Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Sad news from Europe: Sixth coalition is kaput


Recommended Posts

On 9/27/2017 at 9:50 PM, admin said:

Newsflash

During negotiations on the Sixth Coalition one of the archdukes was hit by a candelabra. The resulting melee between royalties has ruined the chances for peace in Europe. Mobilization started in several countries on the continent.
war-3-125-prussia.jpg.jpg

Is this the end of the world as we know it? Or is it a beginning of the new empires? 

@admin @Ink This is great news:) When can we expect this to arrive on the server?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit that this is "sad news" because I (at least) can't see how this is going to help the game as it more fractures the population. It seems like sort of a luke warm answer to the clan vs clan requests.

What I would like to see:

1. Green on green possible. IE Clan Wars  One clan can take a port from another clan in the same nation

2. Reinforcement zones stay. Any green on green attack within that nation's zone is treated as an enemy nation attack and the defender can call in AI reinforcements. This will protect new/clanless/casual players and prevent rogue/alt clans from making a mess of things in protected waters.

3. Either immediately implement some of the great pirate mechanics that have been suggested in the forums or admit they are a nation like any other and for now give them the exact same mechanics as other nations.

3. Captured ports can have three designations: Open to All, Open to Nation, or Open to Capturer and Friendly Clans.

4. Missions 4th rate and bigger move to outside the safe zone. Make it possible to sail any mission in any ship. That way, if you want to brush up your skills in your l'Ocean in the safe zone, you can but you'll only gain the rewards for 5th and easier missions or for AI fleets you find and kill within the zone. If you want great rewards, you'll have to either leave the safe zone or play the PVE Server.

5. Next step, Pirate, Raid, and Blockade mechanics if not already implemented.

6. Followed by a port having "needs" that just gold won't solve. Provisions, gunpowder, muskets, building materials, furniture, farm tools, population growth (in the form of labor contracts or minimum number of outposts)

I know some of these ideas are not historical but we left that idea behind long ago. I believe at least some of these steps will keep and develop a player base and provide for long term growth far more than UI and localization -- obviously necessary steps as well. But merely more nations is not going to do it.

Edited by Farrago
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, admin said:

Having some nations without reinforcement zones and with capturable capitals will allow hardcore players to have as much hardcore rvr gameplay as they want, without affecting the rest of the audience.

In other words : How to avoid playing NA as though you were playing on the PvE server in 3 easy steps.

802.jpg

In singleplayer games, sure (that's why I recently started wearing a blindfold in Divinity 2 when it got too easy), but to self-sabotage yourself just to get an above-average gaming experience is just flat out silly in multiplayer titles.

I don't like having lots of repairs, I don't like Wasas being produced by notes, and I don't like the 100% safety of the safezone (even in EVE Concord didn't always make it in time against suicidal high-alpha dessie squads taking out traders), so should I thus gimp myself by never using repairs, never sailing Wasas and only run missions in hostile waters while everyone else will do all 3?

Provide an incentive for those with the balls of taking the road less traveled or don't even bother. Though I suspect you won't just because of the outcry there would be of

'why is X not available for everyone?!', including those who will never sail more than 10 minutes away from their capital and yet demand the full game experience.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Teutonic said:

This is why I stress the need for different port battle size limits. 6v6, 12v12, 25v25. That is how you get nations that have small player bases, or clans who are small to both ENJOY and ACTIVELY take part in Port Battles, which in turn allows them to take part in RvR aspects.

 

I's a good idea on paper, but I fear that the zerg will just shift to the screening outside the port

Edited by victor
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, admin said:

The decision spectrum is simple
We either have 3 large full nations or we have a lot more smaller nations which constantly fight with each other. Having some nations without reinforcement zones and with capturable capitals will allow hardcore players to have as much hardcore rvr gameplay as they want, without affecting the rest of the audience. 

The main benefits of those nations is the risk and the opportunity to sail their national flags. The nation choice is also historical (could have happened).

Don't forget its the test. Final test for the RVR/PVP imbalanc

I would really like to see this. Just give everyone some forged papers so nobody can complain. Did you think about where the capitals would be yet ( if the new nations will have any ) ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Captain Lust said:

I would really like to see this. Just give everyone some forged papers so nobody can complain. Did you think about where the capitals would be yet ( if the new nations will have any ) ?

Allow the forged papers to be craftable - problem solved.

In regards to historical pretext - It could not have happened. It is entirely fictional in order to make the RvR/PvP gameplay work. But I am willing to test it out and see if it actually works..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2.10.2017 at 4:16 PM, admin said:

Don't forget its the test. Final test for the RVR/PVP imbalance

Then we're all doomed. Instead of giving us a good options to find each other in an OW to fight PvP/RvR, you will try to divide the community further and call it a test. It will surely fail. If it's a problem to gather 25 people with 6 nations, it will be impossible with more nations.

We need a content for groups of 3-10 instead, which would allow for such groups to also find each other and fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, vazco said:

Then we're all doomed. Instead of giving us a good options to find each other in an OW to fight PvP/RvR, you will try to divide the community further and call it a test. It will surely fail. If it's a problem to gather 25 people with 6 nations, it will be impossible with more nations.

We need a content for groups of 3-10 instead, which would allow for such groups to also find each other and fight.

 

I'm not sure whether it matters much, since we're already self-dividing into clans.  It is true that a compelling motivation for PvP on the 3-10 scale would help. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

I'm not sure whether it matters much, since we're already self-dividing into clans.

It matters, as on average 5 or more clans are needed to man a single PB now. It requires a lot of organization, on nation level. Usually it's done thorough a council.

Once we introduce new nations and players divide, it will be impossible to organize enough people to do a PB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2017 at 10:38 PM, Farrago said:

I must admit that this is "sad news" because I (at least) can't see how this is going to help the game as it more fractures the population. It seems like sort of a luke warm answer to the clan vs clan requests.

What I would like to see:

1. Green on green possible. IE Clan Wars  One clan can take a port from another clan in the same nation - This would just be the same as having multiple new nations, except that instead of being called nations they are called clans. But maybe that is what the game needs, I did like some points of the original War Company plans that got watered down.

2. Reinforcement zones stay. Any green on green attack within that nation's zone is treated as an enemy nation attack and the defender can call in AI reinforcements. This will protect new/clanless/casual players and prevent rogue/alt clans from making a mess of things in protected waters. - Agree, but again if they had gone with the war company idea the national waters are only the safe zones and everything else is up for grabs by the individual clans.

3. Either immediately implement some of the great pirate mechanics that have been suggested in the forums or admit they are a nation like any other and for now give them the exact same mechanics as other nations. - Agree, but if giving pirates special mechanics it must be very hard mode as making it too attractive to play will cause an imbalance.

3. Captured ports can have three designations: Open to All, Open to Nation, or Open to Capturer and Friendly Clans. - Agree

4. Missions 4th rate and bigger move to outside the safe zone. Make it possible to sail any mission in any ship. That way, if you want to brush up your skills in your l'Ocean in the safe zone, you can but you'll only gain the rewards for 5th and easier missions or for AI fleets you find and kill within the zone. If you want great rewards, you'll have to either leave the safe zone or play the PVE Server. - do not totally agree, I think they should allow all types of missions in safe zone but after certain rank they stop giving rewards, that way you can practice against other first rates but not gain xp or rewards.

5. Next step, Pirate, Raid, and Blockade mechanics if not already implemented. - Agree.

6. Followed by a port having "needs" that just gold won't solve. Provisions, gunpowder, muskets, building materials, furniture, farm tools, population growth (in the form of labor contracts or minimum number of outposts) - Strongly agree.

I know some of these ideas are not historical but we left that idea behind long ago. I believe at least some of these steps will keep and develop a player base and provide for long term growth far more than UI and localization -- obviously necessary steps as well. But merely more nations is not going to do it.

Some nice points raised here, I agree with most of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, vazco said:

It matters, as on average 5 or more clans are needed to man a single PB now. It requires a lot of organization, on nation level. Usually it's done thorough a council.

Once we introduce new nations and players divide, it will be impossible to organize enough people to do a PB.

What is this "Council" of which you speak?  That sounds so official, LOL.  It depends where things go with the PB system or whatever replaces it.  The only PB I've done during the current system was about 9 players vs the 6 AI, which was more than enough players.  The last one before that pre-Patch was 3 players vs 2 players, LOL.  Since the port conquest is now a clan-based thing it really needs to take on more of a clan-based scale.

Edited by Barbancourt (rownd)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2017 at 4:58 AM, Demsity said:

huh?

Since you so firmly rejected my and others proposals, I asked a question about they way the devs will probably add these new nations.

If the add them as new, capital-less nations with no bonus. Why would anyone join them at such a disadvantage?

Some of us like the pain.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2017 at 1:45 PM, Sir Texas Sir said:

And this would fit n more with something that might be an expansion later of the game that covers the Napoleonic War and the European waters, not really fitting in Caribbean theme game.  Now Legends I can see them doing it there to get more ships and such into that game to cover a wider player base of folks that want to sail and fight in ships of certain nations.

Why not now? A good portion of the ships are from that war anyway:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

What is this "Council" of which you speak?  That sounds so official, LOL.  It depends where things go with the PB system or whatever replaces it.  The only PB I've done during the current system was about 9 players vs the 6 AI, which was more than enough players.  The last one before that pre-Patch was 3 players vs 2 players, LOL.  Since the port conquest is now a clan-based thing it really needs to take on more of a clan-based scale.

Clearly you don't know the game so well... You haven't played RvR yet, only RvE. This is what NA is turning to. Dumping it's best parts to promote the worst.

To explain - a council is how players fix what game is not providing them in terms of game mechanics - a system to synchronize clans, to create a meaningful RvR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rediii said:

I would suggest to only let people change nation to a ultra hardcore rvr nation after they played some ranks in a existing one with safezones because the new player experience could be realy realy bad in one of these.

This is true. It's also true that those nations would desperately need recruits to survive, to get to numbers needed for PB. In my opinion the idea of extra nations is simply unsustainable without further modifications of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, vazco said:

Clearly you don't know the game so well... You haven't played RvR yet, only RvE. This is what NA is turning to. Dumping it's best parts to promote the worst.

To explain - a council is how players fix what game is not providing them in terms of game mechanics - a system to synchronize clans, to create a meaningful RvR. 

 

LOL, whatever.

I'm laughing at the idea of an official "Council" - we don't do that. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, rediii said:

With 12 people "grinding" these fleets take 20 min

With 24 people "grinding" these fleets take 12 min

 

Just FYI

I remember spending days chasing AI fleets to set up port battles.  Then having to grind them again after the region got flipped back..and again, and again, and again...  Maybe some of the details have changed, but nobody's interested in it anymore.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

I remember spending days chasing AI fleets to set up port battles.  Then having to grind them again after the region got flipped back..and again, and again, and again...  Maybe some of the details have changed, but nobody's interested in it anymore.

 

Hostility missions introduced. 

It takes 5 missions to flip a port. Each mission is 10 aggies. A skilled group can set the port in the time it takes for a single battle to finish

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Werewolf said:

Some of us like the pain.

Quite amusing how you claimed in the other thread to be a casual... what a pile of steaming BS.

44 minutes ago, rediii said:

Thats why you either dont participate in portbattles or your nation sucks in RvR

Agreed. Really sad that the swedes seem to be the only nation that is well organised and good at RvR on PvP EU. At least pirates don't have much RvR power anymore since the outlaw mechanic split the pirate nation and destroys it from within. I don't think pirates should be part of RvR so i like that...

I would really like to see the new nations added, even if only as more hardmode options. It can't do much harm to the game... would be worth testing how it plays out at least.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Slim Jimmerson said:

Hostility missions introduced. 

It takes 5 missions to flip a port. Each mission is 10 aggies. A skilled group can set the port in the time it takes for a single battle to finish

 

It's only 4 missions unless you do something stupid.  Ask folks how fast we flipped Islam last night.  We had two groups.  One with 15 SOL and one with 8.   Our group killed the first mission in 10 mins and the second group was half way through theirs.  We finished our second one as they where just getting into their second one.  All in all that was 4 missions in less than an hour.  I don't think ya'll could of even got ships out there fast enough to stop us other than the Reno and Basic cutter that showed up in the last mission.

10 Victories goes down fast when you have all PB 1st rates (we did have a Connie or two in those fleets) that focus fire.   Same goes for the Aggies as we tend to flip those with 1st rates too.   Now the Merc's in the shalllow water depends if you can get them in deep water.  Than we tend to use 4/5th rates.  On average it's taking about 1-2 hours to flip a port.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...