Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Coraline Vodka

Members
  • Content Count

    727
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Coraline Vodka


  1. 5 hours ago, staun said:

    An issue could be to set the Pb at 48 h, insted 24 h. I know from personally experience that with real life, sometime you just log in and find out there is a pb in an hour. Longer planing time could be good, But not sure how the guys that flipped it will feel. Personally in the days where we flipped ports I wouldn’t mind the extra day waiting. But guess there is pro and cons for it.

    We used to have 48 hours timer after PB was set, was pretty nice to have a day off between multi hour nights of NA

    • Like 1

  2. 1 minute ago, z4ys said:

    And RvR was almost always uninteresting for the majority you can't deny it.

    Ports have a limited number. With every NA clan highly interested in holding/getting a port overall RvR activity would rise.

    RVR has been the MAIN content of NA for a long time, big clans would rally smaller ones to fill a pb and or screen.

    the problem is the grind and coordination required to set and fill a pb.

    • Like 3

  3. 43 minutes ago, King of Crowns said:

    1.         I see lots of people complaining about the hostility grind. as one of the few clans in the game that actually stops people in their hostility missions let me just say that there needs to be at least two missions to set a port. you should not be able to set a port in one 10 man hostility mission. it should take at least two and  no more than 2. this gives the defenders time to rally and try to stop the setting of the PB. many ports take 4 missions to set right now, and  that's just simply to much. However,  I do understand that this is a population issue as well. if the game were full it wouldn't be hard to get 40 people from your nation to go grind a port. but we need to work with the numbers we have right now. we can tweak later if we need to.  

     

    how about if the mission br is high enough to flip a port in one go it puts an alert out in combat news once it starts


  4. 2 hours ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

    Going back to this port battle challenge idea though, I like it very much. PB's agreed in advance would have less toxicity and less of the boring AI grinding which let's face it, is the main obstacle to PBs these days.

    and if the agreeing parties want to they can kill any other nation that shows up to screen :P And as an addition these agreed battles DO NOT provide a cool down for hostility a normal battle would to avoid people just agreeing to battles and using it to block a port. Also hostility can still be raised to set a PB which would override the agreed battle.


  5. 21 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

    The best thing US could do is work their own coast a bit before defending elsewhere on the map. Pushed back to R zone that's not a lot of room to breath, especially when you have S Florida which is close to the center of the map with the benefit of being mostly made up of deepwater ports.

    Deep water to expensive to contest ATM shallows is where it's at


  6. 2 minutes ago, greybuscat said:

    I don't disagree with the idea that forts and towers might be better at 150 and 75, or something close to that. I'm not saying they can't be countered, or that the US played as well as they could or anything, but I don't think anybody wanted that fight to end as quickly as it did, and pirates didn't have any choice but to destroy the big forts.

    its not as common in shallow pbs but defenders can win by running out the clock. the points from towers and forts can be overcome with a few sinks

    • Like 1

  7. 1 hour ago, Rabman said:

    You have to push the mortar brigs at all times and dislodge them from their firing position. If you let them run unopposed you'll give them free points destroying your defenses. Its a ship worth points to you and cant fight back properly if its not firing mortars.

    you can see they sat for awhile while we waited for our mortars to take out the 2nd fort. we didnt want the points but didnt want forts raining fire during the brawl

    also forts are 225 points per but this was one of the rare two fort battles

    • Like 2

  8. 15 minutes ago, JG14_Cuzn said:

    WO ports are ALL in US time zones. 

    But you guys really don’t want a fight.  

    You want to club seals. 

     

    reading comprehension, shallows

     

    14 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

    There is no moral left, why keep fighting when all you do is get smashed.  Why didn't ya'll just not cap circles or kill towers and brawled it out in OW or out of circles and than left?   You didn't have to take the port you know, but instead ya'll had to take the last main port of US.  The rest of the ports aren't important (reason no timers) so no one is going to show up to fight those.  Did ya'll even think of that?  When I talked to Wraith it was brought up meeting in OW and just brawling it out.  We have no ports left....and not to mention most of the players including a good number that showed up aren't even playing the game. (reason you couldn't get folks to come out and fight you at CT.....NO ONE IS REALLY PLAYING ANY MORE).   

    Ya'll keep saying you want fun battles, but you don't allow for them to happen over and over.  You go for the kill and than complain there is no one to fight.   I wonder why?  Folks don't like to loose all the time.  They would like to win, but when you loose all the time it's not fun and folks stop playing.  

    Hell EU prime time had 250 players today.  I think we almost broke 200 during that PB (wasn't checking).   The server is dead and taking last ports from nations is not how  you get good fights back.  You want good fights you got to show a bit of faith and give back a little.

    Aww and farming the port right now isn't going to help you cause as there are guys sitting out trying to catch any US player that leaves.   Again have fun with your empty server.  Off to play other games.. 

    we had to kill the towers for a good brawl and we again regret capping circles to allow for more brawl. an ow fight =/= a PB when it comes to tactics

     

    ps we saw 10+ players at cton far out gunning our 5 man frigate fleet. dont tell me there arent players.

     

    • Like 2

  9. How about the owner of a port could get a request/challenge for a port battle from another nation/clan and just agree to a time for a PB. this would avoid the tedious grinding of a port and encourage more fun PBs between agreeing parties.

     

    edit

    And as an addition these agreed battles DO NOT provide a cool down for hostility a normal battle would to avoid people just agreeing to battles and using it to block a port. Also hostility can still be raised to set a PB which would override the agreed battle.

    • Like 6

  10. Just now, Sir Texas Sir said:

    Well now you have no one, cause I'm sure no one is going to stick around those ports and get farmed.  You got brits, but most of those are in EU time.   Luckly since they are there will be AI for you to kill.   I'm sure that will be fun.

    why would US not want to fight more of these? you had several of our guys on the ropes, (willis was dead) and they are good fun in cheap ships. your fleet held a good formation and tbh better than ours so if not for circles and forts you may have turned the brawl.

    • Like 1

  11. 9 minutes ago, staun said:

    Well what choise did Crissy boy have? He couldn’t treat you with night flips, he don’t fight the only guy with skill and  players in the same timezone.

    please suggest another group of players to attack in the shallows at US prime time. over all was a good figth and  the port will be opened to allow all buisness to continue. every one in this battle would enjoy more fights like these. altho hopefully at ports where we dont have to fight under two forts.

     

    PS forts give 225 and we didnt want to kill them but the brawl zone was surrounded by them.


  12. 4 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

    Completely wrong to feel remorse.  You did him a favour by sinking him.  He needs to learn not to sail around unescorted and undefended.  Having no canons was a choice he made.  Sleep well, Woodpecker, in the knowledge that you did a good service to this "trader".

    It still would be a nice option to have a way to payoff in battle

    • Like 3

  13. 3 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

    Three things most players can do to get a better than 50/50 chance of winning an OW engagement:

    1) Learn to manual sail...  takes a day or two and is really a requirement with the sailing physics.

    2) Get the wind.  Either in the OW tag (preferably) or when you have the opportunity in battle.

    3) Angling, even if it means sailing towards your opponent.

     

    Its amazing to me how many people refuse to do such basic homework and then complain the game is too "HARDCORE"!!!!

    The game is to hardcore

    • Like 1

  14. 3 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

    You need 5 outposts and 6 buildings to craft your own repair kits. In a game that was about Naval Action, combat.  WAS, notice this game WAS about combat, this WAS amazing PvP game.

    You spend 50% of your time building repair kits?

    You need DLC or an alt to do so?

    I am not even talking from building ships. I only talk if someone wants to build repair kits.  Repair kits that should have a minimal role in this game.

    The whole combat system is now shit after multireps.

    The idea that players leave capital cannot ever work if you cannot even craft basic things.

    This is so F*ing bad game design that I don't have words to describe it.

    You know all capitals sell ai produced repairs right ? And some freetowns


  15. 1 hour ago, Capn Rocko said:

    Fine with me. Many more players would play the game more with this feature and eventually venture into OW with more confidence in their skills. 

    I've said this since steam release.

     

    53 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

    Should only be possible within your nation, as to not replace OW combat.

    No should be fun ways to scrimmage with any group of players in our tiny world without risking ships mods etc. The tournament was a good example

    • Like 3

  16. On 11/18/2018 at 12:03 PM, Simon Cadete said:

    When I saw it takes 8000 doubloons to build a Santi I thought it was a typo. Then I realized the developers lost their mind and decided to just destroy whatever was left of the game. It’s not just crafting but everything in this game. With every patch the game takes the 2 steps back  1 step forward routine. Too bad because their combat gameplay is the best around. Another missed opportunity. Good luck to the very few that still log in...

    No more throw away first rates is a good thing

    • Like 3
×