Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

TXSailor

Ensign
  • Posts

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TXSailor

  1. How is the current release of the map here compared to the game? Are the locations all present and fairly accurate to the latest release?
  2. INV will help set up anyone who is making the jump to globa!
  3. Just to drive the point home further, the current cost of a long-9 on US Global is 20,000. But hey, player-driven economy is great...
  4. Agreed 1000%. Not to mention, if players provide the backbone of the cannon economy, they WON'T make cannons cheaper. Why lower the price on your own income if you don't have to? Also, @admin can we please talk about how the US has NO coal producing ports? How are we supposed to produce without resources? And before you say "take a coal port from someone else", keep in mind they've gotten a head start on cannon production...
  5. Seconded, as well as killing off old players.
  6. I have to agree, the startup is agonizing. While the large clans are doing okay, getting things spun up, you NEED a massive clan working together to really make any progression. This new grind has sent my entire clan packing, as it's less of a game and more of a job. I'm all for keeping line-ships rare and expensive, but right now, EVERYTHING is prohibitively expensive. Even when we CAN afford the guns on a Surprise, it spends most of its time in port, because losing it DOES start you off in square one. Can we consider bringing back the capture of NPC ships? As it stands, 1 durability ships, the cost of repair production and the cost of cannons already keep the ships incredibly expensive. Returning another decent source of income wouldn't be the same level of inflation it once was. I agree, make resource extraction cheaper, and make the lower tier ships a bit easier to produce. I know admin is looking at EvE as a goal, but honestly, they lack the side-lures that EvE has, as well as the activity for lower level players. At present, the casual players are locked out.
  7. Just to throw my $.02 in, is there any chance of having this on Discord instead of teamspeak? I will likely be unable to access my computer at that time, but through discord we can still participate in typing.
  8. I like this, and even MORE like the idea of having the option to ship via AI trader. Allow players to intercept these, and you have worthwhile risk to the trader sending things to make up for not having to sail, and increase rewards for commerce raiders.
  9. I STRONGLY agree with this sentiment. All of the mechanics being introduced after the patch DEMAND a large server population, and allowing a split between the two will only cause problems...
  10. I greatly support both the first-person views and the storm battles!
  11. Though I'm not so salty, I grew up on the ocean sailing no less, and I agree completely. If there was enough wind to catch a sail, there was enough wind to ripple the water beyond reflection, to say nothing of waves.
  12. Bam. QFT. Game over. Doneskies. And if this doesn't illicit some kind of second thought, then there's no hope.
  13. So put a chat ban on the individual. Simple as that. But you want to force people into OW, refuse to let them chat, that's only gonna be more alt-tabbed sailing because what the heck else do we do with our time?
  14. Admin, would you listen to a poll specifically on keeping global chat?
  15. Admin: Is there any chance we can reconsider the global chat going away? I can understand how every other feature may work, but this one truly and deeply concerns me for the future of this game. I think there's one thing we can agree on, before things get more heated. The reason we all get so heated is because we all truly and deeply love this game.
  16. Preventing people from being able to take a mission in a port does nothing about ganking. It simply prevents people from being able to find action if there is nothing else nearby. Allow me to illustrate: I'm a relatively low rank. I have a 5th rate Frigate. Without missions, my only hope to find action is to go out deep into enemy territory. Well, the line between friendly and enemy water is currently filled with 5 players in SOLs with fleets. Well, now, if I go forward to try to find a fight, I stand no chance to survive whatsoever. The massive fleet will eviscerate me. There IS no middle ground to find action, because the ONLY place to find a fight is enemy water, and the ZERG clans know this, and prey on it. So, here I am, a new player. I can't go forward. I can't take a mission. I have nothing available to me. And so, I hit the refund button and there goes your sale. I understand you want PVP. Great. Fleets aren't a problem in and of themselves already. I do most of my fighting hunting in the open world as it is. But when you take away the option for find action ANY other way, you're going to lose casual players who don't have a HUGE clan behind them. And while you don't care about the opinion, you'll feel it in your wallet. As for the global chat loss, again, you're the ONLY game in the industry attempting that. Does that not give you pause? There is neutrality toward it here at best, and no support whatsoever. You have a post here about changes. The BEST response I've seen is a neutral "lets try it and see what happens." You have many changes here it seems NO ONE has asked for. And I'll point out, that a great many of your reviews on steam are complaining about this EXACT situation, where you seek to fix problems that don't exist by implementing fixes no one wants, and claiming that it's YOUR world and we just live in it when there are complaints made. You want to change your reputation as a game, but you're only living up to it here.
  17. Again, this may be tinfoil hat territory, but what came to my mind was that you're taking out missions and quick battles, but moving those into a new game along with the quote "We don't care what you're playing as long as it's one of our games". Matched with the "we never said it would be fun" quote, this sets off many alarms in my head from a game I was previously in LOVE with (Hell, I've put 200 hours into it in two weeks lol). I understand the drive to the open world. I support it wholeheartedly. But I agree with others here that taking away other features to FORCE the open world is NOT the right way. Rather, there should be more done to improve open world occurrences to draw people there of their own desire, not for want of other options. And taking away global chat is about the worst idea I've heard yet.
  18. Honestly, with the global chat being gone, this game is dead in the water. I'll wait on the patch, but I'm already regretting playing too long to take my money back, not because I NEED the money back, but a few things said by devs here have the aire of "we don't care what you think, we're going how WE want to." I mean, I'm appalled that no one jumped on the "We never said it would be fun" line! As a new guy here, the reason I DID stay beyond the 2 hour refund window is BECAUSE I was able to get help and instruction, from the Help Channel, from Nation and from Global. Sure there are purse-fights, but that's life. I've done my fair share of internet gaming and I've NEVER encountered a game which doesn't allow interaction between sides. Between this and the constant "Well, we're making ANOTHER game that has the stuff we're taking away", this may be tinfoil hat territory, but it almost sounds as if now that they've got our money for NA, they're trying to kill it off so when they release this new game (With all the options they took away from this one) they'll get all of our money there too...
  19. So... I'm gonna throw this out here: you probably just killed all new player influx with 3 and 7. You're handing all of the players over to super clans to rank them up. Port missions still forced players into the open world to go find their mission marker, and I know I personally have been attacked en route to one, so it can be a PVP driver. Meanwhile, trying desperately to level up from their Snow in open world only they're at the mercy of the gank groups who already have heavy frigates and numbers. A Snow wanting to level is forced to find some massive clan willing to escort him just to have a chance of surviving against players who only want to club baby seals. With number three you say you want people going into the open world, but there's no longer anything to gain in doing so. If capturing enemy ships is worthless, what do you actually propose we do in this open world? There's no fight to be had from port missions, no fight to be had from he lobby missions, and nothing to be gained hunting enemy ships on the open?
  20. Well sir, copy-paste to a suggestion topic and I will happily back it! How do we feel about slightly more stringent ROE as well? I know it DOES exist for 1v1 fights, as I've seen it there, but when there are more than one ship involved, there doesn't seem to be any restriction to a 5,000 vs 200 BR battle.
  21. I'm not so sure about points 1 and 2, (A friend of mine has pointed out however, maybe some visual references that would be easier to see and take an azimuth off of to allow some still-accurate navigation but with some human skill). Otherwise, I do really like those ideas. Perhaps a suggestion post is in order?
  22. I tend to agree with the above. I can certainly understand the thrill of a slightly mismatched fight, but as I've said in-game, there's a line between a long shot and sheer and utter destruction. Having just a short while ago started a battle with a few friends where we were ALREADY outnumbered, only to have Pirate players bring in 3 more line ships and a handful of heavy frigates and run their mouths again... I'm not against PvP, but there's an ocean between what we're seeing now and what anyone other than a power player in a massive faction might find fun.
  23. Out of curiousity, what would you recommend as a solution to the gank fest?
×
×
  • Create New...