Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Batman

Shallow port hostility - part 327

Recommended Posts

Just fix it already @Ink, @admin

this has beend mentioned countless times by now.

Current example Spain grinding San Marcos & Las Sabinas in 1st rates.

They cannot be stopped because

 

  • no GB deep water port closeby and
  •  why the hell can you still grind shallow ports with 1st rates?

 

This picturce shows Spanish hostility fleet in 1st rates at San Marcos yesterday with Brits deliberately trying to delay them:

san_marcos_hostility_by_Spanish.png

 

Surely it can be coded that shallow water port hostility missions can only be entered in 7th and 6th rates (maybe exclude Hercules from hostility, idk).

An alternative suggestion would be to increase the shallow area around those ports, so that the defender does not wait outside the mission in deep water ships to intercept the attacker.

This would also bring somewhat more diversity into open world pvp than the usual 1st rate battles happeneing everywhere by now.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Batman
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the flip side I think it's incredibly easy to disrupt hostility missions overall, even more so in the shallows.  Be nice if a balance could be found.  I almost wish we had the old system back where if you took 1st rates you still have to do 4 missions.  

How did you flip the ports in the first place.  With shallow ships?  It was done rather quickly if I remember twitter right, so perhaps not.  

Anyway logistically speaking perhaps you should of gone after a deep port first to have a base up there rather than flipping an undefended Russian shallow port.  A port deep into enemy territory should perhaps not be easy to defend one would think

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Christendom said:

 

How did you flip the ports in the first place.  With shallow ships?  It was done rather quickly if I remember twitter right, so perhaps not.  

 

I wasn't online that evening and it came rather surprisingly, this double flip. Personally I wanted to have gone for a deep water port, too. I don't know how many people did the flip in what time, but it should not be part of the discussion that you have to capture a deep water port to effectively defend a shallow water port because of broken mechanics.

By now pretty much everybody used the shallow hostility mechanics to his advantage, but after the big Bahamas campaigns the topic more or less disappeared.

If Nation A would decide to attack the Spanish shallow ports NW of Yucatan, how could Spain intercept the attackers? Before they arrive, hostility would already be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As @Christendom said should of took a deep water port first.  The other thing is some of us don't want to spend hours grinding AI for a port battle.  Just beat them in the PB?  Oh wait did ya'll set a timer and can't fill it?  Or is the port to far away no one is going to show?   It is so easy to defend shallow ports if you have the numbers these days just take it to the port battle and beat the snot out of them.  Not to mention you can screen there shallow ships out with deep water ships of your own.

 

 

 

PS you know you could of keep them tagged in that battle the whole time and ran the clock out if you had a port window....just a hint, and it looks like you did have a window.  Both ports where set 30 mins before the end of the window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it was brilliant, these guys in navy brigs managed to prevent the Spanish Hostility.

On the other hand I agree with the post %100

And I agree with the Yankees, deep water should be taken.

Yes we did the hostility with big ships, still it is not corect mechanics, may be set amount of mission regardless of ship type as you purposed.

Edited by AeRoTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Muy curioso, ya que ahora no estás interesado, tienes que cambiarlo, pero cuando lo haces está bien, como cuando puedes capturar barcos grandes o tienes que reducir los tiros para navegar, o cuando el daño se reduce a palos, etc .; curioso, ¿no?

Muy curioso, como ahora no os interesa, hay que cambiarlo, pero cuando lo hacéis vosotros si vale, como cuando se podía capturar barcos grandes o hubo que reducir los disparos a vela, o cuando se rebajó el daño a palos, etc; curioso, no?

Edited by pepepotamo
traducción
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Christendom said:

On the flip side I think it's incredibly easy to disrupt hostility missions overall, even more so in the shallows.  Be nice if a balance could be found.  I almost wish we had the old system back where if you took 1st rates you still have to do 4 missions.  

How did you flip the ports in the first place.  With shallow ships?  It was done rather quickly if I remember twitter right, so perhaps not.  

Anyway logistically speaking perhaps you should of gone after a deep port first to have a base up there rather than flipping an undefended Russian shallow port.  A port deep into enemy territory should perhaps not be easy to defend one would think

This has nothing to do with logistics, it is simple a broken game mechanic. Same can be done in Bahamas, which is known as shallow port area.

And we see over and over again, that few 1st rates grind hostility for shallow ports, in deep sea areas, and flipping shallow ports. This is wrong and it should not be possible.

Shallow ships for shallow ports. Period.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, pepepotamo said:

(...)

It's not a new issue.

But we don't see any improvements, yet everybody used this mechanic to his advantage. back with old hostility you put 4 players in seperate missions against 10 Mercurys each and had hostility against a shallow port done in fifteen minutes.

Now it's a few first rates grinding outside the shallow area and thus making it impossible for the defender to intercept the attacker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Eleazar de Damas said:

It should not be so difficult to limit shallow water hostility missions to shallow water ships. Is it?

While that fix the hostility mission one question arise. What will happen outside the hostility battle?

Some shallow water ports can almost be able to hold deep water ships on his bay.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increasing the shallow area around ports like San Marcos, Serrana or Mosquito Cay could prevent the defender waiting outside the mission in big ships. But not sure if this can be done without much effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But why did not you complain before heating those ports with deep water vessels? I do not think it's a problem of the mechanics of the game, rather I share the opinion of the comrades that if you want to launch a campaign in an area where there are deep and shallow ports you should first attack the deep ones to have a consistent base of operations. Also according to your method you would be subtracting the opportunity to deploy different missions as it was to move your deep fleet to the other corner of the world to heat a shallow harbor, reducing the emotion of the hand blow to the game. It's okay to complain when things do not go well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this more as a strategy question than a mechanics problem.  If you have a shallow water port with deep water nearby, then it is perfectly reasonable to see heavy Ships.  If you are dealing with a shallow water port that has an enemy deep water port in the vicinity, re-think your strategy.  Asking for game mechanics to change I a case like this is unreasonable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, firebool said:

 

But why did not you complain before heating those ports with deep water vessels? I do not think it's a problem of the mechanics of the game, rather I share the opinion of the comrades that if you want to launch a campaign in an area where there are deep and shallow ports you should first attack the deep ones to have a consistent base of operations. Also according to your method you would be subtracting the opportunity to deploy different missions as it was to move your deep fleet to the other corner of the world to heat a shallow harbor, reducing the emotion of the hand blow to the game. It's okay to complain when things do not go well.

its not a GB vs Spain issue .... it an issue all over the map

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly I do not see it as a problem GB & Spain, it's simple, I do not think that subtract possibilities to the game, as missions or strategies is good, many times to heat the unknown and other shallow ports, we had to do missions with deep-sea vessels passing through the only strait for ships of line or coming from the pirate islands and those missions are full of emotion, seeing as it is possible to discover you and intercept, (as the passage of the two German battleships across the Strait of England in the World War II "Operation Cerberus"), or how other nearby ports are attacked for being of deep water because your strategy is to heat a shallow zone. I think the only thing that makes this proposal is to limit the fun in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the purpose of disrupting a hostility mission is impossible then something is not working as intented.

You cant go to fight a first rate fleet doing hostility in a port where you, as defender, can only undock 7th and 6th rates. 

Edited by Intrepido

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But is that precisely that is not correct, because it depends not only that the port is shallow or not, but of the geographical situation where it is located, it is between two deep ports and it is decided to attack that port? ' Why do not you attack the deep ports that are right next to you? You can not complain that your strategy on the battlefield is not good or it will not work for you, IT IS NOT A PROBLEM OF THE GAME IT IS A FAILURE OF STRATEGY.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×