Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by admin

  1. Overall income situation is getting rebalanced as well and will be deployed next week. But in general it was not ok when a lvl 3 shipyard allowing building of carriers of that time (1st rates) could be built after just doing 2-3 delivery missions (90000 reals cost).
  2. no problem. Currently - it is a legacy feature - you generate hostility for yourself even if you enter other people mission. This leads to this situation when legacy mechanic interferes with the new feature. OW hostility was removed but this legacy hostility calculation was not. It will take time to remove it from hostility missions too. In the past we spent too much time investigating alts and in 90% of cases those investigations did not find alt abuse. But to eliminate all concerns (and even conspiracy theories) port battles moved to clan based mechanic. It was not done because we want clans to fight (we want nations to fight) but human nature forces us to use clan based conquest as clans can control who enter the port battle - thus eliminating alts from port battles completely. Battlegroups also solved some of the alt concerns in OW screenings and interceptions. As a result - hostility missions WILL ALSO move to clan based mechanics or will only generate hostility for the mission owner. But it will take time to implement. Before they are reworked - you can use legacy mechanics - it is not an exploit. Wipe will happen once this feature gets stabilized. There is no point to wipe the map after every flaw is found.
  3. this was already answered multiple times (i even posted about this SEVERAL days ago).
  4. взятие миссии разрешено правилами заход в миссии разрешен правилами утопление неписей дает хостилити утопившему и тоже разрешено правилами эти механики доступны всем и разрешены - вам им и всем остальным про ваш пример фарм марок на альтах запрещен правилами и даже не только на альтах договорные бои для фарма марок между игроками запрещены правилами - так как в вашем примере игроки сливающие свои корабли и не собирались драться - не взяли даже пушек и тупо еще решили это постримить - хихикая в чате что как щас круто марки пофармим.
  5. Excuse me too I was responding to your message IN THIS TOPIC about usage of alts for hostility. And this topic was brought up multiple times on the forums and in game chats as if this topic can be used to ban someone for using other's hostility missions. This rule/post is about surrendering, sinking alts to quickly set up a PB. Not about asking real or imaginary friend to take a hostility mission. BTW We preemptively removed OW generation of hostility to solve 90% of the problems. In hostility missions usage of alts to generate hostility points by surrendering or sinking them is not allowed and is still banneable (for example bringing 10 ships to an enemy side to sink them to gain hostility faster).
  6. с удовольствием забаним повторно так как французы в том бою были без пушек и все весело фармили конвест марки за порты (тогда еще были конквест марки договорные бои запрещены правилами
  7. Please stop misreading our posts and trying to push them to other situations. We have zero information from the recent tribunals that alts were surrendering or alts were killed to generate hostility. If there were such tribunals you should contact mods and/or Ink and cross post in the tribunal. if it was not done.. its the reporter's fault. Empty witch hunts about potential collusion are not going to cut it here - Mueller does not have time for us to investigate this too and we have to time to make screenshots for the reporters. Informal alliances are allowed and if you informal ally will let you use his hostility missions its allowed. Its diplomacy. There is no sinking of alts in this and you spend time sinking bots (risking enemy to enter your mission). Sinking alts to gain hostility or marks or other rewards is not allowed STILL And will cause bans. Using alts to block hostility missions is not allowed and can be reported - but it must be a valid report, have no off topic just reporting the issue, providing proof of what happened, and providing enough information to help prove that that blocking player is an alt.
  8. its already being worked on. Assists will be counted for PVP hunt missions.
  9. main post updated 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)
  10. The hostility mechanic was always working like this. Players were credited for the kill with hostility points which allowed them to generate hostility faster than their competitors (whoever sinks more ships gets the PB), credit in hostility points was given both for the OW kills, mission kills, or other victories. (it did not matter if it was in hostility missions or not). With limited missions and distance limitations this good legacy feature is no longer working as intended The only questions remains is the following Lock hostility missions to clans and friends only removing all interference from national alts or informal allies? Or credit all kills to the hostility mission creator, allowing informal allies to help your nation in case of need to generate points or sink enemies? This will be hot fixed as soon as possible.
  11. на боевом сервере вайп будет в релиз - полное удаление всего и вайп карты. на мирном сервере вайп будет частичный - пока информации о том что останется нет
  12. hold on… its a bug.. we will fix it next week - will give an option to build mining in free towns on peace server
  13. 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.
  14. Clan and alliance invests in shipbuilding bonuses and reaps the rewards. Previously there was no benefit in joining the alliance and holding and capturing ports - now there is. For smart un-allied pvp oriented clans it is more beneficial to wait for some ports to be developed by others and then capture them reaping most rewards for almost free. (as investments do not drop completely on capture - only partially)
  15. overall bonus balance is under review accel/decel bonuses are ok even at 15% as the base accel/decel will decrease significantly on one of the next small patches with upgrade rebalance and we agree with vernon - most bonuses should come from shipbuilding
  16. On war server there is investment loss on port loss - providing natural deterioration of investment over time if port changes hands multiple times. On peace server there is no port loss thus this feature becomes static and never deteriorates. This feature (port investments) does not make sense for the Peace server until there is some form of economic sabotage or port capture (to provide currency - victory marks - to make those investments into ports)
  17. If you are talking about first week Yes this will be a mess around shroud. Fun exciting mess of people sinking each other never leaving battles starting from cutters, brigs, pandoras, hercs and light corvettes. Those who get tired of this will sail out to free towns or will do missions. Battles are open for 20 mins, ganking will be a lesser problem around shroud - and you will always find fights. First impression will be non-stop PvP - not sure if it is bad. Just like it was on release (where we had NO capital waters and no protections at all) there will be lots of battles where you see other people. During this time others will be doing RVR setting up bases. We already had shroud as a starting area for these nations for a very long time - in 2-3 weeks they will ask in chat what to do and sail to national waters (like it was for the last 6 months). And then it will all come back to normal again, but people will most fondly remember this starting mess.
  18. Previous system was creating too much status quo and did not encourage nations to attack each other The status quo is challenged by the fact that you have to capture ports now to expand and use port investments. Best ship bonuses are now attained by RVR Big port battles are exciting Number of controlled ports allows you to level up ports faster (victory marks are main currency for port investments) If the nation blocks your port previously you could avoid it. Now you have to attack it. The argument here is that new players starting for Impossible nations from shroud cay will have problems in conquest. The reality is that new players coming to play this game will have their own problems (learning, leveling, etc) and will only get interested in conquest so fast if they are recruited by clans. Those who know the mechanics (veterans) will move to free towns at first opportunity and operate from there. The impossible tag when creating a character is a self selective tag. Player first choses server War vs Peace, Risk vs Tranquility, Danger vs Calm (more people chose peace server on new account creation) Then if they chose war server - they chose impossible nation - we can safely assume they hope for MORE danger and MORE challenge.
  19. Whole *server* crashed due to provider fault Port battle will happen AGAIN tomorrow at the same time it was supposed to happen today All participants (who entered the port battle) will receive compensation for this trouble 1) Diana note 2) Paint chest ps. server = machine with instances including port battle instances.
  20. Less limits = more action. There was no indication that different BR limits increased happiness or number of port battles. It may sound counter intuitive but smaller limit increased the skill ceiling required to win the battles. Bigger number in port battles will increase confusion, will increase coordination costs, and will give more players an option to experience them. Skilled captains will still win battles when outnumbered, average players will get more chances to participate and learn. Bigger limits will increase desire to recruit and cooperate with other clans.
  21. Do not worry - the front lines feature is new and there will be a full map wipe on release again. And the issues you are talking about will be taken care of too. Current limit of 3 pb per day per nation should be drastically increased. The more PB the better, even if they are at night
  22. Apologies also for brevity in patch notes. we will update them tomorrow based on your questions.
  23. It was always like this on the War server. Impossible nations have no admiralty if they control 0 ports. You must capture a port first.
  • Create New...