Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,067 Excellent

About vazco

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,383 profile views
  1. vazco

    DLC Pood Edinorog

    NO. It's a bad idea on so many levels I don't even want to write about it.
  2. vazco

    Open world UI feedback (2018)

    On my big screen they look great, however I agree they could be smaller on 1920x1080. It would be great if they could scale. Great remark regarding color of the circle based on RoE.
  3. vazco

    Open world UI feedback (2018)

    battles in reinforcement zones which you can't enter on the side which is not protected should be somehow marked. Sailing to them to get information that you can only enter protected side is quite strange map interface looks great. There are a few remarks I hear: Many people would like to see grid back when you search for port on the outskirts of the map, map doesn't zoom into this port and it's hard to find it hold and fleet interface look great. Some remarks: it would be cool to see hold load percentage on hold view (like on fleet view) right-click menu in hold somehow doesn't fit in style to the rest OW interface looks great, there are also some minor remarks I hear: interface icons could be scalable when clicking on battle, BR could be shown right away chat could be aligned to interface style (but I hear you plan to do this later anyway) switch "to group" text to "group up" Overall, great job
  4. Do you know good ones? Which one would you recommend?
  5. vazco

    Admiralty DLC Extra Outposts (P2W or...)

    PvP marks would be too much. If it costs gold though - an equivalent of 3 PvE missions per week - and if your outposts would be not deleted but frozen in case you don't pay, it would be ok I think. Then it could be even substituted for premium account for those who don't want to pay through ingame currency
  6. Why not allow for people to either buy outposts eg. through premium account with reasonable price, or to buy them through PvP marks, VM's and gold. This way people who spend time in game or get a proffitable port are not excluded - eg. they can make 2-3 missions per week to pay for an account, while those who don't want to do this, can simply pay in real money. If bonus is not extensive (eg. 2 more outposts, 4 more dock spaces), I think (hope) it could be accepted. edit: when I wrote this I didn't know about "admirality connections". You could still offer other advantages in premium account - eg. one extra tow per day.
  7. I think it's a good idea, but for reasons opposite to yours. It won't be cheaper, it will be more expensive overall. It will be however more sustainable for developers. Non-paying users shouldn't be discluded though, it should be possible to buy premium acc or it's perks either by investment of money or time. Premium account would work best if it gave users easier access to battles - eg more tows, more outposts, option to remove recently killed status from you etc.
  8. I don't see how having 1-2 outposts more would make a difference in balance. It's much less disturbing than eg. disproportion of number of players between nations and clans.
  9. I didn't want to say this aloud, but I already have an unsinkable Vic in docks... That's kind of a lame meta
  10. No, there is not such developer. You can check roadmap. Right now it's crafting improvements, gold, port interface. Coding "many other things" and those you listed is adding new features. Now it's more critical to fix already existing ones (UI, new player experience, patrol zones), as they take much less time. Once you introduce a new feature, later you have to debug it, tune it so that it really works, then debug it some more. Sometimes you need to remove it after introducing, since it's game breaking. It's better to tune existing features first, as it's less risky and just as needed - if not more needed.
  11. Strange to quote myself... @admin, I think the new sinking mechanic is quite bad. If you can survive with only a part of 1 bar of structure, it's quite strange. In my opinion survivability is too high in this case, as when you fight 1 vs 4, very often you sink people by leaving them with only a fraction of their structure and you can't get closer. Those fights will be much harder now and ganks will have an additional advantage.
  12. Btw, my graphics have too saturated colors after the new patch (Nvidia, I'll make a bug report) . It happens to one other person as well.
  13. We will gladly repeat this battle if you want I'm surprised Henry escaped, as he was still sinking while his repair stopped. That's why I said only two bellonas left. Anyway, if you were not disconnected and didn't tag, I appreciate it.
  14. 2 bellonas and 2 ai frigs vs 2 Vics when I was disconnected - sorry @Hans the Hawk You can find some interesting pictures of this battle below... Maybe it will give you a clue of what happened: https://imgur.com/a/dsIM7lp First two people dropped out. Then for some time all ships merged into one. After that they re-appeared on their locations and two people out of 5 got in, yet game was laggy. After 30 secs all dropped out.
  15. vazco

    National peace treaty and alliances

    Artificially created alliances are just a nuissance. They didn't work and won't work - we've tested this already. They just artificially limit options for PvP and RvR. Nations won't fight each other just because some algorithms tell them to. It's the same with stopping hostilities.