Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

John Page

Members
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

About John Page

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United States of America

Recent Profile Visitors

389 profile views
  1. He did mention a timer for this effect: "two weeks pass." So alts would need to be recreated every two weeks.
  2. Um... Or you could just have nations with individual crafters choosing their bonuses at their shipyards. I'd rather not be a part of one big clan, maybe that's why I'm not...
  3. Are you going to actually discuss the solutions I presented? If you want, you could go make your suggestion in it's own thread instead of as a reply here.
  4. A good idea. What about nations that don't have capitals though?
  5. This is part of the reason I suggested changing how port bonus investments work here: https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/31540-observations-on-the-state-of-the-game-and-possible-solutions/
  6. John Page

    Dynamic BR

    Probably somewhere in between.
  7. If you cannot craft ships with port bonuses, it's going to be a really tough road to hoe. Hard to adapt when you don't have any ports left... You can use your DLC ships, but then, who takes them out for port battles? You can capture 3rd, 2nd, and 1st rates now, except their wood types suck and they have not port bonuses. I did not say it was impossible, what I was getting at was, the majority of players would probably not find that fun. I really like the last idea. Having a series of battles is an excellent idea. RvR mechanics would not allow for zerg nation to do that. Russia already controls more than half of the 55 ports already... Santiago is not an oddity, as Santo Domingo, San Jaun, and Nassau can all be attacked from a free port, and, funnily enough, only the ones in the gulf that Russia owns cannot be. You missed my suggestion on the shipyards and port bonuses entirely. They would not be able to dismantle port developments for your shipyard once it's built so, if they were to take over, the only thing they could do is tax you more. I think that's a fair trade off. Please explain the issues of a rogue clan and how clans friends list solves that. It seems to me that it is causing way more issues than it solves.
  8. Crafting and economy when another nation takes over. https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/31150-port-bonus-for-all-for-a-clan-set-crafting-tax-on-crafting-materials-pls-read/ What happens when an enemy nation captures your nation's ship building and crafting ports? Short answer, that economy ceases to exist. Long answer, your outposts remain, you cannot teleport to them, you cannot produce resources in them, all of your crafting materials are still in the warehouse (1000s of goods, possibly more than 4 Indiamen full), and you cannot use your level 3 shipyard to produce ships, which took many hours to collect the capital investment of 4.25 million reals and 85000 doubloons total. If this is your nation's only shipyard port with bonuses, now what? You cannot craft to even the RvR odds, hell you cannot even craft because you like to. Part of the game is now closed to you until you either relocate all your buildings somewhere or retake the port. For example, the pirates recently took Santiago from Great Britain. Before I go any further, I want to make clear this part is not about me, but about the potential fallout caused when something like this happens. Many players, including myself, lost all production capability overnight. For a casual player like myself, crafting is an enjoyable part of the game, but it took me 2 months from launch to get a level 3 shipyard, just 2 weeks before Santiago was taken. I honestly do not look forward to that grinding process again. Some have joined the pirate nation to keep their buildings to avoid this and I think some have even quit the game altogether. What I want to point out is: what happens if this was a smaller nation that does not have other shipyard ports like Great Britain? Will this cause more players to quit the game? Will they switch sides to be on the 'winning' side? Both effectively kill a nation's population and how can you be an effective RvR nation without anyone to fight? Another example is the current clan port ownership system where only those on the friends list are able to produce ships with port bonuses. I believe this system was introduced to eliminate enemy alts from accessing a ports bonuses. In reality, it punishes those that aren't part of the friends list for whatever reason (whether there isn't enough room for them like happened in GB, or like the Pirates have done at Baracoa where clans have to pay tribute or have been blocked if they are part of certain clans). I don't think it has actually solved the alt problem. Possible solution Allow other nations to craft when enemy controls the port. These national crafters would be taxed and controlling nation (clan) would be able to set taxes differently for different nations. In order to prevent abuse, only allow warships to be towed out like currently (i.e. trade vessels only in/out of enemy ports). The port bonus content will need to be tweaked somewhat. My suggestion: Instead of Port Bonuses being tied to port bonus investments, allow the shipbuilder options based on the level of port development. Higher development levels allow a crafter access to use better port bonuses. In essence, make them economic bonuses and allow Crafters regardless of nation or clan access to use that port's infrastructure. Clans/nations can invest in the infrastructure and players can invest in their shipyard to produce certain builds. Only certain combinations of port bonuses can be used as they are currently (port point system remains, but shifted slightly). For example, it would only be possible to have Hull 4, Gun 4, Sail 3, Crew 3, and Mast & Rig 1 at a 45 point port (15 + 15 + 7+ 7 + 1 = 45), but someone else could build a different shipyard with Hull 4, Gun 3, Sail 4, Crew 3, and Mast & Rig 1 in the same port. This still requires the port to be developed, but it doesn’t punish individual crafters too much if the port is lost (e.g. the tax may rise, but they can still produce ships with bonuses they need to stay relevant in the RvR scene). Clans can set the tax levels for each individual nation. (GB, France, US, etc.). Setting a higher tax rate for a nation discourages them from using the port. All tax revenue goes to the controlling clan to help pay for the port costs (timers, development, defenses, etc). I do not believe tax should be in materials like Sir Max Magic suggests, but clan should get the tax income. Front line mechanics https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/31347-frontline-system-success-or-not/ Another issue is the front lines mechanics. If a nation wants to attack another but there is another nation in between they must first attack the in-between nation if they cannot get the mission from a freetown or a port they own. This is a major problem if a small nation like Sweden or the United States wants to attack a big nation like Russia or the Dutch, they are limited to, at maximum, the 3 closest enemy capitals, not always owned by the same nation. Possible solutions The more ports a nation owns the more the hostility missions available against its ports, based on certain thresholds, up until all capitals are available. Or Make all hostility missions against capital ports available. Or Make all county ports available to unlock the capital. For example, a certain percentage of the ports (51%?) must be taken before capital is unlocked for hostility. Like several have mentioned already (not my idea, but it has merit). Screening Being screened out of a port battle, with no chance of ever getting in, I believe, is a real problem. Although I enjoy screening battles, there needs to be a limit to how many screeners one can employ. I have heard of as many as 75 players show up on one side to screen people out and the port battle never took place. The current mechanic makes it near impossible to have a port battle for smaller nations or clans that want to participate in RvR. Possible solutions Limit the number of screeners. For example, one battle group of 25 players. Or Allow players from clan and friends list to join their scheduled port battles from port, eliminating the need for screening entirely (probably unpopular). Sincerely,
  9. Yeah, Santiago was painful to watch. Especially since all my crafting was setup there.
  10. Or you could just block them in chat...
  11. Not necessarily... Bigger nations could screen out smaller ones or take the treasure first like what happens with the fleet wrecks currently. I like the idea though.
  12. That's true, but it doesn't have to be over bonuses or resources. It could be something like nation X has an admiralty mission to take xyz port and gets rewarded (rewards could be anything, like doubloons, reals, resources, books, chests, etc.), OR there could be a way to 'win' the game where X nation gets a certain number of points for port captures and number of ports held, if they get to a certain number of points first for most ports held or captured they get some truly special reward before the map resets and the round starts over.
  13. I disagree. I'm a casual player and I think it will just waste the time I do have. If I want to go fight AI, I can hunt them in the open world, it is not hard to do. The real issue is finding the ones you want to fight, but I think increasing the number of AI slightly and giving them better routes would solve that.
×
×
  • Create New...