active enough on the forums to get their voices heard. If a perk was created that allowed players to see names and enhanced ship stats on the water I bet 99% of the players in the game would use it. Why not give us a choice? Hardcore players can make theirs and the rest of us can keep on playing how we want. Call it Sailing Master or something.
  45. 6 likes
    I appreciate the time and thought you put into this but repair items are a necessity for one major reason: money sink. Inflation has to be controlled. Add to this repairs are only a speed bump to anyone but the newest of players. And for those new players they represent a huge opportunity for money. All new players should be crafting rum, or one of the repairs and putting it up for sale in forward operating posts. It's easy money, supports national efforts at RvR and is part of a functioning, dynamic economy. And your arguments against repair use in battle are pretty baseless.. Right now the balance is pretty good.. it was very common for ships to disengage to repair for hours/parts of days and then re-engage. This is encouraged in the current system. Carry too many repairs and you're slow.. too few and you run the risk of being unable to keep up with the damage, etc. Do you focus a single enemy down to sinking or risk them disengaging while combat ineffective only to come back and be a thorn in your side later.. etc. I feel like you're not really taking into consideration the big picture of economy, battle, and RoE with your arguments.
  46. 6 likes
    So there’s not enough money to produce more game features. Is that what I’ve read here? Lets do some ballpark maths here. 110k copies sold (actually more) at an average of $30.00 on stream. Yes some at 40 and some at 20. Minus steams cut at 30%. 2 coders salary for a couple of years. Let’s say 80k * 2 for 3 years (most likely lower since this is Kiev and not California). Minus server costs 25k. I’d estimate about 2 mil in profit before admin takes his cut. Perhaps more. We can’t afford more features because......? Some might say we’ve already paid for them actually
  47. 6 likes
    Question is what do you see in the first minutes or maybe first hour UI Tutorial (if you find it, important!) First mission (if you find where to take it, find the right mission and know where to go) Game should start with a question (tutorial yes or no. If no tut can be accessed with esc in port) After tutorial player has to be shown how to take a mission and get explained what mission is for what maybe even show him where he is and how to get to the mission. Thats the most important things I guess. Oh and first missions have to be easy!
  48. 6 likes
    aves (antilles) zone is already on the list - it just did not drop yet new zones will be added BR limits will be introduced (each event will have its own to provide more variety) New items will be added to admiralty (so dont sell your marks cheap/yet) would you guys be ok if the patrol zone is not around the freetown? but is in the active area otherwise.. (like hat island or key west)
  49. 6 likes
    SO your taking away the politics and RP of the game from the players? Thought this was a sandbox we could do what ever we want. Hell Might as well go play NA:L if that is what you want for the OW too.... Some small nations and clans need to do do alliances to help each other out other wise the only ones that will all ways win are your mega clans/nations over and over and over.
  50. 6 likes
    exactly Simplifying taxation for 50 members is not on the mind of the player who just bought a store npc surprise AND - removing the names actually increases pvp for him - because he does not know about some imaginary agreements that were agreed upon before he joined the game we dont want him to ally with enemies. We want him to sink everyone. All captains who dont belong to his nation are nameless bastards that must be destroyed from the face of the earth. And - whats important for pvp: When they type lol in chat he should only see "kek". Less communication with enemies = more pvp (+less hate)