Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

80 Excellent

About greybuscat

  • Rank
    Able seaman

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

430 profile views
  1. greybuscat

    Modeling Local Winds

    When people ask for realism, in any media property, they are talking about how the thing feels, not literal, historic/scientific realism. Any response to such requests that are rooted in "but literal realism isn't fun" are missing the point, and I suspect in many cases, they are intentionally doing so to avoid honest discussions about how said suggestions could work, if implemented properly. Yes, using real-life seasonal winds would suck, gameplay-wise, but real-life winds are not required to have something that feels more realistic/authentic to the players, who are on average probably quite ignorant about meteorology. Regardless, the question should be whether what we have can easily improved upon, and what we have now is a dial that rotates very 48 minutes. Almost anything would be better than that. Winds that follow geography and change direction less predictably would make the game more interesting, and would feel more authentic than the rotating dial.
  2. greybuscat

    Reduce the crew numbers on the indiaman

    When completed as a combat ship. I doubt it would have had 56 guns if used as a merchant vessel, but I could be wrong. Wiki doesn't say, either way. The in-game Indiaman is massive for a 5th rate, and under-gunned for her size, because she's a merchant vessel and not a combat ship. I'm just extrapolating from that.
  3. greybuscat

    Reduce the crew numbers on the indiaman

    Not sure what the in-game Indiaman is based on, if anything real, but some of the larger historical Indiamans (Indiamen???) had up to ~350 crew. And an extra 30-ish over the historical limit isn't exactly a strain on the suspension of disbelief. IMO, it's no worse than Surprise being over-gunned.
  4. greybuscat

    Griefing - Dbl 00 Buck

    But regardless of what they said, they did intend to fight you with an allied fleet. Their later behavior is shameful, but doesn't seem relevant to their overall role as a tagger. Just because someone is a screw up or a coward, that doesn't mean they were trying to sabotage your ability to enjoy or play the game. Intent matters if you're going to label them like this. If the devs have said this specific behavior is forbidden, then that's fine and you are very much in the right, but it's important to draw a distinction between keeping you in one place for a strategic advantage, and keeping you in one place because "gently caress you." Calling it "griefing" feels like equivocation to me, and muddies the waters. As far as being "off-topic" is concerned, I only drew attention to information that you decided to share in the first place. I didn't exactly tear into you over it or call you a crybaby or anything. EDIT: To clarify, I define "griefing" in the tribunal sense the way admin has defined it here: In terms of deliberate consistent griefing like tagging a player 3 times in a row and keeping him in battle for all duration without any desire to fight - we have warned captains in the past and will continue to do so. If the devs are using a less strict definition and punishing captains based on that, I'm willing to concede the point, but it should be up to them to define it, not someone personally invested in the outcome of the tribunal. In that instance, it should be more clearly explained for all players, including those who do not use the forums, as it isn't behavior that is obviously wrong. But that, of course, is outside the scope of this discussion.
  5. greybuscat

    Griefing - Dbl 00 Buck

    At risk of incurring the wrath of my clan lead 😉, I have to agree that this is a NA mechanic problem, not a griefing problem. If the intent was to fight and sink you, delaying you for 20 minutes is definitely annoying, but it's not griefing in the sense that any other community uses the word. Griefing is an attempt to ruin the game for you. Fighting is the game. The fact that the fight and chase dragged on for three hours is immaterial because a fight is definitely not griefing, no matter how tired you may be. If they devs don't want people delaying for that long, to set up a ganking fleet, then they have to make that clear to everyone, even people who don't use the forums, and they need to design the game's mechanics around discouraging or preventing it. I'd love to see those changes, by the way, but tribunals and attempts at shaming aren't going to get us there. My question is, if you wanted to go to bed within minutes, why were you sailing around the open world in a L'Ocean, without an escort of any kind? That just seems like the kind of behavior that maximizes your chances of having to stay up late.
  6. greybuscat

    Maybe some ships that might see the light of day?

    Some of you guys are acting like there's a dichotomy between new ship models and more generalized content. The art team can't make you a new economy, people. I could see the argument that there's a law of diminishing returns with ship variety, but it certainly won't make the game worse, unless the hypothetical new ships are implemented poorly. New ships take time and resources, yes, but not all man-hours are interchangeable. As to the OP, as much as I love the idea of asymmetrical balance, and unique pirate mechanics in particular, I think heavily restricting what each nation can build would only further break the game, at least at this stage. You would need far more ships, an equal amount of each type for each nation, a much larger group of active players to ensure that everything is being built and sailed in sufficient quantities, and even then, it would still probably piss off a lot of players. I'll leave it to others to argue about time frame or the over-representation of American frigates.
  7. Not sure Farms are working as designed. It's an improvement over yesterday's issues, but still not right. New art assets are very pretty, but overall the UI feels like a lateral move, at best, utility-wise. Hotkeys are always appreciated, but I'm separating that from my opinion on how many clicks it takes to do things, how much information is conveyed at a glance, etc. Like all quality-of-life improvements, any UI can have hotkeys, even an ugly or simple one. Other than that, I think my only other criticism so far is that the size and detail of the icons necessitates manual UI scaling options.
  8. greybuscat

    Forthcoming patch 14 Part 3

    One last question. What about unredeemed redeemables on the global characters? Those will also carry over, too? As in, I will end up with 4x Aggie coupons, assuming I have used none for either character thus far? Like, the extra Yacht I understand not carrying over, but the unused forged papers, non-premium ships, etc?
  9. Politics is by far the most important skill, but AO can actually be increased a little bit more slowly. Keeping your army relatively small for the first few campaigns let's you preserve manpower and build up resources/weapons, while keeping the enemy from inflating their own army size past the minimum for each battle. You don't really need 2,500 (or even 2,000) man brigades as soon as you can get them, and throwing around massive corps tends to erase your gains from victories, even when you rotflstomp the enemy.
  10. greybuscat

    King-of-the-Hill Circles Are Dumb

    I really don't think Counter-Strike is a fair comparison to a game like Naval Action which, even in Legends, is a slower, more methodical game. Can you end a battle in, say, World of Warships within five minutes, just by capping zones? At the very least, it should take considerably longer to build up 1,000 points. And barring that, though I realize that making a "win" give a meaningful reward would actually incentivize the thing very I'm complaining about, at least that would justify victory via bombing and make the experience less absurd. It's not just that I "want to shoot," it's that not shooting and killing also means zero progression. If I'm not having fun or progressing (not just getting new ships. I also mean getting mods and leveling officers for existing ships), I'm not going to be playing very long. I don't think I am unique in this, either. And none of this would be a problem to me, at all, if we had the option for the traditional Team Deathmatch.
  11. greybuscat

    hull repair?

    This was, like, five days ago, but if you say it's a bug, I'll take your word for it. I eagerly await the patch notes that announce it has been squashed.
  12. greybuscat

    hull repair?

    I'm 99% sure I have seen a player suspiciously recover back to perfect hull strength in Legends, but wasn't sure enough of it at the time to file a report. In my experience, paranoia about cheating is more detrimental to a competitive online game's experience than actual cheating (sore losers and network issues don't mix well with rumors of cheating), but at least now I know it is a thing and will pay more attention in the future.
  13. I'm just going to say it. Circles are dumb, they allow people to troll everyone (including their own teammates) by ending the match in less than five minutes if you get the maps with only one, and to make matters worse, they offer no meaningful rewards because of how XP and silver are allocated. It just ends the match and kicks you back to the lobby, barely covering the ship's maintenance fee if you are particularly aggressive. Even when it "works as designed," endlessly circling each other to stay in the zone is not engaging gameplay, especially when 10-15% of some capture zones are shoals. It forces good players to fight like the AI, and makes new players into bad players. There's a lot of things that could be better about Legends, but this is by far the biggest flaw. When you're lucky to see 30 people in-game, and have to wait 5 minutes between matches, this can be devastating to the player's experience. It works okay when everyone is willing to avoid the zones because they understand how detrimental they are to having fun, but we shouldn't need unenforceable "house rules" to make the game playable. The shrinking circle mechanic from Sea Trials was just fine and could easily be adjusted to speed up matches, so I'm not sure why it was tossed out in favor of this nonsense. I also can't believe that no one in the first closed alpha noticed this problem. Maybe there was a better class of player or something. Off-topic but still important: Mixed battles with 6th-1st rates are a blast. Bring back "small battles" for 6th and 7th rates only, and "large battles" that are a free-for-all, and maybe add a third battle type for 5th rates and higher only. Also, why is there no dueling? 1v1 equally matched fights are also amazing. I can understand wanting to sell the arena mode as a separate game, and it's great that it gives us something to do during server downtime, but can you at least make it as good as what we had before?
  14. Thanks. I just like to be sure, especially because tons of people who don't visit the forums have been asking about this stuff in-game. It's nice to be able to provide concrete detailed answers.
  15. There are 78 people on global right now. "Half of the globe" have already given up on the game.