Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

133 Excellent

About Busterbloodvessel

  • Rank
    Able seaman

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Knitting, crochet, day dreaming, sitting on cushions

Recent Profile Visitors

510 profile views
  1. Is this an unacceptable exploit?

    @admin A difficult nut to crack eh? How about making a battle free area around a PB port where it is not possible to tag players or NPC. The size of the battle free area would be twice the maximum render range from the PB port dock in good visibility. The duration of the battle free area would be for at least 2 hours down to 15mins before port battle start time. This would mean no battle could start close enough to allow an invisible sail-in and any battle starting before 2 hours would not be a safe haven as it will close at least half an hour before the PB starts. The battles opening 15 mins before would allow screening action to commence but be so close to PB time that the battle swords would be visible for sufficient time for screeners to disrupt Buster (on trash arsehole dickmans watch)
  2. Is this an unacceptable exploit?

    @qw569 Thank you for your response. I will not defend the heinous act of travelling from La Tortue to Port-de-Paix without allowing an opportunity of being screened by Pirates! I didn’t actually do it, but I would, I am so condemned! It’s rather different to a fake battle instance though isn’t it. I take a couple of things in evidence from your post: 1. You don’t deny that you were party to the BF arrangement as I claim. 2. You cite game play by others as being your motive. I take this to mean that you would also prefer not to see this in the game. @admin To me the evidence is clear. The video shows what happened. By qw569’s mail it is more than reasonable to conclude a fake battle instance was used. BF and qw569 colluded in this ploy. The only defence, if you decide that a defence is needed, seems to be that others did or would use it. I haven’t seen a single post that applauds this means of entering a PB. The method is open for use by anyone who cares to use it. I fear it will become standard practice unless you declare against it and enforce abstinence. If not, it’s going on my to-do list tomorrow. What say you! Buster and Buster (Attorneys)
  3. Is this an unacceptable exploit?

    Yep your mistaken, I looked in my diary of misdemeanours. If permitted, I am reluctantly willing to use the BF tactic on you next PB though! Buster (looking over top of specs)
  4. Whilst trying to screen at Bahia Escocesa (14/11/17) the Danish BF clan and friends avoided the Russian screening fleet by creating a fake battle with a Pirate right outside the PB port. Shortly after the PB started the Danes exited the fake battle and ran the short distance to the port to enter the PB unmolested; apart from two Danish screening Wasa's seen in first spyglass view of video who were not part of the PB fleet. The Pirate player involved, qw569 from KIWI clan (sailing a shop bought Essex, I am sure of this because when sunk he had no repairs or rum of any sort on board; video available upon request). The entire Danish fleet entered the PB and won the port (good fight apparently, no complaints there). I want to know if this method of avoiding a PB screen is considered acceptable. Having been demoted once, following the "Gunless French PB at Cap Francais", I do not wish to endure another keel haul for another exploit if the Russians use the same method. Could I add that If it is NOT an exploit, can you please bring back logging off outside the port so we don't have to go through the farce of bringing out a friendly nation to create a fake battle for what is the same effect Video below is a clip which is self explanatory, fortunately I was scouting from a balloon so caught the Danes emerging red handed. Looking forward to a response. Buster (Tarantino eat yer heart out)
  5. Hotfix for patch 13. Le Gros Ventre Refit + Swivels!!!

    There has been a clamour for some time for the Pirates to have a game play all of their own, rather than just another Nation at play. Some Pirates (and no doubt some others in Nations) have made a life of PvP spurning PvE and RvR. Two examples are ALOHA (spit) and RUBLI. I dislike being ganked as much as the next guy but I believe the refitLGV opened a window on what the Pirate game could be and how it may enter the game along with lots of ideas elsewhere on the forums. Neither ALOHA (spit again) or RUBLI take any real interest in RVR. The refit offered a hit and run ship they needed to suit their gameplay and whilst the refitLGV was able to outrun, too easily, most anything else I do believe that this gave some players a suitable ship to straighten their warped minds around (:)). I am therefore both pleased (due to personal ship loss!), and sad, to see the refitLGV castrated. Clearly it was giving some players a Pirate PvP game to play AND WE NEED PLAYERS, even some of the mean minded ones! So, if nerfing the refitLGV is required, the devs would do well to take great care to balance the ship rather than just to correct some ship data. Buster (Не пират)
  6. 9pm for Aussie Sydney (east coast) players....

  7. PB closure exploit

    As a 'quick fix' Is it possible to put something in the results (progress) screen to indicate which players are present in the instance, perhaps 'sunk' or 'escaped' or the rank in blue to indicate which opponents have not left the pb instance. This would prevent the entire fleet from unnecessarily loitering on the pb instance saving player time and decreasing server load. it also means we could identify the unlikely/possible/probable/definite (delete as appropriate) miscreant! Buster (twitching slightly)
  8. PB closure exploit

    Admin/dev chappies, can I ask that once all captains that HAVE NOT SUNK leave a PB that the PB closes mmediately and that any dead/sunk but spectating captains are kicked from the Pb instance to permit closure without the 15min wait. Why? Well, some dishonourable sunk captains loitered as spectators to hold the Pb instance open. The Pb winning Russian fleet waited until surviving Pirates escaped before they themselves exited the battle. However, the pre-requisite that all players must leave the Pb before it closes means that spectating captains can hold the Pb instance open and delay access to the captured port by the victorious attacker. The fleet, denuded of repairs and in a sad condition that it wishes to enter the port, is then at risk of being attacked by screening Pirates and those pirates who exit the battle repair in port. Fortunately the Russian fleet was sufficiently large this time to defeat such attacks on grounds of Insufficient BR. For a spectator to effectively force an entire fleet to stay in a battle over instance for 15mins before the are forcibly required to exit is trolling at best and an exploit at worst. To my mind this mechanic provides no useful purpose other than to encourage the disreputable. To any that may accuse me of hypocracy bearing in mind my demotion after the SORRY French no-guns port Battle I am currently a reformed character being Russian rather than SORRY, honest guv! Buster (sweeping round the alter)
  9. [PVP EU] battle results

    Are you yearning for him to return? How times change. Buster (winding back his sun dial)
  10. Solution for Empty Portbattles?

    Come on, make us all on Euro PvP really hate you and HRE , you're really going to have to work at that as you need to get all the other Swedish clans mad at you too. TBH I don't think you've got what it takes to get everyone that mad at you, you are too nice compared to LV, when commanding a PB you sound, to me, rather Priestly. LV's 'gift' of personal annoyance you just don't possess; I reckon he could make the Pope curse at him when he was an alter boy. Nevertheless, it was great fun with almost endless RvR battles, aggression and salt throughout the entire player base (including other Pirates) and large ship gatherings mixed with endless venom that surpassed the requirements of game play and entered into the personal. Good times and some not so good, but memorable never the less. Buster (stirring his tea)
  11. Solution for Empty Portbattles?

    Hey LV! Your long lost twin brother? He's over here! Buster
  12. Uninstalling

    No more talk of merging servers, I mean what does merging servers mean, does it mean the server is merging with something else. Does it mean that if we merge the servers Haitchi will re-emerge in a merged server. I never want to hear the phase merged the servers again. It's not like anyone wants it, is it? I mean who wants a merged server. I mean it will halve the number of ports and double the players and things who wants that! Buster (must have merged me baccy with somthin)
  13. Respawn at closest outpost

    Unlike you to get sunk rediii ;). I also have a bit of an issue with "Tow to Port" taking you to the nearest deep water port. I think this should not include ports within 30 mins of PB attack. I recall that capitals were excluded from 'Tow to Port' when PB attacks were only at capitals. Now that 'all' ports are open to attack then all deep water ports are vulnerable to teleport main fleet attacks if the attack fleet can position itself favourably. Buster (beam me up Scotty [if he doesn't mind])
  14. Foreign clan alliances

    Can we have a larger friendly clan box so that we can allay up more small clans? Buster (a bit lonely)