Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Helbent

Ensign
  • Posts

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Helbent

  1. That trip was an Indiaman and a traders brig. I ran into several players on that trip, but with the agreements we had at the time I had no issues. Had to dodge a few Frenchies on the trip home, but made it back without losing anything.
  2. My last trip from Willemstad to Christiansted got me about 350k in profit. Shorter trips from say coqui to WS are usually closer to 75-100k but are pretty short trips. I don't disagree that if you can grind max rank missions they will generally net you better returns for the time investment, but I have no trouble making enough profit via trading to make it worthwhile if you can't do max rank missions due to ship or rank.
  3. Ya, I interpreted this as port ownership no longer matters. Which means no need for cross-nation alts (a good thing IMO), but it also means people will just move from one port to another looking for the lowest tax rates. My guess is there would be lots of activity right after a reset to claim areas, but after about a month or so we will settle into the same stagnant map we have now, and alts will now be the way to safely store goods (ie take a port, then never use the "company" warehouse, just give it to an alt thats in a clan and have them store it safely for you). If you own the port and are collecting the taxes, then there is 0 cost to you to do this.
  4. What does this mean for production buildings? Does port nationality really not matter anymore and we can build outposts/buildings in ANY port, and all we are really worrying about is what the tax level is in a given port? That seems... Boring. I don't mind the idea of shifting RvR to a clan-based mechanic, but the idea of essentially making nations a cosmetic thing seems like it would really dumb down the map, and also would seem to imply that we can teleport all over the map again?
  5. There are a lot of issues here honestly. I could have done a lot of things differently than I did, but I honestly thought that once I got the kill and the scoreboard showed him as sunk that it meant he was dead and I didn't need to worry about it...
  6. Fair enough. But if the crew is on my ship in a boarding action, why am I getting notifications about them being killed? If they can still fight and take my ship, saying they are killed is incredibly misleading as it implies things are over and you have won. Which in my case is exactly what happened and that confusion cost me my ship. Honestly, if you're not going to give my ship back then fine. I'm not going to demand stuff or try to hold anyone hostage over this, it is what it is. But this was an extremely frustrating experience that really left a bad taste in my mouth. No matter how you spin it, this IS broken, and needs to be addressed one way or the other.
  7. I hear and understand. But why is this situation treated differently than any other action? A player that's killed is killed. A capped ship becomes the "player" and an empty ship they leave behind counts for nothing. So why is a "kill" in this case not counted as a kill, just a temporary thing? I could have actually played the boarding game if I thought it mattered and maybe kept my ship but I had a kill so I didn't really pay attention since the "player" I was fighting was already DEAD...
  8. I understand the "realism" but from a game mechanic this is broken on so many levels when you look at it in context of the rest of the battle and how it behaves in other situations. At a minimum, the UI is completely broken and kills should not be awarded if the player isn't going to actually be considered "killed". Whatever, lesson learned. I guess ill see if after I cool down from losing this ship if I come back since I just lost weeks of playtime to this glitchy mechanic and I don't know if I will have the motivation to start that grind over.
  9. That makes NO sense. If this wasnt a 1v1, a player marked as "sunk" will now be sailing around again and have to be killed twice? If the AI capped a ship and swapped to it in a fleet battle, I don't get credit for sinking his empty ship, and I don't have to kill both ships to complete the mission. The kill is tied to the player, not to a ship in every other case, so why would this be different?
  10. I was doing a mission last night in my Victory against a single AI Santissma. The Santi started sinking, so I slowed down so I could loot him after he went under. However, he pulled me and started a boarding action before he sunk completely (woops!). I figured it was no big deal though since he was already sinking. However, after a few rounds of boarding I realized it wasn't ending. Checked the scoreboard and the ai was flagged as "sunk" and I had a kill, so figured it was just a boarding UI bug and kept going. Finally got to the end of boarding and the dead AI that I had already killed took my ship and sailed off. I submitted an F11, and also took a screenshot of the after-battle report showing I got the XP, gold, and marks for the kill, but somehow I still lost my ship :(. If this is a bug (which it certainly seems like to me) I would like my ship back please. I am at work now, but can upload the Screenshot later tonight if needed. @Ink Any input on this?
  11. Ya well once you called his bluff I guess he didn't have much choice did he? What would he have had to complain about if he let you pay him back?
  12. Ya I was here when you guys started coming back. The old swede/French/Dutch alliance trying to survive the Dane off-hour onslaught was fun times. Then benny and his SS crew went swede and it all blew up BTW did you guys ever "repay" benny for those ships he gave you to get started again? You know, the ones he offered for free out of the goodness of his heart?
  13. We are still recovering from the scars of those 3 am port battles and 40 minute peace treaties, give us some time.
  14. Now this I could get behind. A ship is a ship. Trims are the only choice to make when crafting, and then get rid of upgrades entirely. Then tune the officer perks to be the method for customizing ships to certain gameplay styles. Leave NPC ships (bought or captured) but they only ever have 1 dura, while player crafted ships can get the extra dura like we have now. A simpler system is probably a better system at this point, and at the end of the day it is really becoming apparent that upgrades and the number of slots is increasingly creating issues with ship crafting that otherwise wouldn't exist.
  15. Thank you for putting that more succinctly than I was able too. That is exactly what I anticipate will happen.
  16. I interpreted "old" to be any ships crafted with the basic/common/fine/MC/excep model. So basically anything before this patch drops would be wiped because the database will be completely changed. Only the devs can say for sure, but with the changes they are talking about it sounds like a database change that would require dropping the existing tables.
  17. I think this is a good point. There are some key ship parameters which 95% of the player base will care about. You can spend a lot of effort on adding lots of customization which ends up really not being used. Finding the core values and focusing on how to do those seems like a better way to get to the result as quickly as possible and get something out to test. I would honestly break things up by ship and crew... Key ship parameters like speed, hull strength, crew size, hold size, etc... can be tweaked by shipbuilding, while "crew" parameters like reload, boarding, tacking, etc... are things tweaked by upgrades.
  18. In general, I like these changes. They are def a step in the right direction I think. However, I am very curious how this will interact with the existing wood and regional bonus mechanics. Do those stay as they are and this new mechanic essentially replaces the trim? Or is this overhauling the entire system?
  19. Good, continue to enjoy that experience. Those of us on PVP2 are happy where we are, not sure why if you are having such a good time on PVP1 you keep arguing so strongly for a merge.I don't understand why a performance issue on PVP2 turned into a debate about server merges anyway. Seems like PVP1 isn't the utopia you all claim it to be if you are constantly asking for a merge. PVP2 has a lower pop but we figured out to work with that pop and enjoy it, you don't see a bunch of people on PVP2 asking for a merge and there is a reason for that.
×
×
  • Create New...