Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/28/2018 in Posts

  1. 17 points
    Screening battle outside Hat Island. Commander @mexicanbatman It was a hard battle, fighting ortography, getting Chinese not to write in chinese, the Germans to understand what letter comes now, the Swedes not to draw a pronounced genital and everybody to stop drinking booze! Anyway, inside the PB, GG WP o7 Russia.
  2. 12 points
    Just git gud. Accusing without a proof is banable.
  3. 11 points
  4. 11 points
    "400 hits to bottom mast with my 12 pounders and the mast is still standing, enemy must be cheating." git gud
  5. 10 points
    someone had to pay for the wall, right?
  6. 9 points
    Hey Mr Hornblower, I kneel infront of you and to show my gratitude for your generous offer I would like to gift you the Bucentaure of the dirty Russian Christendom. Just message me ingame and I will give it to you for free!
  7. 7 points
    I am thinking about this idea for a very long time and since I see that the complaints about demasting are on the rise again and that many mostly blame the accuracy of our cannons for this, I decided to present this Idea in a hopefully fashionable manner. Keep in mind these are just some ideas I have and want to share. I don’t insist that these should be implemented nor would I be frustrated if they won’t (I will just write a bad steam review ). I too think that our cannons are far too accurate and thus enable players to snipe for specific parts of an hostile ship. Especially at longer ranges. Also the speed of changing your point of aim, acquiring a new target and the feeling of disconnection of the cannons from the ship, bothers me. Our cannons act like they are mounted on modern turrets. You can single shoot masts and if you miss you can instantly adjust your point of aim (horizontal and vertical) and shoot again with almost no delay whatsoever. Also, the up and down motion of the ship doesn’t influence the aiming at all. Sure, heel does influence your max and min elevation, but doesn’t pose a real problem. So the main subject of my idea is, that the cannons and their point of aim really get fixed to the deck and are affected by roll, pitch and heel. So our aim bar constantly moves with the ship. The roll in the game right now is moderate to almost nonexistent because the sea in the instances is very calm. Maybe that should change too (variation). Heel can be significant but everybody should know by now how to minimize it. I don’t know if pitch plays a role, since aiming at the moment is not very much affected by the movement of the ship. Furthermore, the change of horizontal orientation and elevation of cannons should be a bit slower. Cannons were manhandled with handspikes to change these parameters. This took time and to instantly fire a cannon during this (like we can do now) wasn’t possible. So cannons in game should not be able to fire while being traversed or elevated. A simple example of how it could be shown to the player that his cannons aren't ready to fire during adjustments What will be the effects of this? Changing horizontal traverse and elevation isn’t almost instantly anymore. Adjusting your aim to snipe enemy masts in a fast manner isn’t an option anymore. To have a further option of balance. carronades could receive a buff in horizontal traverse speeds due to their carriages. Changing elevation fast to quickly aim at the waterline and right after that back at the hull or masts won’t be possible anymore. You must pre-plan your broadside. You must calculate how and where you want to aim and how to position your ship to get the best result. In fact you will mostly don’t touch the elevation setting of your cannons and aim with the ship now and keep your guns leveled to the deck and use roll to either shoot high or low. You don't wan't an arched flight path of your balls and want to keep it as flat as possible. Elevation then comes into place if you want to compensate for heel or are very close to your opponent but still want to shoot high. Also there would be a use for battle sails and people wouldn’t sail around with all sails set all the time. Full sails let the ship heel but also stabilize it against roll (although I somewhere read that higher speed makes the roll more unpredictable, sailing experts?). No sails on the other hand won’t let your ship heel as much but let your ship roll too unpredictable. Battle sails could be the middle ground between both extremes. A moderate heel and a moderate more predictable roll. I also read somewhere on the forum that the current battles sails layout isn’t exactly correct with set topgallants and royals but again, I think our sailing experts can prove me wrong on this or give better explanations. A downside with current firing mechanics in combination with my proposed idea above is that many shots of a broadside probably won’t hit due to the ship movement. Well at least if you are not right next to the enemy ship. Right now we can single shot with space bar or release a whole broadside with a mouse click, where many shots will miss and be wasted. I believe that no gun captain would fire his cannon if the target isn’t in sight (I assume he has a clear picture and is not hindered by smoke). Therefor I would like an additional way of releasing a broadside. This was an idea of @Hethwill some time ago. He suggested that, while you hold down spacebar your ship will fire a rolling broadside (front, back, random). If you release spacebar it will instantly stop and will continue at the next cannon if you hold spacebar down again. Maybe a general gimmick could be to let the player choose between 2 or 3 different rates of firing intervals. With one where almost all guns fire at the same time. This could increase the probability of a reload shock of your enemy. A downside could be that it also has a small negative effect on your structure. But that's just an extra and honestly not really needed. Until now I just made it harder to actually hit a target. I would also propose something more positive for the gunplay. As far as I know, the transparent fire sector roughly shows where the shots will land. I don’t know exactly where the aim bar is pointing but I assume it is somehow an elongation of the bore axis (of course somehow the average of all decks). I would like to keep it that way with a few adjustments. I will explain these things with a few pictures too. At first, all decks should be independent from each other. This means different point of aim and also different cannon loads per deck. You will basically see an aim bar for every deck (aiming all decks at once should still be possible). If you go into aim mode of a deck, the correspondent bar will be highlighted and a vertical axis for elevation and horizontal axis for traverse will appear. There would be middle markers (where the cannon is leveled/perpendicular to the deck) and min and max markers. This way you could load chain on the top deck and aim it a bit higher, while the two other decks are loaded with double shot. Or you are up close and preparing for a boarding action. So load your small top cannons with grape, while still pounding the gun deck and waterline with ball. Since it is a bit more complicated, I think UI wise it would be probably better to use the mouse for everything instead of smashing long button combinations (like 1 - 1 - 2 for example). no deck selected all decks selected and in aiming mode (chain loaded only on the top deck) all decks selected and traversed to the right example to show what I mean: only the lowest deck is selected and all decks are aimed differently In addition to that, captains should be able to mark up to three individual set settings on the elevation bar. You can experiment against AI or whatever you like and find some good settings that will help you in future battles. For example, you roughly know how far 200 meters are. With simple trial and error you can set the cannons of all decks to an elevation, where they will hit the target at 200 meters and roughly the same spot and mark it on the elevation bar. Doesn’t matter if the top deck consists of carronades while the other deck mounts longs. Or you keep your top deck always loaded with chain and aimed higher, because the low caliber won’t penetrate the hull of the enemy ship. example of premarked elevation settings. Deck 2 and 3 set to almost the same elevation, while deck one is elevated higher (the colors are just to make them more distinguishable) Since gunnery would be less accurate with those ideas, other things could also be adjusted. Like the thickness of hulls back to normal values. Leaks can be more dangerous (although I think they are fine as they are right now). Performance of cannons and carronades could be adjusted. Maybe introduce different firing mechanisms for cannons like flint lock and fuse ignition, which affects the delay between the command to fire and actual release of the round. So a rough overview of what these ideas can change Pros: no more easy mast-sniping (especially at long ranges) no more easy waterline sniping long range chaining very difficult - easier to escape a purpose for battle sails positioning and maneuvers are even more important more difficult to get the perfect rake (also affecting long range rakes) individual loadouts and aiming of every deck possible reintrodution of reasonable hull thickness because it is harder to hit consistently also adjustments of cannon damage possible to make up for worse accuracy (a really good broadside should have a big impact) Cons: too complex and over-complicating mechanics too difficult can be frustrating no real difference with current calm and invariable sea states/ship movements many others I bet.... Swivels. Since we introduced swivels with the new pirate refitted LGV I thought about a way to implement them to all ships. Every ship should have some places where you can install swivels if you want. An example is shown in the picture below. To fit swivels to your ship you have to select in port where you want them on your ship. Maybe limit the number of swivels so not every point can be equipped with them. The player could also be allowed to switch the positions during the battle. This should take some time of course. To man the swivels in the battle instance with crew, there should be a second option in the boarding menu (like press 9 and then 2 for “man swivels”) to fire the swivels you can switch between them and aim them personally at your target. I made some example pictures with a swivel aft and one at the fighting top. This can be a nuisance to smaller ships who like to stern camp your SoL. Those swivels can also be used in the new boarding mechanics if the devs are still on it. So, this was it. Remember, these are just some ideas I had.If everything stays as it is, fair enough
  8. 7 points
    Or perhaps, we eliminate the incentive to alt farm by getting rid of the bass-ackwards PvP mark system in the first place? Keep marks if you like but only make rewards cosmetic/superficial. All content that affects your game play (modules/skillbooks/notes) shouldn't be tied to a system where winners keep winning. The fact that there is incentive (PvP marks are now worth 400k+ in some markets) means that there will always be people that work their way around it. Any solution that uses IP-based detection is meaningless in the end.
  9. 7 points
    Yes, you did, it was also our first PB as a clan, we stood our ground where some would run, we left with a 50% casualty rate, and we enjoyed a good clean fight. Thanks for the opportunity, we hope to have learned a good deal from it, until we meet again. o7.
  10. 6 points
    I think we have found the one true carebear. Truly a momentous occasion. Some real masochist shit trading that much.
  11. 6 points
    I didnt read the full thread due to lack of time TBH. BUT: You cant punish a enemy for not showing up. Why? Because Screening punishes the attacker 2 times then. For not showing up in the portbattle and for running into a screeningfleet. So worst cqse: they get ganked by screening + punished for not showing up
  12. 6 points
    I fought against BF on multiple occasions, never seen anything suspicious and didn't lose many of those fights. The entire accusing good players of hacking is just silly.
  13. 5 points
    Do you know what happens when you show IP address public? People can DDOS easily and also access private information about them. Much better solution: Ban main accounts of alt farmers instead of demoting their low level alt account. First offense 1 week ban. Second offense 1 month ban. Third offense perma ban. Suddenly almost noone will altfarm anymore.
  14. 5 points
    You just overstepped the maximum amount of gold the database could handle.
  15. 5 points
    Fleet practice is yolo while a Pb vs a real enemy let you play different - a more realistic behavior.
  16. 5 points
    This was agreed before we understood the lobby concept but it was also a chance for players who have never be in a PB to understand how the basics work. We will be looking there next. Better to have a clan wanted to learn rather than running trading and ai fleet missions only. Take your point on the PVP marks, but the experience may yield some reward.
  17. 5 points
    Of course - I'm not Lord Vicious I wanted to go for a crack at Hardy, but neither of us made it. I was too busy losing a Buc up at Sombrero Island. We had several guys in there that typically don't get to go into PBs and I hear it was good fun.
  18. 5 points
    We had an arranged fight with the Brits at Misterio this evening. VCO came out in force and spanked them. Skmarsh commanding.
  19. 4 points
    Although I feel that the amount of pvp has improved a bit, I wonder whether pvp would not be further promoted by rewarding losses as well. If players get a few pvp marks for assists, why not also provide a few marks for players losing a pvp engagement?
  20. 4 points
    @BPHick Their Leader is streaming right now, go watch and learn https://www.twitch.tv/lreversel
  21. 4 points
    Maybe stop fighting 10v1 😇 Seriously though, I can't think of a battle in the last month that I've participated in, where my side won and I didn't get PvP marks. This is mostly because I typically hunt solo or in small groups. However, I think it's good that ganking isn't incentivized. If you choose to smash small groups in massive fleets, there are consequences.
  22. 4 points
    Sombrero Island PB Russian Commanders: Anolytic & Christendom
  23. 4 points
    why don't you ask to do fleet practice vs other brits and not give the enemy marks? I don't care what you do and its a free world after all but there is a lobby now that will teach you pvp with no risk We have done 3 so far and its the most fun you can have
  24. 3 points
    Short and simple: If not enough players line up for battle, please let the Que restart immediately instead of waiting 4 minutes and 30 seconds longer. Love it by the way. Tools for players are always a good idea in my opinion.
  25. 3 points
    Can we implement the "officer" knowledge schema that is found in Legends instead of the current "grind and pray to the RNG gods for a book drop" schema we currently have? Player hires officers, assigns them to ships (so knowledge gained is ship-type specific). Ship XP can unlock officer slots, each ship can have up to 4: quartermaster, gunner, carpenter, boatswain. Carpenter "learns" to repair the ship more efficiently through repairing the ship (i.e. xp gained for damage repaired in battle), quartermaster learns to handle the ship better/store supplies better to improve handling (xp gained through sailing/time in combat), gunner learns to operate guns quicker/more accurately (xp gained for damage given in battle), boatswain learns to manage crew better (xp gained for boarding?). The idea is coupled with the shipbuilding post I made previously (http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/24416-change-to-shipbuildingupgrades/)as a way to reduce "stacking" upgrades while also eliminating some of the boring as hell PvE grind for random drops or having the super-rare stuff (like some of the books and copper plating) only being the realm of those that can hit epic events (i.e. players in nations that can afford 1st rate fleets).
  26. 3 points
    FRAN do not worry, VLTRA can lend you gold (whatever the amount), you'll pay us back when you got this fixed. PS: we'll apply a small credit interest of 40%, no big deal.
  27. 3 points
    Well, that's not entirely true.. We had people farming their alts in the PvP event zones for chests/paints/etc. Just ask KoC about that. But the point still holds, if you tie any meaningful, game-changing content to PvP where winners make out better than losers, you'll have PvP alt-farming regardless of any "technical" solutions you try to put in place.
  28. 3 points
    Name and shame for everybody? Great way to get people to go out and PVP. How many hoops are we gonna jump through to keep PVP marks in the game?
  29. 3 points
  30. 3 points
  31. 3 points
    Not turning up to Port Battles This has probably been done before but I couldnt find the thread. I was in a PB the other night, there was a full PB fleet and Screening fleets, probably involved 60 or 70 people. 60 or 70 people who could have been doing something else and in my case probably would not have been playing NA at all. But I changed my plans (and those of other people too) cos it was an important PB. The clan that raised hostility didn't turn up. That just lacks class and respect for your fellow players and I'm not happy about having my time wasted by a bunch of scrubs and for me that constitutes griefing and some action should be taken against players who deliberately waste people's time. Most clans have some sense of decency, rivalry but with respect to other clans and nations, fellow players. What makes it worse is that the useless scum-sucking clan in question, ran the hostility while we were in a Port Battle, as they would never have dared show themselves otherwise, (they are cowards as well as time wasters). I can understand that the mechanics of this game allow for diversionary tactics and fighting on many fronts, but if this just results in 60 or 70 players sitting around doing nothing getting bored of the game, then thats a problem. The clan in question were logged into the game and decided to run fleet practice missions instead. That was by far the most de-motivating experience I have had in NA, and made me question whether I want to be involved in RvR anymore. As it is your opponent that sets the time for the battle, it effectively means that someone has been allowed to actively go out of there way to waste my time and that of 60 or 70 other people, and that can't be good for the game. There should be some kind of penalty for raising hostility and then not making a reasonable effort to take the port. eg. clan banned from entering hostility missions for 1 month. Or at least the 'port can't gain hostility' period should be extended so attacking an enemy port and losing the PB at least has a big benefit to the defender. The Port Battle should be automatically won if no attacking players have entered within x minutes of the start, instead of having to sit there waiting for the points to accumalate. It's really Boring. Change it.
  32. 3 points
    необоснованное обвинение карается блокировкой? До свидания сэр.
  33. 3 points
    They are available for a certain price and you can buy unique upgrades in open ports: Northern Carpenters - 800k Bovenwinds - 1.1mil Cartagena - 4 mil Crooked hull - 800k Yes, they are limited, however this only changes the price. The only upgrade which you will have trouble getting is copper plating, since it's not produced. Upgrades are not that OP any more in PvP. They are an issue only in RvR, where stacked thickness upgrades (Cartagena+Navy Structure) decide about victory and failure. All the others I think are more or less balanced.
  34. 3 points
    All joking aside the VCO clan gained PVP marks, we gained experience and the process was handled honourably on both sides. o7 to all Russian players involved.
  35. 3 points
    Pretty random battle outside Harbor Island, mixed up fleets of several nations showing up looking for a fight at a PB that never happened gg
  36. 3 points
    work together in a clan and this issue is eliminated, you won't make it without tremendous effort if your solo playing in NA. Naval Action is all about playing together.
  37. 2 points
    Thank God! I have spent 530 hours on this game for the last 2 months according to Steam Completed 4 campaigns, 2 union 2 CSA and on BG/MG difficulties.
  38. 2 points
    bernie sanders idea are actually quite good seen the situation America finds itself in today...
  39. 2 points
    v2.1 lower resolution map and anti-aliasing switched off to improve performance select ports on port battle timer (new feature) select ports on capture date range (new feature), current capture queries corrected (bug fix) select port with green zones (new feature) selects with live-search ('go to a port' and 'select a good') port info shows goods for trade only separate from other goods fort and tower colouring corrected (bug fix)
  40. 2 points
    The Battle of Antietam... The Bloodiest Day in American history. Close to 70,000 casualties as I repulse Lee and end his first invasion of Maryland. A really tough fight which actually was beyond my abilities to control in real time. In so many parts of this battle I really could have used half time to make sure my artillery was well placed and firing on the folks I wanted. As it was, I was having a major struggle just to control my infantry. Having said that, I went into this battle knowing I had to beat on Lee's army. The only really good thing to come out of this battle, expect of course I won, is that my infantry almost to the brigade increased it's efficiency by a great margin and given 400,000+ in money, I am left with a smaller but an elite fighting force across the board. I will be sure to show the differences in my next battle, the Battle of Luka. Hope you enjoy the video.
  41. 2 points
    PvP marks, if anything... we don't need more reason to PvE... Making all Books available for PvP marks not only does justice to the pure PvP players but also gives PvE players incentive to get into PvP, since the price for a PvP mark is pretty high ( until alt farming takes over )...
  42. 2 points
    I can already see 100 ways to exploit it and all PBs empty, farming loot.
  43. 2 points
    Those guys at Misteriosa had only a few players who had experienced a Port Battle. Hats off to the VCO clan who facilitated it and showed us the value of experience. Spanked? I prefer some guys who genuinely love the game, and want to learn and help keep it alive, giving it a go and falling short. The future of the game may be based around those players like SALTP wishing to put their ships at risk to learn. Maybe Christendom you could pop along to the next one so we can get at least 1 kill
  44. 2 points
    @admin Thanks again for increasing the Wasa BR! Tonight at Hat Island we saw a very interesting mix of ships, where before literally everyone was in a Wasa. We even saw a heavy frigate in a port battle! Keep up the good work, we are all looking forward to the upcoming overall rebalance.
  45. 2 points
    Why not try to play without marks... Just dont think about it and fight, if dont have any for a Wasa, try to find a Connie, Frig, Belle Poule, Cerb, Snow, Pickle... Personally, i dont need PvP/Victory mark for my PvP... Take marks as rewards, dont farm for it.
  46. 2 points
    Sounds like a problem with unrestricted, unlimited ship notes used to bypass OW. Remove them and let us buy a tow for 100 combat marks.
  47. 2 points
    Sucks for you and its boring, but BF didnt had enough people online thats why they couldnt come. But on the other side, maybe your nation is most famous for abusing every shitty tactic so I dont understand why you make a topic about just another shitty tactic. Thats not true, at the point they were doing hostility all you did was flipping North Inlet and even after that PB was set you had time to stop hostility but you only watched with basic cutters and probably thought: "Who cares, we just screen them out as usual" instead of going for a fight there.
  48. 2 points
    Maybe it was fake attack to keep you busy. Valiable tactic. Next time kill them when they grind hostility.
  49. 2 points
  50. 2 points
    that capping of npc is a tricky one ... might add new exploits (fireships, cheap PvP Mark farm, tagging and screening pb fleets) I dont know what else
×
×
  • Create New...