Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Isink A Lot

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

78 Excellent

About Isink A Lot

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman
  • Birthday 03/27/1969

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Herdy dur flerty floopin

Recent Profile Visitors

545 profile views
  1. The above quote is from Admin's post Development plans for conquest mechanics (RVR). Is this still planned? Is it coming with this map reset? There are many questions that have not been answered about all this new RvR from the many different post on each small part of it. ‚ÄčThe above quote in red, what does this mean? I will use Sweden as examples in my Questions I have. 1. What does it take to "capture" a region? 2. Is it just the Regional Capital? 3. So for Sweden to take Bovenwinds do we only have to cap Oranjestad? 4. If this so then all Port Battles will be 1st rate affairs only?
  2. Ding Ding we have a winner winner chicken diner! It's a MMO, people live to troll and grief new players, it's how they get their jollies on, it will happen and happen often I guarantee it! Just like the "Events" where to bring big PvP battles, in the Dev's minds and on paper it looks good, but us players will abuse it and screw it up to no ends. This is seal clubbing gift wrapped and delivered to your door step! All be over here chuckling to myself. Now change the ROE to Character level of more than two or three in difference the younger character gets unlimited reinforcements then the sea
  3. Good, now I expect you to also champion for the removal of ship mods and officers perks as they are a contrived fantasy and nothing more the World of Warcraft magic spells as it insults the history and detail! No one every said they would be by game mechanics limited by the nation you chose to play, however with a National material needed to construct them they WILL become one by game play. National materials are in regional ports, regional ports are 1st rate PB ports. Nation A has a first rate BP and more than one Regional port for its material, Nation B has the 1st rate BP but no re
  4. Now we have Dutch, Dane, Swed, and US captains sailing Brit, Spanish, and French 1st rates to cap deep water ports. Even though the Dutch, Danes, Sweds, & US did not make a true first rate is it the end of the world if the Dev's took one of those 15 90 to 95 guns ships and added an extra 5 to 10 guns to it? Or kept the 90 to 95 and upped the 2nd decks poundage to get a similar broad side weight as the other 1st rates? And hasn't that already been done on some ships we already have in game? And if that small change is not okay for game play reasons then why the hell is magical officer perks
  5. admin, on 01 Sept 2016 - 04:18 AM, said: Per Admin's statement here the Christian VII is a first rate for both Danish and Sweden. Not a second as you have listed. Maybe they are modeling the up gunned version?
  6. Technically you are at war with anyone who is not your Ally by game mechanics, but agreements can and will be made as they are now I am sure. I still think a third neutral state needs to exist but eh...
  7. Only for round two and beyond. You can not have an ally that has your enemy as an ally. Let do that and see what it looks like. Ally picks Spain - picked France, France picked Denmark so no alliance for Spain France - picked Denmark, Denmark picked France so they will have an alliance. Brits - picked Dutch, Dutch picked Brits so they will have an alliance Dutch - see Brit pick Denmark - see France pick Sweden - picked Denmark, Denmark picked France so no alliance US - picked Brits, Brits picked Dutch so no alliance Enemy Picks Spain - picked US France - picked Brits Brits -
  8. I hate to break it to some of you but if the votes stays as shown here Sweden will not have an ally. Both sides must be each others TOP pick, therefore Sweden who picked Denmark must have Denmark pick them which they haven't (they have picked France). So lets do a run down shall we. Spain - picked France, France picked Denmark so no alliance for Spain France - picked Denmark, Denmark picked France so they will have an alliance. Brits - picked Dutch, Dutch picked Brits so they will have an alliance Dutch - see Brit pick Denmark - see France pick Sweden - picked Denmark, Denmark picked
  9. No I don't think they are nor do I think they should. Ship tuning to balance PvP is something that hardly ever is right right out of the box. We are alpha testing. All ships should be tested now before release so no one ship is overwhelmingly OP compared to the others. Once release happens new ships should be tested in the test server before release to the "live" server(s). I agree there looks to be a load of new ships coming now, but they are all 1 year plus in the making, and with all the new RvR, officer, crew, mission stuff I have no idea if any new ones have even been started. So how
  10. If this is true then why did I see you up at 4 am your time trying to take US ports? If your not interested in being up at 4 am why are you attacking other nations ports at that time? Here is a clue for you, don't try and take ports that require you to be up at 4 am, take ports that are open at your time of play! Not hard. Are you saying none of the other nations have interesting battles at your prime? So you have to be up at 4 am to have interesting battles against the US, but main time zone not in yours is useless? This is why I left Spain 2 months ago, no logic to there nation at all.
  11. But is it? With the length of time it takes to get a ship in game and the limited number of Dev's doing said ships I think what we "vote" for should reflect what the game needs more so than what we "like". And I would guess that most captains would like whatever ships they got that filled both of those roles. We are into the last half of this year and still don't have what "wild card" ship the Dev's have chosen for the first half, And we shouldn't we be voting on the next round of ships? For instance the 2015 ship poll had the Amsterdam, HMS Indefatigable as the two top vote-getters with t
  12. What if the 24 hours was busted up into 12 separate battles? A defender only needs to win 6 of those, an attacker needs to win 7? That's 1/2 a day of coverage if you win them all. Now throw in allies to help you with your battles, and pirate clans as hired mercs and you could cover the entire 12 battles if you make the right political deals. This will require the "Pirate Nation" to have the ability make make contracts for a port offence or defense to be paid by the nation that hires them. And if done by clan or group you could have Pirates on both sides of the battle! Of course I have the idea
  13. With multi battle does it matter if you can raise a fleet 24 hours? What I proposed will make each PB 12 battles long, as a defender you only need to win 6 of those (tie goes to defender), as an attacker you need to win 7 (attackers should have to win more, no?). So if you can cover 1/2 a day with you pop and or ally/hired guns (hired guns are pirates clans) you can still win even if the rest of the battles are empty. But with this setup you just might find people spreading out to other nations to get fights instead of certain time zones having a couple of nations with all the pop.
  14. I disagree. 1. It was not yours and yours alone action that resulted in the fight to begin with! 2. A national effort to create the PB should mean a national effort to win it. (not on somebody else's actions to lose it) 3. If I fought well to get the PB and some other player loses my port because it didn't happen in my play time I will be extremely more upset about it than if my nation lost it as a whole. The very reasons you list as to why not have it a national effort are the same reasons not to leave it up to just 25 players multiplied by the number of players that help create it in the
  • Create New...