Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/15/2019 in all areas

  1. 8 points
    Dear Developers, Please do something about the NPCs. I know that with the port bonus rush nobody on PvP server gives half a rat's arse about them right now, and that's where the action is, but on PvE side of things, NPCs are the only thing we've got. Making their sailing more realistic was a good first step (it's nice to be fighting sailboats instead of motorboats). But, NPCs have way too many HPs, way too much pen and way too much DPS. I've specifically done some test runs where I went broadside-to-broadside to observe. I've seen my Bellona do less damage with two consecutive broadsides to an USS United States, than it did to me with a single broadside. This isn't right. Especially since my ship is fairly optimized (Teak/White Oak and thickness upgrade) and the NPC ship is as always fir or oak with crew space. I'm not saying NPCs are unbeatable - but you have to resort to long-range artillery duels (not exactly a thing in the Age of Sail), and if you are fighting the same ship as what you are sailing, you are almost guaranteed to need to break off and repair. "NPCs have more HP because they can't repair" is not a valid reason anymore because of how many more HP NPCs have. Also, when I repair, I have to run (or the NPC will just destroy whatever I repaired) and at the very least I suffer a reduction in efficiency because of crew reallocation. NPC overbuffs become more pronounced at higher rates and lead to three glaringly obvious issues: 1. It is not historically accurate. As it stands, in 4th rates and up, smaller NPC ships can comfortably stand broadside-to-broadside with larger player ships and if the player doesn't repair, they have a good chance of sinking the player. 2. It is frustrating. A battle against the same ship in the hands of NPC turns into a knife's edge contest. For one, I am not playing NA for a "Dark Souls" experience where one mistake can send you to the bottom. Higher-rate ship battles, ironically, are now more stressful than lower-rate ship battles, because margins of error are razor-thin, and you are risking losing an expensive ship with expensive upgrades. High risk you say? High risk should result in high reward. But there are no high rewards. You can't capture an awesome ship after a difficult battle, because NPC ships are bad. You don't get awesome loot unless RNJesus smiles at you, which doesn't happen very often. You take on high risk for inadequate rewards, so the optimal way is to go seal-club lower rate ships. 3. It invalidates players' optimized builds. In terms of speed, player ships can come out ahead. In terms of turn rate, after the nerf the NPCs are either "just as good" or better than an optimized player ship. In terms of tankiness, thickness and HP barely matter anymore, because NPCs chainsaw through LO/WO just as well as they do through regular oak (the differences are there, but they are very marginal). In terms of firepower, we cannot hope to match NPCs, because they have medium cannons that have range and pen like long cannons and reload and damage like carronades. Even with poods and gunnery upgrades, we come up short. Finally, NPCs still have their humongous fire arcs as if every cannon is mounted on a swivel. Of course this does not apply when 4th rates and higher fight frigates. But at similar rates, it very much applies. Now you would be tempted to say "ha ha, Ahoy got his ass kicked by NPCs and went crying to the forums, git gud scrub." Which is not the case; I have not lost a ship recently and I'm doing quite all right, but I am playing it VERY SAFE. It works, but it's getting tiresome. If you want more proof, watch the streams of your biggest advocate, Captain Reverse. He could not even pass the final exam because he got pounded into scraps. And there was a stream a little while ago of him and a few more PvP players taking a fleet of Bellonas against an NPC fleet. They lost at least one (possibly more); these are guys with THOUSANDS of hours that breathe, eat and drink NA combat. Also look at how closely the PvP battles are fought; people are within very short distances of each other and they don't immediately get perforated unless it's a much larger ship vs. much smaller ship. If you try fighing equal NPCs at realistic "Age of Sail distances", you will get ventilated in short order. And of course we have no port bonuses on PvE. If you nerf books and upgrades to compensate for port bonuses, we are screwed. Please do something about the NPCs.
  2. 5 points
    Wow, I guess someone is feeling a bit salty because they can only feel accomplished zerging the map and hiding behind numbers and game mechanics that have been purpose built for that? Any potential threat to that advantage or allowing other players to play the game they bought in the timezone they want is a real problem to that hegemony isn't it? Let me clear a few things up for the mouth breathing sycophants who responded here and brainlessly mashes "like" on your posts above. WO and VCO did not coordinate a multiflip on the U.S. We honestly would have rather had the U.S. show up with their best (and I can't understand why they didn't just no-show Marsh and fully commit to a port battle on their coast, but whatever). We flipped it at a time that was convenient for us (believe it or not, the U.S. is a big country and spans multiple time zones), not to mention we flipped it immediately when the port hostility could be gained because Texas forgot to put a timer on it for the day it would go live. That's not evil planning, that's just logistics and mechanics. Regardless, we knew the U.S. would hide behind an E.U. timer like they've done with Savannah, which is their right of course, but it doesn't create good U.S. time zone play for them. In any case, the timing was circumstantial, not some nefarious plot between WO and VCO. Second, WO and VCO are fine with friendly fights in the OW but we have a long history of absolutely toxic RvR, and it's not healthy for either clan. So we avoid it plain and simple. Why should we engage in something that's not fun when there's fun to be had elsewhere? Beyond that, as Admin's numbers show, the U.S. has plenty of players relative to France and Pirates during our prime time, they just suck at organizing because they insist on roleplaying instead of figuring out the meta. That's fine but they should stop bitching about it and relying on demonizing two clans that have made sport of the meta over the years. The US should instead focus on getting better through arranging port battles (which we've offered over and over) and worrying less about pixels and PvE. Third, both of our clans have had to deal with incessant bullshit from the loudest whingers in the game about exploits and "cheating" that have been confirmed as neither, and so forgive us if we wanted to prove a point to those whinging about mechanics by making it absolutely clear that if we wanted to get to the U.S. coastline and set up a camp there we could do it under any scenario. As far as questioning our morality, I don't think you have a leg to stand on there. Why would we have any need to post any negative reviews when so many other players are doing it for us? I've not left a single review, as I'm philosophically against doing so for any Early Access game, and I think any of our players who have posted probably have done it in equal parts negative and positive, which is probably fair in the big scheme of things, or do you disagree? If you think you can pin declining player numbers on WO and VCO you need to really take a step back and assess the source of your anger bud. Because those players that post negative reviews are well within their rights, not just because they spent money on the right to access and test the game as it's being developed, but because many ideas and changes in the game, not their own, have led to some pretty miserable outcomes for us as players over the years.
  3. 5 points
    We should all join Russia, they need more population.
  4. 4 points
    He is not looking for human behavior, read again. Just this, just that. Did you read his post at all? He said that he's doing fine and has not lost a single ship. And he also said that it can get tiresome. I completely feel the same. Haven't lost a ship in a while, yet I'd rather play another game at the moment because I have no pleasure playing against roid rage AIs, it just feels, well, unfair... And this is valid only for the more persevering players, because the other ones left. I managed to get 4 friends back in the game and they all left within what, two months? Specifically because of the reasons mentioned here AND the lack of communication on the matter.
  5. 4 points
    Wo and VCO dont even have the balls to attack the US at a reasonable hour... you had a choice of when to set the pbs at marsh and the other one on the east coast and you set them at like 1am east coast US time and set both pbs within 20 mins of each other and on top of all of it you decided to do it on a monday night. Gtfo with your "entitled" eu player bs, you guys wont even give the depleted US a chance to even put up a defense. People are just sick of scumbag gameplay. But please tell us more about how you guys are morally our betters and that we should listen to your armchair game developer ideas. Go on, show the screens from those battles and tell us you're all for good fights. Then lets consider how many of your members gave the game a bad review on steam telling people essentially to not buy the game because of the butthurt from admin not using your genius solutions. #adminmanbad
  6. 3 points
    Timers are good, they prevent the bad people on the other side of the round earth from hurting you when you sleep. But if we must remove the timers and set a standard server time clearly it should be set to the Caribbean time zone you know it being a Caribbean game and all. Anyone who plays outside my time zone basically does not exist right so I see no issue with this time zone being used.
  7. 3 points
    There is an ongoing problem in this game and it is that Devs design it around the wishes of the best players. This manifests itself here in an NPC problem, because exceptional players find low skilled NPCs to be boring. Now I did read somewhere that there is a plan to vary the NPC's skills, so there is hope that this problem will go away and become an interesting aspect of the game. Imagine going into battle against a bot and not knowing it's relative skill....
  8. 3 points
    We actually lost Australia with the merge, server reset falling right on their prime time, with that went NA's best content creator as well.
  9. 2 points
  10. 2 points
    We dont have nightflips, what are you referring to?
  11. 1 point
    Hi, I'm a member of the Spanish community of strategy games. Games like total war, paradox games, and games of this type. we are more than 10000 members in different forums and internet communities and youtube all addicted to strategy games. Well, we have been following this project with interest and enthusiasm but we want to convey our concern about the absence of nations as important for US independence as Spain (Notable empire and naval armada of the best in the world only compared to the royal navy ) and France too. We ask that you take into account the importance of these two empires in this game since both were of vital importance and whose history in the naval is unquestionable. having said that we hope that we can not only play battles and campaign with the US and the British Empire. if not also with Spain And France.
  12. 1 point
    It is my view that such arguments are best made with visual aids. So I was going to make a video showing the difference between port bonuses and no bonuses in surprises. However @dron (<3) put a stop to that by sinking both test ships… And I haven’t gotten around to making a new test. But the argument is already raging about the portbattle of Les Cayes, in the wrong topic. So I thought I’d redirect that discussion here and sprinkle it with a few facts. And these recent port battles will have to do as demonstration. Here is my ship from Les Cayes PB: Anybody want to trade? The fact is that for each of the battles of Nassau and Les Cayes I constructed 8 new ships with port-bonuses (only one was better than blue). That is, less than a 3rd of each of our fleets was new ships with bonuses. So, did they decide the outcome of the battles? In Nassau it’s a clear NO. In Les Cayes, the answer is both yes and no. Without them we might have lost some ships, but the brawl was still decidedly in our favour. But let’s discuss the particulars of the battle elsewhere. The fact is the stats on ships with port-bonuses are very high compared to those without them. Just looking at the stats it’s like having a ship with 10 upgrade slots and all elite upgrades. Just to highlight a few stats, the 5% speed boost of Sailing Bonus 4, or 10% armour thickness AND HP of Hull Bonus 4. Port-bonuses seem like a good idea for content in principle. But they need to be nerfed. And they need to be accessible to all, dependent on effort, not nationality. I know that port-bonuses will be changed next week. But I don’t think that it is enough. No ports should have more potential for greater ship-building than others. But the full potential of a regions should only be realised through the development of dependent ports in the county. Making other ports on the map more valuable than now. Notice how some nations have not even bothered to take the ports around their county capitals yet. If we want to have some special ports that are extra attractive for conquest like now, make it through convenience and profit. Give them more profitable trade-goods and make it so that ship-building in those ports require less hauling of resources and less logistics than in other ports. Right now a few nations can take all of the 55-point ports and monopolise the production of OP ships. Skewing the balance of PvP and RvR alike. People ask for something to fight for. But I remember in 2016 when there was no exclusive resources and we all fought more than any other time just for dots on the map and our names on the Lord Protector list. And I also remember other times in the game, and how troves of players, even entire clans, left nations or left the game over the loss of these pixels which suddenly had become more than just pixels, but prerequisites for gameplay on even terms. We should not go back to the times when RvR was about the destruction of communities rather than fun fights. If you loose one crafting-port, you should be able to set up your facilities in another one until you can get the first one back.
  13. 1 point
    Empire Total War had 1 million sales probably motivated by the fact you can pick several playable nations. Many mods later unlocked the minor nations. Gamelabs must understand that some of the most succesful games in the recent history are those which allows the players to have freedom of choice.
  14. 1 point
    Seal-clubbing fifth rates with a second rate is not a good example and I specifically mentioned it in the OP.
  15. 1 point
    Then there is still time to include a campaign or free battle with playable Spain. hopefully Thank you
  16. 1 point
    I wonder who attacked La Navasse at 3pm when brits already had 20k BR PB 😃 and then who was bitching in global about navasse not being contested 😃
  17. 1 point
    I was doing missions killing 3rd rates with a Christian (T/WO) and tried one just sailing broadside to broadside and came away with considerable damage (1/3 structure left). That's with 3 slots with reload bonuses poods and double shot. In theory a Christian should out DPS a 3rd rate without mods. The last one I did I noted the AI was an Admiral so maybe that effected the battle. They still seems to shoot at extreme angles as well.
  18. 1 point
    Pues fijate, llamarme tonto si queréis, pero yo no creo que los americanos ponen esos timers para fastidiar a los europeos, igual que no creo que los europeos pongan sus horarios para fastidiar a los americanos........... Simplemente cada uno pone las horas en sus horarios, como es normal............ Los americanos son tan perjudicados por el horario como los europeos... ¿Donde está el problema entonces?.......... En quienes se han empeñado en que juguemos juntos cuando no podemos hacerlo porque tenemos horarios diferentes...... ¿Por que los americanos no quieren dos servidores si son tan perjudicados como los europeos?.......... Pues porque saben que son el 20% del servidor, y si se separan los servidores, entonces el servidor americano tendría menos población que la aldea al lado de mi pueblo...... Por eso no quieren que se separen los servers, porque cuando ocurrió, en el europeo había 4 veces mas población que en el servidor americano........... Por eso hicieron fuerza para que se volvieran a juntar........... Este es mi punto de vista........... Si los desarrolladores no son capaces de ver esto, en lugar de un server poblado y otro despoblado, tendremos un server despoblado como ahora ocurre. ¿Por que los ingleses no dicen ni pio, y cuando dicen algo es para defender a los americanos?............ Pues porque ellos tienen gente en ambos horarios, y pueden elegir los horarios que mas daño hacen a cada uno.........
  19. 1 point
    In christian against 5th rates of course
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    As much as I would hope is not the case, based on past issues the deciding factor may well rest with what the "trusted friends" think. Just waiting to see.
  22. 1 point
    When we bring a warship as one of our fleet, does it have the same capabilities and behaviors as a NPC ship on its own?
  23. 1 point
    Thats not a way to solve problems. Fighting cheating AI is not fun, in any game
  24. 1 point
    The problem is we have to go in LO/WO ships to fight against AI which should be balanced vs Oak/Oak ships not the strongest ships. I had a legency LO/WO with floating battery and maxed out reload getting out DPS by an AI I'm broad side to broad side with. It seems lack of crew, sinking or other factors don't effect there reload and they reload double ball just as fast and can do so unnumber amount of time. Again AI should be balanced against the middle not the best ships. I actually found it was faster to just go in and rage board the SOL's with an equal ship and be done with it instead of going broad side to broad side. Not to mention the rewards are so bad half your reals are gone for repairs, but Admin did state they plan to boost these up next patch.
  25. 1 point
    VCO and WO both have the two biggest/most active "night time" fleets and BOTH complain there is no one for them to attack at those hours. But instead of attacking each other and having some decent battles, they choose to work together to multi flip nations that they assume cannot fill the port battles. I mean they're already targeting what they see to be easy battles yet still feel the need to multi-flip. I agree with what you say about giving the US chance to put up a defence but that is not what these guys want
  26. 1 point
    Maybe, it is so difficult to understand that the world is round for him...... as for you to understand that you and I can not play together, because when you sleep I play, and vice versa .... Create a game so that we play together if we can not do it is doomed to failure........... It is not so hard to understand either ..... As soon as the new players see that they can not conquer ports simply because they are sleeping, they abandon the game. It has happened in the past, and it will happen again in the future when game release ...... Maybe your brain also has problems to understand obvious things ... I have given this battle as lost in the forum those who rule and that is why we are in this situation (500 players in the best moments). But do not treat as stupid who does not think like you ....
  27. 1 point
    https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/29160-cant-post-on-forum-cant-send-private-messages-either/ N.
  28. 1 point
    You notice he did not mention Spain. (snicker)
  29. 1 point
    So far I’ve been underwhelmed by the Pandora as have my AI opponents.
  30. 1 point
    9-pounders is another classification that gathers a rather homogenous group of ships that all carry 9-pdr guns or 32-pdr carro, from the Niagara up to the Surprise. Look at 3 ships, say : LRQ (6th rate, 9-pdr ship, in game 32-pdr carro, 24 guns) Cerberus (5th rate, 9-pdr frigate, in game 32-pdr carro, 26 guns) Trincomalee (5th rate, 18-pdr frigate, in game 32-pdr carro, 50 guns) A Cerberus (5th rate) has more to do with a LRQ or a Niagara (6th rate) than with a Trincomalee (5th rate).
  31. 1 point
    Beautiful pictures of Ronan Follic (professional photographer) during the passage of the Raz de Sein (Brittany) !!!! https://www.facebook.com/pg/RonanFollicphotographies/photos/?tab=album&album_id=290852829585854630
  32. 1 point
    Economy based game. We all know that harsh and realistic economy is what everyone desires. Nelson didn't build HMS Victory alone and in one day.
  33. 1 point
  34. 1 point
    Gods when is this game gonna go full release and wipe already? I can only sip my tea and wait for soooo long.
  35. 1 point
    I, Dread Pirate CheekyBreeky of VCO, being accused in cheating without evidences and NOT in Tribunal section for the 2nd time, demand this person to apologize or get his ability to post on forums taken away!
  36. 1 point
    It is easy to understand why. Around 1/3 of the nations are dead in RvR due to the lack of players. Another big % cant do anything to counter the top RvR nations. Also, the new BR for port battles makes things way worse except for the guys with nostalgia.
  37. 1 point
    Apart from the mechanic and timer issues I´d very much like to see some content for the unrated vessels. They also merit some place in the game!
  38. 1 point
    Let's use some real clans as examples. BASTD, largest GB clan, could just go along a coast raiding. Small clan can't defend against that and neither can nation mobilise quickly to defend it. Smaller clans will just get steamrolled by larger ones if the benefits are so large as to incentivise it. Most of the time there are screen it's true, but that's because there's the loss of a potential national port at stake. I don't think anyone except the owning clan will bother defending in that case since other clans have nothing to lose. To strike a balance I would suggest two things, that it be one clan against another, so only the clan owning the port can defend it and the opposing clan attacking it. Set it not as a port battle but as shrinking circle kind of thing like the patrol zone. The rewards should not be as you've described. They are far too harsh on the defending clan and not balanced at all. Instead reward the raiding clan with the worth of the taxes collected from the port the previous day and have the amount deducted from the owning clan's clan warehouse plus maybe a couple of chests or something. Give people after the battle the chance of teleporting back to port after the battle. This will have the effect of incentivising raiding but only raiding of the richest targets, those that can most afford it will be most impacted. It will also contribute to the frontline mechanics you're trying to create. Clans cannot take ports all over the map without being at risk forcing clans to locate their ports in one area or another.
  39. 1 point
    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
  40. 1 point
    Perfect. The most weird part is developers, who should want a living and striving server, are not recognizing these simple issues my 11 year old (but quite nerdy) son is able to analyse and criticize (and it's not a joke; dark reality: he sometimes sails on my behalf).
  41. 1 point
    This is nothing new, it is well known, and it has been noted before in the forum. It is a feature or a bug depending on how you see it. However it is worth to mention it again to let Devs consider before release. The issue, if it is one, is this: In Port Battles against neutral ports it is possible for a nation to get an almost endless number of captains into the PB and earn Lord Protectorates. And thus earn Victory Marks. In other words, while normally a port would earn a nation up to 25 Victory Marks, it is possible for a nation to get 30-40 Victory Marks generated out of a single Port. That is per week. The system that makes this possible is a feature that was added some time ago: If a player leaves battle in the first 20 minutes of a PB without having inflicted or received damage in the PB to that point, his Battle Rating and his «slot» in the PB is restored to his team in the PB. In other words his side can join another ship to replace his BR and number without exceeding either the BR limit or the 25-player limit. Case in point, if you have 25 players in a PB and you are exactly at the Battle Rating limit for that PB. One player in Agamemnon can leave the battle, and another player can join the battle. But only if the first Agamemnon did not fire at anyone or get shot at, and it is within the first 20 minutes. So this would never mean that one side could have more than 25 players on their side. Nor would they be able to have more than the BR limit in the battle at any time. So it cannot be used in that way to gain an advantage in a contested battle. The feature in itself is a great and much used one. Introduced to us because it did, and still does, happen that someone joined a PB who was too eager and not supposed to. Or he was in the wrong ship. Then you can kindly convince him to leave the battle, and let the original member of your party join. Also there are, and were, cases where a player who was supposed to be in the PB, would discover in the beginning of the battle that he was experiencing particular lags or connection issues, or a ship could even disconnect and drop out. Then this player could, in the first 20 minutes, be replaced by someone better able to fight in the battle. This is a much appreciated feature. But it can also be used, in battles for Neutral Ports, where there is no dangerous opposition, to generate more Lord Protectorates than originally intended. Because a player that was in a PB, whether he left after 2 minutes or stayed till the end, will get a Lord Protectorate as long as his side won. The situation is demonstrated in this screenshot from Harbour Island: Note that in the screenshot I took, my character’s name is not on the list of the first 25 players to join the battle. He is way down the list from that. Now, we have been discussing between ourselves whether the core mechanic at work here, the replacing of ships in the first 20 minutes of battle, could be abused in some way. In theory an attacker could join an entire PB-fleet at one position in the PB, and after the defender has started sailing to that position, the attacker could literally replace their whole fleet for another PB-fleet that would spawn in a different position, unanticipated by the defender, who now may have sailed too far in the wrong direction. Personally I tend to believe there would be little or no possibility to gain any real advantage from this. Just a great risk of abject failure. To the problem of Lord Protectorates, there is an easy solution if we want this possibility removed. As this can only be done against neutral ports or in traded ports, and nobody is harmed by it, I am not sure a solution is really that urgently needed. But the simple solution would be to only count Lord Protectorates for players that stayed past the 20-minute mark of a Port Battle.
  42. 1 point
    lets turn it another way. Russian Timers are 16-19 and 17-20. This basically prevents US players from moving forward on these front lines. Obviously an exploit because they won't fight me in my time zone. ----------------------------- so, now that we have that established. You can get friends in that timezone, or you can attack those ports within that timer. If I recall correctly it didn't seem to be too much of a problem when you attacked the secret Island to take it from the French? what's the issue now?
  43. 1 point
    what i can see now is that the big clans get the best ports the small to medium clans get the useless leftovers...(45 points for the big ones ... or 15 [15 is shit and nothing] there is no balance... but huge ridiculous prices (like 50 victory masks for one building on the port [for all building types with different characteristics but the same price is just lame thoughts) this game becomes into too many negatives for players to keep them in the game ... can you please make a game where the game helps players to proceed to the next goal or level...at this moment you scare them away... for beginners, it feels.... if you nuke them...(example 3.000.000 reaals and 50.000 dubloons for level 3 shipyard [that will keep you for decades in the game only for that item,....it is a no go area)
  44. 1 point
    I'll come out of retirement to throw in my two bits here, because finally the reality is setting in that the nation structures as it stands are too rigid, especially in the face of finer and finer grained clan-based control of ports and regions. The RvR game must be oriented around clans that can control alliances between themselves, regardless of nation. Clans and players should be able to change allegiances between nations by disbanding (letting contestable ports go neutral, etc.), and move at will. But the in-game nations should just provide the backdrop or tapestry for RvR, much in the same way they do in most other successful MMOs. So what I've proposed in the past is what I'd support, which is neither of the options represented in poll. It would roughly follow this design: There should be the base nations, creating the tapestry that sets the theater and provides the high security, no-PvP space where new and casual players spend all/most of their time. But that security comes at a cost and the mid-tier delivery missions and mid-tier port buildings, ship construction, rare-ish wood development, etc., loot from higher tier AI, etc., as well as slightly lower taxes and higher profits await for those players who venture out into neighboring counties (limited, no-ship-loss but full hold-loss PvP). And for those who join clans and leave the shallow pool for full experience, full-loot/loss but high reward, no restrictions PvP, you have the highest tier port/ship production, missions, etc. These are areas outside the full control of nations and where clans set the game rules and alliances, hold the ports, set the restrictions, the taxes, etc. They would have control of an expanded "friendly clans" list and management of that regardless of national affiliation. These ports are under clan control, but get colored a nation dot only by virtue of the clan's having declared it for their current nation. Therefore it's the clans that determine alliances and RvR is encouraged in this free-for-all zone only by setting up crafting outside the safe zones, capping AI outside safe zones, holding on to ports and trading outside safe zones, etc. and it's only there that profits be maximized, higher tier crafting woods be available for port development, etc. etc. etc. And at the end of the day, if you're 100% a solo/casual, hour-a-day player then grind away in the high/mid security zone. Sink some AI. Run some missions. You can get all the goodies it just may take you a long time and once you're comfortable you can dip your toe in PvP in various, consensual ways, etc. in the mid-tier zones or join a war company and venture out for maximum fun, profit and loss. Now, all of this would work better without the hard-core nations and their disruptive influence. Fewer no-PvP spaces would be needed, rather than more for this to work. So I'd propose returning to the original nation states and re-draw the nation starting map to accomplish this to create these buffered, no-PvP zones. It might not be purely historical but it would create for much, much better game play for a diverse array of play styles.
  45. 1 point
    NA community can be toxic but of all online communities, one of the best.
  46. 1 point
    How about baselining things for starters by removing the NPC overbuffs and giving them the same actual equipment as players? You know, longs and carros where appropriate (instead of magical medium cannons that shoot like longs and hit like carros), actual chasers that don't vanish when the ship is capped, actual permanent upgrades, actual skills, and the same limited ammo as we have? It won't matter on PvP since only lower-rate NPC ships are capturable, and would give us on PvE something to do - as in, if you are a broke but skillful captain, you could go out and try to catch yourself a better ship or catch yourself some actually useful equipment instead of yet another Fir/Fir/Crew Space barge loaded with mediums (which, despite being Fir/Fir and sailing like Fir/Fir, tanks the incoming fire like LO/WO or maybe IDK, LO/Iron). Then you could broach the subject of teaching the NPCs to use repairs, because why not? Repairs aren't all that technically complex. Sure, when players use it, there's some light strategery involved, but at the end of the day "IF ARMOR < 50, USE HULL_REPAIR; ELSE IF SAILS < 75 USE SAIL_REPAIR; ELSE IF (RUDDER_BROKEN OR PUMP_BROKEN) USE EMERGENCY_REPAIR" or somesuch. Saying "our AI is dumb therefore we'll give it ungodly bonuses to compensate" is easy but also lazy. Y'all are better than this. (Also, I get why you did it early on - it was a justifiable shortcut to get things going, but now it's the spit'n'polish time). It also breaks immersion like nobody's business, and makes PvE piracy boring, because 99 times out of a hundred you'll always capture a crappy scow that is only good for either looting and sinking, or taking back to port and selling to Admiralty. And that's after the crappy scow puts up a fight worthy of a 5/5 gold ship with permanently loaded doubleshotted double charge in some kind of long-ranged carronades.
  47. 1 point
    I had not seen when @admin said that. It's such a big mistake to punish the huge percentage of players just doing PVP and now will be basically unrewarded if they don't have the right mission or just never see enough combat. All because of the few who might waste their time farming their alts. Seriously, does anyone care if Captain Joe Blow gets a ship permit or mod he didn't deserve?!? Basically this is a message that since he doesn't deserve the reward, no one does.
  48. 1 point
    Wir haben aus meiner Sicht aktuell drei Probleme was die Wirtschaft und den Handel betrifft: Der letzte kleine Wipe hat die Händler "finanziell" auf das gleiche Maß runterreduziert wie die "Kämpfer". Die meisten "Kämpfer" haben sich jedoch ihre Docks noch rechtzeitig mit Schiffen vollgemacht, die sind ja auch erhalten geblieben. Die Händler haben neben den Finanzen auch noch ihr "Vorratsvermögen" verloren. Für nen Unternehmer also ne wirtschaftlich Vollkatastrophe: Geld weg Vorräte futsch Markt verstopft Dazu kommt noch, dass sich grade jeder erst mal mit der Währung "Dublonen" für die seltenen Hölzer beschäftigen muss. Die Playerbase mit 300-(im besten Falle) 400 Leuten führt auch nicht grade dazu, dass viel versenkt wird. Mir persönlich gefällt das System mit den Dublonen und den Random-Ports in Verbindung mit ein, zwei dauerhaften Vorkommen. Der heute angekündigte Mega-Patch hat in dieser Richtung tierisch Potential Wenn ich mir überlege, dass zukünftig Clans ihre Häfen weiter ausbauen können und vor allem in den Werftindustrien spezialisieren können, entsteht da ein Potential in der Zusammenarbeit von Clans das erst mal begriffen werden muss. Ich verstehe ohnehin nicht, warum die Clans in Puncto "Rare-Woods" so wenig zusammenarbeiten. Dublonen zusammenschmeißen um die Mindestabnahme zu finanzieren und zu transportieren kann doch nicht so schwer sein! Wie viel Teak wurde denn aus Point-à-Pitre von allen schwedischen Clans bisher rausgeholt?? Sobald die Playerbase wieder regelmäßig an die 500 rangeht sinken wieder Schiffe und die Händler werden wieder reich und fett👍😎. Die wahren Gewinner eines jeden Krieges sind immer die, die Waffen (und damit Schiffe und Kanonen) liefern (Portbattles gewinnt man nicht mit Brustschwimmen). "Früher" hat man wenigstens alle 5 Minuten nen Eintrag in den Combat News gefunden. Heute sinken Schiffe doch (fast) nur noch bei so großen Events wie gestern, wenn riesige Flotten kommen. Ich finde die Diskussion mit den DLC's schon langsam fast albern. Rotsegler findet man fast keine mehr. Die Dinger sind nutzlos geworden. Herkules hat ihre Metakraft verloren und ist in der Klasse der leichteren Fregatten angekommen. Ist in etwa so "Meta" wie es die Surprise lange Zeit mal war. die 4. Ratte hat bisher nix gerissen und ist nichts Besonderes die Hermione ist ein Schiff ohne Profil - die kann alles ein bisschen aber nichts richtig Solange das so bleibt, finde ich persönlich kann das dem Spiel sogar eher gut tun, weil es halt den Spielern die nur für ein zwei Stunden Zeit haben ein ordentliches Spektrum an Schiffen, anbietet ohne direkt "pay-to-win" Maschinen zu haben. Wer "richtig" spielen will, wird sowieso versuchen Schiffe wie Trinco, Endy, Essex, Aga, Bellona und so weiter zu kommen. Machen wir uns nix vor, wir sind alle ein bisschen eitel. Wer nicht wenigstens fünf von den "Klassikern" besitzt wird doch sowieso als Noob bezeichnet.
  49. 1 point
    Honestly these two perks should be free to players just like we have limited chain shot and now the free fleet perk. Maybe have it where you learn double ball at level 5 or double charge at level 7 etc. There is no reason for them to be perks if AI gets them for free and it's a limited use item so they should be something that all ship captains know.
  50. 1 point
    Update - Testing goes on with the RattV and while that's not the focus of this thread, the behaviour of the AI is. I'm finding the total effect of the new AI to be excellent. Numerous one-on-ones vs. Class 3 ships have given me a strong appreciation for the individual skills of AI Captains; and HOW they apply their protocols dependent on ship type. For example, the 3rd Rate is slow, awkward and trends to downwind tactics - its captain undoubtedly knows that going into the wind is not helpful with such a lumbering vessel. She hits HARD though, and WILL try to suck the player into close-range action where it can pump a broadside into your hull. I was caught by surprise when it suckered me into following him into a downwind parallel; I lost quite a bot of armour before gaining separation - and gave up a ton of structure through the stern. Terrifying in the moment - an excellent tactic for the 3rd Rate. The Bellona is of course always a tough fight, and unlike all other Class 3's is largely impossible to kill without at least one rep - for me anyway. They're using a mix of upwind and downwind tactics and can be extremely canny when it comes to forcing the player into a potential head-to-wind stall - while maintaining the inertia to capitalize on it, either with a broadside or boarding. They haven't managed to complete the trap yet; in the first case I managed to squeak past at 4.1kts, thanking Poseidon that the RattV accelerates well. They hit hard AND accurately, targeting your ship for maximum damage. They'll also hold fire if you're angling off, and blast when you round to fire. BLOODY tough. While they have wide firing arcs, I don't see a particular increase in firepower - which is good, since they're already nightmares at the broadside. I haven't lost to one yet but it's been DAMN close. Like...THAT close. Wasas are the dogfighters of the Class 3's; again a unique set of tactics emphasizing their maneuverability and quick firing. Very canny, VERY frustrating when attacking from upwind. They'll round up, spoiling your hit on his sides. They'll 3-point, giving you both broadsides in double-quick time. They'll sucker you in, trap you, force you into unneeded damage. One thing I've noticed with them: they can get rattled. Last fight, my enemy was tough, crisp and accurate, until I blasted him down to 1/2 armour, gave him a solid stern rake and his broadside bounced off. Then he seemed to become uncertain, firing wildly, keeping his distance, making mistakes. It didn't last long, but it really seemed that his cool was blown for a few minutes. Connies are...well...Connies. Upwind-fighting, evil, sneaky insta-boarding bastards that have perfected the upwind ram as much as an AI possibly can. Staying upwind on these buggers is critical, but they're fully capable of rounding up, closing the gap FAST and forcing you into the wind where they WILL take you - every time. I lost a beautiful Gold Indef to one; I'm no beginner at boarding but it took me down - I need to take defensive boarding lessons from Tenet; he's a bloody master at it. So far I haven't lost a RattV; its manoeuverability and high-fighting ability trumps the Connie's excellent upwind fighting and trapping skills. Results: I am LOVING the new AI. The same old boring 'Steer-him-off, broadside-then-rake' predictable AI are gone; replaced by a much cannier, complex AI that is still predictable, but takes much greater advantage of ship-types. While I DO see that all ships have wider firing arcs, they're not nearly as wide as some people fear. Also, I still see no indication at all of increased firepower or accuracy. If there IS any change, it's minimal, to maximize an individual ship type's advantage against the player. So far, I give the new AI 4 out of 5 stars - there's always room for improvement but it's pretty excellent. Cheers!
×
×
  • Create New...