Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/20/2019 in Posts

  1. 49 points
    Captains Patch is being deployed today. Main feature of the patch - Port investments. This is a group feature. Solo players must find a group of friends to use it or join a clan. Imaged - dutch players deciding if they want Caracas to have a +5% speed bonus for shipbuilding or +10% thickness or BOTH Investments. Clan alliances can now expand production of resources in ports Clan alliances can now expand shipbuilding in ports Clan alliances can now improve defenses in ports Investments will drop their level after you lose the port, multiple losses of ports will lose all investments (to remove port trading) Forts destroyed in port battles will have to be rebuilt Clans will be able to decide who can access the facilities and build them Once you build the facility you will be able to use it even if you are kicked from clan or alliance (provided you are in the same nation). Other nations WILL NOT use the facilities and investment benefits Ship building bonuses are created by clan alliance only if they build ships in their city. Other captains (who are not part of the alliance are not going to be able to hire artisans trained by clans). Due to limited investment points some cities will have to specialize – in the first iteration there are going to be 2 types of towns Resource base Shipbuilding base Or a mix of two There is a limited number of ports that can build amazing ships with all the possible bonuses. Nations will have to fight for them. This is a first iteration of the feature so expect bugs and problems Map wipe All forts on map were removed (they can be rebuilt by clans) Map was reset Lord protectors were reset, National leaderboards were reset Hostility mission changes Hostility now can be gained only using missions. OW hostility points are no longer granted to avoid exploits. Hostility generation in missions will feel much faster Defense timer cost is 250k Reals per day (might go up even more) County capital and capitals give missions to capture 2 nearest county capitals Free towns give missions for 2 nearest county capitals Once you taken the county capital you can take its regional cities. Marsh Harbor also gives an option to take Treasure Island, Treasure island capital gives an option to capture Bermuda. Other changes Forts were buffed BR limits for ports have changed Largest towns (55 investment points) have 25000 BR limit All other county capitals have 20000 BR limit Regional towns have 10,000 BR limit Shallow capitals 3000 BR limit Shallow towns 2000 BR limit Lord protectors are no longer have tiered rewards for VMs you get what you hold (but not more than 15VMs per week – lets see how it goes and maybe increase this limit later) Hostility points for port battle creation have changed County Capital deep – 10000 pts Regional town deep – 4500 pts County Capital shallow – 2500 pts Regional town shallow – 1000 pts Peace server changes Historical peaceful map applied (this will change bot routes and bot nationalities) Admiralty can now be used in ALL peaceful cities Peaceful outposts and buildings can now be built in all cities Peaceful PVE missions can now be taken in all cities too Top class ships on the PVE can still be built in towns that are capturable on War server. Other changes Combat medals are now only granted for mission and patrol completion. Improved FPS performance in instances and port battles Added additional item descriptions Bots now use universal ranks to help judge their difficulty easier Added an option to make more books and upgrades in production run Added inverted mouse to options Added tooltips to clan warehouse Permit prices and requirements rebalanced New ship notes added to admiralty Pandora lost ability to use stern carronades due to placement of ports Epic chest now drops in Epic events a lot more often Grape damage distance slightly increased Grape min damage from raking slightly increased Port name changes and other minor beautifications Some ports have their name changed or improved. Spanish town (a city of striking contrasts) is now a capital of the Virgin islands Sisal is now a capital of Merida Some counties were rebalanced. Fixed bugs Fixed bug that did not build 5/5 ships in some ports that became capturable recently. Apologies for the inconvenience. Fixed bug that was visually showing wrong ammo type (for example ball was flying instead of chain or vice versa) in instances for new players who just joined instance or relogged in into instance Fixed stationary bots in OW Fixed bug that cut your speed if you switched to a fleet ship Fixed bug that did not update your map if you switched from Peace to war server after AFK kick Multiple other bugs fixed Enjoy. Hotfix 25th April 2019 Hostility missions now have a deadline and have to be done until maintenance (after maintenance they will disappear from quest log). This is done to remove the possibility of keeping old missions for the future attacks on the ports. Fixed the bug that did not let you sell the ship if you had books in knowledge slots Fixed the bug blocking the sharing of the captured ship in the instance (by setting it free for all) Temporarily increased the limit of missions from the county capitals and free towns to 3 from 2 Increased the limit of port battles against the nation from 3 to 5 Changed BR of shallow water ports to lower 2500 for shallow capitals 1500 for regional towns in shallows Nassau limit is set for 3000 Mantua is now neutral and capturable (giving capturable city crafting bonuses) Hotfix 2nd May 7 New port investments added allowing production of rare woods in clan controlled ports Rare woods clan delivery missions rebalanced (prices lowered) Peace server: admiralty prices for rare woods rebalanced (prices lowered) Peace server: some free towns converted back to neutral towns to allow production of resources (Atwood, Cayo Romano, Barcos, Cayman Brac, La Navasse, Hat Island, La Désirade, Carriacou, La Orchila, Coquibacoa, Concepción, Bonacca, Bensalem, Santa Ana, Tamiagua, Calcasieu, Saint-Malo, Cayo del Anclote, Las Tortugas, Cayo Biscayno, Saint Marys, Salinas, Little River) Building costs and costs of upgrades rebalanced (and increased)
  2. 38 points
    1. Why are we forced the confirm the reward of patrolzone events if we get the reward at maintenance anyway? Just autoconfirm at maintenance 2. Why dont we see hardcaps ingame? 3. Why dont we see portbattles when pressing "m" without going trough 5 or so clicks? (Mark them on the map with a red cross or something like that) 4. In the port UI, when buying a ship, select all rates, rather than just one at a time. 5. I know it's been asked for before, but I would really like to click on an enemy player in OW and message him, just like we do with friendlies. Maybe give him the option to refuse contact. 5a. I would like to see a diplomacy mechanic again ... included the possibility to identify allied nation ships and captains at OW and chat with them. Enemy Players should be shown as enemy players but conversation should also be possible. 5b I think the OW should have anonymous comms between hostiles. IE you can message them but it doesn't say their name or anything just a chat room with "anonymous" and you. That way you can still communicate without being identified if you want. 6. Buy contracts for ships 7. The old boarding game (I can not believe that I say this) untill a new one is created that does not feel like boarding with an Imperial Star Destroyer. I have to set the screen bigger because I am a little older and all I can see is this boarding screen I personally dislike. 8. I wish everything that NA-map did was in the game. 9. Ability to switch ships in OW when using Fleets. 10. Remove the additional "Yes" clicks in port when buying/selling items and when adding crew to ship. Make only the 1 "yes" click like when clicking repair. 11. Give us the ability again to delete outposts that currently have ships docked. 12. Clan Docks 13. Global Trade Chat 14. Cities that are properly sized. (Buildings are 3 or 4 times of shipsize, doors are as big as a 1st rate) 15. When claiming a completed sales contract, remove the message "You lose all fees", as it has no economic effect and only causes confusion 16. Show the point where your ship would stuck on the beach (in battle) (Map) 17. Keep "details" checked in battlemap 18. ALL AI traders should be loaded to capacity. Real traders didn't sail around in half-empty ships 19. Hostility missions against fortified ports should spawn right beside these towers and forts. If they get destroyed during the instance, they reappear afterwards, like the do now and thus if host mission is successful, towers and forts are still there when PB takes place. 20. Start all battles with "fire from bow" and convergence on water. 21. Crafting straight from the clan warehouse, so we don't have to withdraw every single resource type... 21. A new rank for crafters in a clan which have access to clan warehouse but cant invite/kick people 22. A fireship perk that only allows you to light a fuse and guarantee that your ship will explode. (add mods are what should dictate the strength of the blast) 23. This is far too easy to exploit. But I'd add changing all Combat Medal missions to be satisfied with assists or kills. For those of us who are generally sailing non-primary DPS ships PvP kill missions are a real drag. In general though, I'd go back to awarding combat medals for OW assists and kills. The new system of no rewards for OW PvP is stupid and discourages PvP in general. 24. Adding UI to know how many Repairs you repair actions will use up (goes along with knowing your total repair bonus) on your ship info. 25. Able to Create a Port Battle calculator in-game and USE IT for a Battle Group Creation! 26. Able to Better Compare Cannons, ships, goods - the UI is still too "big" and overlaps each other. I always feel cluttered and with I could resize every window to my liking. 27. The ability to change the colors of Battle Swords to your own liking. I hate the White swords and would love to change them to a color I can better see while sailing. 28. Change portownership (clan) by trade (within one nation) 29. Add "Show Port on Map" when choosing Cargo/Passenger Delivery missions 30. Add warning sound when tagged 31. Add pop up tab when hovering mouse over "Perks" in Fleet menu (F- in open world) Feel free to contribute to the list
  3. 32 points
    Captains Patch 32 will be deployed today. Monday 20th May. Warning: 2 New ranks and updated crew requirements might affect your ability to sail the ships you sailed before, and recently reached that rank. Contents include Added the ability to destroy the investments made by the alliance of clans (available only to the clan alliance leader) Added Elite NPCs that occasionally appear on the map - The flagship of the elite fleet often drop elite ship notes comparable to ships crafted in fully invested ports (their loot tables will be expanded over time to have additional interesting things to be captured) this means you can get notes for 1st rates as well, provided you kill them Assists now counts for PVP Hunt missions Changed successful port defense cool down and attack cool down to 2 days. (previously defense cool down was 1 day and attack was 2 days) Added ship paint preview button that can show you how your ship will look like, if you have the same ship selected in port 2 New ranks added (Vice admiral and Admiral) Crew requirements re-balanced (XP thresholds are not final) and some ranks have their crew limits increased or decreased Here are the changes on the high level leadership limits Commodore - 700 Rear Admiral - 900 Vice Admiral - 1200 Admiral - 1500 Thresholds for new ranks are not final and might be updated once more before release, as additional rank of Admiral of the Fleet might be introduced, but we have not made this decision yet. Changed the hostility missions point attribution. Any kills for attacker only count to the mission taker clan (clan attacking the port). Any kills on the defensive side only counts to the port owner. Significant nerfs to mortar brig perks, accuracy and reload time were applied. Additional changes will be done by the next patch. Bugs Fixed bugs with the port investment features Fixed bugs that allowed you to sail with incomplete gun deck Fixed Hold optimization in instance Fixed names for forts and towers in the commander tablet (in case umlauts are present) Fixed the bug when forts and towers shoot your allies in instance Fixed the invisible walls that stop players to sail to north or east to places without any chance to return Whats next. Finalization of translation for all new features Final update on upgrades, port bonuses, limits to investments Final update on battle and kill XP based on final damage model Final update on economy and battle rewards and loot tables Stabilization of the release candidate and launch
  4. 31 points
    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.
  5. 30 points
    Captains. Patch will be deployed next week with Elite NPCs fleets that players will be able to find and hunt in the open world that will not only give interesting challenges in combat but also will give options for active PVE players to get (not often) ships with bonuses similar to clan based RVR bonuses XP calculations update Income rebalance (where combat will return to be main money making activity) Port points updates - top ports will have to specialize - the maximum number of maxed bonuses (lvl4 bonuses) will be reduced already made investments will remain until the next map wipe. Important: We are aware that buildings prices are high, but high level manufacturing should be expensive to set up - We will improve sources to make money for those who are not interested in trading and long distance trading only and want to make money by fighting (players or NPCs). We could not deploy it this week unfortunately
  6. 28 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
  7. 28 points
    i think we need alliances but no forced by game....
  8. 27 points
    mods and books are getting massive nerfs in 1-2 days. + some base ship parameters like accel and decel turning.
  9. 24 points
    Captains. Let's discuss the number of nations for the release state of the game. Should we keep current 11 nations at war with each other, where smaller nations have less chance to compete in RVR Should we enforce alliances from Europe by game rules. Current populations Pirates 14.52% Spain 8.83% France 10.21% Great Britain 26.86% Dutch 4.88% Sverige 8.76% Denmark 2.87% United States 9.15% Russian Empire 9.33% Prussia 3.61% Polish Commonwealth 0.97% Proposed coalitions Northern Coalition 17% (based on historical agreements during napoleonic wars Dutch Sweden Denmark Poland British Empire 27% Western Coalition 28% (based on historical agreements during napoleonic wars) USA Spain France Holy Alliance 13% (based on the historical holy alliance against france) Prussia Russia Pirates 14% Proposed coalitions will have separate starting capitals but will act as allies allowing clan alliances between nations and port usage rights. Coalitions will increase minimal size of the nation from 43 average daily players for the smallest nation to 600 average daily players for the smallest coalition, greatly increasing the potential and ability to have effect on the map.
  10. 22 points
    Hello everyone, We are glad to announce the new official website of our upcoming game! https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com The blog posts provide a first useful information about Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. New articles will reveal more news and features as the game progresses.
  11. 22 points
    I want alliances back but I completly disagree with the proposed coalitions. Let the players decide their alliances, with restrictions to avoid unbalance, of course.
  12. 21 points
    no if alliances come back they will be forced by the game reason is simple: previous alliances system broke down because humans tend to ally with the strongest which will cause top 3 nations in power to ally and create the unbreakable status quo.
  13. 20 points
    I vote coalitions because more player per nation is better with the new system, wish you had not introduced unrealistic nations ! Only Problem is Western Coalition will be very powerful, we can keep them as seperate nations. British having %28 has no meaning as after wipe it can be %15 percent while western coalition becomes %35. What about introducing dynamical coalitions according to balance of power by developers. There is no king of Spain and Queen of Britian at our waters, what they have decided we have to obey. ( Queen = Admin , King = Ink may be) -----------------------------------------------> But my dream; British Nation Spanish Nation French Nation Dutch Nation Privateers (remaining nations with flag of their nation but under privateer faction, where clans able to get letter of marque from nations) Pirates (not a nation but clans, end game for best players, only level 1 shipyard, fame board, can retire from pirate with forge papers and join a nation (very expansive), but very profitable during pirate life if you are good)
  14. 20 points
    Introduce Portugal / as a new option or at the expense of one existing one. Make Portugal an historical ally of Great Britain. I don't dislike the system as you present, but not a fan of player made alliances as well.
  15. 20 points
  16. 19 points
    Buenos días a todos. He decidido publicar mi primer post en este foro el cual pensé que no estuviera muy activo pero ya veo que me equivocaba, en el que simplemente y con toda la humildad del mundo os paso un enlace con mi canal de Youtube. Es pequeñito, y está principalmente dedicado a subir batallas PvP de Naval Action. Espero que lo disfrutéis, a pesar de no ser un buen narrador, pero bueno, básicamente lo hago porque me entretiene bastante y si también puedo entretener a alguno de vosotros me sentiría mas que satisfecho. No soy un jugador especialmente polémico, no me gusta entrar en temas de ''política'' dentro del Naval, por lo tanto valoraré enormemente los comentarios basados en el propio vídeo y no en otras movidas que ocurran en el juego. 😋 https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkiekaKy8TxcHBoXyhFQFTQ?view_as=subscriber Un saludo a todos 😉
  17. 19 points
    Я был осведомлен о том, что произошло, и от имени REDS я оговариваю факты, представленные в суде, и приношу свои извинения. Я также организую незамедлительную замену потерянных кораблей и улучшений. Пожалуйста, дайте мне знать, что конкретно было потеряно. Что касается случая: хотя присоединение к сражениям с целью их закрытия не является чем-то, что ранее рассматривалось трибуналом, я согласен, что это должно быть определено как подвиг, и это так же хорошо, как и любая возможность для его решения. Поскольку это первое нарушение рассматриваемого игрока, приоритет заключается в том, что игрок должен получить предупреждение. Он также получил предупреждение от клана. Что касается других игроков в битве, они не знали об этом до тех пор, пока это не произошло. Нам стыдно за этот инцидент и искренне приносим извинения I have been made aware of what happened, and on behalf of REDS I do stipulate to the facts that are shown in the tribunal, and I offer our apologies. I will also arrange to replace the lost ships and upgrades forthwith. Please let me know what specifically was lost. As to the case: while joining battles in order to close them is not something that has been previously been addressed by the tribunal, I agree that it should be defined as an exploit and this is as good as any an opportunity to address it. As this is a first offence of the player in question, the precedence is for the player to be given a warning. He has also been given a warning by the clan. As for the other players in the battle, they were not aware until after the fact. We are ashamed of this incident and apologize sincerely.
  18. 19 points
    Frontlines are a great idea, but they way they are implemented is sloppy. At first we had that from each county capital/free-port you could attack the 2 closest counties. This led to situations such as Pirates not being able to attack Pitt’s Town from Mortimer Town, even though the two regions are directly adjacent to each other. To remedy this, it was expanded to the 3 closest counties. The consequence of this, is that for large parts of the map, the actual Frontlines are eviscerated. Case in point: From Cartagena, you can now jump past the British frontline and attack Old Providence. But presumably it would be impossible to go the other way, because Old Providence has several Counties that are closer to it than Cartagena is. However, Cartagena is no longer an eastern Frontline towards the freetown of Dariena. It is perfectly possible to bypass the Cartagena region and jump straight to Santa Marta. Because the 3 closest Counties are Portobello, Cartagena, and Santa Marta. From San Augustin on the Florida coast, the 3rd closest County is Abaco (Marsh Harbour), which any way you look at it is not adjacent to each other. Some parts of the map have still a semblance of Frontlines. If Spain was to settle the Gulf of Mexico, most of the territory would be behind a couple of frontlines, due to the relatively far-apart free-towns. If you are not already situated in the Gulf, it can only be attacked from the 3 closest Counties to El Rancho, and a single county from Tumbado. The Gulf has 10 or 11 counties depending on your definition. In either case more than half the counties are behind frontlines. Britain also benefits from the relative safety of being able to lock down most of their territory behind narrow frontlines. Everything in the triangle between Jamaica, Bacalar on Yucatan and Portobello in Panama, as well as portions of South Cuba, and with the exception of Old Providence can be defended behind Frontlines. Similarly, anyone possessing Bermuda and the Secret Islands will have the 2 very strong regions very safely protected behind a frontline as long as they hold Marsh Harbour. On the other hand, if you are Danish or Swedish, you might as well forget about the concept of Frontlines, at least as far as helping you to defend the integrity of your territory. When you are looking for places to expand, it might be a different story. From a Swedish perspective, not only has the Virgin Islands County been inexplicably expanded to protrude to ports directly on top of their capital, forcing an immediate confrontation between Denmark and Sweden that will be long-term completely destructive to the player-base of one of those nations. In addition, even if Sweden were to expand outwards from their starting position, in the 2 directions available to them, and capture every region north of Fort Royal (Martinique) to the South, and all the way to the Eastern half of Hispaniola to the West, only a meagre 2 counties (Leeward Islands and Grande-Terre) would be covered by the Frontlines Mechanic. Due to access from the Freeports of Aves, La Mona, La Tortue as well as enemy capitals, every other region they capture near their core territory will be constantly compromisable. For Denmark this is even worse. Given that they work outward from their capital and capture the same territory as mentioned above, comprising of the ten counties of La Vega, Santo Domingo, San Juan, Ponce, Virgin Islands, Bovenwinds, Leeward Islands, Grande-Terre, Basse-Terre and Dominica, only a single one region, Grande-Terre, would be protected behind their «Frontline», since Leeward Islands is attackable from Gustavia. I have said this before, and Hullabaloo made a good write-up of it somewhere as well: If we are to use frontlines, simply coding Hostility missions to be distance-based for each port is a terrible solution, whether it is the 2 closest or the 3 closest regions. Instead, the map has to be looked at and adjacent regions/counties identified, and for each County Capital and Freeport, it must be carefully considered what ports should be attackable from there. And most Freeports should only allow attacking 1 or 2 adjacent regions. For Aves, this number should be 1 - Basse Terre. And from La Mona, also only 1 - Santo Domingo.
  19. 18 points
  20. 18 points
    Soooo..... Now that we are approaching a finalized set of game mechanics, complete with some cool new Port Mechanics, I feel like we need to address the issue of "Bonuses" in Woods and Mods and Books once and for all. With the addition of specialized crafting facilities in upgraded ports, I'm extremely concerned about the return of "Franken-ships" of the past. Speed-capped SOL's and impenetrable frigates, etc.... Couple some of these Rig -refits with this: and add in some of the bonuses from the new port mechanics and you can see that some serious craziness MAY occur. May I suggest a serious re-examination of bonuses and their ability to be stacked and/capped? I would also suggest an immediate 50% reduction in ALL bonuses, ranging from Woods to boarding mods to rig refits. I fully understand that all games have a "meta" and am finally at peace with the concept of "mods" over an officer system. However, I feel that the mod bonuses are just a bit too high at the moment. Currently, if you're not sailing with Elite Pirate, Cartagena and carros (or poods), you're just fodder for someone who is. Thanks in advance for your consideration.
  21. 18 points
    so in summary -10% reload +6% vertical gun range -10% dispersion +10% penetration +5% speed +10% turn rate +15% acceleration +15% deceleration +10% HP +10% thickness -20% fire spread rate -10% splinter resistance -15% heel -10% sail damage +15% mast HP +10% mast thickness -12% repair time +10% repair +10% crew +5 crew transfer per sec. All together on one ship ?! And that's not even considering possible upgrades or rare trims. Yeah, that seems totally fine This needs some tweaking ASAP. A port should have to specialize on a trim, and NOT be able to have everything maxed out - Also IMHO this will require removing the bonusses from ports which are already maxed out, as I think this was not planned for the next patch. Else the balance will be totally gone.
  22. 18 points
    What is needed, in my opinion of course, is random "Diplomacy Changes from Europe" happening only a few times per year. This would reduce the amount of salt in the community as well as provide ever-changing content for continued interesting game-play. Static alliances and perpetual war with the same enemies day after day clearly causes burnout, which is marked by extreme frustration and inevitable toxicity. If you make it so that enemies must become friends at some point, I feel like this would be a good thing. As we have seen over the past few years, humans will always choose the path of least resistance. Letting a computer randomly generate some changes now and then is a much better idea.
  23. 18 points
    Polish player was tagged near La Mona. [BF]Zz1m joined the battle only to increse BR side on the Polish side, so soon after another RUBLI (Agamemnon) joined to the combat, and Zz1M left the combat. Intentionally raised the OW limit and left the battle without a shot fired.
  24. 17 points
  25. 17 points
    Please add a name change history. If a captain has changed names there should be a drop-down or similar in the player info card (when you search for someone or right click them in your friend list), listing previous names. Forged Papers should allow you to change the name you go by, or how it is spelled, but not for players caught exploiting or spying to become anonymous again. It is annoying when some players change name every 30 days, and there is no way you can keep track of them. And many people have forged papers on their alts to move them around between nations as needed. But this also allows them to change name if they are found out. There should be a way to find out that the new name you see pop up in nation chat is actually the same player you had a confrontation with earlier, or that was called out for cheating somebody in a trade transaction. For anyone changing name because they got tired of their old name, or because they have grown some creativity since they bought the game and named themselves "Captain J4ck Sparrow III», this change should be inconsequential. For anyone using name-change to escape notoriety, this should make it harder. The only way to wipe your name-change history clean should be to delete and recreate your character and regrind. Since we should all start with a clean sheet at release, name change history should be wiped with the rest in the final wipe.
  26. 16 points
    As someone ironized, we are running toward #42+ post all around same issues. Various kind of - perceived - exploits. I, as anyone, have my opinion on each case. And my, like anyone else's, opinions on these cases are, technically, not relevant. Still, granted the number of cases posted, and taking into account that many are central mechanics of game (from how RvR is and should work to OW tagging and reinforcing) and granted that the days are passing... sincerely I think Devs/Admins need to stand clear on these issues. It's not matter of punishment or not, exploits or not, griefing or not or whatever. It's matter of rightful request of clear game rules and therefore rightful request to know how is and should be the game we are playing. I'd add "conditio sine qua non" to have the least toxic and most enjoyable game that we all love to play. I kindly ask and suggest to reply on these issues (again: what matters is not which reply, but a clear reply) as soon as possible. Thanks in advance.
  27. 16 points
    It is very simple, if you know a bug and you use it to your advantage then it is not a matter of testing a mechanic but it is cheating, and measures must therefore be taken! Using an alt in an enemy nation to your advantage to activate a port battle is against the rules! Insulting players in the forum or in the game is against the rules! Against such behavior, action must be taken, for the sake of the game itself and to restore a favorable climate in which new players can have fun! No one will ever buy a game where it is legitimate to cheat and where rude behavior is allowed! Please developers make your voice heard, the players who follow the rules and who try to create a favorable climate for all ask you this!
  28. 16 points
    Russians are Using pirate Hostility missions to grind up hostility for Santiago De Cuba. this is a clear exploit and use of a loophole to break and get around the Frontline system. This needs fixed ASAP, and the hostility/port battle on Santiago De Cuba needs cancelled or reverted. P.s im not a Brit player
  29. 16 points
    We tried to give this the chance once again but it seems that unique steam ID tracking in missions is the best way to close al potential loopholes. It is better to do it before release so we never have to come back to these issues ever again. Even one person farming can ruin the impression on the overall system, thus such loopholes must be closed. As a result Combat medals will no longer be provided for OW kills. They will only be granted for missions/orders and patrols completion. As missions require to sink unique captains (and track steam ID) it is impossible or very very hard to farm combat medals on alts Rewards for missions will be increased accordingly.
  30. 16 points
    Now that clans with the next update will be able to expand their ports with more industry opportunities, in return for an investment, and as both clan-members and friendly clans will be able to benefit from this. It is high time that Resource extraction from industry buildings should require taxes paid to the port owner. The port owner has facilitated that this port is available to you and expanded with the resources that you need, and hence they should be entitled to some taxes from everyone who benefits from these facilities. This would also make tax rate a factor in where some players/clans would set up their industry. If a clan sets a lower tax rate they could entice more players to make their crafting bases in their port. Obviously the base daily cost of upkeep of a port should also increase in relation to how many port expansions and defence options are enabled for the port. Taxes from industry would help pay for this increased cost.
  31. 15 points
    Problem : Battle initiations can be abused very easily and result in many ganging battles. You can keep half of the fleet in distance while baiting with single ship. Ships not visible in horizon appears (teleports) in your battle in no time. 2 minute timer is a long one comparing ow speed. Baiting was used since beginning to drag enemies into traps. That creates lost of frustration which diverts players out of the game. Sailing alone is becoming rarer and rarer. You never know when some enemy will drop from the sky right behind you. 20 minute timer based on BR adds some interesting options but yet it is far away of being immersive. If you are in a higher BR like constitution and attacking Agamemnon, you should always be ready for a Bellona dropping from the sky in next 20 minutes. The position you entered the battle keeps changing in another parallel realm called open world. when you were engaging the enemy, empty sea turns to a death trap after the battle, full with revenge seekers. Everything above, forces you to sail in a group. Adding you as another ganging squad. Solo playing style is important and should have place if you want the game to succeed. Best gang win mentality has no future. Solution : JOINING BATTLE: Keep the battles open till the end. Inside battle, mark the enemy and ally join directions on mini map. People should join the battle based on time they are entering. Place the ship away from center of the battle as following: Keep the center of battle as reference point. Coordinate (o,o), OW speed multiplier = 4 (whatever it is) If 1 minute passed in battle : Ship speed 13 kn (6,69 m/s), (60x4) x 6,69 = 1.605m.(OW distance when battle started). 1605 - (60x 6.69) = spawns 1.203m away from start point (we assume ship sailed for 1 min in battle instance). If 1 minute passed in battle: Ships sped is 10.5 kn (= 5,40 m/s), (60x4) x 5,40 = 1.269m (OW distance when battle started). 1269-(60x5,40) = spawns 945m away from start point (for ships outside, slower ships should be closer to able to join in same time with faster ships) If 10 minutes passed in battle : Ship speed 13kn (6,69m/s), (10x60x4) x 6,69 = 16.056m (OW distance when battle started). 16.056-(10x60x6,69) = spawns 12.042m away from start point if 10 minutes passed in battle: Sip speed 10.5kn (5,40m/s), (10x60x4) x 5,40 = 12.960m (OW distance when battle started). 12.960 - (10x60x5,40) = spawns 9.720m away from start point Briefly we are putting them in their respective places when battle started + assuming them sailed same time inside battle. Condition 1 - Battle is very close to land or distance calculation considering join directions are on land: Move the ship to closest sea tile, with closest direction for calculated distance. Condition 2 - Somebody sails out of the port and joins or the battle is right in front of port: Join him as above, keep the distance and move him to corresponding sea tile, far away from his actual position. We are simulating arrival time (which is important) not starting position. Put a timer on battle screen outside in OW, people should know if it is worth joining or not. As a captain in instance if you wish to run, hoping for help go to your ally join direction. That way you will get closer to friendly late joiners. EDIT: Possible exploit, people joining battles to escape enemy. OW threat has higher priority, hence we can introduce 10 sec stationary joining time to allow anyone outside to able to attack you. Your timer resets as soon as someone start targeting you (if BR check of attacker fail after 10 sec, you join). e.g : You clicked, enemy start attacking you at 9th sec. Your time reset but server keeps checking for BR difference, informing player with a message. If BR fail at your 19th sec, you join and battle start loading. your spawning distance will be calculated according to time you click to join (your arrival time). BR difference, battle group rules for tagging still apply to avoid exploits. EXITING BATTLE: Give two options on exit screen. Stay where you are in OW : You pop up outside ready to be attacked and attack. No invisibility timer. Sail away: Depending on the time spend in battle you gain invisibility and you can not see other players meanwhile.(to avoid exploit) (Formula : 10√x+x/2, you can find the better one) 5 min in battle: 10√5 +5/2 = 22,3 +2,5 = 24,8 sec invisibility (no speed boost) 10 min in battle: 10√10 =31,6 + 5 = 37, 1 sec invisibility (no speed boost) 45 min in battle: 10√45 +45/2= 67 + 22,5 = 89,5 sec invisibility (no speed boost) 90 min in battle: 10√90 + 90/2=94,8 + 45 = 139.8 sec invisibility (no speed boost) If player attacks AI: Only one option will be available to leave battle : Stay where you are in OW (to avoid exploits) IF any enemy joins during the battle, regardless if he stays, sinks, leave; the second option to "sail away" become available. BENEFITS: Total immersion and simulation. No magical beamed ships appearing on water. What you see is what you fight Sailing closer in OW become important = better immersion and predictibility No more Ganging traps More enjoyable fights! FINALLY SOLO OPTION FOR THE GAME, which is crucial.
  32. 15 points
    I just think the issue is that with other nations being allowed and able to help gain hostility in parts of the map where a nation would never be able to get to itself, kind of makes the whole frontline idea pointless. And it doesn't need to be an alliance, just needs to be one char.
  33. 14 points
    Well, when regular trading became obsolete, with much easier (and much safer) delivery missions, upkeep of the port came quite high. There is no more tax income, as almost noone does trading. Maybe a taxation of delivery rewards would be cool? So there is some more income from the port?
  34. 14 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?
  35. 14 points
    No forced coalitions but add Portugal. Remove Poland, Russia and Prussia - their presence in the game is comical.
  36. 14 points
    Sorry to start a new thread but as the Santiago thread has been closed I cannot add to it WO clan have set a port battle at Jeremie , as GB own Port au Prince the only way this can be achieved is through alt abuse the rules concerning alt abuse for port battles has been clear for some time this isnt testing the flaw in mechanics has been talked about and already exploited . two options 1 punsh WO CLAN according to rules 2 scrap rule and lets have a free for all sick and tired of trying to play this game acording to the way its supposed to be played and time and effort I put in is undermined by people exploiting mechanics Devs and admin need to show some leadership in the game because its falling apart at the moment
  37. 14 points
    Tonight before server reset (5/1 @ 5:08) a French Alt in the US nation opened multiple hostility missions for San Mateo for the only purpose of allowing French clan WO to enter instead and run up hostility and set PB at Mateo. This is an exploit and is using an alt to run up hostility in contrast with the stated rules and allowable uses of alts. Please investigate the player who opened the the hostility missions for a foreign nation. The PB should also be cancelled.
  38. 14 points
    my concern is not the victory marks but the steady state (stable state of port investments) Eventually all ports will be fully invested on the peace server (with no conflict) which will make experience of players coming then boring or not interesting. If you remember player housing problems in some MMOs - it is the same - eventually EVERYTHING is built out and there is no point to even play if you cannot put your own house on land. Hope you understand what i mean. But we do not give up - i hope we can find some solution to bring economic warfare to pve server that is not increasing toxicity or find the way to reset ports (using NPC invasions for example that players will have to fend off). Hold on.
  39. 14 points
    Please stop with these light rantings. We dont want them here. This game shines in solo combat AND fleet action, a lot of people come here to experience Trafalgar battles. Stop pushing your solo players are doomed agenda. Adding features to a group of players does not discard another group of players. Solo players can capture amazing ships from clanned members for free + can group up into a small clans which can build a small holding somewhere or ally with large alliances who need experienced screeners or pvp trainers. Wars and lands were not won or captured solo in real life. This game tries to give you a realistic experience. Group sports are most popular sports. Football players do not demand solo content. Cherish it or accept that it is not for you - its fine to not like group based competitive sports or activites. Countries were created when you JOINED forces with others. I am sure Franklin (who created this ad) would never get anything solo.
  40. 14 points
    With the introduction of player-created defenses, can we have a return to player-manned guns in the forts and Martello towers? It was great fun and seems like it might be a simple way to put a bit of spark back into participating in Port Battles. I believe it should be already coded given the fact that we used to be able to man them in pre-land PB's.... I honestly think that this aspect of the game is where most further, post-release, gameplay has the most room for additional content. Stay tuned for my next suggestion of Mortar Brigs not actually destroying fortifications, but just "suppressing" them, as IRL.
  41. 14 points
    Let’s accept that devs want some ships to be «rare», i.e. permits obtainable by RNG from chests only. While I object to this concept in principle, given that this seems to be already decided I will rather focus my input on what ships should and should not be, rare. This is the list of ten ships mentioned by devs as being rare ships: Santisima Christian Bellona Constitution Indefatigable Endymion Renommee Rattlesnake Rattlesnake heavy Niagara Questions have been raised by others about the future status of LGV Refit, Diana and Santa Cecilia, three ships that would also be likely candidates for rarity. I would think that these three are better fits than some of the ships on the list, though Santa Cecilia has in the past been mentioned as a possible exclusive reward-ship for tournaments and gifts from the developers. Regarding the aforementioned list, there are a few ships I think should not be there. Mainly because of how they affect the balance in RvR. I am opposed to any lineships being «rare», except through higher pricing. Although these three lineships are all replaceable in RvR-setups given their current BR and balancing, I would much prefer if they were, in addition to RNG-drops from chests, also available to use in RvR in form of permits being purchaseable for a significantly higher price in Victory Marks. My reason for wanting the Indefatigable and the Renommee not to be rare is that they are both ships that I find are often under-appreciated, yet are both great ships for levelling captains to learn the game and get introduced to PvP. If they are made rare I fear that both or one of them will not be sailed nearly enough for captains to appreciate their beauty and performance, and not enough captains will figure out just how great these ships both are. Lastly the Rattlesnakes and the Niagara. I am concerned about limiting the tactical and variety choices in the shallow waters for beginners, and the diversity in shallow water PBs, which is already limited. But most of all the Niagara, as I have said before, should not be rare, given that with its sailing profile and BR it is unique in its ability to contend with and fill the role that can otherwise only be relegated to DLC-ships in RvR. The Niagara permit should also be purchasable for Victory Marks. Make it as expensive as a first rate, but those who do RvR should be able to utilise it in lieu of DLC-ships should they wish to.
  42. 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.
  43. 13 points
    Why do we need to "produce more competitive ships"? Why aren't ALL ships competitive? The differences should be entirely in the captain, not entrenched in the gear. Being content wag fingers and lock groups of players out of "end-game activities", which are really the core activities of the game, is one of the many reasons why the server is dead. We need people happily playing, not feeling locked out and scolded.
  44. 13 points
    I like that the people who said "books make no difference" are now saying port bonus is op. Now that almost everyone has all the books and we were finally back to an even gear lvl port bonus got introduced. Now you guys know and experience how a new player felt when he joins the game before and had to face all the ency and stacked books + mods. But that stuff makes really no difference - yes 😉
  45. 13 points
    I greatly reduced in last times forums usage - till last exploits - but I was thinking by some weeks to underline some points in game mechanics added recently. New Weight-based damage I think, even from the perspective of a mainly light ship user, it is good. SoL should be deadly for lighter shipping. I consider quite bad HP bonus lately given to all ships... but I have to admit that it was required to make game playable especially for the majority. If this means a Requin can (barely) withstand a full Bellona broadside is not good, but it's in any case WAY better than in the past. On the other hand I noticed quite an issue with sail (not mast) damage with this system. Having sail HPs scaling with ship rating is on one hand quite unreal (Bellona has not almost two times sail surface of a Endy) and coupled with weight based damage makes bigger ships too effective in chaining and smaller too uneffective. And unreal too: real damage to sail is hole-size based, so it should be diameter sized, not weight based. To give an example: a SINGLE 68 carro chain can rig shock a requin. And two light 9pd geared ships can barely damage sails of any SoL. Twofold bad mechanic, granted ligher shipping is already facing far higher risks in combat against heavier. Sincerely I have no idea how can be solved this issue code-wise (may be reworking sail HPs of all ships and differentiate ball damage base value if hitting sail or hull). But I think it's something Devs should look into. OpenWorld battle opened for weaker side and R-zones. As already stated it's better to have more battles. BUT the system is prone to a lot of abuses as well noted and reported. IMO it could be better to or get back to previously 2-minutes joining timer or, to keep a good share of more battling open, to swap to a plain 5/10 minute opened for all. I can understand that this could be considered quite brutal... but let's face it: any organized group (and usually so more experienced) will forever exploit the joining system and BR values. About no more R-zones, I obviously appreciate, raiding. On the other hand I feel it's too brutal for defending side, especially now. BR system is "hull based". Today we will get more and more superships (superior crafts and ENORMOUS port bonuses). A 4/5+ 4 port 2+ bonunes Indef used by a veteran is deadly for a random 3rd rate... but BR-wise the indef will be the weaker side. So raider will be able to tag the 3rd rate in front of enemy capitol quite sure that NOBODY will ever can disturb his killing. Raiding in enemy waters is already profitable but it has to be risky. Therefore I'd suggest to add back R-zones, making the owning side able to join for 20 minutes irrespective of BR and raider side getting closed in 2 minutes in any case. Port Crafting. In a few words: GREAT IDEA. BUT definately the bonuses are totally over the roof. Coupled with Devs idea I read to nerf mod/books is plain crap. Having an high bonus port will be central gear-wise, not a nice extra bonus. Therefore smaller teams and especially smaller nations will stand ZERO chances at all against bigger groups, being outnumbered and badly outgeared. Giving higher chances to get purple-gold ships could be nice, 1-2 mods help but dont break totally game balance. Ability to choose ship trim (even AI-only trims) could be bearable again not breaking totally balance. Port build ship with 5/5 4th level port bonus will throw any ship balance out of the window. I'd like to point that AFAIK a Russian port is almost top ranked right now. In like a week post reset. How other captains (I do not speak even about RvR) could be able to stand any chance gear wise? These bonuses are too high and it's too difficult to get close to them for a too big share of player base. IMO they could destroy totally the game condemning it to definitive death. I'd add again that DLC/note redeemed ship do not get any bonus. This means, and it's commercially stupid IMO, that DLCs will worth nothing in the next future; already now Surprises are more competitive that Herc/Pand in shallows. With port bonuses only on craft DLCs will stand zero chances. I hope this, coupled with revised port bonuses could be handled as soon as possible before game damage will be too much. For those saying "DLC is easy instant full ship", aside remembering them these ships need to be fitted, I would propose again: DLC owners should get ship crafting BP for owned ships: if they want better ships (and same superior quality chances) let them craft their ships. Otherwise DLCs will be close to a fraud: not easy instant-action ships, but simply targets for other, far superior, ships. Frontlines. Again: GREAT IDEA... if not for implementation and exploits. My main concern still is the capitol based line of attack: this means that on map real targets are only county capitols. As soon as a capitol is taken, rest of the county can be considered if not already neutral, only matter of time to be conquered. This has 2 bad sides: first, it reduces greatly potential targets for all. Secondly, being the capitols usually the highest BR ports, making RvR for smaller teams/nations even more less viable (as we see the game is more and more powerplaying oriented - and this is bad for any MMO wishing to create a great playerbase: NA has still a playerbase mainly because it's an unique game... but keep trying to suicide and it will die soon - IMO). My proposal to overhaul the system is exactly working it on the contrary: Capitols (bigger ports with probably higher improvement points too or as it should be) can be attacked only AFTER all minor ports (or majority of them) is conquered. And it makes sense too: you need to get closer to the main objective (the capitol) with forward bases (the secondary towns) to then unleash the bigger attack on the most defended port (the capitol itself). Working on this concept, I think, could make hostility lines (from where you can take hostility mission to where) simpler and more obvious: based on capitols we get big (or small) jumps in front advance or retreat and port links (that should be clearly readable on map) less logical. Simply any non capitol or free town can be used to get hostility to a set of N (3-4-5?) other small nearby ports. It will require some refining but I think if well set it will create a web of linked-attack.able ports creating on the meantime some natural chokepoints, that are usually militarly interesting. Moreover this will unlock the majority of the map port (and not the minority) to free RvR, and granted smaller BR (something in general requiring some refining) ports, some ways to expand and create bases for smaller clans and nations. Thanks for reading.
  46. 13 points
    Well we all thought that today's patch was gonna fix the hostility exploit but apparently not? Russians are currently doing hostility missions on Kidd's island which shouldn't be possible This is not testing this is clearely exploiting an unintentional mechanic . Admin please let us know if you are ok with this and if we all should do it Thanks
  47. 13 points
    Thank you Sparkydog for bringing this up! The great idea of frontlines and capital ports is foiled by this misuse of ALTs. All players that participated in that should be warned to get banned and the PB should be liquidated. I am so fed up with this loop hole using.
  48. 13 points
    I wanted to take a moment to look at potential ship bonuses and how they can impact gameplay. Right now, there are four ways ships can get a variety of bonuses: 1. The wood(s) the ship is made out of. 2. The random bonuses such as "cramped," "very fast," and "agile." 3. The permanent modules that are put on the ship. 4. The skill books used on a ship. 5. The port port bonuses when the ship is crafted. This can lead to some rather strange things. This morning, a Xebec was just a shade slower than my speed-rigged, Fir/Fir Pandora 190 degrees off the wind. Similarly, I've seen square riggers sail just as fast close-hauled as a Prince. We routinely see speed-capped Teak/WO vessels, and some have been made so fast that the speed curve turns into a flat line, as they lose any "bad" points of sail. To boot, when they get close, their hulls manage to still be thick enough to shrug off most damage, or to repair through the lion's share of it. Simply put, the ability to stack bonuses has gotten us to a strange place, and we have not yet even seen how much further the very high port bonuses will over tip the scales of realism and arcade. I am aware that there are plans to nerf skill books and modules, but I suspect that it will not go nearly far enough. Instead, what I propose is a general idea to keep in the back of the developers minds. We already have balancing mechanisms for perks and port investments. There are X points to spend, and more things to choose from than you can spend them all on. Simply put, there are Either/Or scenarios put upon the players. Those Either/Or scenarios are not present in ship building. You really can have a ship that is so excellent at so many things that it negates any weak spots it might have left. So, the brass tacks of the proposal: 1. Keep in mind a sort of "point" system for ship characteristics. I would argue a good starting point would be a specialized ship should be no more than 10% better than the base model vessel in one aspect. A hyper-specialized ship should be no more than 20% better than the base model vessel in any one aspect, and should come up with 10% points in other aspects where it is in fact worse. 2. Divvy up how you want those bonuses to originate. If you want half of them to come from the shipyards, then they should only get 5% bonuses to something OR 10% bonuses to something with a 5% penalty to something else. 3. Get rid of sail force modifiers. They have too many follow-on effects, such as tacking, the ability to stop suddenly, and are entirely broken with the Xebec. 4. Look at sailing profiles of ships again, and try to make them more distinctive so there is less ability to "flatten" speed curves. How might this look in practice: If you want half of the bonuses to come from port investments, a quarter from woods, 20% from modules and skill books, and 5% from random bonuses, a pure speed built vessel might look like this: Fir/Fir for a total of 5% speed boost, Negative 2.5% hull integrity; Very Fast for 1% speed boost, negative .5% turning ability; a port investment of 10% speed boost and negative 5% hull integrity; and a variety of books and modules (ten total!) adding up to only 4% speed boost and negative 2% in other attributes (such as 1% in turning and 1% in hull integrity). This would make for a vessel 20% faster than others, but with 8.5% less hull integrity and 1.5% less turning ability. The average book and module would only add .4% speed and take away .2% in something else. This would further mean that the best ship would be only 10% stronger than the base model, or 20% stronger with 10% of weaknesses in other areas, but the average ships would be significantly closer, reducing the equipment gap and allowing for skill to more truly shine through. However, the true gist of the idea is this: Please have a finite cap in mind for how much bonuses ships should be able to get. What number feels right to you? What should players sacrifice to get those bonuses? How much more powerful should a fully kitted out vessel be than one fresh off the docks? For those who read this far, thank you. If you have examples of ridiculous ships, particularly your own, where you can demonstrate how it was built, how it was outfitted, and what the effects are in combat, please post them up here so that we might bring balance to bonuses before the launch of the game.
  49. 13 points
    Am I the only one who thinks it will be a huge chaos for all impossible nation starters at release? At release we all start from 0. That also means that all starting players for russia, poland and prussia start in the same port. The result will be that the nation with the most starting players will kill the nations with less players at the beginning because everyone spawns in at the same port. Suggestion: Either give impossible nation starters the choice at which freeport they want to spawn in or give russia/poland/russia different starting free ports or (worst suggestion) randomize it at which freeport they spawn in. (bad because you split friends joining the game together)
  50. 13 points
    New patch, and yet again, new mess with BR pool of the ports. How about, we sit down for a minute, and think about a proper design of port battle limits. Let's use Trafalgar as a nice benchmark. Battle of Trafalgar took 74 ships to participate. Out of them, only 60 were the Ships of the line. (80%) Out of those, 49 were the 3rd Rate. (another 80%) So now, let's move that numbers to the Naval Action. Out of 25 ships per side, 80% beeing Ships of the Line should be 20 ships. Out of those 20 ships, 16 should be 3rd Rates, and other 4 should be bigger. Math: 2980 - 4x either 1st or 2nd Rate -> current avg BR of ships from that range is 745 7008 - 16x 3rd Rate -> current avg BR of 3rd Rate Ships is 438 + extra 1000 BR for 5 frigates. That makes total of 11.000 BR for one fleet For the most epic sailing battle in history. And we're setting up the BR for 25.000? More than twice as much? How about we tune down the numbers? 12.000 for Biggest ports 10.000 for Capitals 5.000 for majority of smaller ports, with also limitations of nothing bigger than 3rd rates? Also, some smaller ports (not shallows!) where BR would be even smaller - like 3000, 4000 with only 4th rates and smaller allowed Yeah, huge battles 25v25 are fun. But there should be some place in the game for smaller encounters as well! Also, the small differences in BR per port are really needed. If every port will have the exact same value, there will be just ONE template for all the port battles. Not fun.
×
×
  • Create New...