Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'open world'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Naval Action
    • Naval Action Community and Support
    • Naval Action - National Wars and Piracy
    • Naval Action Gameplay Discussions
    • Naval Action - Other languages
    • Naval Action (Русский язык)
  • Age of Sail Historical Discussions
    • History
    • Shipyard
  • Ultimate General
    • Ultimate General: Civil War
    • Ultimate General: Gettysburg
    • Forum troubleshooting
  • Naval Action Legends
    • General Discussions
    • Legends Support Section
  • This land is my land
    • General discussions
  • Game-Labs Forum
    • Jobs
    • Future games & special projects
    • General discussions
  • Age of Steel historical discussions
    • General discussions
    • Blohm+Voss
  • Pyrates and rovers's Literature & Media
  • Pyrates and rovers's Gameplay / Roleplay
  • Clan [GWC] Nederlands talig {Aanmelding}'s Topics
  • Polska Flota Kaperska's Rekrutacja
  • Polska Flota Kaperska's Historia - Polska na morzach
  • Chernomoriya's Topics
  • Unsolved mysteries in plain sight's Mysteries
  • Unsolved mysteries in plain sight's The Book of Rules
  • Congress of Vienna's Global
  • Congress of Vienna's EU
  • Congress of Vienna's Historical
  • The Dutch Empire's The Dutch Empire
  • The Dutch Empire's The Dutch Empire
  • ROVER - A treatise on proper raiding in NA developed by real events's The Rulebook
  • ROVER - A treatise on proper raiding in NA developed by real events's Tactics (methods)

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Categories

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

  • Community Calendar

Found 58 results

  1. Today was a strange day on the Global server as we had an influx of "new" French players. These new French had been fighting at La Tortue for a few hours and so I decided to go check out what was happening. I teleported up, got in a basic cutter since I didnt really have another ship there worth taking out, and exited port. After sitting around for awhile in between a group of pirates and these new French I began to get tagged so I would hop into port for a bit then hop back out. This tagging stopped and I started to watch a video on YouTube, but before long I heard cannons firing and checked back seeing a battle. The other new French with me took all the hp off the lynx and we were waiting for it to sink when a few enemies entered the battle. Which ended with these results: This is where the tribunal begins. After trying to race to the Santi and then being sunk by the enemy I exited battle and relayed that information in nation chat. This is when I was accused of having green on green tagged in Simon Cadete seconds before he could get out safely. I do not believe I had even shot before he surrendered and the only way I would have hit him was if I had shot and it had passed through someone else first. I was told the enemy did not have range but in global they all thought the snow had hit him to keep him in. I welcome anyone else with further evidence for either side to join in on this. I would just like to know if at all possible who shot @Simon Cadete in this battle. So that I can either be punished or have my name cleared.
  2. Hi there, The recent national rework that saw most ports revert to neutral control was perhaps logical for PvP but makes little sense for PvE where port conquest is not an option. My perception is that PvE is more of an environment for players who generally operate outside of clans/groups and on their own--much as single cruisers (frigates, sloops of war, commerce raiders) did in the Age of Sail. As such, the national structure is more important to PvE than PvP, which is now experimenting with a much more clan-centric model that explicitly requires conquest. It would be great if the PvE server could see ports revert to national control and orient itself around the activities of cruising warships rather than battle fleets. This could harness the open world by including historically realistic trade routes (the British, for example, sent their convoys outbound from the British isles to Barbados, to Jamaica, and homeward bound from Jamaica to Belize, around Cuba by the Florida Strait, and across the Atlantic by way of Nassau and Bermuda) for commerce raiding, and adding new categories of missions like convoy escort and attack (which would encourage players to take more full use of the open world map by sailing longer distances), and single/multiple-ship (i.e. not fleets) port raids (which would deliver goods and prize money, and possibly ships in the case of a cutting-out expedition). These would require the restoration of national control over ports, and in the case of the long-distance commerce-related missions, a means of plotting positions on the chart with a similar resolution as can be accomplished with a sextant and chronometer in open ocean (so something similar to, perhaps slightly less accurate than the previous GPS-like system, but much more accurate than the current, rather unhelpful dead-reckoning only method). Many thanks--
  3. Hi people. I've created this thread for everyone that feels the sailing in Open World is too slow and time consuming. My goal is to get every like-minded player to come here and make some noise about slow sailing, counter-winds and everything related to OPEN WORLD Travel. For any who would dismiss my arguments, I am aware the speed was increased a while ago, yet I am here to tell you it is not enough, and I know I'm not the only one who feels this way about the current situation. My goal with this is to make a bit of noise and hopefully get the devs to make some improvements in this department. For any who would dismiss the willingness of the devs to acknowledge players demands and opinions, I politely ask you to refrain from posting. I've read all the "Devs are Evil" posts and I find them immature and nonconstructive. For the devs: I have been spamming the F11 ingame every time I log in and try to do simple actions like getting to a mission or just getting out of port in counter-winds. I hope you do not resent me for it, I'm just trying to prove a point and I mean no ill will. At the moment 80% of time is spent sailing towards some destination. The farther the destination the longer the sail(doh), and in turn the longer you stare at a screen doing nothing. This is in ideal sailing conditions. Add some counterwinds and you might as well leave the computer and do chores and come back half a day later. This scenario is ideal for players who are on vacation, or retired, or simply have nothing else to do and I've heard a lot of players actually play like this. To those who are not bothered by this, I say, fair enough and good for you. Just consider those of us who love your game, want to experience all the cool stuff in it but feel like, in order to get to the fun we must first be forced to sit through several hours of doing nothing before we can get the "reward". It's literally like sitting in a queue at the post office. Now, I get the fact that the game tries to emulate realistic sailing conditions, and it's doing a nice job in Combat Instances. Open World is basically the map where the all the stuff is and where you need to get to. This Chunk of the game should be fast paced and represent the least amount of time spent in the game. At the moment it represents the core gameplay. Why? Because if I had to describe this game to a friend I would say,"Naval action a game where you sail a lot on empty seas and occasionally do naval combat." It should be " it's a game where you do naval combat sprinkled with a bit of sailing for the flavor" Open world is a great concept, but all other open world games have content in between the important areas of interest on the map. The open world in naval action is missing this element.There is nothing to fill the empty space in between those important areas of interest. And when you add a "realistic" sailing feel to the open world travel, at 2kn, this becomes a nightmare to the not so hardcore veteran player who is just sitting there, looking at waves, waiting for the wind direction to turn so they can get somewhere. After 1h of waiting to travel a few lousy Km, you start asking yourself, why did I log on today? To get your ship from A to B. To be continued tomorrow? But, oh wait, what if I decide I want to go back from B to A? Doesn't sound like a very exciting experience, does it? Whether you like this or not, this particular aspect of the game is keeping people from enjoying the cool stuff in Naval Action. So what should the devs do? In my opinion, the main problem stems from the actual wind system. Very many times you log into the game very excited to do a mission or do a trade run or whatever and right off the dock you get counter-winds. One's next thought is, "Oh shit this is gonna take me 10-15 minutes to maneuver out of port, then another 5 till I get to my mission(which I clicked 1000 times so I can spawn it near to my port) if it's at a good wind angle. If not, probably another 10 minutes. So you get 20-30 minutes of practically looking at a loading screen immediately after login, before you can reach your objective which is to play the mission. Picture this scenario in any other OW game. I bet you a million $ it's not something people want to or enjoy to do. I see a few solutions to this: 1. Lose the wind direction system in OW and increase the speed across all ships according to their tier. This is very fast and easy to do as you already have a mechanic to ignore wind and sail fast out of danger areas after respawn. 2. Have the areas around land masses use the current system but ignore the wind system once you are heading to open seas and have reached a certain distance from land. Also open seas speed should be increased to shorten the travel time. 3. Keep the system as it is but increase the absolute minimum speed from 2kn to 10-12kn so you actually travel instead of standing still. Big ships suffer horribly from this at the moment. Additionally people have suggested to bring landmasses closer together/ shrink the map. Personally I like the current map size. 4. A combination of the above. High speed zones + no wind system when you are far enough from land. When you are near land, minimum speed increased to 10kn or so. I realize you(devs) and some players might not agree with me, but at the end of the day you have to ask: What is the target demographic of this game? If you guys(devs) are making it for the 100 veteran hardcore old-timers who love the slow pace of OW, then you can call the game done and split it into 10 DLCs and launch it yesteryear. But judging by the effort and resources poured into the game, I'm thinking you actually care about getting more and more players in. Subtract the 100 veterans from your current player-base and you are left with new players who ignore the grind because of the excitement that Naval Action can provide, and players like me for whom the novelty is wearing off and still want to play the game but are losing patience to the point of abandonment. You need to adress the issue that is dead time in your game. I understand vision, I understand passion. I come from the same profession as you. As a player I'm telling you, the current travel speed is not enough. As a fan of age of sail and NA, I'm telling you, it's not enough. As a "early access tester" of NA, I'm telling you, it's not enough. In the most friendly and respectful manner possible, I'm telling you, it's not enough. Let's try to find a solution for this.
  4. I've been mulling the new mechanics put in place and feel like there are some significant disincentives for new players and veteran players alike to get and stay involved in the game. The largest of these is a huge lack of content on the non-battle (PvE, PvP, and RvR) side of things. Trading is mindless and with the complete abandonment of any type of inflation control with the new PvE rewards system it's almost unnecessary since money is so easy to come by other means. Therefore I'm proposing the implementation of a new resource gathering mechanism that removes "player production" of things like raw timber, ore, and fiber to one that forces players outside of the safe zones of national harbors. To collect these raw materials gathering/trade outposts might temporarily appear in natural harbors and inlets along the coast lines, in addition to towns and ports outside national home waters where these resources could be purchased and loaded onto ships. Once depleted they would disappear until restocked, but always because of raw resource scarcity near national home waters it would force players to sail beyond the regions of well-traveled areas for these. This would facilitate some exploration beyond just mindlessly AFK sailing from one port to the next since you might miss a lucrative pop-up resource gathering/buying opportunity. Refining these materials into building materials would still be housed in ports in player controlled buildings (and should give crafting xp), so the raw materials would have to be transported back to safety. But the introduction of random raw material production instead of player controlled production increases the possibility for meaningful trader movement, importance of players moving outside safe home nation waters, offers opportunities for solo pirating and resource spot camping, as well as economic warfare for blockading home national waters and raw resource movement. I'm not saying these raw resources wouldn't be available in home nation waters, just limited, and potentially could scale with the nation's active player population size?
  5. I'd like to try a system where all NPC ships on the open world (outside of missions) are player produced or captured, and sold to the admiralty. Traders and war ships could be player-produced/capped and sold to the admiralty, which are then used by the admiralty to fill roles in the NPC navies for each nation. The prices the admiralty pays for certain ships should reflect how many of each ship the admiralty needs for coastal defense and "trade" needs (perhaps scaled by the number of ports held by the nation, etc.)? This would incentivize players to produce/cap ships of different classes, support lower level crafters for making ships outside the current PvP meta, and also provide incentives for sinking NPC ships of different nations because it lowers their ability to protect their home nation waters and limits supplies (if nation port production is tied to nation NPC traders, etc.).
  6. Open World - No Wind Effect

    Simple suggestion, eliminate wind effect in the open world, or else severely compress it. What does it do for you? Two things only: - Gives your tag a strategic battle setting at outset - Reduces your speed in the open world from peak speed at best point of sail to something other than that Why not just keep the Rose the way it is so you can tag people properly for battle instance, but keep the open world ship speed at peak? The whole point of that is because it's open world ship speed that slows the game down. The thing that people complain about the most is too much sailing time to accomplish things. If my ship gets reduced from 24 knots to 8 knots because the wind is against me, then how does that improve the game? Let the ship's top speed be the ship's top speed and either compress the reduction so that 24 only goes down to say 18 or something like that, or else don't reduce it at all. If people complain about not being able to catch someone on the open sea then they have books and upgrades to help. Just my opinion, I think the speed reduction is too much with wind against.
  7. Another World

    I envisioned another world for this game. Please excuse me for trying to express the world I had hoped THIS GAME would model. I'll call it NAaW - Naval Action alternate World. A: From the pace of battles in Sea Trials - I "caught" the bug of wanting a world with fast paced, one after another, NEARLY EVEN battles available on demand. B: After my first week in open world I pined for something to explore to make that sim more realistic, the birds and scenery upgrades helped, but ..... ------ Here is the TLDR: I think the relationship between Battles and OW is back asswards. I think we have gone down the rabbit hole of trying to make the OW "work" by gluing various forms of failed "battle instances" onto it - a wrong approach from the start IMO...... Look at EVE Online: All Battle Instances - All The Time. Each System is it's own "battle instance". NAaW Would have started with each "county" on the map being it's own Battle Instance with entry/exit gates between each of the 100 or so odd "counties" in NAaW. Each county could then have it's own "matchmaker" lobby similar to Sea Trials - if it's a Brit County you as a Spanish could hang in the lobby and just fight brits all day long - cool? Of course Sovereignty and battles for change of Sov would be another thing to figure out, but I think with the entire county being an instance all the time it could easily be worked out. ------ Aw well, the path not taken ......
  8. Sailing the Atlantic

    Docu-series to watch while you are open world sailing
  9. Outside of combat and trading, there's a core gameplay element that seems to be missing from this game, to make it fully engaging and more sim-like. My main gripe with Naval Action is not its slow pace, nor its detailed trade system. And certainly not its tension-filled sea combat. Rather it is in the feeling of grinding for XP that this game conveys, a game design sin typical of MMORPGs. To be sure, this feeling of grinding for XP is the single biggest reason for my install/play-a-few-sessions/uninstall relationship I've had with this game over the last two years. It's also my belief that no amount of tweaking with ship speed and manoeuvrability - or ship teleportation - will solve the current XP grinding issue tied to the open world portion of the game. No, what Naval Action needs right now is a feature that adds depth to the moment-to-moment gameplay in the open world sailing part of the game. My suggestion is as follows : add an additional layer of simulation to the sea travel gameplay. Specifically, a crew management "layer" should be added on top of the auto-skipper function, so the player can micromanage crew tasks and activities while engaging in sea travel, and be reactive to changes both in weather events and aggregate crew behaviour. How I see this feature in my mind's eye : a replacement/upgrade of the current very basic ship management interface available on the top left of the screen in the open-world sailing portion of the game. Basically : while sailing on the high seas using the WASD controls and mouse for ship and camera control, the player should be able to hit the space bar (or caps lock) at any time to get a full "ship dashboard" translucent overlay superimposed onto the the main screen, for the tasks of both crew and ship management. This "ship dashboard" could be a simplified cutaway of the player's current main ship, side view or overhead view (or both). Using the mouse, the player could then click at sections of the ship cutaway and select specific tasks, from simple pop-up contextual menus appropriate for each ship section. Thus, from the overall pool of sailors, a set number of sailors could be assigned to a specific task located at the selected part of the ship. Beyond the ship cutaway, the "ship dashboard" overlay could also provide a basic sailor task assignment table - à la Banished - for crew assignment to specific tasks from the overall pool of "free" crew. Or, a visual 24h crew scheduler - à la Prison Architect - to play around with different schedules of crew rotations. Sailing modes could also be implemented into the regular scheduler, such as a "discipline mode" for an unruly crew (a "crew loyalty" metric would have to be added, of course), an "emergency mode" (full crew mobilization) in the event of storms. In terms of visuals, this system would require no animations or complex visuals. No need to do full cutaway visuals à la Silent Hunter (or the upcoming UBoot). Just a good visual implementation of real-time crew management mechanics via a visual dashboard and ship schematic. Simple metrics could do, so long as feedback to player management actions in implemented in a clear fashion. Of course, I'm also aware that the main challenge of implementing such a system lies at the level of game mechanics. For effective crew management to work at the moment-to-moment gameplay level, the design team will have to tie crew management activities to overall ship and sailing performance. So the crew management model needs to seamlessly blend in with the ship sailing mechanics. At minimum, this would mean that optimal crew management by the player would impact ship speed and manoeuverability. One could also tie a crew "morale" metric to tangible sailing performance benefits : i.e. optimal crew management - the sweet spot between discipline and meeting diverse crew needs - would result in an overall better, and more adaptive sailing experience. More experienced crew would also handle weather situations more responsively, etc. I am mindful that there already exists a simple version of moment-to-moment crew management mechanic in Naval Action's combat mode. My view is that this feature needs to be extended onto the regular sailing gameplay, via a crew management screen overlay that can be toggled on or off at will during the activity of sailing - or even as an optional feature available in the options menu for players who don't want a crew management layer added to the existing sailing experience, but with XP generating activity to incentivize players who do wish to occupy themselves with crew management for the added challenge. Naval Action : it's the name of the game. So let's add a little bit more action, and a little less grind, and this game will truly shine ! In my opinion, real-time crew management mechanics would be a definite cure to the bore out and grindyness of the moment-to-moment sailing gameplay. Properly implemented, this feature could make the sailing portion of the game even more immersive, propelling the sim qualities of the game a notch up from its current state. So that's my two cents, for what it's worth. As for the feasibility, the devs and the NA community are in a better position than me to assess whether this is desirable (or realizable) feature for the current game. Many thanks to all of you who've taken the time to read this for hearing me out. And my apologies if I've missed somebody else posting an identical suggestion : my bad!
  10. One PVP Server

    First let me preface this with a couple of things: I know that this has been discussed a lot. Please keep your responses civil, rational, and with out personal attacks to other people offering their feedback. Ping is not a big issue due to the nature of the game. People can be very competitive with a 100 - 300 ping. Okay, so, with that said... There's no reason for the community to be split in two anymore. Period. Before the recent wipe I played on PVP 1 (i think, the EU one which ever number that actually was. It's been a while) I live on the East Coast of the USA, and some of the most fun gameplay I have ever had in an 18th century sailing game was had doing pvp there. It was glorious being able to fight UK, British, French, Spanish, and a host of other nations representing their actual nation. That was beautiful. It was fun, it was engaging and it created a very unique environment unseen in any other MMO like this where pvp is a large focus of the game. Now, a couple arguments as to why the servers were split in the first place were because the US players would create port battles that happened late night EU time. They claim, or claimed that this was unfair, and unbalanced, or what ever other term they chose to use at the time to argue against doing this. They unfortunately did not see though that it works both ways. During EU prime time the US nation saw a lot of port battles while the majority of its player base were at work, unable to get into the game. That's truly no different from EU players being asleep. Top that off though with the fact that even in the US nation we had a lot of German, and UK players playing with us as well. Which was a lot of fun. I am certain other nations had US players in their ranks as the French, Spanish, and UK fleets are rather attractive to a lot of Americans to sait sail for due to the history of those navies. Now, after the wipe I started on the EU pvp server fighting for the British. At peek time during the weekend I saw about 1200 people online. Which is a healthy server population. During non peak times I saw the player base dip down into the 300 - 500 range. On the Global PVP Server we see a peak of 400 players maybe 450. However, that being said, I have yet to see it really dip that far below 200. The lowest I have seen was 175 at 0400 EST. So... What I am getting at is, why not merge the servers again. Please, for the sake of increasing the population and increasing the pvp and conquests going on. With the new pvp token and conquest token system it is only hurting players not to be able to find regular fights. If you combined the servers, the lowest population might see about 475 people ish. Where as during the peek mutual hours we could see as many as two thousand and all players could be having a great deal of fun fighting each other. I sail with Tattered Flags, and some of the best pvp we have had has been with good mannered Brits, and French players. With good games tossed back and forth to either side. Laughing about people exploding, or sinking slowly, and generally just having a good time. TL;DR - Don't be lazy, if you have something to say on the topic please read what I had to say. It is only a page in length.
  11. Three small questions/suggestions for version 10.0

    @admin I was wondering if you could explain the reasoning behind a few of the decisions in the new patch, and suggest an alternative for you to consider for some of them. 1) The removal of coordinates and grid system. I know what some people will say: "There was no GPS in the early 1800s". This is true. There was, however, a very thorough understanding of celestial navigation. As you are no doubt aware, good captains prided themselves on their mathematical (and therefore navigational) ability. The Caribbean and Atlantic coasts were not the same as the Indian Ocean and Pacific when it came to the possibility of getting lost. Even in those far more desolate areas, there was still a very good idea of where all the major landmarks were and no good captain was ever forced to rely on dead reckoning except in certain extreme circumstances. All ship captains, sailing masters, and typically watch officers (including midshipman) had their own sextant from which to utilize to find their position. It is therefore completely unrealistic for a warship of the time to navigate solely by dead reckoning. For those arguing for "total realism" and suggesting that giving the latitude and longitude of your ship somehow breaks this, I would respectfully suggest that the developers institute one of the following changes in the next patch: 1A ) The inclusion of a sextant mini-game to satisfy the requirements of the most zealous of "realism" junkies. If you have time, perhaps you could include formulating a watch bill, a tracker for the consumption of grog by your seamen, and Thursday laundry. (Please note that I am being completely sarcastic about all this). 1B ) The return of the grid from previous versions, and a position for your vessel given at noon each day that your ship is in clear weather. Thus, if absolute realism is the goal, this would simulate the ability of the captain and the master to take a noon observation and mark the ship's position provided weather cooperated accordingly. It is the perfect compromise, because it is in fact perfectly realistic. 2) My second question is concerning the removal of AI ships from Fleet Missions. I think I understand what you might have wanted to do, but I would ask if you considered that there are probably many people (I have spoken to quite a few in GB PVP-EU nation chat) who found them very useful when either there was little PVP to be found, or sometimes when you just didn't have time to go on a long cruise looking for PVP, but wanted a little fleet battle. Again, I understand the desire for a realistic MMO, but please also consider that it is a game and there is a certain element to it that people enjoy and are now no longer able to utilize. I can see no reason to eliminate this feature - it did not hurt anything and if hostility generation was the problem, that has been reworked anyway. Could you please explain why you changed this? 3) Why were the servers simply renamed? I think many players, including myself, either misunderstood or felt misled by what we thought was happening when a "full asset wipe" was announced - that there would be a new choice of server based upon whether a player was in the EU, and therefore wanted timers limited to their normal hours, or wanted to truly play globally with people from around the world and accept and understand that the game was ongoing and attacks, port battles, etc would happen as people played throughout the day: i.e. there would always be activity no matter what time you logged on. However, since the global server is merely a renamed PVP2 US (which was already rather depopulated compared to the EU server), it so far seems that its population relative to the EU server has remained unchanged. If one subscribes to the view that Naval Action is a true MMO yet also hard core sailing simulation, then one must also accept that - just like real sailing war - action takes place at all hours of the day across many time zones. Could you please explain a little of your reasoning here? Finally, I do not wish to seem that I do not like the new patch or I am complaining without cause. I have put over 1000 hours into the game, which I know is less than some, but for me is still a substantial investment of time. I have put far, far more time into Naval Action than I have games from blockbuster developers and that says something about what you have taken on here. But, I think I am not alone when I wonder about why certain decisions were made when it seems that it sets the game backwards compared to what it was in previous versions. I would just appreciate it - and I am sure others would as well - if you could explain some of these decisions so that I can at least understand why you made them. Thank you very much for your time.
  12. Modding / Steam Workshop

    Hi, are there any plans to allow the game to be moddable, to have user-created mods in steam workshop ? Maybe so as to allow players to modify their ships graphics, world graphics, flags, custom UI, custom maps, custom skins, maybe some scripts for example to enter some harbours...leave it to the community to always have some ideas. Besides today's game, i am also thinking about the game in 20 years time, when user-created mods could help make the game live for several generations, as is the case with some old games that still have a strong following mostly thanks to their mods. Of course the game is open-world and not solo, so unless there are private servers there is a limit on what can be modded. Thanks.
  13. Hi all, I have one suggestion to improve the gameplay towards something more "realistic". Obviously, the concepts of teleporting ships and tow requests are not quite realistic and spoil the gameplay, as it simply does not feel right (at least for me). However, I do acknowledge that these features are needed to not require players to sail all over the map themselves. But, this can be achieved also in a different way. My proposal is to remove teleport to capital, teleport to outpost and tow request features from the game entirely and replace them by allowing players to send a ship or even a fleet of ships to another port. These ships should appear in the open world actually sailing to the assigned port as NPC ship/fleet. Obviously, there is the risk that the ships are attacked by players and eventually sunk. But hey, that's life! When the ship/fleet arrives in the assigned port, the player may take control of the ships again. The ships sent abroad should be allowed to carry cargo to facilitate trade and allow transferring goods to distant places also. Implementation of this feature is not very demanding in my point of view. Instantiating a NPC fleet from the ships assigned for the journey should be easy. Setting the route to be sailed by the ship/fleet to an arbitrary port is not quite straightforward, but there could be limitations as to which port is available from which and the number of routes could be expanded step-by-step later. The concept allows players to reach distant harbours without forcing them to stay in game. There would be a lot more NPC ships out there on real, meaningful missions. The ships would be loaded with goods encouraging privateering. Port battle logistics would change dramatically, as you would not risk sending your 1st rates unescorted. It would no longer be possible to have a whole fleet of battle ships pop up out of nowhere for a port battle or to raise hostility in a far-away region. Battle ships could be intercepted while on the way. The whole RvR gameplay would require a lot more strategic planning. I'd love to see this in the game! Looking forward to your feedback! Cheers, van Veen
  14. Scale, proportions and dimensions

    This is a minor graphical thing but it annoys me a bit. It annoys me cause its improvement it is not difficult. "Issue" Im talking about the relation of scale and dimensions between 3 things: ships, forts and cities's buildings. Let me ilustrate what Im talking about. The comparison was made between a first rate ship (3 decks=3 floors), the biggest fort ingame (judging by the door size its height its has about 3 or 4 floors) and some houses from the city (as you can see only one or two floors). The scale between forts and ships are good (more or less) but the proportional relation between forts/ships and the buildings of the cities looks weird. "Fix/ suggestion" Change the dimensions of all city building to the 40% height of its current size. Another thing that you may look into into its the urbanism of the cities. Cities in the Americas were built following a clear order and configuration. Right now, its mess of buildings placed absolutely random, when I think its easier to replicate its historical urbanism. PS: Sorry, Im architect,
  15. Hi there, Right now in the open world map the coordinates are given as longitude, latitude. This is somewhat confusing, as in real world navigation coordinates are always given as latitude, longitude. If this could be addressed in the next patch that would be most wonderful. Thanks--
  16. Superforts (Buildings Growing!)

    While the Ayes Port Battle was being fought in Costa del Feugo some of us where outside the port fighting in front of the port itself. During our battle in "open world" the port battle of US vs Spain completed and when it did suddenly all of the buildings became 3-4x larger and seemed to be able to shoot further as well.. Then Suddenly after the port battle ended.... Superforts! In Battle Open World Full album:http://imgur.com/a/JzsoW
  17. People are talking about adding "warp" when ships are distant from one another, but this seems unnatural. While on the one hand, faster open world speed appeals to me when there's nothing happening, I also see players using alts to exploit this, or groups of ships suffering slow speed compared to individuals. Basically, inconsistent open-world speed struck me as arcade-like and exploitable. However, what if it were consistent to all players, remained "immersive", was able to be planned around, and based entirely on the open world geography? What if it were just stronger winds when further from shore. This fixes everything. The boring part of sailing is when you're away from the coast, unable to see anyone or anything, and making some long cruise across the big, watery expanse of the Gulf of Mexico on on a compass bearing. It makes sense that you'd want open world travel to be fast out there. But when you're close to the coast, passing AI ships, encountering players, we don't mind the slow pace of OW sailing because there's a high probability we need to pay attention, and scenery to look at besides. As players in the OW move further from shore, the "wind speed", and so the open world top speed, increases gradually to a maximum of 50-100%. Precisely how far from shore the effect starts and peaks is a matter to fine tune, but ideally a slow increase that feels natural can be found. Top speed should be attained before being so far from coast that you cannot select passing ships, while a fairly wide "slow lane" is next to the coast of normal wind speed. Most ships will enjoy top speeds of 30 or 40 knots, which effectively cuts a long travel time in half. Everyone around you has the same increase in speed, so groups remain together, and intercepting enemy players on the open world won't cut them down to "normal" speed. Rather, you'll both have the same increase to your speed. Since most engagements are "merge and tag", it shouldn't make tagging much different, although the tagging itself might be a little hectic. The large circles certainly help. This also creates interesting PvP dynamics and risk-reward decisions. I'll use a flight sim analogy. Altitude is a major component in flight sims, because an airplane in lower altitudes is in thick air, but an airplane at high altitude is in thin air. A plane in thin air goes faster (gross simplification). It follows that being at high altitude gives you an advantage because you can position yourself against the enemy before diving to attack. However a plane at low altitude has certain advantages as well. A high altitude plane is easy to detect, while a low altitude plane is much harder to pick out, and in friendly territory there are ground-based air defenses. Consider a pirate frigate. Does he want slow speed next to the coast, or high speed far from coast? Consider the merchant. Does he want slow speed next to the coast, or high speed far from AI fleets, coastal guns, and friends who might scramble out of port? An attacker farther from coast enjoys a speed advantage over a defender close to shore, however he is easy to spot. He can position himself ahead of a target he sees along the coast, then move in to attack. The defender, meanwhile, can see the attacker because he's sitting in open water. He's harder to spot, somewhat. He can move himself closer to shore batteries while the attacker is moving in from off shore. Also consider the PvP fleet. It wants high speed winds to allow it to move against enemy ships it spots. Enemy ships scrambled from port moving to attack the ships off shore have to struggle with slower wind at the start of their attack, letting the PVP fleet evade a superior enemy. However, a defensive fleet already off coast enjoys high speed, and can attack invaders that go closer to shore and into slower wind. Does the merchant stick close to shore, where coastal batteries can defend him, or does he go for deep water and high speeds for convenience and the ability to outrun other ships? Being far from shore gives you an advantage in your ability to maneuver, but sacrifices the protection of ports, AI fleets and coastal guns. Certain terrain features also become interesting. Choke points and gaps between islands will become effectively narrower, since someone sailing from Jamaica to Bermuda wants to keep to the fast winds, which means they'll go for the middle of the Cuba-Hispaniola straight, and interceptors waiting in the central deep water will be able to attack them. However, ships attempting to sneak along the coast, if spotted, can be attacked from the same speed advantage of deep water. Players in general will be less inclined to "camp" the coast in certain areas since it reduces their maximum speed. Players in general will prefer deep water, I think, and we'll see more and faster travel over long expanses of ocean. Note wind speed in battle will not change, and speed increases will respect the ship's performance at all times.
  18. to shorten travel time

    It is not an original idea, nor very popular, but... I just thinking in a way to shorten travel time: when the ship goes in a straight line just after about 3 or 5 min, the time gets a boost, increasing the speed of vessel in like x1.5 or x2.0 more than the actual rate...in case of crossing another player vessel in his line of sight or when the player change the course, the speed and time comes to the normal rate. It is not a warp, just a little boost, and will not affect the interactions in ow.
  19. ROE We will be testing several options in ROE. This might upset some users but it have to be done before release (will be impossible after). Open world battles: 2 circles system will be added. 1 tag circle for attack and 1 large circle for pull. Battles will close instantly on start (except for rookie zones) Rookie zones battles. Battles always start 1v1. Battle will be opened until BR evens out. Hostility missions: Battle will be opened all the time. Invisibility timer might be added on battle exit to allow some breathing space against revenge ganking OW NPC fleets will no longer count for 5X anti griefing protection. Only players will affect that rating Crew size will lower battle rating of your fleet. Example (numbers are for illustration only): If sail a cutter with 2 Bucentaures in your fleet with 40 crew on each - you will fleet will be valued as 3 cutters for ROE. Hello. I cant figure out the new mechanics. Can any one help me ? Battle close instantly ? Large circle ? Can u join the battle, ? Much appreciated for any info.
  20. I made these charts to flesh out the resources in game. There are a large set of basic goods that would be found in every port. Then there is a list of items that are only found in their respective national ports. These items are either produced there (very cheap) or brought there to be dispersed from other locations (cheap) that that nation owns. This way French players will always be able to provide French Glass at a much cheaper price than other nations, but their ports will need Iberian Dried Pork, which the Spanish will profit from as well, and so on. This will drive more historical trading and give national players a reason to use their home ports and to make meaningful and long distance trade runs, not just the most profitable short run. It will rely on permanent production/consumption settings that don't reset with maintenance. I researched these items across the inter webs, some of them I already knew about, this book was a good read as well "Daily Life in the Age of Sail", as well as wiki articles on the economic history of some nations. If you know of a quintessential national item that was heavily traded in this era, let me know and I can add it to the list. I counted the spaces in the port UI and there isn't room for hundreds of items, however, it will have a limit. A rare common item is comparable in price to a plentiful fine item, the quality and availability will both affect price. Universal British, Spanish, French Danish Swedish, Dutch American
  21. Ranks visibility in Open World and Battle Mode

    Hello, this morning I came up with the brilliant idea... READ THE WHOLE THING TO GET THE IDEA At the current state of the game when we're sailing in Open World we can see ranks of every captain. What I suggest is to limit the "Rank visibility" so that we only can see ranks of captains in our nation. Why? In Open World: 1.Because it would make a lot of sense. In navy you can more or less determine the rank of friendly captains. But how can you determine ranks of hostile captains? Short answer is, you can't. You're not a spy + enemy navy is not giving away ranks of their captains just like that. 2.It's more realistic comparing to what we have now. 3.This brings the element of a doubt and element of surprise. For example: You see an enemy Constitution on the horizon and you think two things: a)there is no way he is sailing this thing fully crewed, you take your mates and attack the fellow. What can happen? -boom, you're right and you sink that bastard -holly cow, he is fully crewed and he sends you and your buddies to the devil b)damn, if he's sailing this thing on our waters he must be confident enough and he must be fully crewed. What can happen? -you run as fast as you can -some of your friends tags him, you get into battle and it turns out he's sailing that ship with 50% crew. You outmanouver him and fire 10 broadsides to his 1 which means he's dead On the other hand imagine YOU are sailing the Constitution and you see an enemy or a bunch of enemies on the horizon. What can happen? a)you are fully crewed but they don't know it. What can happen? -they run like flies due to your Fear Factor -they think you're undercrewed and they attack. And then the fun begins... b)you are undercrewed but you think your Fear Factor will do the job. What can happen? -they run like flies due to your Fear Factor -they think you're undercrewed and they attack. Turns out they were right and you're literally torn to pieces In Battle Mode: 1.This whole thing leads us to one great feature we ALL want you to implement - THE SPYGLASS - 2.Imagine how many good things this would bring. The only way you could determine enemy rank, number of crewmembers, number of working cannons could be only possible through spyglass. We could exclude the armor and rigging status, pump status, rudder status or magazine status so that is stays visible all the time (it would be hard to determine those things with the spyglass). 3.By opening the map in Battle Mode and clicking the enemy ship silhouette you could only see: a)Armor b)Percentage of sails (85% Sails etc.) c)Type of ship (Cerberus etc.) d)Shocks e)Pump, Rudder, Magazine status THE SPYGLASS should have limited realistic range (obviously) and it should be some kind of mechanism, for example: (the loading circle would appear with the message "Gathering information" - similar to the one when you Capture a ship, but you could move the camera and your ship to track the enemy with your spyglass) a)If you want to determine the Rank of the Enemy Captain you should SCAN that ship with the spyglass for let's say 60 seconds b)If you want to determine the more or less accurate amount of crew on enemy ship you should SCAN that ship with the spyglass for let's say 90 seconds c)If you want to determine the type of cannons on the enemy ship you should SCAN that ship for let's say 45 seconds d)If you want to determine the amount of working cannons you should scan that ship for let's say 120 seconds (time of each scan is just an example, it would have to take further tweaking once you would like to implement the Spyglass mechanism) So whay do guys think? I know it would make the game even harder, but "spotting mechanism" is at the moment ridiculous. Too many information about the enemy is within arm's reach. The current state limits the PvP capabilities by a large margin. EDIT: Almost forgot - by using the spyglass in battles you could also implement a thing called "Captain's Log" or "Captain' Journal" in which every player would have the database about players he had encountered. The database would be updated after the battle ends with the information you gathered by scanning each captains ship. The database would (of course) be one time registration. Which means that to get the latest info about the captains you've encountered you would have to encounter them again. The information you store in your Captain's Log would be: Captain's name, ship, rank (or whatever information you think will be suitable)
  22. Terrain fix

    Hi there, One thing I've noticed as I've been sailing around the Bahamas and the Florida Keys are the towering pinnacle rocks and ridges soaring high above the waves... while that sort of terrain exists elsewhere in the Caribbean (the Windward and Leeward islands come to mind), the Florida Keys and Bahamas don't have any mountains or particularly much rock whatsoever. The Bahamas and the Keys are quite low: the highest point of New Providence Island is little more than 100 feet, while none of the Florida Keys breaks 20 feet. As an example, Key West's maximum elevation is 18 feet above sea level, so it probably shouldn't look like this: From what I've observed, an elevation similar to the areas near Charleston's outer harbor for these islands would be more accurate. Thanks so much for creating a great game--you guys rock. Cheers--
  23. Open world ship's telescope

    For a while I have been wondering why we have a telescope to see ships closer in open world. It doesn't seem that we see more or get more information by looking at the scope. In the regular view you can select a boat that is barely a dot in the horizon and get full information on it. Furthermore you don't see more in the haze whether you look with or without the scope. Bigger doesn't really make a big difference since we're all looking at screens. Suggestion: First make ship visually "sink" in the horizon to simulate curvature of the earth . A ship far away might show only the top of the mast depending on the size of the ship. If you want to see more switch to the telescope to simulate sending a lookout up the mast and you'll see more of the ship since you're higher (you are reducing the angle created by the curve of the earth). Second, to enhance the contrast between regular view and telescope view, make it so in the regular view ships can only be seen as they are and without any information and data; Then when you switch to telescope view, it lets you identify a ship in the horizon with all the data as we currently do. Third, remove some of the haze while in telescope view. Some ships may appear that you could not see while "naked eyes" or land features, flags etc... that you where too far to see are now clearer. As a whole this is more realistic than clicking from one spot to another regardless of how far they are. You identify one boat at a time with the glass. Also it simulates the ability to see past the curvature of the earth by climbing up the mast as well as collecting more light in the scope to cut through some of the haze or darkness of the night.
  24. Hello there friend?

    All this diplomacy is real intriguing. I'm having a blast reading the stories from the beach. But I fear that once I get back and boot into Open World, I'll not have a clue what to expect from the first ship which sails up to me. How about when I click a ship, I see in the window the RoE state of that player? Basically hiding all complexities that the diplomatic mechanics brings down to one state: Friendly Neutral Hostile Where friendlies can not attack me (or are turned to Pirate). (The second is the "easier" option because then friendly Pirates can still attack one-another, although it could also serve as a measure against damage farming.) Neutrals can attack me, but it is likely frowned upon. Hostiles will simply run in fear of my approach. Off topic: the diplomatic mechanic itself and all current treaties.
  25. Allow ship deliveries between outposts

    Hello captains, for a while now, I have been annoyed by the fact that I have to use the "feature" of capturing a trader and sending my warship "to outpost" if I want to move a warship from one of my outposts to another. You could argue that this is not intended use of the "send to outpost" feature and that moving assets around the map SHOULD be a chore. I, personally, disagree because moving assets is just a time sink with very little positive effect on the gameplay experience. I do not enjoy sailing around warships for hours just to store them in another outpost. Since everybody seems to be using the AI trader capture method more or less frequently, lets talk about a more "legal" way to move your ships from one outpost to another. My suggestion would be to 1. allow deliveries of ships between any of your outposts. 2. exclude the cargo hold from the delivery (ship+equipment only, for obvious reasons) 3. make it somewhat costly (between 30.000-50.000 per ship, maybe?) 4. make it time consuming (I could even live with 4+ hours for the ship to reach the destination to avoid mass movement of fleets) Obviously, these would be my preferences but you can freely chose from many other options in the poll. Let the voting begin! Cheers, Hugo
×