Forthcoming patch final discussion.

[King of Crowns]

13 minutes ago, admin said:

Removal of revenge gank due to invisibility and speed buff (favor pvp hunters and not average players)

this does help the problem a little bit. but it doesn't solve the issue. and lets look at the features that help the average player......#1 Fortresses and towers everywhere. #2 massive ai fleets that people can snuggle up to. #3 pvpers having to sail for hours and hours to get to hunting grounds. #4 pvp is the least rewarding gameplay to seek after in terms of money and exp. #5 oh yea how could we forget the lazer guided butt guns. 

I mean there are some places on the map where it is impossible to catch and kill players due to the frequency of forts or AI. your only hope at killing a sweede is that they are afk and not sailing towards a town that is close by. 

[mikawa]

All these ROE discussions are very tedious and no one seems to have hit the nail on the head ...

What if we introduce special Zones (lets say Swedes against Danes -> this zone is located somewhere between Chirstiansted and Gustavia) where ships within this zone cannot be attacked by another player. Instead they are waiting for other ships to sail into this zone until a certain BR is reached on both sides, then the battle starts. And I don't mean 1st rated battles, but samller ones (neat 3 vs 3 frigate battles for example, or 4 vs 3 depending on the BR they bring in). Maybe this could be helpful with the hostility / unbalanced pvp problem ... ?!?

[vazco]

If you just remove access to sheep from wolves (which next patch does), without fixing the system, wolves will leave and you won't have any group interacting on the server any more. You could go single-player mode then.

PvP encounters are the best part of your game. You should promote them, not limit them, as it's the only way to hook players for longer, and  it's the only way for a player-created content and stories. All players should at some point drift to PvP. In order for them to drift, they need incentives there.

[JobaSet]

29 minutes ago, admin said:

Maybe the number of people who could convert to pvp has fallen drastically due to the design paradigms we have been creating with the active community here?

• Insta- closed battles (favor pvp hunters and not average players) This was Stupid to start with all battles should be open all the time. Then you would not need SAFE ZONE in Capital Water.
• No reinforcements (favor pvp hunters and not average players) This was Stupid to start with all battles should be open all the time. Then you would not need SAFE ZONE in Capital Water.
• Removal of revenge gank due to invisibility and speed buff (favor pvp hunters and not average players) That Was a Safe zone lol you just removed it with that crap.
• Removal of resource transport (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
• Many other features that were pushed in to just place average players in line for easy consumption by pvp hungers
•  When they get safe zone you never see PVP again other than massive gank squads and will all ways be close to the Safe Zone.

Now we are getting requests to remove missions from capitals (to let pvp hunters find target easier). 
Your opinion is valuable and you were one of the players who asked for some real fixes of revenge ganks - you got them. Did you start to pvp more?

Or maybe all those changes destroy the supply of targets and because wolves don't eat wolves you have nobody to play with once average players dissapear?

The whole thing in a nut Shell is Safe place to xp.  Everything was taken away when you could not defend your friends.  Revenge Gank Squads = Reinforcement by player or in other words a More Safe place lol. and you killed it.  Now you want to add and remove so much Stuff.

I would bet all my 1st rates, If battles were always open You would only see huge fleets even attempting to go to CTOWN.  And maybe one or 2 battles if they lived threw it before the Pirate would have to withdraw do to sure numbers. Instant Safe zone no coding needed

Same goes with Mission you get jumped in a Mission you called in real player support.  I am Sorry but that is a Safe zone pre-made.  I not sure why you want to reinvent the wheel when you had that in place many times.  Want to xp...  Go for it just make sure you have friends at port and you are good instant safe zone. 

 

PS when it was 1 hull 1 sail a PVP battle was over fairly fast.  Now with repair for ever Support will get to you 90% of the time.  If battles were open all the time.

Edited August 22, 2017 by JobaSet

[vazco]

4 minutes ago, mikawa said:

What if we introduce special Zones (lets say Swedes against Danes -> this zone is located somewhere between Chirstiansted and Gustavia) where ships within this zone cannot be attacked by another player. Instead they are waiting for other ships to sail into this zone until a certain BR is reached on both sides, then the battle starts. And I don't mean 1st rated battles, but samller ones (neat 3 vs 3 frigate battles for example, or 4 vs 3 depending on the BR they bring in). Maybe this could be helpful with the hostility / unbalanced pvp problem ... ?!?

This would work if it was a player-created battle. It could give interesting encounters.

It shouldn't be simply a zone, as combat is an event. You need numbers on both sides to start it.

This is what raids could be. You set a target port, pay for battle, and defenders and attackers have a time to group up. If you win, you get some prize. Battles could be on the sea, not necessarily in the port.

Edited August 22, 2017 by vazco

[Sven Silberbart]

11 hours ago, admin said:

• sweden very very very hard (only 1 uncapturable port)

Discuss and ask questions

All in all I like the most ideas of this patch.

But if I think about the future of the swedish nation with such a patch, than I don't see any potential to survive without alliance system. I think you Devs are right: Sweden will be very very very hard. Maybe too hard. The distance between very very very hard and unplayable could be zero with this patch. I fear there will be no economy left if nation is one ported first time and ends with the total destruction of that nation. As result the players will left nation or game, making the nation more and more harder to play. Then no new players will join and the nation isn't able to do anthing in RvR and dies completely.

I hope I am wrong

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

21 minutes ago, Borch said:

Good to see dev respond to the game issues, but I dont think those changes will stop people leaving the game. Too much clan focus. No fun for solo/small clan players. You need to bring something for the to the table in order for the game to function properly.

- PB's allowed only to clans - OK, but bring raids to the table for solo/small clan players. Dont take away content from players not giving them anything in exchange. And if you're afraid of raids ending up as PvE only activity, stop. Make contested raids pay better and stop worrying about players raiding empty towns. Not everything needs to be PvP content.

I was thinking about this is there any way you can give a token for a solo/clanless player to join a port battle maybe?  Some times this was a great way to recruit and see how folks do is bring them along on a raid/port battle now you can't.  Unless they allow for raids that are not clan base, but instead fleet group based.   

- Get hostility done only through PvP with no hostility decay (only defenders lowering it by wins). Missions wont work. People will just drag AI away from spawn point in first 5 mins of combat.

Making hostility PvP only doesn't work.  Folks will just avoid any combat to avoid getting a port flip.  As some one once said the best way to win, is not to show up at all.

- Bring back AI ship capture ( can be with lower ship knowledge slot - like max 2-3 and only in most common wood builds ). Bring back game content that people liked.

Uh do you play the game?  It's all ready has been returned.

- Start awarding ship knowledge xp for damage in combat (if needs be increase xp need). Stop fighting alts at the cost of everyone else. People with alts will get their xp anyway if they will decide to while us poor mortals will have it hard all the time.

Getting no rewards in a fight cause you didn't get assit or kills is one of the many things that is making grinding so bad.  Give XP only for damage.  Let the devs deal with alt abuse when it's found an reported and be firm about it.

- Make 5th ship knowledge slot open only through PvP and awarding special only for that ship modification ( not some crazy stuff but fun and balanced upgrade possibly making it tottaly different that 4 slot ship)

I know they want to change the paints system but what would be cool if that 5th slot unlocked a paint that only some one with all 5 slots ulocked got.  This will let folks know that is an elite ship and player.  If you capture the ship though you can keep that paint on the ship until you change it.  I think the devs mention something about doing paints like ship slots so that once you learn that paint you can put it on any ship of that type.  This would be cool way to combine the two.   Though the five slot can be dependent on PvP only xp.  So that way you can unlock the 5th slot even before you get the 3rd or 4th one by just PvPing.   Than just make the 1-4th slots off any xp you gain.  It should be fairly easy to gain the first 3 slots on most ships 1 slot should be unlocked after a fight or two, not an insane amount as it's a basic knowledge of that ship.

- Increase the drop of rare mods or bartereable goods exchanged for mods in all PvP combat. 

Are keep them PvE RNG drops, but have them where you can purchase them too with PvP Marks  you gain only from PvP kills/assit.  

- Waiting for the mossions in developement to be added to the game.

- Start working on cumulative achievements ( for example succesfull PvP in 5 counties ) unlocking tiny boosts to your ship nahdling. PvP achievements - combat boosts. PvE achievements - trading and crafting boosts.

Achievement missions could be ways to earn other rewards.  Demast 100 ships you get an accuracy mod or mod to strenghthen you mast.  Board a 100 ships you get a boarding mod, things like that so that it's not just PvE grinding you get rewards.  Kill a 100 Spanish players and you get a Spanish flag that you can fly or even sails....so cosmetic rewards can be gained too.  Specially if they just add a reputation system or something.

- Get rid of artificial ship locks. If you dont want pirates to sail sol's or nations to sail P frigate lock it tottaly. In current game alt players will get locked ships anyway, while everyone else will be angry that they dont have acces to the ship.

Are if your going to lock ships than come out with some proper mechanics to reason why Pirates are restricted from SOL's other than crafting.  And give them a few ships in the shallow/light (6th and 5th) rates that are pirates only to craft too.  Just something to make them different instead of just another bastard nation.

- I get why you wanted to limit sol ships in game but currently clans were able to sail best first rates in like 3rd day after patch when everyone else had problems with crafting simple frigate. I hope that current crafting changes will make the difference here.

Organized groups are all ways going to beat out the small or solo players no matter what.  Just cause it takes them a month or more to do something doesn't mean solo/casual or small clans are limited from getting it.   

I know that I didnt actually provide much feedback about proposed changes but only because they looks promising and would like to see them in game ( at least to test if they will work ). Changes I have listed would in my opinion help your patch to work properly and would make the game better in future. Hopefully it will all work out.

 

 

17 minutes ago, admin said:

reinforcements in missions are positional. So if you send in a scout to find out their location, so you can enter where they are, or even ahead of them. 

So they will be like Pirate FFA so you can pop in and tell the rest of your team where from a distance they can join?  Cool that is great we have practice this and actually got it down where we could drop almost right next to the OUTLAW that was attacking a trader around our capital.  I think this is great and sorry if you want to raise hostility it's the risk your going to take.

1 minute ago, King of Crowns said:

this does help the problem a little bit. but it doesn't solve the issue. and lets look at the features that help the average player......#1 Fortresses and towers everywhere. #2 massive ai fleets that people can snuggle up to. #3 pvpers having to sail for hours and hours to get to hunting grounds. #4 pvp is the least rewarding gameplay to seek after in terms of money and exp. #5 oh yea how could we forget the lazer guided butt guns. 

I mean there are some places on the map where it is impossible to catch and kill players due to the frequency of forts or AI. your only hope at killing a sweede is that they are afk and not sailing towards a town that is close by. 

#1 meta got so bad that some folks of some nation auto always run to the forts even when they out number you.  At West End port battle out side I had sunk a Mercury and the low level in a snow turned an run....straight for the fort cause that what they teach them.   The problem was it was a Pirate owned port...didn't go to well and I was going to even let the guy live like we did the fight before with a LtJg in a Privateer.   It was one of those new clan guys from that twitcher.   That is bad when they are learning habits like that and not how to properly fight.

#4  High Risk needs to have Higher rewards. It's sad when I can do PvP all day and port battles and what not, but i get crap for rewards, loot and what not, but i can do one AI fleet mission and make more money and combat credits than all that time I did PvPing.

#5 With all the updates these need to go, there is no reason to have lazer guided butt guns any more.  Devs need to remove this from ships and let all guns have the same accuracy. I mean give them and chasers maybe the same buff or something but no where close to the laser guided tracking system stern guns have now.

33 minutes ago, vazco said:

The only complexity you have to take care for is alt farming, that's why I proposed a system I did. If you don't address it, PvE grinding will turn into alt grinding, or inter-nation fake battles, which is even worse.

There have all ready been system put in to stop alt farming.  No rewards for recently kill.  Changes to rewards compared to ship cost.....the combat news has actually let folks know who could be farming.  Just be strict one alts abuse and be done with it.  I think Admin said it best in this post about alts.

[admin]

28 minutes ago, vazco said:

If you just remove access to sheep from wolves (which next patch does), without fixing the system, wolves will leave and you won't have any group interacting on the server any more. You could go single-player mode then.

PvP encounters are the best part of your game. You should promote them, not limit them, as it's the only way to hook players for longer, and  it's the only way for a player-created content and stories. All players should at some point drift to PvP. In order for them to drift, they need incentives there.

You only see part of the loop. Nature will find the balance. 


 

In other words
You ruin the ecology by making fox life better. And a smart fox will only attack weak and ill rabbits because if they eat everyone - they die next winter.

[vazco]

12 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

The current problem I find wolf vs wolf is the risk and the very little reward if I win.

In terms of game profits, that's very true. In the same time, those are the most interesting battles, which you remember. Hunting sheep is tedious and boring.

In my opinion it's a bad incentive design.

Admin, I'm repeating this in a few of my posts, as I feel not being understood by you. It seems to me that you try to say we should focus on PvP, regardless of incentives. I would really appreciate if you confirm that you see PvP incentives are preventing meaningful PvP right now.

All the rest can be created by players once good incentives and tools to generate fun encounters are there.

[vazco]

Ok, I saw your response after writing mine. The problem is that with a new patch you give rabbits tools to avoid wolves completely. It's ok, as long as they turn to wolves after some time, and they have a chance to fight with other wolves without being rabbits 80% of the time to afford being a wolf.

This is just an inperfect analogy. Your game is not an ecological system. It's best parts are fights wolves-on-wolves or rabbits(cooperating)-on-bots. In my opinion you should really promote both, and make both of them viable paths.

With a new patch, you can be a happy rabbit, or a starving wolf who has to grind as rabbit to find other wolves to fight with, with other wolves being inaccessible, as they hunt for upgrades and books as rabbits.

Edited August 22, 2017 by vazco

[Sven Silberbart]

make some safe(r) areas for the rabbits to regenerate and be able to play just 1 hour safely and bring much dangerous areas for the foxes to hunt. Bring good reasons (much of green and fresh gras) for the rabbits to got to dangerous areas to bring a privateer and pirate gameplay.

You need to support both!

Edited August 22, 2017 by Sven Silberbart

[Skully]

53 minutes ago, admin said:

reinforcements in missions are positional. So if you send in a scout to find out their location, so you can enter where they are, or even ahead of them. 

Trouble is brewing.

I should not be able to see the composition of the fleet inside on the swords.

On 8/2/2016 at 2:02 PM, Skully said:

To ensure visibility to the outside world keep a fast interceptor out of the battle instance. Victims lovingly refer to him as the bait ship.

As the ganking guide says (but in reverse), so providing visibility automatically is a sure way to induce a gank.

What if the scout tries to deny victory by sailing away?

How would number of repair uses, repair timers and repairs usage interact with this?

In other words, would we not see the winning strategy to be:

1. Toss in a scout
2. If you do not have numbers, deny victory.
3. If you do have numbers, wait until AI deals with repair inventory then gank. Your bait ship will ensure a positional gank.
4. Because the swords stay up you have visibility on the enemy. As long as the enemy has no visibility on you, you can also execute a gank afterwards. (More commonly called a revenge fleet by those who have no scouts or escorts.)

[vazco]

Anticipating a comment from someone that "NA Legends will fix it all":

In NA you can create something that you can't in NA Legends. A sense of purpose, ability to fight for your clan and nation, artificial world where you can have your role and can be known by your enemies and friends, gain and loss mechanic. NA Legends can be only about grind or clan fights. It's still great, however NA can be so much more. NA Legends won't fix things for me personally, and NA seems to have much bigger potential.

[Corona Lisa]

1 hour ago, admin said:

Maybe the number of people who could convert to pvp has fallen drastically due to the design paradigms we have been creating with the active community here?

• Insta- closed battles (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
• No reinforcements (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
• Removal of revenge gank due to invisibility and speed buff (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
• Removal of resource transport (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
• Many other features that were pushed in to just place average players in line for easy consumption by pvp hunters 

Now we are getting requests to remove missions from capitals (to let pvp hunters find target easier). 
Your opinion is valuable and you were one of the players who asked for some real fixes of revenge ganks - you got them. Did you start to pvp more?

Or maybe all those changes destroy the supply of targets and because wolves don't eat wolves you have nobody to play with once average players dissapear?

What kind of PvP are you enforcing tho since the last mega patch? All you did was making noobs and traders the target, which is boring for both sides. Thats why PvP players are leaving. Ganking a fking trader is not fun.

And its not like Tommy Shelby is running away from Otto Kohl, they simply never see each other in the OW.

 

This makes me honestly wonder if you even play the game...

[dagdriver]

Reading through all these posts, it seems to me that people want 2 or 3 different games, but we need to accept the fact that this cannot be squeezed into the same game.

Question is what kind of game is Naval Action supposed to be?
A PvP game with easy access to balanced PvP fights? - That sounds like "NA Legends" to me
An RvR OW Game? - then forget about Balanced PvP fights. RvR OW is war, and War is about winning more than you lose - Wars are not won by fighting perfectly balanced gentleman fights.

The only way you can mix balanced PvP with RvR mechiancs is to place some kind of pseudo "Clan Wars mechanics" on top of the PvP fight system - it cannot be done in Open World. ( I am thinking WoT clan wars here, but I have no idea how successfull that is/was)

Everybody keeps talking about promoting PvP - but IMO the pure RvR OW game the RvR mechanics should be the reason for PvP
Get RvR Open world mechanics right, and PvP will come, but rarely in perfectly balanced fights.
Mechanics includes proper reward systems, so the Player needs to be rewarded for the win in porportion to the risk he takes, and the punishment for a loss may not be so severe that it becomes an obstacle too great to recover from (and the player leaves). 
If there is a reason to fight, then people will fight. But do not expect it to be easy to find the perfect balanced fight just by hunting some area, and dont expect that anybody will just "pick up the gauntlet" and engage in a perfectly matched battle. But if there was an incentive - like a mission that needed to be accomplished, and a possibility for that mission to be reinforced, then interresting things could happen.

Not an expert on the subject, but: Did the Red Baron patrol the western front randomly just to find single allied Aces? Probably not - I guess he must have been on patrol missions, or other specific missions, were he met - and defeated - those opponents ?

[Sven Silberbart]

15 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

That's the best habbit for rabits to grow. Healthy, not dangerous and limited just to young rabits...

 

At that point i disagree: There are more reasons than just to be newcomer. If someone comes online and just want to do some crafting, one mission and then go offline he should be possible to do that without the risk to get ganked. BUT this safe zone should NOT be the Heaven of grinding money and xp. Grinding in the dangerous zones should be much much more profitable (money and xp) and a good reason to go out of the safe zone to provide pvp. But that must be the players decision to do safely or riskful.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Sven Silberbart

[fox2run]

RvR is what kills this game. Now I need to spend time with teens on TS in order to participate in a port battle. No way I'm coming back... The rest seems ok, though.

[Bart Smith]

3 minutes ago, fox2run said:

RvR is what kills this game. Now I need to spend time with teens on TS in order to participate in a port battle. No way I'm coming back... The rest seems ok, though.

But how open world mmo may work without RvR? For many is kind of end game feature. There is many many other reasons game population going low but RvR is not the main i bet.

[Hethwill]

I will agree with Skully here, fog of war is a package we did not try yet. We have all the info we need at any time. Maybe explore a new venture ?

But regarding the opening post ( OP):

- As a whole the proposals for discussion are a good base support for RvR escalation, from first steps in NA to getting into a clan and then participate in RvR. Is this what all players of NA seek for ? I don't doubt it, but there's a perception, shared by development team that roughly 10% participate actively in Port Battles, whatever it means, even empty PBs day after day. Add 10% more to act as screens IF really needed and a fifth of population might get involved.

- What about the core ? The "daily life" ? The careers of choice ? Is too much sandbox too much ? As average, trade/transport resources, to craft, to sail, to fight. It is a steady rhythm but monotonous tempo which relies heavily on the individual player to break the routine, hence a lot of players do try to break this and build their own career paths in the sandbox, like authentic pyrates, inducted privateers, or captains of the chase. Their focus is the middle game, the unseen actions that mould the daily life, the successes and the failures. If the entire path from day 1 to day 1000 is focused on a career path leading to RvR, what is left for the 4/5th of players, PvE and PvP alike ? Storyline quests and events ? Dynamically generated missions ?

- Further, what are the incentives of actually showing up to a Trafalgar port battle ? The battle just for the battle ? Or is the control of a port important to break a "resource" chain or logistics route ? Why not have NPC trade routes be established/broken according to ports controlled ? Or maybe it is something else that's needed. Linking dots to build something makes sense. Dots for just dots is, as proven several times along the way... void.

One thing that creates a divide in the player points of view is, many are here just for the fight, the competitive combat. Others seek to actually emulate their presence in a west indies age of sail daily life simulation.

Both want their actions to be of consequence, be it in a first rate at the line of battle, or in schooner running a blockade.

 

 

[Quineloe]

First question:

How do I generate a hostility mission at an enemy port? Do we dock there with a smuggler flag and a trader and generate it? Are these static, available at all times to begin like an epic event in front of every port?

Second question:

"but some ships will remain rare and expensive"

What is your definition of rare? Is a L'Ocean, that Denmark could field 25 of within three weeks of the wipe, considered a rare ship? Is the goal to move away from 50 first rate port battles?

 

[Duncan McFail]

@admin Although I really like the movie No Country for Old Men(props on the Anton avatar) I worry about it's relation to this patch. Is the theme "the things you have to go through to get the cash", "the bad guy wins", or "let's weigh outcome of this game on a coin toss". I have a bad feeling it's the coin toss one and I'd never want to bet that much on a coin toss. I can see in the changes listed this won't be enough to win this coin toss. You do need something big to bring people back, so the clan territory control mechanics are good. But you also need to solve the problem that caused people to leave in the first place. Because it wasn't that these clan mechanics weren't implemented soon enough. Everything implemented should have a positive effect on the game. Everything implemented should have it's repercussions weighed. Sometimes a light touch is all you need.

Fixing costs of 1 dura ships-This is great. Many people wanted this. You don't have to go to crazy with it. Just some minor tweaks on the sub-components and permit prices. In addition to the ship cost the total cost of outfitting that ship is also a real big problem. You lose your trinc and want to replace it to be back in the action again you're paying an arm and a leg compared to before the last big patch. If a good trinc is up for sale it'll be around 500k. Gotta get cannons for it. That's around 300k. How about repairs. Another 300k. Need 3 perm mods for it. 400k+ easily. That's 1.5mil right there. They could craft all that for about 1/3 of the price, but over the course of around 5 days. Either way that is a heavy price to pay to pvp and will turn many people away from it. But there needs to be a loss when pvping. It needs to hurt people to lose a ship just not as much as currently. Even SOL's need some love. If one group has them and the other doesn't have many then they either bring some and lose their port and SOL's, they bring trash ships and lose some and their port, or they just don''t show up and lose their port.

Stale conquest will still have problems. Grinding npc's was unwanted and will still remain. 3 circle system is pretty boring resulting in players avoiding them to avoid the fight. 

Throughout most of the bad review I seen(and even good reviews) there's multiple complaints on the heavy grind. Life was definitely better when there wasn't a need to grind each ship you want to use. Before you could use a variety of ships without penalty. Much better. Get rid of the slot unlock system and maybe tone down the leveling requirements and those complaints go away.

All the changes that involved getting people into the open world were great(at least to me), but time spent on pointless sailing is also a big complaint on the reviews. My only problem with these changes was without being able to sling or deliver ships you had to have ships in port already. Then lowering dock space and buying the slots became a huge sink caused more problems. Too much.

The whole issue with tagging, revenge fleets, super speed/invisibility, and camping the enemy capital is a mixed issue. The hunters want want to be able to do it more easily and the hunted want to make it harder. I don't think buffed npc fleets are the way to go, but changes are needed. It's not realistic that other players can enter your battle, but it's also unrealistic that someone's in a battle right where you are and you don't know it. Just leave the battles open, but make joining far away over time and not positional joining. If the point of super speed is to keep players from dragging another player in battle over and over then it's broken. It's being exploited with defensive tagging, tagging AI fleets, and exiting other player's missions. Super speed should only be for the defenders that started in the initial battle. Players should definitely have a disadvantage when camping the enemy capitol.

I hope the whole change all capturable ports to neutral ports doesn't follow the same rule set as before. Pirates were screwed with the Camp du Roy change a long time ago. Don't want to see a repeat. Also neutral defenses only firing at pirates would also be a concern. 

 

Edited August 22, 2017 by Duncan McFail

[Quineloe]

12 hours ago, Stilgar said:

Sounds good. Remove or strongly reduce knowledge slot grinding and we have a deal

Knowledge slot grinding wouldn't be a problem if you could obtain decent amounts of exp in PVP.

 

please bring back exp for damage again. x2 modifier means nothing if you walk away with nothing because you captured the ship in the end.

[Bart Smith]

1 minute ago, Quineloe said:

Knowledge slot grinding wouldn't be a problem if you could obtain decent amounts of exp in PVP.

 

please bring back exp for damage again. x2 modifier means nothing if you walk away with nothing because you captured the ship in the end.

Or lost after 1 hr fight...

[Thonys]

12 hours ago, Bart Smith said:

Are clans in one nation can attack each other?

i hope not then we are all pirates by nature

i hope it will only be possible when a clan makes claims on the same port

and not in the normal OW play for every other nation player

of course a claiming clan can be attacked in OW by a defending clan on the same port

Edited August 22, 2017 by Thonys

[Bart Smith]

23 minutes ago, Thonys said:

i hope not then we are all pirates by nature

i hope it will only be possible when a clan makes claims on the same port

and not in the normal OW play for every other nation player

of course a claiming clan can be attacked in OW by a defending clan on the same port

If i remember orginal proposal was clans can attack each other until they set up friendly status. But maybe im wrong on this...also jumping NPC into players battles may bring some dynamic into it and change whole way to plan those fights since you can be outgunned in any moment.