Archaos
-
Posts
2,031 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Archaos
-
-
With the hotfix to affect the speed of overloaded ships the expanded cargo hold does not seem to be allowed for in the calculations. When I load my ship with the expanded hold and depart the port my ship has zero speed and will not move if it has more than the original cargo capacity before hold expansion.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Galt said:
I think the worst thing about the Indiaman is the very distinctive stern carvings. If you could remove those, paint it black with a white stripe then I think people would really thing twice tagging you. I also really love the idea of the tag just displaying the rate and what gunload you can expect. I think these dummy guns can go a long way to deter people with that kind of vague information. Really rewards you for knowing the subtle differences between some ships. (I still mix up connies and trincs)
My ship recognition is lousy too, I twice in the same session tagged a Bellona which had Indiamen in fleet, I guess it was the fact that he had medium fleet ships that made me think he was an Indiaman too. Anyway even though it was a Bellona I still had a go in a Le Requin and almost sank one of his fleet Indiamen, but was taking too much damage from the Bellona so I disengaged.
For me personally whether the trader is armed or not I would still give it a go especially if it is just traders. This of course is mainly due to the OP nature of the Le Requin and the fact that I know I am still likely to be able to escape if things start going wrong. This also appears to be the same for a lot of other people judging by the new names popping up regularly in the KPR green zone all sailing Le Requins.
-
If you look at time 0:27 you will see that your speed is 3.4kts and pulling has commenced. I am not sure how it works with your speed increasing and what limits there are as the pulling has begun, but you were below 3.5 when the pull started.
-
57 minutes ago, Po Tsai said:
I do not agree, an armed in indiaman who carries repairs can be trouble (at least for me), maybe not if you are in a frigate but anything less you need to careful.
So, keeping it armed at least give you some fighting chance against smaller ships, even Requins.
For any player with a moderate amount of skill, they should have no trouble against an AI controlled Indiaman especially in a Le Requin. I would not class myself skilled in sailing the Le Requin, but earlier today I was able to take on a player in an Endy with two Indiamen in fleet and I had no problem sinking one Indiaman even with the Endy firing at me and both Indiamen were armed.
The only people who are really asking for traders to arm themselves is those who want the traders to fight back in some way. I dont know if it gives them some form of satisfaction that it is PvP if their prey shoots back even though there is little to no hope.
-
1
-
-
On 8/6/2018 at 10:53 AM, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
Well, we are pretty much there. Just make it Exit to nearest Outpost. Can buy Basic Cutter if owns no other ship.
Well played Texas sir.
May I ask have you ever been involved in problem solving in a commercial environment? Because you have made a classic mistake here by following the trail of a discussion and solutions proposed and thinking you have arrived at a solution without going back to see if it solved what was the original problem or has the requirement of the original mechanic still been met.
Why did they ever have the option to go to nearest friendly or neutral port? It was to avoid the situation and frustration of someone spending hours sailing half way across the map only to get sunk before they arrived at their destination and be back at square one and being ready to rage quit. If you only had exit to nearest outpost then this problem would arise.
If you have an issue with basic cutters you need to address those issues directly not other game mechanics that were introduced for a good reason. The only available as a taxi with no guns or no hold space was a better solution but could still be abused by spies and alts.
-
2 hours ago, jodgi said:
Then on the flipside; Why should traders have so much safety?
Is it bad for the game that people rolling around in big personal trader fleets stand to lose all their shit when they don't have sufficient protection?
The obvious solution is to stop dragging bots around and limit your exposure to loss and re-tagging by sailing one ship. Why is that so bad?
I don't believe in the concept of pve grinding in all it's forms and in (total) safety is a long term health factor for the game.
You say that traders want more safety and that they roll around in big personal trader fleets, but the fact is that traders run the greatest risk because the more cargo they have the slower they become, their ships are limited to 3 knowledge slots, they have less crew than a same class warship and where before you could relatively safely transport small amounts of goods around on trader lynxes, the introduction of Le Requin has killed that.
If a single raider comes upon a fleet of 4 ships why should he automatically be able to kill them off one at a time? If the trader is caught by multiple ships then he is likely to lose all his ships. So why dont the raiders have to hunt in packs to stop trader fleets? Maybe the raiders should have fleet raiders with them so they could assign individual AI raiders to individual AI traders? I remember once I commented how I was caught on a trade run and I got my fleet to escape my having the raider follow me in one direction while my fleet escaped in the other direction and the comment someone made on this forum was that I was lucky as if it had been them that caught me they would have sunk my AI traders first then come for me. So why are people asking for it to be made easier for raiders, why should they have it so easy?
The reason you need to drag bots around is otherwise many trade runs are not worth the time it takes, currently with the overload bug many ports are making huge sums of money due to the amount of goods being traded. Once this overload bug is fixed the money will drop drastically as there will not be as much cargo traded.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, z4ys said:
You know that a Grp of attackers would get all the ships right?
So let's focus on 1 attacker and 4 defender because that's the only case when scatter works.
It's still possible to scatter. Just surrender at distance and get a headstart while attacker is sailing and securing the prize. If done right it's over 1 min advantage to get away. Then we have the invisibility time that can make it impossible to predict where you will come out of warp. I wrote can because some player like to chose the obvious route.....
There are so many mechanics to protect players but giving free rides to safety is the ultimate safety a merchant can have. Let's be honest I bet there are some merchants out that did not put any goods on their ship and divided all the goodies between the AI ships because they know when attacked the attacker will focus on them while fleet can escape and will be teleported to safety.
And last but not least. Canons do the difference in a 1 attacker vs 4 defender.
When staying together with the AI and actively controlling them it's possible to repel the enemy by focusing the hull. Furthermore AI has unlimited chain.....
Then it's possible to switch ships at the battle start. Take warship into your fleet. And switch to it during the fight against 1 attacker. You don't need to sail it in the first hand when you need to smuggle. But just have it in fleet.
How to switch? Just order AI to stop sail close and transfer crew during battle.
There are many tools to defend the merchant fleet. But most of merchant that I encounter choose to be prey...
No guns WTF......
You have obviously not done a lot of serious trading. On one hand you say that the traders are stupid for not having guns just so they can get the extra 50t of cargo then on the other hand you say that they are sailing a whole ship empty so the attacker gets nothing.
What you also seem to forget is that very seldom does the attacker keep the cargo ship or the goods as usually the value of PvP marks is worth more than the risk of trying to get the trader back to port. With these new mechanics there is even less incentive to attempt to get the trader back to port. Make it so that when traders are capped that the attacker gets no reward, PvP marks or cargo, if the trader is not taken back to port and then you would see a major change in how raiders deal with traders, or alternatively traders should not award PvP marks at all as the cargo should compensate enough. I bet raiders would not like that.
In the 1v4 scenario you keep mentioning having guns is only ever possibly effective on traders of the size LGV and above, lower level traders just do not have the firepower even combined to pose a serious threat to an attacker unless they are attacking in a very small ship. Working closely with 3 other players you may stand a chance but AI are more likely to hinder you by ramming into you, firing broadsides into you, taking out your bow spirit or chaining your sails.
You also seem to miss the point that on the more profitable cargo runs if you are intercepted in enemy territory the chances are more likely that your escaped ships will end up back close to where you started from rather than to your destination.
With regards to your suggestion of having a warship in fleet which you switch to when you are in the instance, well this clearly shows that you have not sailed traders very much and that due to their slow speed and the now smaller tag circle any reasonable capable attacker will be entering the battle very close to you, meaning they are likely to be almost ontop of you and are likely to be in a boarding position before you have changed ships.
I have taken on 4 armed Indiamen in a Le Requin and the only thing that stopped me getting them all was the fact that they were able to escape and in another battle where they remained and fought the only reason I had to let some go because I was damaged was because I was leaving myself exposed by trying to keep them all tagged rather than concentrating on one at a time. With this new system I will be able to concentrate on the player alone while the AI run around ramming into each other, because now I know I will get a second bite at the player once the first battle is completed.
-
15 minutes ago, sounthernrebel78 said:
People forget there is a recently killed tag that prevents any rewards being given if attacked while being recently killed. Unless the raider is after the trader ships them selves there wont be any risk for the battle.
This feature does however save the trader a lot of time in longer trader routes. Currently if you do not have a friendly port near by you have wasted sometime hours sailing to that port only for it to be for nothing and you lost a ship in the process. AS A TRADER I welcome this update.
I can say personally that a recently killed tag does not stop me from attacking a trader. If I attack a trader my aim is to take or destroy all his ships and not just the player for PvP marks. I do not class killing traders as PvP as there is really no competition unless they have an escort. I have on occasion let a players fleet escape if I felt that it is a new or relatively inexperienced player but many others would not give that consideration.
How does it save you time as basically you are guaranteed to lose all your ships as long as the raider can defeat you.
-
4 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
Okay, thanks for the example.
I see a very strong reason for traders to organize convoys and simulate this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pulo_Aura
or this
I have no objection to convoys and I wish more people would use them, but the fact is it is almost impossible in the current game to get people to escort you unless it is some major clan movement of goods. In order to get people to do such things you would have to make trading the only way gold can be earned in the game so trading became important and the proceeds would be required to maintain warship fleets, but there would be too many people against such a system. Currently a warship can go out and fight some AI and make just as much money as a trader so why should they spend their time escorting a trader only to have to share the profit.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Percival Merewether said:
While this is true in theory, it will require the raider to drag the battle out for a full hour - I doubt that will happen.
To be on the safe side though, it may be a good idea to prevent the "Recently kill" timer from counting down during battle. Just to avoid kiting of course.
This raises an interesting point, so after the first instance the raider will drag the next battle out over an hour so he can get more PvP marks, just keeping the vessel tagged enough to keep him in battle till the timer expires and he can get more PvP marks, then rinse and repeat for the next two fleet vessels. You may doubt that will happen but I can guarantee it will happen even if it is just for trolling purposes.
-
Just now, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
? I see no mention of that.
Okay look at this example, I sail out with a Wappen as they suggested to escort my fleet of 3 Indiamen, I get attacked by a single raider and I send my 3 Indiamen away and fight with my Wappen, I am up against a skilled raider and he defeats me but my 3 Indiamen have escaped. So the instance ends and now I appear in OW in one of my Indiamen with 2 Indiamen in fleet so the raider tags me again and this repeats over another couple on instances till all my ships are sunk. Are you saying he will not get PvP marks for each kill, rather than the current single set of PvP marks for the kill on the Wappen?
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
Escort duty mean the warship must be ready to face the odds. The escorts ships safety is secondary to the convoy. Not many are ready to do this.
Exactly and the escort ships sacrifice if he cannot overcome the odds means that the traders have time to escape, but now it looks like you can lose both so no point in having an escort.
-
14 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
Problem is the squadrons.
So we have a organization issue.
Gankers take time to organize themselves and sail together.
Traders cannot spare a minute to organize themselves in a large convoy and sail together.
I mean... mechanics cannot possible cover all of the human made choices.
I am intrigued about this change and eager to see it in practice.
In the case of gankers or organised groups of raiders, there is not an issue as they will be able to take out all the traders in one instance. This change if it works like I suspect it will give too much advantage to the raiders and increase what is already easy PvP marks, as they will get PvP marks for each trader they kill.
If it only applies to ships captured in battle and not ships already in fleet, then I have no issue with it.
-
6 minutes ago, z4ys said:
Why not use a convoy guarding ship like wappen? No lets take 4 traders for maximum profit no guns no repairs and cry afterwards that the trader has no chance.
Then lets scatter so only 1 ship is able to focus the 1 raider instead of all ships focusing the hull of the raider so he has to withdraw. ANd most important part stick together.
Withdraw of the attacker is a win for the trader.
But i understand crying and being a sheep is easier. The ones that put up a fight are the ones that get away. Nobody expects a trader to fight. An agressive trader will always get you by surprise.
Even with an escort, the reality of it is that the trader ships in the fleet would scatter and the escorts job is to allow the traders sufficient time to escape. Traders are not supposed to be fighting ships and if you remember correctly there was a time when you could not even install guns on them.
People keep mentioning player escorts, but they have never tried employing someone to act as player escort or they would soon find that they could not find anyone to do it or that the price charged is so exorbitant that its is not worth it.
Even with 4 fully armed trader brigs working together, one single Le Requin could rage board them each in turn without blinking and take each one out in a single round in boarding.
I have faced a raider before in an unarmed trader and managed to stop him boarding for best part of 30 minutes while my other fleet ships escaped, why should I then be back at square 1 and have to go through it all again for each of my other ships, surely that time I have bought them would have taken them well away from the battle even when you account for the time differences between instance and OW.
On the other hand I have attacked fleets of traders and the skill is keeping them all tagged so you can get as many of them as possible. Now you want to remove that challenge so the raider can leisurely take down the player because he knows that the rest will be waiting for him to do it all over again. So basically no skill required.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, z4ys said:
or trader could just atucal start to equip guns and fight instead of accepting what they think is their fate.
Get real, about the only trader ship that could stand any chance against another vessel even when armed is an Indiaman, the rest just have too few crew or guns to make any difference against any serious opposition. The only option for traders is running and scattering so that at least some escape when facing a single raider. This also replicates the reality of it, if the raider spends too much time capturing one trader the rest have time to get away. A skilled raider can keep multiple ships tagged and capture and sink them all, so this now just looks like another way of making it easier for the raiders, and people have the cheek to call traders "carebears".
-
7 minutes ago, z4ys said:
if i understand correct:
Trader sails with 4 ships. He splits - 3 fleetships sail in different directions fleet ships escape. Player trader ship gets sunk. Trader spawns at the battle symbol in one of his 3 fleet ships. raider can continue to kill the other 3 ships. Splitting the trade ships will not help after this patch. Trader will have to start fighting for their stuff and not get free rides.
Well that would be just wrong as it makes it too easy for the raider as he can take his time killing the trader rather than have to try and get them quickly before they escape. The only defense for a trader is to delay the attacker so much that the rest of the fleet escapes. If you now make them have to fight individually on each ship in the fleet you may as well get rid of fleets and trading altogether.
Can I also ask is this the response from the Devs or just your interpretation of what has been announced? I would like it confirmed from the Devs.
-
2 hours ago, admin said:
If you have a fleet ship you will not be sent to port, but will be assigned to your fleet vessel.
How will this affect trader ships in fleet? Will you be assigned to one of your traders if you lose your main ship or does this only apply when you have captured ships in battle?
Even if it does only apply to ships captured in battle, how will it affect a raider who has captured a trader and wants to keep it because the cargo is more valuable than the PvP marks he would get for sinking it, yet after capturing in he is sunk by other ships in the same instance after he has sent the trader away. Does he now end up on a trader deep in enemy waters with a possible revenge fleet waiting for him?
-
10 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
How ?
I explained how, you lose your ship in battle and you intend to go back to your outpost as you have no money but instead you click on go to nearest port. You are now stuck in a port without money to buy a ship if it is available or even if you do have the money there may not be ships for sale (As I said I am not sure how quickly ports replenish the npc ships other than basic cutters)
12 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:If you own less that 300k you can sail a BCutter. That was answered and is a good one, because everyone gets 300k plus thousands of repairs upon successful exit of the Academy - Tutorial and Exams.
So the people that currently abuse the use of basic cutters just make sure they have less than 300k on them by transferring it to an alt or friend before they head out, so your solution changes nothing.
I am not opposed to your solution, I am just playing devils advocate and looking for flaws in it. Personally I do not use the basic cutter for transporting anything as there are better and safer ships that can be used. I do not even use it to get from port to port without risk to open new outposts as again there are faster safer ships that can be used for this (A speed fitted Le Requin will not be caught unless very unlucky).
-
Although I like the idea of simulating the lifetime of woods I think this would essentially make ships used in major battles a one time use only as the degradation to HP would very quickly become a concern. In a major engagement most ships heavily involved in the action will repair over 50% and some will repair a lot more than that using several fully modded repairs during a single battle, meaning you could be losing 3% to 5% of your HP for each major engagement. So unless there was some way to reverse this loss by either drydocking or some special repair you would find most people would choose to use new ships rather than second hand ones for major battles.
There are many such suggestions that could be made that would simulate the reality of sailing ships in this period, but I am not sure the all translate well into the game. For example we do not take into account the marine growth on ships and how it affects their speed. Marine growth was a major issue especially in the warm waters of the Caribbean but I think it would detract a bit from gameplay if we had to consider it.
-
3
-
-
19 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
Two to Port exists as a emergency measure to get unstuck. If you use for other ends it is on you.
Tell me, in which situations will you be stranded in a port away from home IF when you lose a ship you exit to friendly port or closest outpost.Tell me it is not just a excuse to be able to sail from A to B in a free ship when I sit in millions of gold and could well exit to outpost when I have lots of ships ready to sail.
Please, tell me it is not to transport books and extra refits or farm marks in patrol zones.
C'mon, be honest and tell one single situation where a player would voluntarily get himself stuck when the mechanics do protect said player from making that mistake.
Saying that "one might get stranded in a far away port" is nothing. Describe the specific situation.
- is the player killed ? I doubt.
- is the player sailing a ship that he wants to put on sale ? Can be, but is on the player, take a fleet ship to get out. Plus I doubt anyone with zero gold going to sail a ship to sell in a god forsaken port.
Tell us, what else ? Remember, tow to port is a emergency measure to get unstuck, if you use it any other way you throw away your safety card voluntarily.
As long as there is a possibility to end up in a port where you do not have an outpost there is a possibility of getting stuck there. Not everyone has millions to buy a ship at any price and there may be some ports where all the NPC ships apart from basic cutters have been sold (I am not sure how quickly ports restock ships). I randomly checked in a quiet port and there were only 5 Brigs and 3 Mercs for sale and 1000 basic cutters, could it be possible that all the other ships could be bought out leaving the person with no options to leave the port?
You are proposing a change to solve other ingame abuses of a last resort system which is exactly the same as the abuses of the tow to port function.
Personally I always go to an outpost if killed in a battle but many do not for whatever reason. If you bring in such a change then you may as well not give people the option to go to nearest free or nation port when killed in battle and automatically make them go back to their nearest outpost or you would have to allow teleport from a port you do not have an outpost in.
There are a few reasons you could get stranded, you may have misclicked the option to go to nearest port, you may end up in a port where there are no ships for sale or only ships at exorbitant prices which you do not have the money to buy. These may be unlikely but that does not mean it couldnt happen. I have never in the game ended up in a situation where I needed to use tow to port because I was stuck, this does not mean it is not possible.
Your solution, although it may remove certain abuses leaves the possibility that people may get stuck in a port.
Edit: Also what happens if you lose all your ships and money? how do you start over without access to a free ship?
-
54 minutes ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
What you going to do when you exit to nearest friendly port anyway ? Sai a basic cutter to do.... what exactly ? Sail to your outpost ?
You could just exit to the outpost right away.
Or am I missing something ?
You could sail to the next closest port to find a ship to buy. There are issues with the basic cutter but it is still required so a person cannot become stranded in a port unable to buy another ship and unable to teleport. If you can solve these issues then you could remove the basic cutter from the game. Its the same reason that the abuses of the tow to port function have to be overlooked, because there is a chance that a person may get stuck somewhere and need to be able to get out without intervention from the Devs.
-
1 hour ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:
This will be brief.
Mechanic works like this:
- upon getting sunk the player has the option to stay in the nearest port ( free, or nation ) or go to the nearest outpost.
Observation:
- Given there's the option to go to outpost, there's no more need for a commander to rely on a Basic Cutter.
Suggestion:
- change attributes of Basic Cutter so it is an "academy" ship. Meaning that it can only be used by the very first 3 ranks.
A downside to this suggestion would be the case where a person is involved in a battle a good distance from any of their outposts and after sinking they wished to return to the battle as soon as possible, but on arriving in the nearest free or nation port they find that there are no suitable ships on sale. They are now forced to buy any ship that is their rather than take a free basic cutter to sail to the next port as they cannot teleport from a town they have no outpost in.
-
Its interesting reading back through the early posts when the Le Requin was first introduced for testing and how most people liked it and were even asking for more advantages for it like the ability to load chain in the bow chasers and to have a special ability to overcome determined defender, and the thread was around 7 pages long before people started realizing how broken the ship is and how it can be used to troll.
-
46 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:
what will the guys in small ships, or even 5th rates will do, against 360 crewed Le Requin which bypasses DD.
What will those same guys do if there is no DD? At least with DD they stand a chance if the manage to take out some of his crew before he boards. I believe being open decked leaves the Le Requin susceptible to grape even at full armor.
ship sail bug - ship speed 0
in Support
Posted
This is the same bug already reported to be hotfixed tomorrow. Reduce your cargo to the original ships maximum without expanded hold and you should be able to sail.