Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Arsilon

Ensign
  • Posts

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Arsilon

  1. At least someone in BLACK acknowledges there is a different pirate mechanic that makes it easier for the pirates to thrive as a nation that it's impossible for other nations to do. "Get organized" isn't so easy, especially for countries the size of US and GB, when there is no way to resolve differences of opinion and establish that mutual respect and tolerance that must be the be the foundation for any broader level of cooperation.
  2. But...but....they are ALLLMOOOOST done grinding their ship slots and then they will be ready to come out and fight.
  3. Unlimited teleport eliminates whatever little reason there is left for RVR. If they fix RVR to have more of a point, then perhaps TP can be brought back. As with many other things, the root issue isn't that TP is or is not available. People just ask for it to band aid some other bigger problem in the game.
  4. So what if you have the contention logic applied to Freeports? If there is contention you can teleport. If there isn't you can't. I'd have to think through what it would mean based on different nation contention and what levels might matter and whether the logic would apply to teleport to vs. teleport from. Perhaps if you have a Freeport bordering a US owned county. As long as the US keeps the contention at 0 no other country can teleport to that Freeport. However, if GB puts GB contention on the port, GB can but no other nation can. If the Pirates want to activate the teleport, they would have to go and unlock it by sailing out there and putting contention on it. As long as the US doesn't grind it back down, they are open to having enemies teleport in. I equate this to other games where you have capture points tied to spawn locations. One side can lock down the spawn to disable it if they want but otherwise it allows for more rapid movement of players into a zone. You'd have to be able to track all nations' contention separately and have the contention tied somehow to ability to teleport. *shrug*
  5. Ok, so we don't need Thunderdome then. We need to schedule PB's and schedule PB flip attempts. We should know that the Pirates will be flipping Trinidad in the SE corner of the Map on Thursday at 8pm Eastern to make sure we are online and not already up at La Mona or Mortimer and therefore a 3+ hour sail away to come down and counter grind / fleet intercept a PB that we have no intention of showing up for regardless. You are missing the point completely. WE ARE PLAYING DIFFERENT GAMES. We just happen to be logging into the same server to do it.
  6. Someone is a bit sensitive today. I wasn't attacking Black in my post. I was pointing out Black is playing a different game than other parties are in this game. And until we can figure out how to make those different games intersect each other, nothing will actually get fixed in a meaningful way. But since you point out OW hostility grind, keep in mind that the hostility grind happens right before the PB flip is finished with a 2 hour offset. When you flip a port for a 7am Eastern Portbattle, that means you finished the OW hostility grind at 9am Eastern. Now if France is unable to show up at 7am for the PB, what makes you think they can show up to counter the hostility grind between 7am and 9am Eastern? And note, this is not a complaint. Its a global server and PB times are what they are. It is no secret that the French population and prime time is. The Pirates (and Danes) can choose to flip any port they wish at whatever time of day they feel like it and declare victory....but my point is still valid, as a result we are playing different games which has everything to do with Server Health. And as for Trinidad, same thing goes, we were already engaged at Dominica so there was no way to be in two places at once? Or was that the idea? (I would have assumed it was)
  7. I was out of town and couldn't log in, but from what I understood, Trinidad was set up at the same time Dominca was against the Danes. Now if I'm wrong, then I should correct what I said and should have said "All but ONE of the PB's were actually set at a time the majority of the nation could attend" The rest of your post I'm not sure what exactly has to do with this thread but *shrug*.
  8. The crux of the problem is there is no way to get the players to want to play the same game. [BLACK] wants to play the Dots game and just take ports away from anyone that looks at them the wrong way. They think they win since no one has stopped them from doing this. US and GB stopped trying to stop them. France never intended on trying to stop them (not that they really could have put up a serious effort given none of the PB's were actually set at a time the majority of the nation could attend -- and the one port they flipped was never intended on being a PB but was just done in hopes it would get the Pirates to come out and counter grind). For the most part the rest of the server has given up caring. So they continue to grind PVE fleets to flip ports and continue to sit in empty PBs (or PB's where the defense fleet is thrown up for laughs and not any serious type of fight). It can't be a huge amount of fun for the Danes and Pirates that are left to do this. France wants to play the OW PVP game and thinks they win by sinking anything flying a Pirate or Danish flag. They think they win because for the most part no one has stopped them from sinking anything that moves. [BLACK] won't play that game until they finish grinding all their ship slots This can't be all the much fun for [BLACK] unless they just enjoy mission grinding. So the French sail around looking for them and in the meantime they sink anything else they can find. This can't be all that much fun for the victims of the French patrols. And its getting less and less fun for the French since they have to sail farther and farther and targets are fewer and farther between. The Brits and US are stuck somewhere in between. Denmark is stuck as the lapdog of the Pirates and are 1) either stuck grinding fleets for empty PBs just like the Pirates are or 2) sits looking at each other since they packed 90% of the server population that plays during their primetime into the same nation. I can't imagine that being fun for them. There aren't enough Swedes/Dutch/Spanish to make anything other than pure solo play practical. I don't think Thunderdome solves this problem - you still have people unwilling to go out and fight and there isn't enough people that do want to fight to make it sustainable. I don't think War Companies solve this problem - you still have the same problems you have with nations but you've just moved it to war companies. people will shift war companies and bandwagon just like they do between nations. Treaties will still stifle any type of game play as war companies negotiate their way out of actually being to play the game. There is still an underlying problem with the way the game is set up that the key elements are not tied together in any meaningful way. Econ people can econ to their hearts content and watch their gold value go up and nothing else really affects that in a truly meaningful way -- trade goods, alts, smuggler flag, ship capture, etc. eliminate any real cause/effect interaction to the rest of the game Crafter people can still build ships -- smuggler flag, uncapturable capital ports, alts, Permits = Marks, etc. eliminate any real cause/effect interaction to the rest of the game. RVR people can flip dots - ROE mechanics, PVE flip mechanics, etc. eliminate any real cause/effect interaction to the rest of the game OW PVP people can hunt - living out of freeports is totally viable as this is how France has been playing the game for weeks now and have proven there isn't any real cause/effect interaction to the rest of the game. The Pirates and Danes still seem to think that 1 porting France will have an effect, but despite what we keep telling them they don't believe us or think we are just posturing.
  9. I think a good chunk of the communication gap is that not everyone is "keeping score" the same way. Heck some people aren't keeping score at all? So you say [insert group 1] is [winning and insert group 2] is losing. So therefore it's just sour grapes by "the losing side". The reality and what the point of this post isn't losers complaining about what the winners are doing. The reality if this point is we ARE ALL LOSERS ULTIMATELY the way the game is currently being played out.
  10. [BLACK] Player and [CCCP] Player hiding in a battle off FR. French Player (Known and openly admitted [BLACK] Alt) sitting at FR scouting when players came out so the [BLACK] player in battle with [CCCP] could pop out of the battle to tag them. I'm not naming names since as you say all of these are known game mechanics and not against the rules and I'm not trying to flame anyone in particular. But don't say [BLACK] doesn't play those types of games.
  11. Yup...probably about as much a waste of time sitting in an empty PB (see what I did there?)
  12. You will find that in general it is the same relatively small group of people that account for 80% or more of what you don't like. If you just ignore those people, its really not all that bad. Everyone, myself included, will get baited into saying something you might normally not but hey we're all human and emotions get the best of us sometimes.
  13. 68 combat marks / 2 hours * 7 days = 476 combat marks (assuming you only have 2 hours to play a day -- number goes up from there accordingly) 476 combat marks = 2.72 VM's per week Seems like a much better use of our time than sitting in an empty PB hoping someone shows up only to get 1 VM per week and only if you're #1 on the list.
  14. OK. Simpler solution. Top of screen there is now another checkbox next to the Smuggler Flag called "RVR". Check that box and you are now exempt from all those issues.
  15. I get all of this. But if that is not the problem you are trying to solve, you don't need to rework the entire RVR, port ownership, etc. mechanic to solve that problem. The problems that Admin stated were the root cause of this proposal had to do with new player experience and alts. None of what I've seen described actaully solves any of those problems ultimately and just shifts where they create issues from Nation to War Company --- and in fact the mechanics as described just push War Companies into 'defacto Nation" status under the existing mechanic.
  16. ...which was basically my point. Why bother if all you're doing is creating a new "nation" mechanic which aside from what limits you place on it end up with the same problems the old mechanic did?
  17. I get there is potential, but what I don't get is why you need to complicate it with all these new entities and rulesets. You could add all those same mechanics at the nation level as you can at the War Company level. Heck you could just add a "PVP" and "RVR" flag to each character in addition to the "Smuggler" flag and end up with a very similar scenario. We discussed the Port Governer idea way back and it wasn't adopted for a reason. It is an overly complicated mechanic that doesn't solve any of the underlying problems. It just shifts where you have to deal with them to the left or right.
  18. My initial reaction is that all this really does is shift the problem of population balance, national politics, dealing with grievences, etc. from the Nation level where you see nation flipping regulated by access to forged papers and willingness to move with all their stuff and/or willingness of any individual to want to go through the hassle of re-rolling and any re-leveling that might be required as a result. Instead it shifts it to the "War Company" level which is now regulated by quit & join timers. You've not solved any of the underlying problems -- its like you squeeze the middle of the balloon and shift the air to the left and right side of your hand. The same amount of air is still there as was before. This would be no different than giving everyone the opportunity to create their own nation and provide limited access to forged papers (except you wouldn't need to move your stuff first). If your concern is new players don't know what nation to join and just leads to bandwagon nation flips and/or people quitting the game, how does any of this solve that? The natural evolution of this will be that you end up with mega-War Company entities which in effect would be no different than what you have today with Nations except now people carry two flags (Nation Flag and War Company) instead of one? Am I missing something?
  19. We can discuss whatever impact the 'New Danish' may have had on status quo. We can discuss whatever it says about those same 'New Danish' that choose to spit on pre-existing treaties (or choose to abide by some but not others). We can even extend some amount of sympathy to poor CCCP for being put into a bad position by those same interlopers and a Danish nation now out of control. However, we also know how much honor means to them and how much their word (used to?) mean. The previous French-Danish conflict was started based on perception of broken promises. Throughout the conflict ICS sat on the sidelines and was given a free pass by the Danish based solely on 'words given to each other'. So this speaks poorly for all the "New Danish" as well as the "Old Danish" alike when a simple 72 hour notice would have been sufficient to release you of all previous comittments to the French.
  20. I would have abided by both. 72 hours won't matter ultimately. Denmark could very have easily triggered the 72 hour out clause. The only thing that would have happened in those 72 hours in all likelihood would be more sinking of a heck of a lot more pirate ships. If you honor your agreements made with the French. You're out after 72 hours no harm no foul. Then you also honor your agreements with the Pirates and you come to their defense 72 hours later and flip French ports to your hearts content. We can leave for another day what else this says about the desperation this shows that this was the path forward chosen.
  21. An agreement is an agreement. The only difference between an alliance and a NAP is what you choose to put into them. And in this case Denmark could very have easily honored both with the 72 hour out clause. Yet they chose not to. True colors shine through.
  22. I find it very interesting you stand behind upholding one agreement to "defend "the Pirates yet you choose to violate another agreement for non-aggression against the French. You could very have easily said you value the agreements made and future relationship with the Pirates more than you do with the French. While the French may not have liked that point of view, it would have been very much in line with what was agreed upon by all parties. There was a very simple 72 hour clause that gave you the easy out and you would still be able to abide by both agreements made and everyone could have gone on their merry way sinking each other. Instead you choose the dishonorable path. Shows true colors and that any previous misgivings and distrust were justified.
×
×
  • Create New...