Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/23/2020 in all areas

  1. A clan should be able to tax its members. Just like any other society a clan should be able to charge a membership fee. It could work like this. The leader / officers could set a percentage ranging from 0 to 10%. Now whenever a member gets a battle reward 10% ( or any other % between 0 to 10%) goes to the clan wh. only Battles get taxed Contracts and Port sellings are not taxed Leaders / officers are taxed as well Doubloon loot out of ships is not effected Example: A member finished his battle he would get 100 000 reals reward and 10 doubloons Then 90 000
    9 points
  2. I started looking at decompiled code. General This is from v68. Most constants have the capability to be overridden from their defaults via a configuration file, and many are. It's always possible I've misinterpreted something in the code, if you see something you think is off, let me know and I'll take another look. Armor/Penetration Fire control has armor equal to the main deck for both side and top hits. Turrets have side and top armor for side and top hits respectively. Secondaries and conning tower have the designed armor for both side and top hits. Towers
    7 points
  3. 7 points
  4. You Germans and your taxes. I approve it, but I will do my utmost to avoid them like a proper Greek.
    7 points
  5. Special effects A section is either on fire or not, and either holed or not. Modules are either damaged or not. There are no degrees in-between. All sections damaged by a hit roll for fire/holing at the specified chances. Larger ships are less likely to suffer from these effects; chance is multiplied by 5 / (1 + displacement / 5000), i.e. inversely proportional to hit points. Chances depend on the size of the shell, but not damage directly. Generally this means that the shell base damage will matter, but not modifiers such as super-heavy shells, explosive type, etc. The
    5 points
  6. Still members in LAMA playing who don't play for Prussia. Cartagena is hold by one player. Can't see a problem. And I made offer to drop it And Prussia is not enemy of GB.
    3 points
  7. 3 points
  8. Galdonas PB: Galdonas screning : https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/596003866248609801/681229961503572045/unknown.png https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/773994364003877881/740798396217F96CA35CDC3C384146466D1DE828/
    3 points
  9. The whole clan system needs lots of but lots of changes. From tax, to cwh sharing permissions, to different ranks etc. As well as chat interface to map interface. All needs to be handled, as we have enough money maker dlcs now. Time for dev team to take a deep breath and complete missing parts of the game. Sorry to hijack your post.
    3 points
  10. Currently we have in the game merchant ships of 7th (Tr Linx, Tr Cutter), 6th (Tr Snow, Tr Brig), 5th (Le Gros Ventre) and 4th (Indiaman). But the Spaniards began to use ships of the line for their Indies treasure fleets (Veracruz-Habana-Cadiz, Portobello-Habana-Cadiz) and Manila galleons (Manila-Acapulco) from 1720, with the introduction of new proportions in the construction of vessels dictated by D. Antonio de Gaztañeta, instead of the famous Galleons. These ships were still generally called Galleons of the Indies race or Manila, but were in fact ships of the line. One of the most famo
    2 points
  11. Hi, Can it be looked into why alt clans can keep major ports, such as Santiago de Cuba? If a clan leaves a nation, they should not leave there old clan with the port as in my opinion this is a major issue with the game as it's funding the enemy. Can we have an official verdict on this please @admin
    2 points
  12. I would like to start by saying that I don't usually post and I tend to support game developers that make games that are historically based. This is not meant as a complaint but more as a constructive criticism from a casual gamer. I have no idea what you guys did when you tweaked the game in the last patch, but it is less enjoyable. The AI is waaaay too accurate compared to the ships I build The AI is waaaay too hard to sink The missions are waaay too hard and frustrating, even the ones I completed pre-patch are less enjoyable or just plain frustrating to play
    2 points
  13. Can we have a thing that shows us, what books we currenty have applied to the ship at sea?
    2 points
  14. This part interest me to the highest degree. You see I have been thinking about ways for us to help the dev with balance and stuff. I like modding, but I an aware that modding that early in alpha would make developement really difficult for them. But there might be ways for us to do it in a fashion that do not make it a nightmare for them. If we can have a config file and play with balance on our end then we could come up with better informed suggestion to pass to the dev and implemented into the game. What do you think?
    2 points
  15. Dutch made peace with russia so attacking russia cant be part of nato goals So why not join the pve family. Looks like you can be NATO and still be neutral.
    2 points
  16. Thanks for the friendly welcome. I wrote my post in docs and pasted it in here. Somehow in the transition it got converted to all bold. Didn't see that until later. My bad. 😅
    2 points
  17. Bug alert... The design, 1x 254mm and 5x 229mm centreline mains... See below, mains are set to target BB (far right) and secondaries are set to target CA, 254 (c turret) correctly targeting BB but the 229s are all targeting the CA as if they were secondaries! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PS, second bug, 'Modern Tower V' has 2 casemate slots each side but the toolbar is completely gray-out.
    1 point
  18. Offhand, this is what I've noticed: Starting weapon for British (Sea Service 38) not available (since Dec/Jan) Starting weapon for US (Kentucky Rifle) not available (new this patch) Bayonet for British unlocks Land Pattern 78 w/ Bayonet even without Land Pattern 78 researched (since Dec/Jan) Structure Repair Kit II (and I presume III) does not reduce weight Sail Repair Kit II (and I presume III) does not reduce weight Gun Carriage II (and I presume III) does not reduce weight in UI before equipping, but correctly does after Gun Carriage II (and I presu
    1 point
  19. I know that the original premise of the game of design whatever you want however you want was abandoned due to AI issues, being that it (AI) couldn't design ships properly. I understand why you've opted for the current system in use. That said, this shift in focusing only on historical hulls, towers, secondary towers, funnels, etc etc, removes player choice in the design of their vessels and limits them to prescribed ship designs that were available at the time by nation by year. For a game that's eventually supposed to be a grand campaign sandbox of naval warfare, a game where the player
    1 point
  20. Are you playing Naval Action? What you are asking for is already in game and has been for quite a while. Battles are first open for 2 minutes for anyone to join. Afterwards the battle is open for 20 minutes for the weaker side, until the BR difference has reached 13% (iirc). This change together with the privateer fleets was a good addition to a healthier pvp game. No more noob slaughtering around capitals and way less mass ganking around free ports, because you can now actually help out.
    1 point
  21. Oh, if only we had a FAQ, that gave approximate estimations, of what they currently work on and when they will bring it in an alpha version... That would definitely help me and my patience and it would help me to go test specific things, so i could give more developmentdirection related feedback.
    1 point
  22. You mean the part were its like having a second job?
    1 point
  23. - Do not post private conversations - Hethwill, the moderation team
    1 point
  24. https://prnt.sc/r6hjwv Вот это леопард с пудами на нижней деке. Теперь вопрос. А можно как то захватить столь ценную добычу? Нет!! Предлагаю как то решать эту проблему.
    1 point
  25. It's a fair point actually. Player design can't be opened up until the default hulls are working as intended and the AI is competently building good ships. Crying out for "balance" and changes to "the meta" only makes that harder. It's much easier to get the AI to design ships along historical lines, and that process would be much easier if the game used historical parameters. If both the player and AI have to design ships to contend with realistic threats, travelling with realistic mobility and with realistic protection, you'll find the process goes much more smoothly.
    1 point
  26. yup exactly. if there was a penalty of some kind for the a.i To turn and run that might be better, but once a ship decides to run they are impossible to sink as we all know. if that gets fixed there wont be an issue.
    1 point
  27. Apparently, because devs fear it would break AI ship designs even more. Although dev team cannot claim their game is "historical" if we can't build ships with barbettes amidships. Like Nelson-class or Wyoming-class.
    1 point
  28. Taking 24 hours to finish a battle can be solved with the devs optimizing the game and making higher time comoression scales more playable. Curently even 5X can get sub-20 FPS and I'm willing to lose eye candy to skip 50 minutes of stern chases.
    1 point
  29. What about remove it from Open World , add bigger waves in battle and realistic clouds.
    1 point
  30. Free the barbettes! Freedom and equality for every barbette! Hoorah!
    1 point
  31. Eso de revisarlo todo yo concienzudamente se podría hablar... ¿de que sueldo estamos hablando al mes? (modo sarcasmo off) Me refería a que el creador del hilo avise que alguien lo está desvirtuando. A ser posible con un reporte. Si el creador no dice nada será que le da igual. Otra idea es que cuando haya algún tema importante, no usar otro hilo sino crear uno nuevo. A ser posible con un título normal y corriente tipo "Pagar por calentar puertos" y no "A algunos se les va a acabar el hacer esto o lo otro" P.D. El problema REAL aquí y lo que realmente quieren algunos es tirarle m
    1 point
  32. ¿Y eso?, ¿la moderación te ha dado un golpe de remo?. A todos nos han arreado alguna vez y aquí seguimos. ¡Qué falta hace la mili por Dios!.
    1 point
  33. lol your arguments get weaker and weaker theres no in game mechaniccs to trade a port to another nation are you sure you seem pretty expert at trading ports to spanish Trux was traded to sweden ,,, just you dint like the clan it was traded to you can actually fight for it there is 3 mechanics as for no alts involved are you seriiously asking us to believe that Havoc sailed out of SJ with all there ships went to a neutral port and switched nations ... I dont beleive you mate .. no one in havoc swe had a havoc dk alt or vice versa ??? lmao Im
    1 point
  34. Отдельно хочу попросить за Хеви-Ратл. Корабль три года назад успешно конкурировал с Ниагарой за звание лучшего мелководного. Недавно многим мелководным побустили скорость, калибр каронад. Хеви-Ратл, как на его пермите написано, легкий фрегат, трехмачтовик - уступает шняве и в калибре, и в скорости, и в маневре. Он медленнее Геркулеса - более чем на пол-узла. Единственное его преимущество перед другим мелководным фрегатом (ДЛС) - лишняя сотня hp борта+структуры, которая снимается одним удачным попаданием 32ф каронады, и лучший маневр, но остальные ТТХ гораздо хуже. 100 БР ему уже не свети
    1 point
  35. Then why did HAVOC not just let the port go neutral and take it that way? Because they were afraid that a Danish clan or even some other Swedish clan would get it. The same as Truxillo, BASTD did not want to stop Sweden taking the port they just wanted to stop HAVOC getting it. Can you not see the similarities, in both cases people have played loosely with the game mechanics to get the outcome they desired.
    1 point
  36. I havent even done it lol, i think i did some of the other newer missions, especially prove your might when i realised you didn't even need to sink biscuits just damager her enough so she sods off home. Maybe they should split the missions into 2 categories, so ones where the enemy doesn't retreat but its a sink them or you lose thing and ones where the enemy will retreat for whatever reason but you dont have to sink them entirely. should help somewhat.
    1 point
  37. Damage model needs serious work combined with AI not having hard limits on anything so it almost always outperforms the player. And the biggest issue in the current iteration being the target ship speed modifier to accuracy which renders your guns useless. Best example? German Pride. You cannot build a ship that goes more than 31 knots and still have enough weight/cost to do anything useful while the AI can field 381mm guns in 4 triple turrets, go 35+ knots and have a 500mm armor belt all on less weight than you. And they get a cruiser squadron and destroyer squadron in addition to your histor
    1 point
  38. Yea... i'm also struggling with every new mission and even the oldest ones (in one of the latest update, i think Alpha 3... i lost my progress ) because if i'm not gonna blow them up by detonating main ammunition magazine, they just gonna run away from me and for some reason, they seem impossible to kill when that's happening. I guess you just need to get some lucky shoot to the engine or main magazine.
    1 point
  39. Creo que ya van 6 hilos cerrados por lo mismo. Al menos no hay insultos directos graves. Parece que vamos mejorando en general. Aunque una cosa me deja flipando, ¿que coño tienen que ver los 50k doblones esos con el título del hilo? En fin otro candado.
    1 point
  40. I think you're right about this. I guess I'm saying that rather than have a system in which ships are arbitrarily divided into blocks, the placement of things, including the main belt, should be more fluid and dynamic and less LEGO-like. Otherwise, you're not really "designing" a ship, but rather assembling one.
    1 point
  41. Let me put a ball in on BuckleUpBones' side, because I can kind of see a point. While I appreciate analysis, I can also see how it can be overdone and overshadow the overall holistic feel of the system as a whole. In other words, once you see a "bad number", it sticks to your mind like a dead pixel, and all considerations as to its contribution to the overall system, or that it might have a justification disappear. You see the bad number and your immersion is significantly reduced. Here let me use the much-hated speed malus. On paper, assertions like speed matters not with accurate plotti
    1 point
  42. I know I’m late to the party, so I don’t know if the devs will ever see this but here are the things I would really like to see in future updates. Naval Academy 1 -Split the Naval Academy into two sections on the main menu: Naval Academy, and Scenarios. Reason: “Naval Academy” sounds like a tutorial. There are currently 35 Naval Academy missions (thank you Devs and keep up the good work!). The first 8 or so missions teach you the basics of the game, while the other 27 are there for experimenting and exploring the mechanics you learned in the first few missions. For someo
    1 point
  43. @admin you really need to sort out this game with regards alts ... seems there is one rule for some and different rules for others ,,, Trux is no different to San Juan ,, unless Havoc can prove ,, that no one in Danish Havoc had a swedish alt and no one in swedish havoc had a danish alt ... did the guys who attacked San juan really sail all their ships and goods out of san juan to a neutral port and then change nations ,, and then sail it all the waty back ,,, hilarous if you suggest so ... they just used alts and traded the ships and goods between them after port was taken ... we
    1 point
  44. This strikes me as a fairly small dev team with limited resources. I expect multiplayer would probably take away too much from the core focus. For instance, I backed Battletech, but the kickstarter eventually pushed all the way to multiplayer support. For a game running on Unity, this pulled valuable dev time away from the polish work that game still desperately needs, just for a fairly limited PvP. And once the multiplayer was out, it didn't really evolve into something special. The meta builds were quickly learned, and it just devolved into stun-locking firestarter spam, which pre
    1 point
  45. 1ship 1 capt Kind of battle all day long
    1 point
  46. Galdonas PB. DE vs. VP. Well won by DE, again
    1 point
  47. The same button you use to board is also the button you use to break off boarding the only thing I will mention is you may have to press that button a few times for it to work.
    1 point
  48. Yep I had the same thing happen to me on Sunday. The sails would not move. I tried to play with it, cause the battle was pretty much over. It was fine for the first part of the battle. Then for no reason the sails locked up in a bad position. Luckily this happened when the battle was in hand. I reported this just before leaving the battle. You can see that I have the sails in auto, but the sails are in a position that would have never been with it being in auto.
    1 point
  49. Hmm, no freeze but loosing control over my ship for some seconds. Means no reaction on pressing keys on the keyboard. And I know that I'm not alone with this issue. Location: PVE Server.
    1 point
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...