Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/07/2019 in all areas

  1. 23 points
    Captains Lets discuss raids (which we plan to work on for next patch or first patch after release) There are two options which we wanted to discuss with you, but first what is a raid. Raid is an attack on a port which does not take control of the town but just robs the port owner for certain resource. Raid can happen during the defense timer. We need to hear your opinions on the best implementation A - Raid like port battle - happening tomorrow Mechanics You take a raid mission on the enemy port - the same way port battles are set up (but instead of 10v10 it will be 5v5) After you killed the designated targets - the Raid will be set up for the next day Next day battle will be set up for 5v5 port battle You have to capture circles and if enemy players do not arrive you will have no opposition After you win the battle you get rewards in form of 10% of all enemy investments (number for illustration purposes only) Benefits Clear intent declaration and battle the next day Defenders do not have to scramble and can arrive in time Benefits skilled players as 5v5 greatly increases skill ceiling for the battle, less chance to succeed for average small groups/clans B - Raid like placing a flag - happening today Mechanics Part 1 You take a mission (flag) in certain county capital You place the flag near the raided port (placement takes some time) generating a mission (or just take a mission which generates battle entry point Message that flag is being placed or mission was taken is sent to server Part 2 You fight with the elite NPCs in the battle You take their special loot - raid documents and bring them to the designated county capital Part 3 Spoils Once you deliver the special loot you receive the following rewards 10% of all port investments in that port (numbers for illustration purposes only) Enemy loses 15% of the port investments in that port Loot is capturable and people who take it from you can deliver the loot themselves or destroy it (cancelling the raided status) Loot will be on the timer like deadman chest to avoid sitting out things in port or in battles Benefits You want to play now, your friends want to play now - you can't wait until tomorrow Defenders could be distracted elsewhere giving a small clan a real option to take something valuable Raid also can provide content to other players (trying to steal your loot) Benefits the smaller attacker as defenders have to scramble from other things to try to find you in mission or intercept you after it After both cases Overall the second option is better for the attacker, the first option is better for the defender. Please discuss and ask questions and make suggestions on improvements
  2. 13 points
    Yes raids are great But it should be something you can do allways and in an instant without planning ahead and asking 25 clans for support because the attack happens 1 day after PVP PLS NOT PVE LIKE HOSTI Make raids easy to defend if defended so the experience gap has to be large on the attacker side. Even give defender more BR for example But it should not be something that is planned for the next day.
  3. 11 points
    Some pics first to ilustrate current state of things. 20k and 25k BR ports are providing us those screenshots. 20k allows up to 22 first rates and 25k is full fleets of 25 first rates. Some exceptions with the inclusion of mortar brigs to snipe on the distance first rates (which is pretty stupid to see btw). As a consequence, almost full fleets of first rates with little diversity (mostly Oceans) in which the outcome is decided in one massive brawl. Circles become quite irrelevant, so as diversity and complexity of tactics. Second and third rates have no place in battles where there can be so many first rates, so the side which come with those ships instead of first rates is screwed. Again, another advantage to the biggest nations. Devs, if you really think all those 20-25 players like to sail always the same ship, the L'Ocean, for port battles and for hostility missions, then you are quite wrong. You have killed those players who like to sail other ships like Bucentaure, Bellona, frigates... Furthermore, in my view, those engagements are neither historical neither fulfill the potential of limited BR on port battles. All your hard work and all those hundreds of posts of forum feedback on the issue throw in the bin in the lastest patch. Discuss.
  4. 10 points
    Meta ships are not the issue. There is simply no reason showing up to a battle with half the ships of the other side. The BR is so high that as said if you don't bring all firsts your just shooting your self in the foot. It was far better when BR was lower. You had to think about your PB line up and we had more ship types of all rates being used. I would rather have a battle with 4 sets of 5 meta ships then 20 of one type.
  5. 9 points
    Thank you Admin, this type of content is greatly needed and I'm glad it's finally being given consideration. Unfortunately I don't think either of the options as presented accomplishes what it could. I would urge you to think about designing a system that accomplishes the following overarching goals: A system that is instant-action for anyone logging in and joining up with friends/clan/nation-mates; a mechanic that does not require PvE grind but offers up potential for PvP action; finally, a system that encourages full nation participation, not limited to friendly clans or imposes arbitrary limits on the size of fights generated through BR or other types of RoE gimmicks. The system I have in mind is complex but serves to enforce these principles: Raids are oriented towards a county. A group buys a raid "landing" ship for a particular county from the conquest missions. This ship is a shabby Indiaman for deeps, or a shabby Trader Brig for shallows, and is filled with provisions and weapons (max-filled == slow) The attacking group with no fixed size or BR must escort one or more landing ships to the county of interest. As soon as the landing ship comes within sight of any of that nation's friendly AI or ports a Combat News post of a rumored raid on that County is generated. The landing ship captain can click on any port within the target County and generate a raid battle instance. This battle instance looks much like a port battle instance but all joiners, both attackers and defenders, must join outside the bigger circle. Once joined the attackers must escort the landing ship to one of three landing locations where it must remain sails down for 10 minutes. These landing zones may be protected by port fortifications so mortar brigs may be necessary to take them out and protect them. Once 10 minutes have elapsed the landing ship(s) holds will be replaced with goods from the port, doubloons, combat medals, and must exit the battle and be escorted home. Rewards should be scaled by the amount of time since the last successful raid on a port, visible by clicking on the port. A successful raid will result in 1/3 of the port income, per successful landing, of that port for the day to be placed in a chest of the landing ship captain and removed from the port income for that day. The battle remains open the entire time on for both sides up to let's say one half of the BR of the port's port battle. For anyone participating in the battle on either side, reals, xp, and combat medals (in the hold) are received as rewards, thus encouraging all nation players to respond to raids Because the raid is taken for the County, more than one raiding battle can be started by 1-3 raiding ships at a time, forcing screeners on both sides to fight across the entire county creating a hot spot of PvP for potentially multiple nations. Raids battles can only be started, however, on ports with an open timer, thus encouraging clans to keep timers on important ports, and encouraging large clans who own County Capitals to get smaller clans to invest in port timers and protect the other ports within counties. And this is the most important part, which accomplishes full nation participation as opposed to just the clan owning the ports being raided: A successful raid landing in a county will raise the timer fee by 10% for the next three days for all county ports. This will encourage two things: multi-clan and full nation participation to protect vital counties, and continued raiding of ports within counties where countries may be timer-hiding. Please note, that the above mechanic doesn't impact port investments at all, with the exception of destroyed fortifications. I think forts and towers should be cheaper to build, but also destructable in this mechanic. I'm unconcerned with small vs. large groups in this context because small groups can both start and join ongoing raids, both attacking, screening, and joining defensive raid efforts. I think the dynamic nature of the system I proposed basically accomplishes the goal of creating voluntary PvP zones, with risks and rewards that benefit both attackers and defenders in equal parts. Hopefully these ideas help spur discussion towards a more dynamic end result for players of different group sizes.
  6. 8 points
    People have been asking for fast-small rvr actions such as raids long time ago. Raids happening the following day would be very similar to how port battles work. We dont need that.
  7. 8 points
    "Raids like port battles - preparation today, raid tomorrow at a set up time - favors larger clans and defenders." On the contrary, I think the exact opposite is the case, the other option favours large clans that have many people on immediately and able to counter quickly. The raids like port battles favours smaller clans because it gives them time to prepare. The second option is awful in my opinion. Taking away investment is a terrible idea. PvE. No quality PvP. Port battle raids at least give small clans experience in small equal BR engagements, perfect for training them for larger ones. Raids are a fine idea, the implementation as others have stated in the latter is bad.
  8. 7 points
    Browsing through the current discussions regarding Raids has lead me to the following idea: Have a blackboard - a list of players for every ship ingame, going by their sucess For example, Trincomalee blackboard would list Players from 1 to 15 (or more, not sure). Number 1 being the most successful captain. If you want to get up in the list, you need to challenge the captain above you. So if number 2 wants to become the ships champion, he needs to challenge nr. 1. the one challenged then gets a certain amount of time, say 48 hours, to react. If he doesnt, its a loss and they Swap positions on the blackboard. Important: in order to make it fair, both captains should be given the same ship to use by the game. No mods. No books. No ship loss. Perhaps perks. I would also suggest to make ir best of three since two out of three wins tell more about a captains capabilities. The battles would be held in the former small battle instances. Perhaps the champion of each ship would get access to a unique paint not accessible in any way - maybe a full Golden paintscheme. Or get an additional title, e.g. "trincomalee champion" which is displayable instead / in addition to the regular rank. This game is still lacking duel content imho. Issues I see: How can two captains agree on a date to have the duel? How does a captain get on the bottom of the list? I think these issues are managable though somehow. What do you think?
  9. 6 points
    Clearly big lineships shouldnt be on raids. If not, it is going to be a first rate everywhere. Raids, hostility missions, port battles. What a waste of ressources modeling awesome ships when we will only sail the L'Ocean.
  10. 6 points
    Hello Port "Ship building" investment is already a fail it just lead to unbalanced a little bit more the game. I suggest to developp a "Tec Tree"for crafter instead. And give back to player's (crafter ) the power to create better ship. As a crafter (i'm not ) once you reach level 7 you don't have content in the game to upgrade your skill. You could imagine some "specialist" who become master in Trinco crafting ...You create content's and the game become far more interresting for a larger amount of player's. So please remove ship building bonus from the port,and give them to crafter's clan will manage ressources and it's far enough. You could imagine the same thing for trader's (who doesn't exist since mission delivery) improving their merchant experience in some ressources...Buying cheaper and selling expensivier...Imagine One merchant could be the Banana master of the server....That's content's and not very difficult to develop.... Please make your game more interresting (not only an fighing arena ). Thank's for reading Cheer's
  11. 6 points
    Why create such a PvE barrier into a mechanic that is directed at the "easy accessible small group pvp" crowd? We already have a barrier for the "impactful map warfare pvp" group called hostility missions and i hate it...
  12. 6 points
    Not sure if i understand B well: Is it only pve ? Or Elite NPC spawn only if no player enter to fill the defender's side slots ? Is it also 5 vs 5 ?
  13. 6 points
    I leave for literally a weekend and you find a way to screw up the game even more.... jeeze. Are you trying to further kill your player base. Reference the post in the Alliance poll thread and just look what you implemented again. If you are going to change a mechanic then change it across the board taking it from everyone. This has not stopped you before. I have been reimbursed for previous alterations to the game. This made a larger gap between haves and have not but made it to where the playing field will never be equal until you wipe on release. Which the fun part is, will probably never come, and at the rate you keep unbalancing the game and pushing people away will probably result in decreased sales as people post poor reviews and very short job security for the developers moving forward. Your credibility with the player base is continually decreasing and you make no attempts to increase it. Fix your game or lose it. Fix your credibility as well and maybe players will believe your drop dates for updates, currently most of us add at least a few months on any "promise" you deliver. I simply hope someone actually rebuilds the game better after it dies so the community has some where to go at this rate. At this point I really do believe middle schools who can code could do better (and they exist). Update: Steam says "mostly negative" recent at 4,089 reviews. I would never touch a game like this unless it was less than $5 and I was intoxicated
  14. 6 points
    One tow is fine. Sail your ships people. I'd be more than happy to have a delivery system back as long as your goods were shipped by AI or players on the open water. Why we don't have player-generated "Courier Contracts" ala EVE is beyond me. This would be a huge step forward for non-combat oriented players in the game.
  15. 5 points
    A player had nostalgia of the old 25 mono fleet. Unfortunately, admin read his post.
  16. 5 points
    Do not think so The smaller the engagement the higher is the importance of skill, knowledge and fleet composition. If raid is for next day you can provide screens + best players for 5v5. You either do not get to the raid event or lose against top pros. If raid is for today, not only small clan can find the defender distracted, but also sneak in without the ability to react (as defenders will have to find you and catch you to take the loot back)
  17. 5 points
    Gregory has a point, I think the poll result will be influenced by stating which option was advantageous to who, when that might not necessarily be the case. There are pros and cons for both though I think. Option A: gives the opportunity for small PBs which is great for smaller clans and I think quality PvP is always preferable to PvE missions. Option B: Could be fun in theory but there is a danger that large nations can mobilise clans with 60 Port Bonused 1st rates, 5 go in to deal with AI while others wait and they all sail home with the loot, almost impossible to oppose on such short notice. Theoretically they could do multiple raids down an entire coast. Basically just taking everyone's stuff unopposed in a massive show of strength. So B would only work if it was smaller ships and/or the loot was relatively minor (so as to not be worth mobilising an entire nation) and there was a limit on the number of raids in any given time. B would also be better if players could replace AI if they were available on a very short timer? I also think that a raided Port should have a long cool down before it can be raided again. It could be a fun mechanic which provides extra content and a chance for smaller clans to take part in RvR, but if the Port depletion is too harsh or defenders are being constantly targeted it will soon become a pain. Raids should be a fun mechanic for small clans to get involved in some RvR. But NOT yet another mechanic that hands large nations a further advantage over smaller ones.
  18. 5 points
    Or you can make it pvp inside the instance if you give the defenders 10-15mins joining timer. When it expires, bots appears.
  19. 5 points
    I like the idea of raids but I don't like the proposed implementations. Option B would be good if it wasn't pve
  20. 5 points
    ... or 5 players if they join before battle starts ?
  21. 5 points
    I completely agree! I hope the developers will listen to this..
  22. 4 points
    Timeflow: Attacker buys a flag from any national port. (to avoid basic cutter scouting right from the beginning, flag cost resources to avoid spam) Rumours about the plan start spreading. The flag is announced to Nation or whole server (if you want everyone seeking fun to join.) The targeted port is unknown for defender, only the nation to be attacked is known. Every port of that nation can be a target. The flag cannot be removed from the port for coming 20 min, giving time for others to prepare for fun. After 20 min, attackers can take the flag and leave the port. An announcement will be made that a raiding fleet set sails to attack an X nation port. After 10 minutes, rumours will spread about the county name the possible raid has been launched. regardless of the attacker leave timer. Sooner they leave better for them to be undetected. Attackers will have 30 min to plant the flag. The route they took is up to them. Yet the target is unknown. Do not worry about it. Not every port is worth raiding. Let some raid very unexpected ports for low-profit while others try to raid Cartaghena. There is no problem of raiding very close enemy ports either, that will serve to the creation of frontiers. Planting the flag will take 5 minutes standing stationary, allowing defenders to attack and interrupt. As soon as the flag is planted loot menu will appear like deadman chest. The attacker will need to bring it to any national port. No needless AI fighting. The defenders can intercept prior to or after the raid. The chest will contain the 20% tax income of the port from the previous day (to be extracted from future income) + some extra goodies. If anyone else managed to cap back the chest, goodies will be deleted and only tax amount will stay to avoid abuse. Deadman chest is heavy so you need to bring traders with you. Traders will serve to avoid fast ships abuse ect. protecting, capturing traders will be a priority. Rules: Max group size 6. 1 being a trader. Trader as a fleet might be allowed or let's try fighting traders? Max ship lvl allowed to the attacker is 4th rate. No limits for defenders. (Finally remove the stupidly high bonuses/wood difference to not see fir/fir Victories catching every 5th rate. Without correction of idiotic bonuses nothing will work in this game.) I am at work and can not write more detailed. But this will give lots of content for everyone I guess. EDIT: More restrictions or rules you add will only serve to another failure implementation. Keep it basic, simple, let it flow. It is raiding, keep it open, stop restricting everything to force your vision. Let players decide how to approach it. We don't need circles, AI battles, OW is enough. Whatever makes you sail is good. Stop approaching everything as a lobby instance.
  23. 4 points
    Pvp With shrinking circle and only for pirates. No rvr for pirates. Only port raids
  24. 4 points
    The first question we need to answer is: Admin, What is the actual purpose of the "Raid" concept? Since us EU prime-time forum watchers generally get first crack at catching the devs ears, I figure it would be beneficial to know exactly WHO they're trying to target with this mechanic. Is it the "off-hours" players who basically get locked out of conquest-type content? Is it "small-clans" who have few options to go up against the mega-clans in traditional PB's? Because each one of these groups would need different mechanics. But there is ONE VERY IMPORTANT mechanic that needs to be implemented so that "Raids" don't turn into an utter &^@*-show of salt: THE CLAN DOING THE RAIDING MUST REMAIN ANONYMOUS UNLESS IT IS ACTUALLY DEFENDED BY PLAYERS OF THE CLAN BEING RAIDED. If you are a small clan, what is the point of raiding if you know that you will just be curb-stomped into oblivion for "daring to attack your masters"???
  25. 4 points
    its pvp when you are bringing back the loot. Enemies will decide themselves if they want to intercept you or not to create pvp
  26. 4 points
    The British among others are worried to have an unbalanced game which might be funny in your eyes that are wide shut. Continue counting numbers of ports and points and credits and whatsoever. Your subject only is "i got the best, the strongest, the longest". It´s not useful for our game at all. Ship bonuses and mods should be nerfed to marginal. But there´s a second topic in your crude logic right now: Unlimited tows. Basically creating an arena with a beautyful and well though of map wrapped around it rendering the open world to useless. It´ll all be very enjoyable... Best wishes Gene
  27. 4 points
    Don't worry! Once someone gets a 5/5 Connie with all the port bonuses in LO/WO, a proper speed stack build will push her over 13.5. HISTORICAL ACCURACY HERE I COME!
  28. 3 points
    Moving the solo PvP zone outside the normal zone would help as well. I would like this kind of tournament on a weekly or monthly basis.
  29. 3 points
    Trafalgar wasnt a battle full of first rates. And the most important thing, for the nostalgia boys, you can always have battles of 25 oceans vs 25 oceans in the OW.
  30. 3 points
    Just keep one major thing in mind, if it becomes easier for a clan to lose stuff than build it, than players will stop building up ports. Small clans will retreat to the capital areas and give up on the idea of building up a port for the bonuses.
  31. 3 points
  32. 3 points
    @admin I still know the arrival of hostilitymechanic compared to flagmechanic and you lost 20-30 active swedish RvR players that sailed out every day and did something together. The same happened in other nations probably. @sveno @Havelock If you want to have something again for these "instant action" players then reintroduce the flagmechanic. Let flags cost combat marks/pvp marks however they are called now to avoid too many "fakeflags". It would give players something to do right when they log in again, screening, flaghunting, joining a ongoing fleet etc.
  33. 3 points
    Well, make it depending on target port respectively the BR, for example: Shallow port: max 6th rates Regular port: max 5th rates County Capitol: max 4th rates Don't restrict the bottomline, maybe the attacker wants to mix 1x tlynx (for the loot) with a 5th rate raiding force
  34. 3 points
    This is a quite good idea to compensate the clear advantage of the attackers. #Vote for raids happening in the same day, vote for PVP-only raids. Make raids great since the begining.
  35. 3 points
    Will they be limited to ships? I think raids should be exclusively 5th rates or 4th rates.
  36. 3 points
    I agree. Raids must be pvp content only.
  37. 3 points
    Yes, for Raids. But i think it is Time to rework the Pirats, make them a Hardcore Faction with some restrictions.
  38. 3 points
    Option A people will only get screened out by defending nation. Option B is best for smaller groups and is more spontanous and realistic.
  39. 3 points
    I am for number one. Like Port Battles today. Why? because it creates more opportunities for PVP.- But however it is done I would take the opportunity to create missions that are for 2nd, 3rd and 4th rate ships. Not 1st rate again. Make it so that in order to get a raid mission in XXXX-harbour you have to field a number of 3rd rate ships that meets, lets say, 6 3 rate NPCs per mission. You have to go in with ships of the same BR. I am a bit sick and tired that 1st rates are used for everything important in RVR in the game. We need to create content for 2nd, 3rd and 4th rates too. Raids gives you a GOLDEN opportunity to create content for other ships than 1st rates. So however you do it, with flags or missions, PLS do NOT turn this into another one of these "we use 1st rates only" things in the game. It is enoough that PBs and hostilitymissions demand 1strates almost exclusively. Otherwise i think the idea is excellent. It allows you to attack ports that are not capitals and gives an incentative to defend even thses ports. And it gives minor clans some more freedom to act on their own-
  40. 3 points
    If you dont see the involved features now... you're showing again your intellectual level. PS: forgot. How a weaker nation is espected to have an upgraded port... if alphadog can and especially do attack them... being no way to keep it secret thanks to ever present alts? And this crappy power gamer shitty mindset is quite clear: why does Russia need 5 out 6 top ports (and leaving one to a more or less ally)? Arent 2-3 MORE THAN sufficient? No: because (and in real war is absolutely fair and right) you want to close them to enemy (especially knowing perfectly being upgraded). And as already explained: how a weaker faction could recover after losing a couple of heavily invested ports... especially now the prices are manyfold higher? BUT Russia, being richer was able to (almost) fully upgrade cheaper? Wasnt better from devs RESETTING all port upgrades and giving back what expended? Or at least downrating upgrades in proportion of what was been spent in them? If you dont understand that EVERYTHING at the moment is helping you (even luck - like Nassau PB crashing delaying GB by 24 hrs there) you, again, showing total lack of any analitical ability aside utter lack of intellectual honesty. PPS: Everything helping like even an "allowed" exploit (Santiago). Hitting the first port GB was upgrading even if was breaking intended rules. So making them wasting resources - widening you head start. Sincerely I rarely read such intellectual dishonesty... and being quite active politically I am quite used too.
  41. 3 points
    So what are you trying to say here? Their zerg better than yours? So sad you can not see the real problem here.
  42. 3 points
    There is no need to be concerned about this. When nations hardly can fill 10k PB's, nostalgia of 25 1st rates suddenly hit the game. When everybody is complaining about bonus stacking and superb ships, more bonuses emerged to serve the owners of important ports. When accessibility of competent ships was questioned by many, more requirements/barriers of hard investment introduced to serve the resource owners. It was pure luck that all above served to 1 nation. Lets make a basic calculation. Nation A with 50 active players, nation B with 100 +all needed strategic resources. You can finish port upgrades in half time as Nation B. You can craft double amount of "stupid" ships way before Nation A can do so. Nation A will burn themselves out way faster because of grind required. Nation B can rush to kill other nations before they have a chance to build up. You can never guarantee that nation A can have 25 players available to meet Nation B. Even though nation A manages to bring 25, Nation B will always have bigger player pool to choose more skilled players. Once nation B wins, there is almost no way to recover because the same conditions above, worsened 4x I am not revolutionizing rocket science here. All above is very simple, basic logic. Gameover. Develepors won this round. Looking to future.
  43. 3 points
    So what your saying is that the russians will be the only people who are able to craft ships like this after you make your update? Because your making the decision to allow them to keep the already made investments, so once again you will be making people not want to fight in case they come up against one of these ships? Yet another mistake from admin
  44. 2 points
    Im geniunely curious, what are the potential drawbacks to having a 6hr cooldown on tows or even a 12hr cooldown, and why would players having the ability to better situate themselves to pvp/pve be a bad thing? Suggestion: 6hr cooldown for tow
  45. 2 points
    I have to agree with everyone who stated there before me that big bonuses are not working. You should go back to 0.5% and 1% changes. I really would like to know what the F you were thinking when you decided to give 5 different port bonuses? One would have been massive and you decided to go with 5? admin, do you even play PvP games in general? Do you even play Naval Action? Are you really so bad PvP player that you love to butt R new players with your OP gear? Don't want to be offensive here but if you make every feature in this game to support this, then what do you want people to think about you?
  46. 2 points
    Part of my enjoyment with the dynamic BR ports was trying to figure out a ship comp that worked.... no more. The large mono fleets of the fine woods patch era worked because ships were cheap to build and upgrades/perks were generally uniform and did not play as huge of a factor. That is not the case anymore. 20k / 25k BR on a large majority of the deep water ports while making 1st rates more difficult to produce was an astonishingly bad idea. I'd like to think that the game should find an accommodation for both fleets like this and the smaller BR ports with more diversity. Maybe only a handful of ports need to be 20k? There needs to be regions on the map that don't require 25 folks in 1st rates.
  47. 2 points
    Adding on to this. I'd much rather have loot be rare resources than just more victory marks. When I am wanting to raid a port I want the resources that are there - not the doubloons, victory marks, or tools.
  48. 2 points
  49. 2 points
    Santi like many other good fighting ships are hidden behind RNG chest drops for the perk so you won't see many of them.
  50. 2 points
    Imo every single Upgrade and Port Bonus should have a downside too. If you have speed you lose tank, if you have reloading you lose boarding etc etc. Theory crafting different ships for different roles and fighting styles is brilliant. Sailing around on ships that are superior in every way is pants. There is no fun in being destroyed by a player in a much better ship. This is watering down competitive skill, which is the best part of NA and as we can see from above it will not attract and keep people playing the game. I am helping my clan to prepare for release, were it not for this I would have uninstalled and taken a break by now. In it's current state the game is joyless. So called 'elite' players have too loud a voice for devs it seems, they are supposed to be skilful and yet seem to require every advantage possible built into the game mechanics for them (not all of them). Well done Anolytic, who benefits from this and yet calls it out for the farce it is. If only there were more like him. My suggestions would be this: 1. A complete overhaul of Upgrades and Port Bonuses where each and every one has a positive AND negative effect or: 2. Port Bonuses to apply only to SOLs - so that RvR and clan activities do not disadvantage solo players and smaller clans so drastically and do not dictate engagements in the Open World.
×
×
  • Create New...