Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Archaos

Members
  • Content Count

    1,717
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Archaos last won the day on April 7 2018

Archaos had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,425 Excellent

1 Follower

About Archaos

  • Rank
    Commander

Recent Profile Visitors

1,400 profile views
  1. This excuse does not work, if there are low numbers the seal clubbers attack the capital areas because they say that is the only place they can find players, but if higher population and people set up defense for the new players then the PvP players come there because they know they will find PvP there. Either way you still end up with nations like GB, USA and Pirates capital areas constantly being hunted. They should rename these nations to the difficult nations to start out in.
  2. Prepare for the login queues and by the time you login all the good ports battles are already set by the dominant nation.
  3. This was one of many battles that occurred in this region in the last few days of the server before wipe. Some battles were good, some were ganks, some the Brits won some the Spanish won, in general a lot of fun was had and in some ways this region was a good example of what can happen if frontlines are working properly as the waters between Mantua and Baja were a hot point for action. I do hope they properly sort out the frontlines system so we can have areas like this around the map where you are almost always guaranteed to find some action. I would say though that people are not as keen to post battle results when they are on the losing side. Personally I always forget to take a screenshot at the end of a battle and I believe such single screenshots do not always tell the full story of a battle especially now with the 20 minute join for the lower BR side as the final screenshot may show even numbers and BR but if one side joined late with many players the battle may already be lost. I did not partake in this battle so I do not know the history. Anyway looking forward to release and resumption of hostilities.
  4. I am serious as I have seen people advertising it on PvE, you could check yourself by logging on there and finding out.
  5. Its not the ships, as ships are going to be wiped anyway. I used the fact that people were giving away L'Oceans on PvE server to people from any nation to indicate how people on there were more co-operative than on PvP. The difference on PvE will be that players who already have the rare books will give them away to other new players no matter which nation they are from unlike PvP where everyone will be after the rare books and even if people already have them they will only give them to people in their clan or nation and even then probably at a price.
  6. I do think you are wrong on this. I do not play much on the PvE server but when I have been on there I have seen people advertising in global chat for ships and books to give away. How many times in PvP server have you seen people advertising to give away L'Oceans and expensive skill books to people in other nations. They may help clan mates or others in nation but not enemy players. On PvE having more players who already have the books will actually aid new players as it will mean more available for them, while although the same can be said on the PvP server it is not the same as players are in direct competition with each other so any imbalance creates issues for new players. This is the same reason why any sort of indirect PvP, as people have suggested, would also be bad for the PvE server. People suggesting that PvE be wiped like PvP are just exhibiting the worst of human nature by dragging everyone down to their level. Regarding linking the accounts between PvP and PvE, I would agree so that people could transfer their xp and knowledge to PvE before the wipe should they want to play there in future. The only way I would agree with PvE being wiped is if on launch they allowed the accounts to be linked so that you could level up on PvE server and then use your character on PvP. Personally I feel this would actually help the game as it would stop the complaints of new and inexperienced players being farmed and people on the PvP server would actually be there just for PvP. But for some reason many so called PvP players do not like this as it reduces the number of easy targets available for them. Why are so called PvP focused players so bothered if other players are experienced or have all the books and knowledge slots opened on their ships? surely that would make them more competitive in PvP. It is still a steep learning curve to switch from fighting AI to fighting other players so they would still be easy targets, but at least they would be there for PvP and not people that rage quit because someone interrupted their PvE battle.
  7. The changes they have made to the rewards are all based on a 1v1 scenario as far as I can see and not the total BR you are facing. So if in a 4th rate you tag and fight 10 5th rates it treats it as if it were 10 individual battles and does not recognize the additional difficulty of facing multiple targets at the same time, especially considering how the AI will snipe your stern from range with precision accuracy taking out structure and crew. I personally prefer to battle against superior numbers of AI when doing PvE as it introduces some risk and if you are not careful you will lose your ship, but you do not get additional rewards for the greater risk.
  8. This here is the biggest problem and why these sort of incidents still continue. How many of the people who have raised issues via tribunal or via in game report button ever seen any result from their report? at most you may get a comment that appropriate action has been taken, but has it really? If people cannot see what the repercussions of their actions are what is to deter them from doing it. In many of the chats you see reported the response from the perpetrator when told they will be reported is "go ahead, it will make no difference".
  9. Well people will not learn and the game does not have enough people to police these issues as there seems to be no action taken against the perpetrators, so easiest solution is to get rid of the medium to do such things.
  10. Simple solution, get rid of global chat and chat to enemies in battle instance. Problem solved.
  11. I did think before I wrote, please read and understand fully what I said before replying. If a nation has no ports they can take hostility in a free town, but once they have captured a port further hostility from free towns is locked. So "impossible" nations must decide where they want to capture first and start their expansion from that port. This way you get proper front lines and "impossible" nations can be pushed back and restricted by front lines the same as any other nation.
  12. Maybe they should remove the ability to take hostility missions from free towns. To cater for the "so called" impossible nations they should only be allowed to take hostility from a free town if their nation holds no other ports, so once they capture a port, that port becomes their capital and hostility missions from free towns are locked to them unless they lose all their ports. This way free ports can still be used for hunters and raiders but not for RvR, so we can have proper front lines.
  13. The issue is you cannot conquer a free town so you have a permanent front line around free ports, which basically negates the whole point of having front lines when they cannot shift in certain areas.
  14. My comment had nothing to do with the so called impossible nations, but the fact that any region linked to a freetown will always be a front line and there is nothing the defender can do about it as you cannot push that front line back.
×
×
  • Create New...