scepo
-
Posts
138 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by scepo
-
-
2 minutes ago, Hans the Hawk said:
I'll put it another way, What you're basically saying is that doing something you know is clearly wrong is ok if it's not written down somewhere
No I said police should also prevent crimes not just punish those that commit them.
-
4 minutes ago, Hans the Hawk said:
So by this theory if people find a way to commit murder that is not against the law it's ok
What????
Is my English really that bad?
-
2 minutes ago, troody said:
so far SORRY looks like a bunch of players who obviously abusing the game mechanics in a way they are surely not meant. just because the rule isnt written down, u sometimes should use u brain and consider the consequences of ur doing...
I agree but the point is that devs should be preventing abuse not punishing it. If a system can be abused it will be abused and in a sandbox there shouldn't really be a lot of thinking on the player part on what is allowed. I agree that this is clearly an exploit but the root of the problem is deeper than just saying SORRY are a bunch of cheaters. Saying that a sandbox game is not meant to be played in a certain way is problematic because fair amount of players will just find a way not to get caught.
-
1
-
-
In more than year I have been away from the game nothing is changed. Devs need to start thinking how a mechanic is going to be abused before they implement and then either change the mechanic or write clear rules.
SORRY are an example of a playerbase that will become a lot more represented if the game ever becomes a success and Devs should always think what will vicious do to game the system. The belief in decency of Internet players is totaly missguided.
I respect what the Devs did with this game but open world mechanics design is bad at the core. I hope i'm wrong and i'll keep coming back and I can't wait for the arena game because battle system I NA is awesome.
Admin please define the rules clearly and send them in an ingame mail so that this kind of bashing between players is avoided as it has no purpose.
-
I actually think this might be a good pirate mechanic. Pirates are not hard disabled from taking ports but are greatly disadvantaged by not having infrastructure to build a large number of sols. This adds diversity to the game. By your line of argument Sweden should get special ships because of their positional and numerical disadvantage.
-
2 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:
I bet you play national don't you? No one is saying we want to craft them, what we are saying as long as we are part of RvR conquest system and have to fight in Line Ship port battles to we need the same options as other Nations cause we are suppose to be a Nation too.
Just because you have an option to be part of RvR system does not mean that you have to be a part of RvR system.
Who said Pirates are suposed to be a Nation like others.
If you want to play as a nation than play as a national.Personally i will probably roll pirate on one server after the wipe because of new changes.
-
I agree. But if there is no-one in that zone and you want that port. What do you do?
I think that if no players come to defend and therefore no pvp points are gathered the port should switch ownership without a port battle, this should prevent nations from just staying clear of the hostility zones which is most likely to happen as there is no benefit for them that i see outlined.
-
-
Our view was this
1 hour battle is around 3 days in Naval action time.
If you have not been able to destroy the enemy in 3 days the battle is inconclusive. This happened in real life too.
Good reasoning, I like it. Adds time pressure on the attacker.
-
I think this time it will be to the death.
-
1
-
-
No, I think it is fine as it is.
-
Off topic but i would like to know, has admin ever stated that repeatedly ganking someone is griefing and is a bannable offense. I have heard it many times and never actually believed it but i think it needs to be cleared up. Also can we have a subforum for witch hunts
. Bassically a forum where players can complain about other players without it being a tribunal case. If someone gets repeatedly ganked or cussed they could post there so that players can organize response to that. -
No Sea trials circle please, current timer + minimal distance to enemy is the best solution IMO.
-
I think they should all lose 1 dura to be taken as spoils of war and teleported to the capital.
-
I don't see any confirmation of multiple instances? Each port battle will consist of one battle between the defenders and the attackers. If another port of the same nation gets attacked that will be a separate port battle itself.
I guess i used i think wrong, that was just my opinion. Apologies.
-
Maybe i'm misunderstanding but the battles will still be capped at 50 players (25v25) and it's just a matter of determining who gets the invite out of the 300/100 example and the criteria involved. It will never be a 300v100 battle.
Well yes but i think then there will be multiple instances, i still do not see why it would be possible for a 300 people fleet to lose to 100 people fleet. Battles could be 25vs25 but advantage in numbers needs to be an advantage.
-
Ok that makes sense especially if you require travel. But say the US has 300 and the swedes have 100. How do the swedes defend themselves? Or any underpopulated nation? Reroll?
Well swedes have only capital and that can not be captured. They should find a place on the map that no one else wants and make alliances so that if a fleet comes for them it is risking ports they are leaving behind. But the way they started the game they deserve to be kept hooled up in their capital.
-
1
-
-
Over extension, 300 players can not be on the entire map at the same time, there are more than 250 ports now. If a nation can bring a force to the port that can cap it then why would they lose that battle, i see no possible explanation for that. On the other side there would be a 25 player team of players that would just win every battle because they are organized, why is that fair, or do you want to take that away to and just make it sea trials.
-
yea i thought there was all vs swedes and now all vs swedes vs brits, never heard of all vs spain bu that is probably because i have never even seen spanish players.
-
I think if a nation has 300 players available to join a fight vs 100 it should be a sure win for the 300, every battle should be 3 vs 1 ratio. That is why I also think players should travel to a battle, it would make over extension a real thing.
I would prefer clans to be the factors here and new or unaffiliated players should have ports for them to participate that are of no interest to clans.
-
1
-
-
Here is my proposal,
12-24 hours prior to port battle the attacking nation has to pay the invasion force of NPC land forces. A few hours before the defending nation gets a report from their "spy" that the invasion force is going to come from port A to attack port B, multiple attacks could be announced at the same time if attacking nation has money to pay for it. The NPC fleet then sets sail from port A and attackers need to protect it until it arrives at the port B, then attackers need to win a port battle to land their troops.
This would force scouting of ports to see which ports will actually get attacked and which are baits providing roles for inexperienced players. Clan which pays for the invasion force should have priority in joining the actual port battle.
-
1
-
-
My only concern is that if hull planking is increased it will lead to people dismasting and graping as a rule in pvp. But i have not tested new grape changes yet and i don't know if you increased mast hp as well. If you did not you should probably consider keeping mast to hull hp ratio as it was before as i found it to be perfect.
-
1
-
-
I think this could work with a timer like current teleport. But your ship should not go with you. This would mean that you have to be in port with owned outpost so it should not be game breaking.
-
In my opinion if escape is possible for multiple hours by just attacking a fleet of different nationality the game will be unplayable from a PvP standpoint. Just have the option of players joining if the opposing side of their targets is fully AI. After all it doesn't really mater if the AI-s are Spanish or french they are AI. Maybe have the AI fleet disengage at that point and have players battle it out. It would slow down farming as players would need to be more carefull not to use their repairs but it would add strategy to the game and incentive for players to patrol areas so that they are not jumped while lvling.
. Bassically a forum where players can complain about other players without it being a tribunal case. If someone gets repeatedly ganked or cussed they could post there so that players can organize response to that.
Cap Francois battle today
in Tribunal - Трибунал
Posted
I would ban all of them untill release.