Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

No name, no flag

Members
  • Content count

    78
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Excellent

About No name, no flag

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Profile Information

Recent Profile Visitors

351 profile views
  1. NA Servers high ping

    Just logged off NA, after two weeks of this the ping rate is so high during combat it's a wast of time. I'll check back in a week or so to see if there is a change.
  2. NA Servers high ping

    I doubt this very much. Recently during game play, I pressed the windows key to check the forum. Immediately after doing so the cursor shot to the top left of the screen and hovered there. I had to log off the computer to restore it to normal function. During the same game session, the ping rate went to 5500 and my ship and the enemy ships occupied the same space for about ten seconds.
  3. NA Servers high ping

    In the mid US I have a 30ms ping, 25 Mbps download and 5.00 Mbps upload and I am getting a steady 60-70 on Global then it shoots to 850-1000~ and sometimes even 3200-4500.
  4. Kiting Issue

    How would gun range play no role in a gunfight?
  5. Kiting Issue

    Seems to me this is an easy solve. If your out of range, your out of the battle. Darkness should also play a role. At night fall the range is halved. Battle timers are a rediculous mechanic.
  6. Ping erratic, then logs me out

    Having erratic ping rates in the mid U.S.A. Ping will go from 65 to 350-3400. Also ships will freeze for two-five seconds every few minutes or so. Issue is on Global Server.
  7. Player selected ship 2017 - Suggestions

    I already explained the reasoning behind why I believe Padre Eterno would be a good choice. If it did not sink at sea, the ship would have probably lasted well into the eighteenth century. There are no plans because there were no plans. Ships during that period we're built to a set of builders rules not plans. The ships design could be reasonably reproduced based on it's dimensions and tonnage.
  8. Player selected ship 2017 - Suggestions

    Plans of a ship built on the same design : See http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7327-discussion-player-ship-selection-1st-half-2016/?p=140545 None of those ships have any historical interest. As far as the lack of plans, Portuguese galleons during this period we're generally built to the same lines. As for being out of the time period of Naval Action, the ship was built only a couple of years before Wappen Von Hamburg. Galleons as a ship type we're actually built into the early 18th century.
  9. Player selected ship 2017 - Suggestions

    I suggest the Portuguese Galleon Padre Eterno, Launched in 1663. 2000 tons displacement, she was built as a cargo vessel but later sold to the Portugeuse Navy. At 53 meters on the gun deck, the ship is only slightly longer than Bucentaure. The Padre Eterno is listed as having an armament of 144 cannon, but I believe that no more than half of these would have been heavy cannon. If you compare the Padre Eterno, to contemporary ships such as the Dutch Gouden Leeuw (1666) 80-guns 50 meters on deck. The French Lys (1669) 70-guns, 46 meters on deck. The French Thérèse (1665) 58-guns, 51 meters on deck and the HMS Monmouth (1667) 66-guns, 45 meters on deck. And take into consideration that Padre Eterno was built as a merchant ship, it seems a reasonable assumption that she would have carried an armament of between 70-80 heavy guns and the rest would have been smaller swivels and falconets. There is no more famous Portuguese ship in this time frame. No plans or drawing exist for Padre Eterno, but since most galleons of this period were built to similar lines, it would not be difficult to create a very close approximation of the actual ship.
  10. I'll show you hostility

    As you Hostility itself is a failed idea, too much grind, too much of a time sink, bring back flags. NA isn't failing because of not enough mechanics, it's failing because there are too many mechanics.
  11. Forthcoming patch final discussion.

    Yes player A is an a-hat and I doubt any game will reset that reality. But what about players c-z who don't have alts and who don't farm gold? Why do they have to deal with carebear ROE and game mechanics that only exist because there are a handful of player As who have an extra 39.99 and dream of mountains of pixel gold?
  12. Forthcoming patch final discussion.

    Damage rewards need to return, capture rewards need to return, and PVP rewards should be double than those for given for NPC. But nothing will get better until there is more PVE content. The game does not have enough players to create the content by themselves and there needs to something to do while your waiting for someone to show themselves.
  13. A complete fix to RVR

    Another option would be to create buyable Port Invasion flags. Port Invasion flags would have a lifespan of 24 hours from their time of creation until they were required to reach the port specifically designated for the invasion. Once the flag reached the target a 10k zone of control would be activated around the port for a period of two hours. During this time the attacker must transport and land a number of Infantry units into this zone of control. Infantry units would be craftable and specifically created ,for and only during, the lifespan of the Port Invasion flag. These Infantry would delivered (or landed) to a designated circle within the zone of control and would only be landable within the zone of control if the attacking fleet had a BR of 2:1 or better over the defending ships within the zone. Once a favorable BR ratio has been established within the zone, each ship transporting infantry would be required to come to a full stop for 3 minutes in order to land their infantry units. Only one infantry unit could be landed at a time from each ship (this would simulate the required landing time for an amphibious assault). Infantry units would have a weight of 510 allowing them to be carried by most 5th rates and up, but trade ships could also be given a role due to their ability to carrying more cargo. Each port in the OW would be given a defending infantry garrison size based on the importance of the port. Any attacking infantry would need to be perhaps four times larger than this number in order to assume a successful attack and the conquest of the port. An attack against a standard port might require 20 of these Infantry units, while an attack against a regional capital would require 40. If during the 2 hour Port Invasion Window the required number of infantry units is not landed then the port is successfully defended and the invasion fails. In order to counter the Invasion the defender would need to preventing the embarked infantry from landing by either sinking the ships transporting them, by disrupting the attacking fleet so that only a partial landing is made or by preventing any landing at all by maintaining a favorable BR ratio against the attacking fleet within the port invasion zone of control. Within the zone of control it would be the attacking fleet's function to either sink the enemies ships or force them to withdraw thereby allowing a favorable BR ratio, which would then enable the landing of the infantry and the conquest of the port.
  14. Forthcoming patch final discussion.

    Grinding combat marks to build an Indefatigable, frigate or indiaman is not a matter of indifference to a person who wants to primarily craft, or trade, and who also wants to build their own ships to do those things in. Going through ten 5th or 4th rate missions is a huge investment in time doing something you do not necessarily want to do, in order to do something you do want to do.
  15. Forthcoming patch final discussion.

    How many players actually place contracts for ships with crafters? And what about crafters who want to build ships on speculation, or if they want to build a ship for themselves?
×