Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

admin

Administrators
  • Content Count

    16,737
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1,098

Posts posted by admin


  1. 12 hours ago, Geryon said:

    В других играх подобных проблем нет.

    Приветствуем
    У нас из 4 тыс залогинившихся вчера проблема только у вас одного.
    игра раньше запускалась или вы впервые запускаете? подозрение что у вас неправильно встали дистрибутивы (которые идут с игрой) сносите игру и реестры связанные с игрой и переустанавливайте. так как других вариантов нет либо чтото есть на компе или рутере что блочит ее или пакеты из нее. 

     


  2. 13 hours ago, Urchin said:

    @admin

    Could you please consider adjusting the timer effect on trade ships, currently it's a bad experience for players if they send their fleet to sail away and escape only to still lose the entire fleet because they've lost their main ship in battle before the AI have had time to escape.

    Maybe reduce the timer effect on AI trade ships to the previous values?

     

     

    the rules are the same as for players so its easier to exit for them now than before (after the battle timer passed)

    They have to be damaged and if thresholds are not reached they can exit safely (if they dont fire)


  3. 17 minutes ago, Christendom said:

    Hi @admin would you mind expanding on the reasons for bringing back AI port battles? I believe you've said here community decision and popularity will influence future patch changes.  I think the opinion of the community on AI PBs on the War server is an overwhelming "F*CK NO". 

    So why are they back?

     

    We need to wash out poor ports that are neglected by clans to give other nations a chance to take them for themselves from neutrals.

    Previous raider attack to richest ports was a fake feature because nobody would attack Nassau if Russia lost it because of potential consequences. But undeveloped (least developed) ports  - nobody care about them, so smaller nations will have a chance to take them from neutrals if they are not defended.
     

    • Like 7

  4. Hotfix 2nd July 2020

    Raiders on War Server

    • Raiders attack undeveloped ports again on the War Server. Raiders pick 2 poorest ports in 2 random regions and try to take them back from players

    Tutorial changes

    • Due to a lot of requests, bug reports and misunderstandings with the one time rewards the Tutorial has been changed
    • Tutorial now can be completed every time you delete your character and restart it again. Receiving rewards again
    • Rewards were lowered and can now be received every time you complete the final exam. 
    • M&C rank will still be granted on the completion of the final exam
    • Maximum crews have been changed for early ranks (lowest rank now gives 100 instead of 40 crew)

    Fixed several UI bugs
    Added a tooltip showing descriptions for buildings 
     

    • Like 3
    • Sad 6

  5. 18 hours ago, Daxav said:

     

    My only bad feeling about this is the rather low flag drop probability. I can really imagine the frustration of sinking an HDF and not getting a flag, but we'll see. Let's allow some time for RvR to return and for everyone to get a feeling.

    61 flag dropped since the patch. Perhaps players cant decide if RVR is better than peace and strong ships.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 3

  6. 12 hours ago, Voodoo said:

    Hello. I bought the game yesterday and chose the pirate nation, after playing a little bit I noticed that it might be better to start with an easier nation. I deleted my player, but I didn’t know I wouldn’t have the chance to win the 50,000 anymore and would have to wait 24 hours to get the Leopard I bought again. I didn't know those rules.

    Is there a possibility to reset my account completely, so that I can start doing the tutorial, earning 50,000 and having the opportunity to get Leopard?

    You will still need to rank up (or do a final exam for example) to sail the leopard fully crewed.
    50k reals is easy money - you will get them very fast (just rob several NPC traders) or do a couple of missions. 

    • Like 1

  7. 6 hours ago, Never said:

    Another day, another elite NPC tagged, another idiot that Lokis into to grief and troll. 

    Please remove the Loki runes since all that people use them for is for trolling and griefting, while maybe 10% of people actually use them for what they were meant for. Until they can be patched in a way that prevents griefing please remove them from the server. All they do is ruin the experience of the game while making one stupid troll happy. 

    there are no plans to change loki or work on it in any form (the only plan is to add a quest to kill players while using loki).

    Please avoid spamming this question in the future. The answer to you have been given already before.
     

    • Sad 4

  8. 14 minutes ago, Malcolm3 said:

    That's why we need some sort of Captain's log to track killings

    The quest log accurately counts the kills and assists of unique STEAM IDs which are used to avoid exploits (farming by killing the same player over and over again)

    We have these logs with names and steam IDs but have no plans to shot them to players due to performance issues and their lack of usefulness for players (name can be changed). But if you really want this list  of kills you can post this into proposal section and if highly voted we will consider doing it or will reply in detail why we wont consider doing so

    • Sad 1

  9. This is not a bug and was investigated before. In all such reports before (100% of reports) players were just sinking people who they sank before (even long time before). 

    PVP Hunts and all other player related missions are tracked by Steam ID, and you must find new targets to complete a quest.
    We are 99% sure that one of your targets was sank before by you and 1% does not justify allocating time to recheck again. 
     

     

    • Like 1

  10. 51 minutes ago, Despe said:

    not significance stats in that differences and Live Oak has more thickness and much more structure HP... You nerf too much locust. Locust needed a fix but your nerf was too much i guess.

    I dont need use Locust when Live oak have more thick and armour HP, only for a little more mast thick, in this case no signifcance. And think that players need to built a forest in outpost and i only make that if the wood got interesting stats that can differentiate it from others. Before that patch these differences existed, but they were too much, totally disbalanced and im totally agree that wood needed a fix, but now is not an interesting wood.

     

    to rolando's point as well

    Locust could suit better for heavy frigates, (when you need all extra hp and all extra mast thickness) live oak is for heavy lineships

    • Like 2
    • Sad 1

  11. 14 hours ago, ChineseBatman said:

    No post to update us of what on earth you are doing.

    Highly doubtful

    here is from the post on thursday - in this topic. A day before the locust tune
     

    Quote

    Locust - will similar to live oak but with more HP but less thickness for hull, but slightly more for masts
    Sabicu - will be similar to white oak but more HP and less thickness for hull, but slightly more for masts
    Mahogany - will be similar to Teak but with less thickness but more splinter damage resistance 

    These changes were reviewed thoroughly and deployed.
     


  12. 16 hours ago, Lieste said:

    Lignum Vitae is too useful as a self-lubricating timber important for block making, to be wasted on hull structure.

    In the practical cases of Oak vs Fir... I see a spread of density reported for both - 40-60 cu ft per Long ton for Oak, 49-68 cu ft for Fir. Even at 60 vs 49 cu ft per ton, the difference is not huge, and a 10% higher scantling will absorb the highest difference entirely.

    The thickest part of a ship is at the waterline, a thickness of 21.5" for a super heavy frigate of external 44'8" beam being a useful example. This is around 8%, so more closely approximating a hollow shell, than a "solid block". A 10% increase in scantlings for the 'shell alone' would give only  a 10% increase in shell mass just under half the maximum deficit (ignoring for now that much of the internal planking is fir or pine for both), but if there are frame spaces then scantling can increase in both dimensions and the overall increase in shell mass might reach 15% (planking is already tight, so there is no scope to add strength by using this surface).

    Deck beams, and all other 'open framed' structures can have the smaller increase in both moulding and breadth, and any quickwork on the 'heavier' ship is already in the 'lighter' materials.

     

    we all know the uses of lignum
    I asked that question to pinpoint the problem in your comment

    Quote

    A thousand tons of fir weigh the same as a thousand tons of oak. It just takes a little more volume.



    Here is why it matters
    Because of wood gravity (density) if weight is equal THEN size will be different.

    Example
    Of course people used varied woods but for the purity of the example lets say you can only use one

    If you only have 2 types of timber - light fir (30 per cubic f) and heavy timber (59 per cubic f), equal tons of logs of each type

    You want to build a keel for a 50 meter ship
    Because of weight difference (density) you will be able to build a 50 keel from light fir
    But you will only make a 25 meter keel from heavy timber, as due to density (gravity factor) you will actually have almost 2x less logs
    This difference is not minor

     


  13. 5 hours ago, Lieste said:

     A thousand tons of fir weigh the same as a thousand tons of oak. It just takes a little more volume.

    If find your metaphor/comparison really not related. its NOT going to be JUST little more volume

    What would you say about 65m by 1m by 1m square block.  Volume same - what would be the weight difference. Lets say  Silver Fir vs Lignum vitae?

     


  14. On 6/18/2020 at 1:02 PM, admin said:

     

    PVP Hunters are encouraged to sink conquest flag carriers and generally interfere with flag placement. We might give something mildly interesting to those who sink the most.

    2 players fulfilled the request

    z4ys- Sank most flag carriers
    njordhir - Sank most flag carriers
    All other participants had less kills than these 2 players.

    Fort commanders also participated
    Cabo Rojo Tower 1 - 3 kills

    Battlezone also helped to test
    Battle zone - 2 kills 


    Rewards will be sent into redeems for these players tomorrow.
    Fort commander and battle zone declined the request to contact them.

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1

  15. We are working in timber changes and plan to deploy them soon.

    Here are the principles again that will help you provide feedback and criticism on achieving the goals

    We want to bring somewhat realistic wood types to the game that bring variety and dont cast the players into 2 types of woods
    We want players to feel the difference - real difference when sailing the ship made from particular timber.
    We want players to have clear choice when picking wood for a particular combat role

    Current test shown that there is too much thickness across the board and overall thickness will be lowered. Heavy ship battles are really slower now and its not good. All planking and frame thickness will be lowered

    Three types of woods that were not used will fill the certain roles
    Locust - will similar to live oak but with more HP but less thickness for hull, but slightly more for masts
    Sabicu - will be similar to white oak but more HP and less thickness for hull, but slightly more for masts
    Mahogany - will be similar to Teak but with less thickness but more splinter damage resistance 

    Rare woods will be better than seasoned balanced wood alternatives but will be extremely rare and expensive.

    Overall all woods will be able to separate into 3 categories
    Hardwoods - HP
    Hardwoods - Resistance
    Softwoods - Speed with variety of other factors


    To avoid the back and forth the patch will only deploy after full review - The final stat proposal will be posted when ready.
     

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 5

  16. 21 minutes ago, Malcolm3 said:

    Probably in that case you should remove or at least expand Flags expire time?
    7 days seem too small period, especially combined with 10% drop rate and small numbers of players in some nations - they simply have to do HDF and stock flags for future actions, but with expire time it will be pure grind, just to try some RVR.
     

    With 13 ships in a fleet and 10% drop rate on average there will be one flag from fleet. Worst case scenario is 2 fleets probably.

    • Like 1
    • Sad 1

  17. 35 minutes ago, Never said:

    Most players that do RvR HATE farming HDFs. 

    We totally understand that. 
    But thats the only way to get the proof that the person placing the flag is not an alt and REALLY worked and risked something in a group.
    We do not believe in magical ethical unicorns and prefer pragmatic working solutions. 
    Attacking and sinking hard non-negotiating NPCs in risky zones is the only way to 100% guarantee effort (and not using alts)
     

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...