Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/20/2019 in all areas

  1. 16 points
    2nd issue of the Willemstad Gazette available now. https://docdro.id/osnot6U
  2. 16 points
    we should think for everyone and the little guy too. As a result we actually increased the supply of trading goods 2 days ago in the hotfix (by at least 65% across all price categories) , more trading = more pvp and more money. (including a side effect of more privateering). New group of trading goods that will spawn in non capital towns is coming too - to encourage sailing around and looking for deals.
  3. 11 points
    List of ships that changed and decks, left - old, right - new https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1frzTMxV3TrvlYfA6K3h0zfCCWbuk3kekKI1eYc0MY8U/edit#gid=1751816059
  4. 10 points
    Naval Action would be a better game if everyone took their Losses like you. Good stuff o7
  5. 9 points
    Легко: Если забордить топ пвпшера, то в трюме появляется клетка с неудачным капитаном. Этого пассажира можно отвести во фритаун, где желающие могут покидать в него помидорками за дублоны до рестарта. Все дублоны в пользу игрока, который его привез. Пока капитан висит в Тортуге в клетке хозяин акка ходит по морям с приставкой "Новый", типа команда выбрала нового капитана.
  6. 9 points
    It was very simple. My Bellona nearly wasn't dmaged in hull and structure, Potemkin's last shot on my hull was commented by him with only one word "jesus" because he didn't cause damage. As I followed him otuside the circle, he hit 2 - 3 times the foremast and it dropped. Potemkin managed to outplay the Ocean who tried to hold him ouside the shrinkin zone The wind was against me, so I couldn't get back to circle and died with nearly full HP. Ocean couldn't get back because of chains and shrinkin Zone. It was a fine tactic of Potemkin and to much greed onm my side
  7. 8 points
    That or replace fort's 42pd longs by 9 or 12 pounders in shallow ports
  8. 7 points
  9. 7 points
    Havoc: Everyone grow some balls and come fight us! RAWR! DNP, BOCAR, DANVE: *fights Havoc* Havoc: WHAT?!!! HOW DARE YOU YOU FILTHY LOW LIFE!!? WE TAKE ALL YOUR PORTS NOW.
  10. 7 points
    Get rid of barbettes as a separate placeable. Instead, have each gun turret generate its own barbette. Basically, you place the turret where you want, and using the page up/ page down keys, you would be able to elevate it, while the game would automatically generate an appropriately sized barbette for each gun. This would get rid of the visually unbecoming oversized barbettes that you see on so many ships in the game. This feature would include secondary guns as well. For example, you might want to build superfiring 7 inch guns at the flanks of your superstructure. Secondaries could also have higher barbettes, giving us the option to have three superfiring turrets.
  11. 6 points
    Automatic claiming of patrol mission at maintenance remove 10k doubloon cap in money chest? Don't know why the cap is needed at the moment automatic accepting and claiming of leadership events with a message which rank you achieved when automaticly claimed I doubt anyone disagrees with that or wouldnt like it Will think about more stuff more when I have more time ... but I guess new player stuff, exploration missions and other means of getting seasoned logs than pve would be something that pops into my head instantly. Oh and find a way to use victorymarks for please. They are just stockpiling everywhere.
  12. 6 points
    We need real waterdepth and ships draft, then there is a purpose for those small ships. Then some ports might only be accessible by 7th rates.
  13. 6 points
    Зацени, оцени, помоги, посмотри до конца
  14. 6 points
    Feliz Navidad y que tengais todos un nuevo año maravilloso. Despe os ama.
  15. 6 points
    Feliz Navidad a todos los jugadores españoles, sirvan a la bandera que sirvan.
  16. 6 points
    This is how it works now. When we add more detailed Citadel mechanics, it is going to become even more realistic.
  17. 6 points
    HMS Leopard, Temerarie, Wreker. All 3 had way LESS votes. Montañes: -It was first in the poll by a great margin. The community clearly wanted it. -It is a third rate which is good as the game lacks them. -It is spanish. Atm, only 2 ships ingame are spanish: santisima and diana. Diana cant be crafted. Santa Cecilia wasnt a ship built by spain. Santisima is behind a rare permit. -It is a nice looking ship that fits perfectly in the NA timeframe, reached 14knots and fought in major battles. I could understand the need of some dutch ships (there are none), but british (leopard and victory classic) and french ones?
  18. 5 points
    Need more salt for my #popcorn - This should be the right thread.
  19. 5 points
  20. 5 points
    Worth an investigation I guess https://gyazo.com/bdc1a8773293559e988cdd9e90348b87
  21. 5 points
    people have these things called, families and generally over the festive season these people like to see their families instead of playing naval action, maybe? just a long shot though
  22. 4 points
    Капитаны, сегодня вышло обновление с изменениями суммарного боевого рейтинга для портовых сражений, теперь БР для обычных сражений с участием игроков не отличается от портовых сражений с участием НПЦ. Изменения суммарного боевого рейтинга (БР) для портовых сражений Города с БР 5000 теперь имеют 5700 БР Города с БР 10000 теперь имеют 10600 БР Исправлена ошибка с БР города Nassau - теперь это 2900 БР Изменения боевого рейтинга кораблей Trincomalee - БР понизился с 270 до 260 Endymion - БР понизился с 280 до 270 Indiaman - БР понизился с 150 до 140 Pavel - БР понизился с 550 до 540 Во вчерашнем обновлении немного повысилось производство торговых ресурсов и исправлена ошибка с некорректным маршрутом НПЦ в портовом сражении города Nassau
  23. 4 points
    You can count me in the camp of I'd like spotter planes and even eventually air power but for the immediate future I consider it a feature that can and probably should be added later with more fundamental features needing addressed first. Which brings me to an additional suggestion that I'd love to see that I can't believe slipped my mind. More scripting for the Naval Academy missions. I'd love to see them be more informative and useful to learn from but to do that I think we need to see the same AI ships(both friendly and hostile) starting in the same positions at the same ranges rather than seeing different designs every time. Maybe even script participating nations, at least for the AI, but that only really depends on how much effort is to be put into national flavor. Plus this would be a good way to make sure for the campaign the AI doesn't just keep randomly generating ships instead of using designs it should already have in service.
  24. 4 points
    Where you in sea trials and pod by PayPal before steam EA release? That how you get the yatch DLC. I miss it by a day cause I was down in Brazil working and got back the day after and it went to steam. though I still think pandora should not be a dlc folks can buy. It should be a special ship for EA testers only.
  25. 4 points
    Can we expect to see more smaller ships in the second half i.e. different corvettes, sloops, brigs?
  26. 4 points
    My annual post on the need for Exploration of the Open World. The game is incredible from so many standpoints, especially the open world the developers have built. So here's what I recommend for Exploration: The free camera works in the OW. Essentially you can anchor near a port or an island, and send an exploration party or a group of spies (via the free camera) from your ship into the nearby hills or port and watch enemy ships come and go. This feature could be harnessed by the devs in our gameplay content. We could be assigned OW Exploration missions: drop off spies or soldiers in enemy ports - raise national hostility pick up spies find caches of weapons or loot or buried treasure in the port or on deserted islands find shipwrecked sailors establish lookouts and outposts find new sites for mines find new species of animals or vegetation obtain secret orders or maps The options are endless. The modeling of the ports and vegetation is adequate for all types of new OW game content. The OW pickup mechanic itself could work much like the Sealed Bottle mechanic. One other idea is to seed these missions in the OW so people can randomly search them out without being assigned a mission - make them hard to find - sailors like a challenge. This idea is just as important for PVP players since it entices more people and potential targets into the OW. Mission Example - "Anchor next to the island just south of Las Tortugas. Send a party to the top of the hill - pick up the secret map. Take the map to the port of Bahia Honda and deliver the map to the back room in the beach shack with hanging fish in front. Payment - Reals and Exploration Credit. Thank you Devs for this great game - looking forward to its future.
  27. 4 points
    I fully disagree with this part. Changes must be done if they could achieve a greater goal. Recently, you made changes to trading and rvr that resulted in a recovery of the pop lost after months of ignoring the issues. Looking at recent reviews and steamcharts, werent they worth the risks? Be brave, be ambitious.
  28. 4 points
    If you think that map somehow represents a place where a big naval engagement between capital ships of the dreadnought era would take place at all, then UA:D is not only what you expected WOWS to be but that never was...it's also a lot of things you're not expecting it to be. Realistic, for one ;). Now I don't say this to discourage you or to somehow feel I'm dishing you, which can't be farther from my intention. I'm just pointing out that the kind of gameplay you can expect out of a game which has high regard for historical fidelity and immersion has absolutely nothing to do with that you'd find in an arcade game like WOWS where the only thing "Naval" are the 3D models of the vehicles that fight there. And part of the complete lack of regard for realistic naval engagements WOWS shows, is in where it forces those vehicles to fight, and in the way those vehicles are artificially allowed to move so they CAN fight in the maps they're put into. Plainly stated, a big ship could perfectly take more than half an hour from full stop to full ahead, and several minutes to stop from max speed to a full stop. Ship's turnrate was very slow (compared with the racingboats of WOWS). Risks of running aground were nothing to sneeze at, a grounded ship could get stuck with ease in shallow waters (several battleships were lost that way, becoming stuck on some uncharted shallow rock and then being destroyed by the tides). No battleship captain would ever venture into an area like the one you drew. Not even a lunatic would risk such expensive warships in a place so likely to get his ship nose-in into an island. Nor any cruiser one, now we're at it. And probably destroyer skippers would have a serious stressful time trying too. You've drawn a map for a multiplayer deathmatch-style arcade game. UA:D is nothing of the sorts - it's a very different animal. No big surface fleet would've ventured in an area like the one you depicted. Now don't get discouraged by it: UA:D might not be a fast paced arcade multiplayer deathmatch, but if you like ships (if you REALLY like ships) and if you're interested in how they actually fought (Vs the completely made-up stuff of WOWS), then you'll love it and learn a lot in the process. But if you expect it to be WOWS 2.0...well, that it is not. Like, at all.
  29. 4 points
    Like in Ultimate General:Civil War, Career Points are highly important. In Ultimate Admiral:Age of Sail, they have been greatly expanded and the number of points you receive from battles has been greatly increased. Note: I apologize about the guide being incomplete and not having the POI experience you can earn. I just don't have enough time to replay through everything to find out and really would like to post this guide anyway as its 95% complete. Note: This guide is not meant to tell you how to spend the points as there are several different strategies. My recommended point distribution will come in a later full battle guide. Note: The guide goes left to right for each section and left side to ride side. Career Points: Admiralty: Mission Reward provides a 0-25% bonus to the cash reward from each mission. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Prices provides a 0-25% bonus to the sale of a ship as well as a 0-25% reduction on the purchase price of a ship. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Admiralty’s Assortment provides a 0-50% bonus to the assortment of what is in the admiralty shop. This results in better and more varied ships as well as equipment for both land and sea. Each point is equal to 10% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Reputation provides 0-5 additional reputation you gain per battle. Each point is equal to 1 reputation meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Crew: (Notes that the box below Admiralty has no label so I am just calling it this for now.) Crew Training provides a 0-25% bonus to the experience gain of your crew. This results in crews starring much faster as well as their overall stats. Note that there is no distinguishing between land and sea units which most likely means that this applies for both types of units. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Crew Healing results in 0-25% of your casualties being returned to you at the end of the battle. Note that there is no distinguishing between land and sea units which most likely means that this applies for both types of units. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Crew Recruiting provides a 0-25% discount to the cost of replenishing units with veterans. Note that there is no distinguishing between land and sea units which most likely means that this applies for both types of units. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Techs: Technological Novelties provides a 0-50% bonus to the amount of technology you receive(max of 3). The game uses a random curve to decide how many techs you receive which is where this value is being applied. After deciding how many techs the system will give you, there is a separate algorithm to decide what these techs. It is important to note that the bonus will not be applied here. Also, note that this is still based on a random number generator (RNG) so nothing is guaranteed. Each point is equal to 10% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Technology Research Cost provides a 0-25% discount towards the cost of technology. This includes both a monetary and a reputation discount. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Officers: Officer Training provides a 0-25% bonus to the experience gain of officers. Note that there is no distinguishing between land and sea officers which most likely means that this applies for both types of officers. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Officer Recruiting provides a 0-25% discount to the hiring cost of officers. Note that there is no distinguishing between land and sea officers which most likely means that this applies for both types of officers. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Officers Assortment provides a 0-50% bonus to the amount and skill of the officers that are available for recruitment within the shop. Note that there is no distinguishing between land and sea officers which most likely means that this applies for both types of officers. Each point is equal to 10% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Ship Building: Repairs Cost provides a 0-25% discount to the repair cost of a ship at the end of an engagement. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Damage Control results in a 0-25% restoration of the damage a ship took during the previous battle. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Upgrades Cost provides a 0-25% discount towards the cost of applying upgrades to all ships. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Luck: Luck gives a 0-30% bonus to the success chance of points of interests. Each point is equal to 5% except for the first one which is equal to 10%. You will still need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Survival reduces the chance of an officer dying by 0-25%.The bonus will only be applied to the death roll which is rolled after an officer is wounded. Each point is equal to 5% meaning you need 5 points to receive the full bonus. Each battle will provide a certain number of experience points that allows you to invest in a career choice of your choosing. For minor battles, you will be rewarded 1 experience point For grand battles, you will be rewarded with 3 experience points The intros to both campaigns count as grand battles Some Points of Interest will provide experience points (most likely all are 1 experience) Filthy Smuggler: 1 experience Total possible: British: INCOMPLETE American: INCOMPLETE When starting a campaign, you will follow the early life of your chosen admiral which will allow you to gain three starting career points. Note: You will be given a choice between three separate career points. After selecting one of the three, you will not have an opportunity to return so choose wisely. Note: I am writing the available choices you have by reading top to bottom British: 1769 Childhood (First Pick) 1 point into Repairs Cost (equal to -5%) 1 point into Upgrades Cost (equal to -5%) 1 point into Luck (equal to 10%) 1771 Midshipman (Second Pick) 1 point into Crew Training (equal to 5%) 1 point into Crew Healing (equal to 5%) 1 point into Crew Recruiting (equal to 5%) 1777 Lieutenant (Third and Final Pick) 1 point into Officers Recruiting (equal to -5%) 1 point into Technological Novelties (equal to 10%) 1 point into Reputation (equal to 1 per battle) American: 1760 Escape (First Pick) 1 point into Mission Reward (equal to 5%) 1 point into Luck (equal to 10%) 1 point into Survival (equal to -5%) 1770 Emigration (Second Pick) 1 point into Repairs Cost (equal to -5%) 1 point into Prices (equal to 5% on sale and -5% on purchase) 1 point into Reputation (equal to 1 per battle) 1775 Volunteer (Third and Final Pick) 1 point into Crew Training (equal to 5%) 1 point into Crew Recruiting (equal to 5%) 1 point into Crew Healing (equal to 5%)
  30. 4 points
    Sounds like an interesting idea, with the caveat that the player should be allowed a reasonable progression where they can get a perfectly reliable ship. It is one thing if they suffer duds knowing they skimped, but if they did everything and they still suffer a failure, they would first try the Save / Load button and then start filing complaints.
  31. 4 points
    I must say i did like the progression of armor types in the game and progression of hull/vessel types. But other than a slide-in menu, armor placement is done automaticly once you completed the design. It is also a joy to see how different types of armor reacts to the battle damage in game, seeing ricochets, cracks and twists depending on the amount of damage taken. But other than choosing the specific armor type, armor placement seems to be based solely on hull type chosen at the start. What is more interesting would be to implement armor placement schemes in the game, which would affect the designs seakeeping, displacement, turning and speed qualities. Depending on how the armor is placed, (i.e focused on engines, ammunition, citadels) it should nerf the damage taken to certain functional sections of the ship. Many 1880s, ironclads/pre-dreadnought battleships had armor covering the whole hull but armor design continued to change, Protected cruisers, auxilary cruisers, heavy and light cruisers all had varying armor placements, some ships had more armor around the section of the citadel to protect signalling/command of the fleets and finally, more modern battleships had "all or nothing" armor placement, which protected important internal sections. Adding an armor placement function to designing section of the game could improve the specialization of certain ship designs and definitely enrich the tactical approach to battle-system. I also think that being able to see the internal sections, such as engine, fuel, ammo compartment etc... would give the ship-design phase a more in-depth approach.
  32. 4 points
  33. 4 points
    Isn't this thread surpossed to be about feedback? I mean its great and all people having convo's but trying to read feedback consistently and effciently when 2-4pages are taken up by arguements doesn't really help. We should have a general discussion or arguement thread somewhere so people can talk without issue (best to put here since this will be the most viewed sub-forum). Otherwise we are just clogging the thread up with pointless posts.
  34. 4 points
    Hello Team, i startet to play after a break and WOW you did a great job with the last patches. The game looks amazing - the hits, holes etc. are looking so fantastic. Many thanks for this great game i am sure, this game will be great. Thanks for the hard and really good work - love this game so much Regards :-)
  35. 4 points
    Feliz navidad a todos y espero que que esteis con todos los seres queridos y con mucha salud. Un saludete
  36. 3 points
    Name them. With specific detail please. Number of planes involved, roles covered, and actual efficiency in each case. And yes, in surface ship-to-ship engagements (meaning, you don't need to list the instances where they were used for land bombardment spotting). AS for what's becoming toxic, I'll let you decide who or what is. Someone who's just giving historical details to put the game (And suggestions) into perspective, or someone who just comes to dish people in three line degrading answers.
  37. 3 points
    Sorry to tell you that your arguments are as stupid as what you tried to do.😑
  38. 3 points
    While I agree and pity the forgotten ships, it is up to us players to use them. Some more fine-tuning would be a good thing, but right now an Essex e.g can be a serious ship already. Only, all too many players have to always sail the "best" ship, while it´d be a true challenge to take one of the weaker ships.
  39. 3 points
    Forts shooting only to attacker side, is a good mechanic i guess
  40. 3 points
    The new trading system (#nocontracts) works as it promotes sailing (not sitting in ports using contracts) and privateering (just sink the traders around rich ports instead of buying goods). How does having a second account helps you buy anything in Vera Cruz if you cannot buy anything on the first account? Majority cares about inflation - people want to hoard and hoard we will give them as much as they want. Yes it will increase the cost of top class mods and those act as money sinks. We just need more options there.
  41. 3 points
    Oh, this is interesting. So, for example, in a hypothetical Hornblower scenario where Pellew sends him to aid the royalist french army, one could select to play only Pellew part and stay with the fleet -or/and- also play Hornblower and the British and French armies Officers parts ? That's cool would love to play just commanding the naval forces, send marines and give them to land commander and "suffer" by anticipation IF the land forces would do it or not, even with "alternative" endings like having to evacuate the failed expedition.
  42. 3 points
    I agree with Liq. It’s nice to see some change away from bow and stern tanking, but structural and mast damage are both far too high at the moment. No ship should sink from rakes, neither should hull rakes dismast a ship. Weakening masts is fine. But not totally take the mast off, except in very very rare occasions. <insert historical example and complaints here blah blah> I don’t care. It’s bad for balance. It promotes unskilled gameplay. It takes away a bit more from what is left of the depth of combat. Don’t nerf it to the ground, but tune it down some. Rakes should be powerful and in some cases deciding. But at the moment it detracts from skilled positioning to setup broadside exchanges and traditional rigging shooting to cripple or dismast.
  43. 3 points
    If a nation such as VP can't field 10 port battle ships then it's not a BR issue. Some key points, some already mentioned here: It's an issue of motivation to join RvR. More rewards for active participation in RvR might be better than just dropping BR which is already low enough. Better rewards in PBs and maybe the clans that ask for screeners can pay those screeners from their own rewards/tax money. In the case of Santo Domingo for example, the port makes millions a week but no one from that clan that owns the port felt like showing up to defend it's surrounding ports? Not sure what the issue was there. But If a nation doesn't have 10 players to defend a port you have to think of things beyond just pushing lower port BR. Same as Christendom, I'd like to see 900BR ports locked to 6th rates and below; and 5000BR ports locked to 3rd rates and below. If screening is meant to continue to be a part of RvR, I think it should also be recognized by some form of in game mechanic/feature. If the game allows to create a 'screening fleet' which can get special rewards for fighting near the area of the port that is being contested around the time of the PB; then more people might become interested in screening. Last thing, if trading and alts continue to be the best way to achieve success in obtaining anything in game then most people will just flock to trading and not care about RvR which costs them more money and ships that what they get out of it. As someone already said, why put effort into RvR when you can spend your time doing something else and get all the RvR benefits anyway. We need solutions to get more players interested in RvR not to keep RvR small for the all the usual players.
  44. 3 points
    the "jesus" was because i missed almost an entire broadside at 100m trying to hit your foremast with mediums lol, gg either way the post wasnt meant to make you look bad it was meant as a deterrent against the possibility that they would put the circle of death in reg ow battles to prevent griefing.
  45. 3 points
    Looking at griefing / being kept in battles: Suggestion: After one's sails are lowered to 0% for 15-20 minutes, with no hull hits being scored by the player during the time, he gets the option to leave the battle Eliminates griefing and being kept in a battle for 90 min with no actual engagement happening, just the odd mast hit from 1km (without doing any damage) every now and then. -> Less tribunal cases Can't see any downsides.
  46. 3 points
    Captain's Liqueur chest Ingredients: - 3x Burgundian Wine - 3x Madeira Wine - 3x Gin - 3x Whiskey Effects: - Turning +1% - Sail setting speed + 2% - Reload time -1% Officer's Liqueur chest Ingredients: - 3x Tequila - 3x Normandy Cider - 3x Russian Vodka - 3x Liqueur Effects: - Melee attack +3% - Sailing crew required -2% - Gun crew required - 2% Clan: BASTD
  47. 3 points
    Hi folks! Just want to say happy christmas and new year too all teh peeps here on the UA:D forums! Take it easy ladz!
  48. 3 points
    Quick one off the library shelf: John Robert's "Battlecruisers" published by Caxton editions: Reference to the 3'' (british 12 pounder) being labelled inadequate for anti-DD work already in 1906. Page 96: (Talking about secondary battery proposals for HMS Invincible): "The Committee on Designs initially favoured an ATB armament of 4in guns but the development of a new high velocity 12pdr gun of improved accuracy caused a modification of this view on the basis that more such guns could be mounted and they offered a higher rate of fire. However in 1906 firing trials against the old destroyer Skate with 3pdr, 12pdr, and 4in guns led to a reversal of this decision as the latter calibre was shown to be the only one of the three tried that stood a good chance a stopping a destroyer before she got close enough to deliver a torpedo attack" Please also note too, that "Stopping a destroyer" does not equal "Sinking a destroyer". Also, please note that Skate displaced 350 tons only. And 3in guns were thought as not being enough to deal with it. Now think of what that exactly entails for the 3'' caliber as a viable weapon to damage ships roughly three times that size (what was already common by WW1). Also please note that secondary batteries of battleships of the time ammounted for a lot of guns. Destroyers had guns in the single digits, usually no more than a couple, and generally of smaller caliber than battleship secondaries. They could kill other destroyers but it wasn't an easy job for them by far. Reference to the 4in gun being labelled as no longer adequate for anti-DD work in 1910 while discussing the Lion class secondaries: Page 97: "by 1910 the increased range and power of the torpedo meant that torpedo attack by destroyers in daylight action was a much more likely possibility. In addition, the size of destroyers had increased and the need to stop these vessels at much greter range soon led to demands for an increase in the power and range of the ATB armament." What follows is a long paragraph that I refuse to just go ahead and write on it's whole. The short version would be that at the time of the design of the Iron Duke and the Tiger classes 4in weapons were no longer trusted as enough to stop destroyer attacks, that a general consensus was agreed that something bigger was needed ("something bigger" means 6in guns, because the british lacked a 5'' weapon at the time) and that the german widespread use of secondary guns of 5.9in of caliber in their ships sealed the change. The upcoming Iron Dukes and Tiger were accordingly redesigned to incorporate 6in secondary guns instead of the 4in that had been standard in the RN until that point. Hope that helps.
  49. 3 points
    I got tagged by the same Prince 5 times in a row yesterday. The first 3 just to keep me in place til his mates arrived the 4th and 5th when he tried (and failed) to chain me down so they could catch. They didn't even get close. In the final battle I repped only once and after over an hour my sails were at 98%. It took over 2 hours until they finally gave up. Theoretically they could have done it for another 2. You might argue that they did nothing wrong but if so then there is something fundamentally wrong with ROE atm where someone can waste hour after hour of your game-time with very little possibility of an end result. I understand that it is very difficult to apply concrete rules to this. I would suggest an 'ungentlemanly conduct' (very British lol) rule where a common sense ruling is made on a case by case basis. In Despe's case imo they wasted an unreasonable amount of time on something that had very little chance of success and that should qualify as 'griefing'. Either that or change the ROE
  50. 3 points
    Agressive NPCs all over the map sounds like a bad idea at the first look.. Around capitals they got a reason to be a thing, protect noobs - but on a pvp server, being attacked by npcs all over the map? I dont know. Will have to test
×
×
  • Create New...