Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Brass Monkey

Ensign
  • Posts

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Brass Monkey's Achievements

Ordinary seaman

Ordinary seaman (2/13)

61

Reputation

  1. Some questions. Can you outline what the major differences between the two servers will be? Will players be able to engage other players on the pve server? Will port battles exist in an altered form? Will the Ai behave differently? I also have a concern that this amazing PvP server that you talk about and what we are testing don't match up. At the moment I'm logging on to find player numbers between 30 and 100. The small amount of players I do come across are sailing around just outside their favourite harbour grinding mindless AI. They usually don't bother to attack me even if they are in a superior ship. These grinding players are levelling up faster then players who are looking for player vs player combat and therefore will hold an advantage when port battles comes in. Also resources are always available due to enterprising players trading in neutral ports and free towns. So in effect we are testing exactly what you don't want. So I ask; Will the pvp server be consistently interesting enough across the entire map and all times zones on player driven content alone? And how can we test that because we are not testing it now.
  2. SteelSandwich: and others. I think I have misrepresented what i was trying to say from the start through wrong terminology. I put forward the idear of pve areas designated by geology. Where I think a great misunderstanding has occurred is i never ment pve only and that players could not be attacked by other players in those areas. That these areas become some sort of safe zone. What i should have said areas where their are high Ai content. It seems in this forum pve means pvp is restricted or disallowed. This is Not what ment to say at all.I used pve as pve content, as player vs environment/AI content. As in an environment where the Ai attack players and defend their territory realistically. I apologise for the misuse of terminology and also bringing a train of thought over from another thread where I suggested the gloves be taken off the Ai and they should basically behave more like players. Since some members had a problem with that idea saying it interfered with pvp play too much and belonged in a pve only server. I started this thread to see what others thought. Basically I'm after areas where more intensive AI behave more realistically, ie.chase and engage anything they can defeat, defend territories, enter battles and run from anything they can't. And areas where they are less intrusive allowing free pvp game play all on the one server. I hope this clears up my position and what I'm actually trying to suggest. That being said in a 3000 population cap server this may not be needed at all which is an excellent point. But we don't have that now.
  3. Ok. I'm just going to look at the last bit of your post here and I think the point I'm trying to make will become clear. I never said I wanted to mix pure pve'ers with pure pvp'ers. How many players testing this game are pure pvp'ers? How many of them are even getting a majority of their xp from pvp? Probably not that many especially those from the less populated time zones. The reality is alot of us are playing both play styles. The point I'm trying to make is the PVE game play as it stands in the current server/patch has been completely nerfed. I have brought this up in other threads asking why dose the Ai behave in such an uninteresting, unrealistic way. They attack nobody, defend nothing and sail around like ducks in a shooting gallery. I was informed by other members that this was because when more active they interfered with the PVP game play. Now I'm not a pure pvp'er or a pure pve'er. Why should I have to choose a server where I get only pve or pvp with a completely nerfed pve. I want Pvp but sometimes when I log on there is stuff all pvp going on. Why can't I decided "well I'm not going to get much pvp action I'll just sail/teleport over here where I know I'll get some good interactive content with some Ai (that actually fight and behave like real captains) until the PVP picks up again. Is this really that hard to understand or that unobtainable with such a huge map without destroying the die hard pvp'ers utopian pvp only server? Well geez I don't know how about we test it! Also I'm struggling with the "we don't want" content of your post. Who is this "we" you are referring to and are you claiming superior ownership of this game over the rest of the testing community? Just relax and let stuff get tested!
  4. Can we get a preference setting that you can select in options that always loads ball after you fire double. You then switch to double after the ball is loaded.
  5. I think you guys are missing the point. It is a PvP server and will have that in its name so no one will be able to say they didn't know. It's about having a "PvP" server with PvE content as well. Are you guys traveling and utilizing the hole map at the moment? What restrictions are you talking about the map is huge. I enjoy pvp, loved the "sea trials" But I don't always have time to commit to a full PvP game style due to work and Australian time zone. If a mix of the 2 is possible I will like to test it. We are still in the development stage so what's the harm in having a look. Who knows if the game is popular enough we may have enough interest for all 3 types of servers. PvP, PvE and PvP/PvE. Thanks as always for taking the time to share your thoughts. This really is going to be a great game ether way. Edit: If it comes down to PvP or PvE only. I'm choosing PvP.
  6. I started this thread to see if their are any other greedy players out there who want both PvP and good immersive PvE content all on the one server. One argument for PvP, PvE specific servers is that the over active AI ships and fleets interfere with the PvP gameplay. Fair enough we don't want that. My argument is- "It's a bloody Big Map!" I don't know what the population cap for the servers will be but will there be enough players on a PvP only server to provide good game play everywhere or will a majority of the players end up concentrated in a few areas where the action is. I'm thinking it will be the later. If this is so then It would be an awful waste of space. What I propose is that the PvP, PvE content is divided up geographically with the more popular PvP areas having less active/aggressive AI ships/fleets while the more "remote" untraveled areas contain extensive PvE content and more aggressive interactive AI. It would get more use out of the map and give the players freedom to participate in both play styles without changing servers. Thoughts:
  7. Be able to make notes and draw on the map with a full set of navigation tools. dividers ruler and protractor. For plotting curses and listing port goods.
  8. Flavalicious. I agree with you totally for no repairs for hull improving the game. I also agree that irreparable damage to sails encourages more PvP due to the fact that it is harder to escape. Also there should be a form of jury rigging a mast (A sail repair focus may cover this or perhaps under the repair option there should be jury rig mast which uses a repair and activates the 15min cool down.) If you look at the system I've proposed it would never allow you to escape while under fire as it reduces your maximum sail plan while the repairing is underway and the rate of repair would never equal the damage taken by a pursuer of reasonable size compared to your own ship. Some things I think it would address, adding more balance without diminishing the game as it stands; 1. If a player in a large battle has a lot of sail damage and then gets left behind he has an opportunity to get back into the action. 2. Balance out small ships ability to harass large SOLs with irreparable sail damage. 3. A small ship in a large battle can be effectively neutralised by one broadside of chain then forgotten. 4. Sail repair has been argued to be historically possible during combat. At the moment the finality of sail damage just doesn't feel right. if the opportunity presents itself a captain and his crew should be able to try and do something.
  9. I agree with a trickle sail repair in battle similar to survival mode for leeks. As a suggestion a sail repair crew focus is available. Once "sail repair" crew focus is selected the ship is restricted to a maximum of "half sails" to simulate sails being taken down and patched/replaced. The ship also behaves as if in survival mode for handling and reload time. The percentage repaired should be a percentage of damage taken (say 10% per min) so the effect would be faster repair to very damaged sails but to get from say 80% to full 100% will take a long time. Example sails at 50% would repair 5% per min. Sails at 80% would repair at 2% per min. 90% at 1% per min.
  10. I agree. Sailing into a port and not noticing what ships are there would be unrealistic. Would a ship fly it's national colours in a neutral port? I think the ship info should be given but if a player has an outpost there he could constantly change ship types to confuse other captains.
  11. Yes A good idea would be the pirate receives the bonus only if he is the attacking party in a boarding action sure. Probably an accurate representation of the effects of pirate reputation should be an adjustment made to the moral of the crew being boarded for the first round of combat. The adjustment would only be small and probably insignificant until the pirate player has levelled up in reputation. This I think would make boarding actions against lightly crewed merchants over faster and give the pirates a good but not certain chance against bigger ships than theirs with more crew, but until they gain the top levels of reputation against a fully crewed man of war with marines it would not really affect the outcome. Remember if a pirate is getting too big for his boots in an area using his reputation as an advantage you can place a bounty on his head or get some friends together to go hunt him down and strip him of it.
  12. Why do Pirates fly the "Jolly Rodger"? The answer is simple, to inspire fear and make capturing a prize more easy. Pirate players don't have a lot of access to the same services that other factions do so the ability to cause fear is really their "Ace in the hole". So a pliable game mechanic to help and separate pirate players from the rest should be the accusation of Different levels of "Fearsome reputation" that equal a very real bonus when boarding. The Ranks could be anything; for example. "Laughable" "Unheard off." "Fearsome" "Terrifying" "Tyrant of the sea" "The Devil Himself" Each level could be allotted it's own flag and boarding bonus. In PvP the players would recognise the different flags and feel different levels of anxiety, or amusement, accordingly. How much bonus Is given in boarding and how it is expressed I leave for the developers and discussion as this is such a powerful tactic already and any changes should be implemented wisely. That being said a fearful reputation is something every pirate should feel is well worth acquiring. So on to bounties, Players should be able to place there own gold as bounties on pirates, The bounties are cumulative, so multiple players can add to the bounty total. If a pirate player is captured via boarding (or sunk- I'll leave that up to discussion) the pirate is "captured and hung". Their reputation is reset to the lowest level and the player or players involved collect the bounty. Needles to say putting a bounty on a low rep pirate is not going to be much of a payback if you suffer at his hands but it may add up to something in the future as he racks up more victims. On the other hand, as a pirate player, having a very fearsome rep will be a useful thing and a source of pride but you are more likely to acquire a price on your head from your irate victims and the bounty hunters to go with it. Problems with this may be pirate players, once they have a decent price on their head, getting together with their friends to arrange a staged fight and collect the gold. To counter this I suggest gaining reputation as really hard work taking a lot of time and effort. This will also balance out that boarding is already a powerful tactic and any bonuses gained outside normal upgrades should be hard won. This way hanging onto his rep will always be worth more than the money to the pirate as it is his bread and butter. Yarrrrr! What be ye thinkin on this?
  13. Changing the display settings really changes the way the night looks in open world. Maybe the developers could include a screen in menu settings that allows us to match our display settings to how they want us to see the game and improve the quality of our feed back. Something like these:
  14. I think things should be even darker with less visibility. Ships and islands impossible to see until close but the lights of the ports and stars shine brighter. Encouraging players to use them as a reference to navigation. It would provide opportunity to escape pursuit, traverse dangerous waters and the anticipation of what the dawn may bring would be very cool. Day break could reveal you have hit your destination perfectly, sailed into a nest of pirates or two opposing player fleets have unwittingly converged during the night. Give the night purpose not just shorten it because its inconvenient.
×
×
  • Create New...