Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/05/2015 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Ares(Aris) Greek brig 16 or 12 guns (1807) All of the info:http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/6241-5th-6th-rates-collection-with-plans/page-4#entry144850
  2. 3 points
    Show Greece some love Greek-30 gun Corvette (Louis) Info Page: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7011-greek-corvette-loudovikoslouis/ Or the frigate Hellas but i couldnt find any plans of her but she is the sister ship of USS Hudson. Info page: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/4571-hellasgreek-frigate-1826/
  3. 2 points
    Hello Captains. We have relied on your help doing most visual promotional content for the game. 100% of in game screenshots on FB and website were done by someone like you. In this matter we have a request Player IIN8II who is doing an awesome job helping us shoot them. We would like to invite those who can attend this and next saturday for the large trafalgar event. Player IIN8II who is doing an awesome job helping us shoot them. Goals. Create source material to show line fighting and awesome epic action. Provide source material from various angles What needs to be done Next 2 events are not going to be about winning but about dying in spectacular fashions. Part 1 - first 10-20 mins of battle Instead of rushing into action immediately we would like to request players to form beautiful lines (if possible) Let both fleets form before engaging Try to be on TS or at least follow commands Try to fire as a line sometimes even if it wastes your shot Part 2 - the rest of the battle Once melee starts try to board ships, and wreak havoc. Fires are good.. so don't put it down. If you are shooting to demast - try aiming higher to provide varied visuals of demasted ships. And of course have fun. We just need to capture a bit beautiful moments. Captains who will also be making videos at the events please do so with the UI switched off with only aiming line and sector or without it. After making the video please upload the source file to dropbox or elsewhere and provide the link to this topic If you won't make it this week we will do additional cinematic work next saturday as well..
  4. 2 points
    One more Short cinematic for today.
  5. 1 point
    Captains.. There were several proposals on the Navy officer role and we would like to discuss it in depth here. Just to keep expectations clear. We are of course not saying or promising this will be done. It is just a discussion. Proposed Navy roles Naval officer Works for the Admiralty of their respective country. Receives salary - does not make money by selling ships. Does not pick ships - ships are assigned by the Admiralty randomly according to rank and achievements. Cannot capture ships - ships are sent to Admiralty for admiralty points. Does not hire crew - crews are supplied by the Admiralty with ships Repairs are provided by Admiralty Has to fulfill duties - must fight, must accept battles Top rated ships are assigned based on leaderboards Upgrades/officers and unique content can be bought from the Admiralty store for points. Ships for the admiralty stores are supplied by crafters. Can buy ships for himself if he has money (but those will be limited due to low salaries) Basically a combat class that does not think about the cash and is always supplied for combat. Ideal for the player who is not interested Privateer/Pirate Works for himself buying a patent. Patent costs money per month Can capture ships for himself Have to hire crew and pay salaries for the crew and officers Have to repair ships Can sail any ship if he can hire and support the crew Crafter (support role but both officers and privateers can be crafters too) Makes ships for the admiralty and privateers The guy with money Admiralty Buys ships and upgrades from crafters Supplies ships and upgrades to naval officers according to fame ratings The drawback of this system is the lack of freedom. Right now you can sail any ship you want and see and can buy or capture. In the defined roles scenarios most players won't be able
  6. 1 point
    J’ouvre ce topic pour ne pas polluer le reste du forum sur ce qui ne concerne pas NA. J’ai donc une petite annonce de ventre d’ouvrages de Boudriot, c’est un ami qui les vend : Les planches du 74 (pas les nouvelles !) La frégate de 1650-1850 La monographie du Cerf 1779-1780 Les trois ouvrages sont vendus avec une remise de 25% sur le prix du neuf (à ajouter les frais de port), encore une fois, tout ce négocie. Les ouvrages n’ont étaient que très peut ouvert. Me contacter en MP pour être mis en relation avec le vendeur. Toute fois, merci de tenir votre promesse d’achat ou eu moins tenir informé le vendeur si vous ne faites plus affaire avec lui. Par politesse. Merci pour lui
  7. 1 point
    A free exchange of ideas is essential in development of the game and community. Here is the simple guide that will help you understand what this forum is and what this forum is not This is a Game - Labs, Inc development forum and our goal is to limit unnecessary friction, which will only delay the development. As a result discussions that do not help to make the game better or make community worse (for example lack of respect to other members) will be removed and members who do not make this community a nice friendly place will be removed. Here is the list of simple rules. 1. Respect The goal is to support open exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion. We understand that there could be conflicts that happen when people voice opinions. This is a nice and a friendly community (mostly). Users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others. Update: forum and game has zero tolerance for assholes and jerks. Policy for Assholes, shitposters and jerks is simple: ban first, ask questions later. 2. Ranting and trolling A rant is a post that is filled with angry and counterproductive comments. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Trolling is when you structure your posts to anger and insult other players to achieve an emotional response. Please post your thoughts clearly and avoid trolling. 3. Personal attacks, racism and discrimination are prohibited Personal attacks are posts that insult another forum user directly or discuss user’s personal life or situation. Posts that include race, religion or sexual preference based personal attacks and trolling can result in immediate suspension. Such behavior will not be tolerated and can cause immediate ban. 4. Discussion of real life religion and politics is prohibited. 5. Profanity/Cursing. A well timed curse can lighten up a conversation in combat, but use of profanity directed at other players is prohibited. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter. Use of profanity is discouraged on forums. 6. Posting of personal information is prohibited. The posting of personal information including but not limited to personal contact numbers, email addresses, account names and passwords, home addresses and real life names is strictly prohibited. Game-Labs respect the right to privacy, and will not tolerate posting of real life personal details. 7. Posting of private communication is prohibited. The posting of private communication between the moderators, developers and administrators and forum users is prohibited. Posting information from private subforums is also not allowed. Breaking of rule 7 may result in removal of all posting privileges. 8. Discussion of moderation, warnings and bans is not allowed. Such matters shall remain private between Game-Labs and users. The discussion of forum moderation actions usually leads to flaming and trolling. That is why this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. During the development of the game there is usually no way to appeal. 9. Spamming is prohibited. 10. Redundant threads will be locked. Please use search find information you want to discuss. A lot of threads on the same subject delay the development and wastes resources causing lots of good ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread. 11. Player experience and new player experience. Experienced players are encouraged to participate in assisting new players. Players taking a lead in help chat will be rewarded by rare ships if they are pointed to us by the community. Confusing players with incorrect information on purpose is not allowed. Spreading false information without factual video proof is not allowed (this includes information about non-existing cheats that some players love to explain their losses with). Spreading false information ruins experience for others - such players will be banned from chat and forums. 12. All posts must be related to Game-Labs products. Posts regarding other companies and products or services are prohibited and any content of this nature will be removed. Posts regarding other games are however permitted in the Tavern for the purposes of discussion only. Self promotion is not allowed. 13. Off-topic posting is prohibited. Off-topic posting is permitted within reason. Deliberate attempts to derail a discussion may result in deletion of comments. 14. Ban evasion is prohibited. Bypassing a suspension or ban via the use of alternate forum accounts can result in permanent revocation of posting ability. 15. Abuse of Game-Labs employees and forum volunteers is prohibited. We have a zero tolerance policy on abuse of employees and volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling. Forum is a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a constructive manner with the only goal to improve the game. Players who attack or abuse employees or volunteers, will be permanently banned with no right to appeal. 16. Posting of inappropriate content is prohibited. The posting of pornography, discriminatory remarks which are sexually explicit, harmful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive as well as excessive obscene or vulgar language, posts which discuss or illustrate illegal activity, or an instance of providing links to sites that contain any of the aforementioned is strictly prohibited. 17. Forum format. It is much easier to follow a topic, when it is formatted properly. Please edit quoted messages to not post walls of texts. Avoid epileptic gifs and large signatures. If you are in doubt - that usually means your signature picture is already too big. 18. Naming Forum Accounts. (update October 2018) If an Account is assigned a name which is not in compliance with the established protocol, a warning notice will be issued. Account owner must change it as soon as possible. In case of ignoring the warning or repeated offences of the naming rules, an Account may be blocked. The following types of names of Accounts are prohibited: directly or indirectly offending another person or a group of persons or containing profanity; or having a hate speech / racist nature or discriminatory of any social group of people; Containing the real, in game, or forum name of a Forum Administrator or Moderator, or directly or indirectly alluding to ownership of the Account by Administrators or Moderators;  containing information that violates applicable law or ethical conduct norms The Administration of the Forum reserve the right to make a final decision on the compliance of the names of Accounts within the rules.  Warnings and bans Policy The list below shows the structure of our warning and suspension policy. This policy may be bypassed completely in favor of permanent revocation of a forum user’s posting privileges. We use automatic point system and if you accumulate enough points automatic punishments will apply. If you believe you were punished unfairly send message to forum mods or admins explaining the situation. People can make mistakes. Additional warnings can result in a permanent ban depending on the severity of the case.. Suspension & Appeals Forum users are fully entitled to appeal against any actions taken that result in a warning or suspension of forum posting privileges. During the development of the game the only way to appeal is to write a letter explaining the situation to our general support emails. Game-Labs will make a decision based on the case presented. Decisions regarding the status of forum posting privileges lie solely with the community management team, and any decisions made are final. If you are suspended you can ask a reputable captain to make a case for you in the Tribunal section of the forum. Appeal can also be done through the forum support section Permanent Banning & Appeals A permanent ban is only issued in severe cases where a forum user has grossly violated our rules. Permanent bans are final in the Sea Trials until release of the game on Steam. Complaints If any forum user has an issue or complaint regarding the conduct of our moderators please send us an email, or ask in the forum support section. Any complaints received are taken extremely seriously and will be fully investigated. Rule set will be updated regularly. If a situation is not covered here, post the case in the Tribunal forum.
  8. 1 point
    http://store.steampowered.com/app/418180/ Dear devs please dont go this way:P
  9. 1 point
    i do think that atm taking ports is a little silly and only serves to annoy your enemies...... ports change hands daily. so just some ideas here. 1. port flag should be very very expensive. 2. port flag should take time to create......it would in real life have been very costly and time consuming to hire in transport, organise the landing force and gather supplies for said force. 3.once a port has fallen rather than the defeated just taking the port back the next day either the port is unconquerable for so many days or because the flag for said port takes a few day to generate, those who took the port will have time to fortify and consolidate their new gains. BR Raggy
  10. 1 point
    I dont think it is something which should be choosable upon character creation but rather you can choose it sometime in the game, or if you dont choose anything you are just a privateer(note. not a pirate). Gold rewards should not be scaled down however you should have to pay more in ship maintanance, pay your crew and rations and such. I think that naval officers, if they get provided with their ships should get smaller(or the same gold amount works as well), you are forced to send captured ships to the admerality and you dont get paid for it, however you get your ships for free(which you sail) you still get paid(i prefer lower gold count for battles but you get a fixed cash amount everyday dependant on rank) reduced crew capacity and limitations on what ships you can buy is a big no no, these limitations should come from how much crew and maintanance on the ship you can pay, thus making smaller ships like frigates more economically viable. The limitations on what ships you can sail is hated in this community by a lot of people(see what happened when we were forced to sail certain ships) and what you are proposing i feel goes directly against what this game is about, open world freedom, i dont mind roles and think having a naval and a privateer role would be good for the game, imposing ship limitations, making one objectivly better in combat(due to ships of line and larger crews) i feel that this is a poor suggestion just my two not so well written cents.
  11. 1 point
    Tried to defend a port today. AI fleet lead the charge. AI fleet took most of the damage. 18 vs. 2 as first tower was captured. 18 vs. 4 to finish battle. I need help identifiyng what happened here: I tried to attack the flag carrier 3 times before he set the flag outside of port and got the message "attack failed BR too high". I was in Mercury and he was in a navy brig with 2 AI cutters. Was it because all 18 ships (6 players and 12 AI) were in my attack ring? If so, how do you attack the flag carrier?
  12. 1 point
    Perhaps we could exclude hired fleets from port battles? It would be nice to have pvp instead of pve. I just witnessed the port battle for Mayaguana where 6 pirates sent their fleets to win the battle against 4 US players. Fleets are once again proving to be a poison.
  13. 1 point
    Looks like a rather shoddy hodgepodge Frankenstein game of Wind of Luck, PotCO, and PotBS... that said if you dig the fantasy/arcade style it probable isn't that bad. Meteors on command? I swear if there isn't a skill to summon the Kraken i will be very disappointed.
  14. 1 point
    Dannebroge - 1710 Second Rate 2,200 Ton Length of Gundeck 164' 0" Danish Alen (Feet) 164.0000000000000 Breadth 42' 6" Danish Alen (Feet) 42.5000000000000 Draught Forward 17' 3" Danish Alen (Feet) 17.2500000000000 Draught Aft 20' 6" Danish Alen (Feet) 20.5000000000000 Broadside Weight = 694 Lower Gun Deck 24 Danish 24-Pounder Middle Gun Deck 28 Danish 18-Pounder Upper Gun Deck 28 Danish 8-Pounder Quarterdeck/Forecastle 14 Danish 6-Pounder Crew 680 Service History Date Event Source 1710/10/04 2nd Battle of Koge Bay  Paintings Hope you enjoyed
  15. 1 point
    Good critique Sandwich, You're correct that it seems somewhat backwards that a nation that is "doing well" would receive high interest rates. However from a game mechanic standpoint I included it that way so that it serves as a reward for players of a nation that is succeeding in RvR. Providing these players with lower interest rates would seem to undercut the premise of incentivizing success in RvR. I think the disconnect is assuming stability vs. risk. Your initial thought, which is very macroeconomically astute by the way, is that nations successful in RvR would be more stable, lowering interest rates. However my "historical" logic behind higher rates for successful nations is that large empires would likely finance inherently riskier ventures, since they have so much territory to defend and their rate of expansion so great. I could see either side having merit, which is problematic, because any game mechanic in an historical game should feel clearly representatives of the actors of the time. --------------------------------- Therefore, I started to think more about this concept of risk, and how it was almost completely absent from my original proposal, but, when harnessed, can actually provide a better game mechanic than the one I originally outlined. First, the historical context. When territory was captured, there would be a certain need for investments to flood into that territory. From new military installations for defense to replace the ones that were destroyed, to infrastructure that can accommodate the new captors and their equipment, to even property/land that was abandoned by the previous owners and now is available for purchase by the nobility of the invading nation. Conquest Bonds Here's how it would work in Naval Action: 1) When a port is taken, any player within the conquering nation has the ability to invest in the new territory. These investments can be called Conquest Bonds, Consols, or simply as such, investments - I will call them Conquest Bonds henceforth, but the name can be changed. 2) There are two classes of conquest bonds: defense bonds, and property bonds. Each bond type has two types: 7 days, and 14 days. 3) When you buy a conquest bond in a certain class, if your nation holds that port for the amount of time (7 or 14 days), you get your initial investment back, plus interest. If the port is recaptured or captured by any other nation before that time, you lose your initial investment and do not earn the interest. 4) After 14 days of continual port ownership, you can no longer buy Conquest Bonds for that port - the port has now been owned long enough that all new investment opportunities have been taken. Essentially what this means is that -- once your nation takes a new port -- you are placing an informed wager on whether or not your country will be able to hold that port in the near future. The gameplay benefits are voluminous: -A reward for players of a conquesting nation. The interest rates will be high, and a good opportunity to earn free money. Taking ports has more meaning when there is clear monetary incentive. -Will encourage the defense of ports where players have invested in conquest bonds. Nobody wants to lose a port they just took, but once they additionally each have 500k on the line earning them potentially 50% interest...you will really start to see defenders in numbers. -A natural counterbalance against chain port flipping, and zerg conquest. Conquest flags are expensive, and at some point the aggressors will reach an interesting choice: continue to expand, or focus on holding the new port for a week, two weeks, while investing enough in conquest bonds for that port to fund the next wave of conquest flags. -A natural counterbalance against exponential national dominance. Once ports are captured, the temptation will be high for captains of the "winning" nations to invest in Conquest Bonds, thus taking their money out of circulation for one or two weeks. This lowers their cashflow and gives some chance for the nations suffering port losses to outspend them on ships for the time being. -A fascinating "cat and mouse" game, on a national level. The losing nation will want to counter-attack and regain the ports they lost, but they will especially want to regain ports that enemy captains have purchased Conquest Bonds in, for that means the bond money is completely lost for enemy Captains. This will be completely blind to both sides of course - defenders/counter-attackers will need to take their best guess as to which ports the enemy has invested in defending, and the aggressor nation will need to hide whether or not they've invested, through their actions. -An ideal national player-only equivalent to Pirates' port raiding income. Remember, Pirates will have an income source (raiding) that national players do not have. There was much concern over this, and I believe Conquest Bonds provide that income equivalent, provided they are not available to Pirates (historically they should not be). More detail on bond types and classes Earlier I alluded to Conquest Bonds of the "Defense" and "Property" classes, and of 7 and 14 day types. Owning a Defense Bond for a certain port would allow you to teleport without ship to any defensive port battle during the time of your bond ownership, where you would be able to man a small gunboat or fort gun during the battle. (You can also of course participate with your ship like a regular participant if you are able to be present for the battle). This bond class type allows you to feel some type of ownership in the defense of the port since you will always be able to participate in the defensive port battles for it, but for this privilege this bond comes with a lower interest rate. Owning a Property Bond for a certain port is simply the 18th century equivalent of investing in an estate in the new territory. You don't have teleport privileges to participate in defensive port battles, and therefore this class carries the highest possible interest rate. (You can of course participate in defensive port battles if you happen to already be present). 7 Day Conquest Bonds versus 14 Day Conquest Bonds obviously has to do with the magnitude of the risk. 14 day bonds will carry a higher interest rate, since they are riskier; more of a chance of your nation losing that port before your bond matures. I would recommend something like the following: Defense Bond - 7 Days - 20% Interest Property Bond - 7 Days - 25% Interest Defense Bond - 14 Days - 45% Interest Property Bond - 14 Days - 50% Interest These values can obviously be tweaked to meet supply/demand, and in an ideal world would be relative to the risk of the newly-taken port. A captured port that is far from an already owned regional capital will be substantially more risky, and thus the interest rates even higher. -- Overall I believe that Conquest Bonds simplify the situation a bit from my initial post, while still providing an economic/strategic layer that the game really seems to need. It does so in a way that rewards the victors of port battles while also working towards slowing the pace of expansion & creating more incentive for strategic, measured RvR instead of zerg sprawl.
  16. 1 point
    Followers of my forum canon are well aware that I've been beating the drum for some type of strategic rationale for port capture. Currently, we have a RvR game of mere denial of localized resources, in which too few people are reliant enough on any one given port to essentially care if it is taken. The stakes are simply not high enough, as is. I realize that the developers may have another layer in mind, to be introduced later. Blackjack Morgan has outlined a fantastic idea in which regional capitals become hubs for SOL building, and economic/capture ramifications radiate outwards from there. I fully endorse something such as that, however I still believe that even if we had such a system, players not engaged in SOL crafting or buying must still feel some connection to the wartime progress of their nation. One of the challenges of any incentivization system is avoiding the "spiral loop of despair" for factions that begin a streak of losing. If factions are incentivized by greater rewards for taking more ports, those factions who are victorious initially will become exponentially stronger as they are rewarded, making it increasingly difficult for "losing" factions to even-out the course of the war. My idea, outlined below, avoids the "spiral of despair", while providing a strong RvR-backed incentive to all players, regardless of play style or individual goals. In short, everyone will feel that they have a stake in the course of the war, as the economic impacts of capture and defense will be felt by every player. War Bonds Otherwise known as Consols, the earliest historical issuance of war bonds was by the Bank of England in 1751 at the behest of the British government, to help pay for war debts. While some may think of war bonds as exclusively a 20th century security, their issuance during the Age of Sail and subsequent Napoleonic period give them immediate credentials within the historical scope of this game. For those unfamiliar with bonds, the way it works is that a buyer purchases a bond with a fixed lifespan and a fixed interest rate. At the end of the bond's lifespan, the buyer receives their initial payment back, plus interest accumulated. Here's how it works in Naval Action: 1) Any player, at any time, may purchase a war bond of a fixed amount from their nation. Bonds may come in increments such as 5k, 20k, 100k, 500k, etc. 2) During the life of the bond, you cannot spend the money you've purchased the bond with. That money is essentially tied up in the bond. 3) Remember, the value in owning a bond is that after a pre-set period of time, you get your principal amount back, plus interest. Players will do this, as it's free money. 4) The interest rate is determined by RvR victory progress conditions at the time of bond purchase. Whatever the "victory" metric for factions may be (be it regional capitals owned, overall number of ports owned, or whatever the devs decide), this is what will directly influence the interest rate. Nations with favorable victory progress will receive a higher interest rate, and nations with poor victory progress will receive a lower rate. Why does this make sense for the game? Twofold: 1) A higher interest rate is a nice reward for successful national RvR that all players can feel the benefits of. The Dutch have taken most of the Spanish main? Every Dutch player will be able to purchase bonds with a higher interest rate than players of most other nations. This is a nice source of national pride, and profit: at a high rate of 25% interest, a 500k bond will yield the player 125k when the bond expires. That's 125k in free money. A player on a more hapless faction may only be offered a 3% interest rate, making them less likely to invest 2) This one is important. Remember, if you have 600k to your character's name, and you buy a 500k bond, you are down to only 100k until that bond expires. So while you receive free money (in interest) at the end of bond ownership, until the bond expires you have limited your spending power. This acts as a natural cap on nations becoming gradually too strong to defeat. Nations that are winning the map, and have higher interest rates, will likely have more players begin to invest their money, taking it out of circulation as a means to buy ships, for a duration of time. Conversely, nations that begin "losing" will be offered such low interest rates that their players will be more likely to pour all available money into ships, crafting, etc. This creates a form of balance, whereas weaker nations are more likely to strengthen their fleets at the same time as stronger nations are remaining stagnant, waiting for their bonds to mature. The end state is less chance of a runaway superpower, strengthened to no end by their RvR rewards. Fine tuning Obviously, the value of interest rates (from highest possible to lowest possible) can be changed at any time by the devs, to suit what they believe is best. The same goes for the bond ownership duration. I would recommend a bond ownership duration of 7 real life days, although only a day when you log into the game will count as a "day" towards your bond maturing. I would recommend a rate range of 1% (lowest) to 25% (highest), depending on victory conditions for a nation being met. I do not know yet what those victory conditions will be, but I do hope it has something to do with control of key regional capitals and trade routes. Additional layers An important thought for me is always: does this make sense within the "real" universe of the game? In other words, is it realistic to imagine that Age of Sail nations would use bonds during wartime in such a way? The answer, as I've thought about it, is yes. You can imagine your purchase in a war bond going towards your nation's military, for protecting and expanding the empire. The more territory your nation owns, the greater the risk that it will incur territorial losses. To entice investors into these riskier bonds, they must offer a higher interest rate. It's quite a logical way to think about why an expanding nation would offer a higher interest rate, and a smaller nation would offer a lower rate. On that very topic of risk, as any investor knows, there is another side of bonds which I have not mentioned, and that is the chance of default. If your bond provider claims bankruptcy, you may forfeit both your principal and any unrealized interest. If this system were to be truly detailed within Naval Action, we could have bonds whose possible default is tied to the loss of certain key ports. For example, if my nation has captured the far off enemy regional capital of Basse-Terre, I would be able to buy a "Basse-Terre Defense Bond", with a very high interest rate. However, if Basse-Terre were to fall back to the enemy before my bond matures, I lose the entire amount. This would encourage port defense on a level not yet seen, as players would be highly incentivized to keep their investments secure. Final thoughts I do not see War Bonds as the final RvR incentivization mechanic, but rather a useful piece of the puzzle. The puzzle is: how do we get players to care about the progress of the war, and feel like it directly impacts their game experience, other than simply counting who owns the most ports when you press 'M'? Given that War Bonds carry a unique balancing mechanic within their reward structure, it seems prudent to consider them as one of the many elements that will (hopefully) make Naval Action's RvR strategically appealing, thus ensuring we have a wide, active, and interested player base once this game launches.
  17. 1 point
    i asked in the new patch thread, but it got buried too fast for anyone to notice, so ill ask here. the patch notes tell of a move to 64 bit architecture. are you saying we need to be running a 64 bit version of Windows, or does it mean you made the difficult and time consuming task of changing the engine to run in 64 bit instead of 32?. if you did make the switch, that is a very significant thing as it allows them to access an infinite amount of memory (like 14 billion gigs) and make gigantic maps because of the enormous numbers that can be generated from 64 bit.
  18. 1 point
    Storman Danish 4th Rate 44 guns (1703) Characteristics: Lenght:122 feet Width:37 feet Draught( fore/aft ) : 7-6/9 feet Crew:297 Guns: 18x18pdr 18x12pdr 8x4pdr Sources: http://koti.mbnet.fi/felipe/Denmark/Denmark_ships_1700-1850/denmark_ships_1700-1850.html http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=18278 7-6/9 7-6/9
  19. 1 point
    Storman Danish 4th Rate 44 guns (1703) Her info:http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7650-stormandanish-4th-rate/
  20. 1 point
    Unknown Venetian 16+ (?)gun Polacca/Polacre middle 18th century Info:http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7685-venetian-ships/?p=144433
  21. 1 point
    Fama Venetian 66-gun Frigate (1784) All the info here: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7685-venetian-ships/?p=144354
  22. 1 point
    I've always been in favor of cash-poor NOs that get things for free. But of course naval officers should get prize money for ships sent to the admiralty, with a bonus if its a high quality ship that could be bought into the service (and potentially assigned to someone else). And they would get head money for sinking ships, in a lesser amount.
  23. 1 point
    A thought on Letters of Marque: A Letter of Marque should be purchasable from any nation that is selling them. It is when no Letter of Marque is aboard that one shifts into the Neutral/Pirate Spectrum. How might this be reflected? If your monthly fees aren't kept up, and you've sunk or captured ships of a nation, that nation may well view you as a pirate. You could, to discourage constant side-switching, require people to pay reparations to a nation depending on how many vessels of theirs they have sunk (or by tonnage) before that nation would be willing to sell you a Letter of Marque. It makes the Privateer much more "loosey goosey," but also truer to the mark, I think.
  24. 1 point
    Cutter is far too slow closehauled. Speed of 3.7 knots at wind angle 45 degrees. Closehauled speed should be 60-70% of top speed, I'd say.
  25. 1 point
    I voted yes. Indeed, it is more immersive to not know the state of the enemy ship but for a few reasons I would like to be able to know the state of the enemy. First, as I have said in other posts, these battles take a while to finish already. Taking away those damage visuals will only mean the fight will take another ten minutes to finish as you continue to fire your broadsides into a ship whos fate has already been sealed. What could possibly change this though would be the future addition of a surrender mechanic. This way you won't be spending all your time shooting at a sinking ship. Hopeful that player will understand his predicament and surrender before all is lost. But for now keep the visual. Second, alot of those things you want to be seen can be but in a simple hull bashing fight all we really have to go on for quite some time is the shot damage on the side of the boat. Surely, it will eventually start to sit lower in the water but for a long time it wont. we can see the gun ports stove in and of course no blood from the scuppers so our visuals are pretty weak imho. The visuals make up for it. Also, in rl Captains didn't care so much I'd bet. They hammered them until they surrendered and barring a mast going down, the best indication of the state of the other ships fighting capability was its rate of fire.