Tiedemann
-
Posts
768 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Tiedemann
-
-
37 minutes ago, Lord Vicious said:
you must be proud sorry if i am not impressed, when i will see rus or rdnn or hre do something alone as clan and win, we can talk from same league., for moment you cant even do something alone as nation sooo. we still a long way to go
That is why most of us like PBs. In PBs you can see what clans/nations are capable of when fighting on equal terms.
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, Lord Vicious said:
...
Thank you for sharing Lord Vicius, that picture is that is the ganking battle I was referring to earlier in the thread. I know SORRY takes great pride in those "victorys"..
And do not forget, SORRY has a bigger RvR fleet than most nations. So you guys are a worthy challenge!
-
2
-
-
I agree that the contract is a bit annoying. We should have some sort of overflow, so not all go of the goods are picked up/sold to contracts. Like the shop was 1/3 of the new arrived stuff to fill contracts, while 2/3 is placed in the shop. This would reward traders that are actively sailing around in OW and looking for stuff.
-
1. The Port battle group for 25 group members with special ROE.
2. Increase PvP reward - PvP should be rewarded 5x as much in XP, Gold, and combat marks, anything less and it is not worth it. But 10x as much makes decent players into seal clubbing gankers. And please consider adding a higher (much higher) loot drop chance for upgrades and skill books when looting player ships. Right now players who do not like PvE is forced to do it just to get upgrades and skill books. So I think that would be nice change. Personally I don't mind doing some PvE, so on this topic I'm not bias
3. Fix the ship speed meta. There are a lot of different suggestions out there for this, but right now it is to easy to get a fast ship. Most of the veteran players have ships that are are capped at 15 kn with repairs in the hull. So the hunts and chases between 15 kn ships are stand still in OW hunts/chases. The player that are chasing can't gain on the enemy, but the enemy is not gaining distance either. The enemy can run in the perfect wind direction for ever.. Either until we stop chasing, or he/she can enter a port. This is not fun and we are basically just escorting enemy players out of our home waters. Would have been better to not have the speed cap, then at least it is not so likely the speed on the player running and the player chasing are equal. And then we can avoid these still chases..
-
8
-
-
Today we got some payback for the misfortune we had with a few of our 1. rates the other day. Only big differences was that this was a much more even fight, when considering the BR at least..
-
3
-
-
On 29.6.2017 at 7:48 PM, Hodo said:
The top speed of the ship should be base on its base speed. NO vessel should be able to have more than 10% over its max designed speed.
So no matter how many mods you stack on a Indefatigable it wont go 15kn. But an Endymoin, Lynx, and even the Privateer can get to 15+ kn.
That I think that idea is a better and easier idea to implement then my suggestion. My only concern is that getting super fast ships would still be to easy, so I would still want the speed upgrades to be nerfed. Or better give them more draw backs. I do not mind fast ships as long as they are made of papir.. Like the crooked hull refit is a very good speed upgrade imo, it gives a lot of speed% but also lower HP.
-
Economy: Remove AI port consumption of crafted materials and remove the AI consumption of rare wood logs we need for crafting = should help getting a player driven economy.
The way the economy works now it is not rewarding enough for players to bother supplying the player marked with much or anything at all.. Because it is so much easier to craft 10.000 iron ingots and sell it to a AI ports, that are consuming crafted materials. As long as the traders and crafters are not supplying the player marked, we will never see the healthy competitive prices on ship, cannons or consumables. Because there are to few who are making this stuff now the prices stay high and the solo players will have a hard/terrible time ingame.
Also the AI ports are for some reason consuming the rare limited woods.. So traders players are buying it up, thereby pushing the prices up, just so they can sell it to AI ports..
In the big picture this is contributing to making PvP expensive! But I would still argue for lowering the prices on crafting fir log, oak log and iron ore with 50%. Because we need so much of it just to craft the basic stuff, like repairs and cannons. A different solution could be to lower the need for it in all crafting recipes with 50%. Then we would need less and have more labor hours, but that is a larger change and risk effecting more aspects..
Speed meta/upgrades: Reduce drop rate, nerf speed gain % and/or add more drawbacks. Speed caped ships should be rare and impossible for most ships.
The speed mods are to powerful and to common now. Copper plating, Gazelle Bow Figurine, Crooked hull refit (has a nice drawback at least), Bovenwinds Refit ( I have not tested this), Optimized ballast and probably some more. We also have the perk for extra storage space now that gives you extra speed if you don't load you ship up to much (this might be a bug).
This all needs some nerfing and/or more drawbacks for balancing. Because when you have a ship that can carry 75 + rigg repairs in the hold and still be speed capped at 15 kn, then you are uncatchable. At best it just becomes a stale in OW between players with speed capped ships. And the losers are those who enter OW in a ship that can't reach the speed cap. So now if you have a ship that does 14.99 kn, just stay in port. If you go out looking for PvP you will be hunted down and killed by a/several faster ship. And if you try to hunt the players outside your own port they will out run you.
IMO it should be very rare to have a speed caped ship, almost impossible. My fir/teak Suprise does 15 kn with repairs, just with 4 speed modules. It should not be so easy, and it should not be possible to do with so many ships.Leaving a battle instance/Revenge fleets issue:
In a battle we often sail in one direction for a long time. Even after the battle is over, we can still sail for another 15 minutes. So why can we not leave a battle instance and enter open world in the same position? Because when we leave we magically reappear where it all began. And that makes it to easy for other player to camp the battle site in OW.
I'm assuming the coordinates between OW and in the battle instance are interchangeable, but they might not be. A solution then could be to calculate the distance traveled in the battle, and then add that to our X and Y coordinates when returning to OW.I'm also supporting the removal of the battle cross when the battle closes, but not as long as we still have the invisibility feature. Because the invisibility cloak is abused to surround unaware players. Therefor we need the battle crosses ingame as a warning sign to players traveling through.
Reducing the join time for battles further, adding Exit to friendly harbor option or increasing invisibility time will not help PvP, at least not long term. It will guarantee a gank fest right now that will slowly kill of our new players. Because the losers in those fights will be solo players and new players. And when they get scared away from sailing in OW, then we all lose..
Feel free do discuss and disagree.. ^^
-
7
-
-
Hell yeah, but for now using and alt clan warehouse is a work around
-
At least two of them had low rank, so that is seal clubbing!
On 3.6.2017 at 2:13 AM, Cabral said:Get used to that, the majority of veterans are on Global.
I assume you mean British veterans then.. And it's more like you guys are hiding in exile over on the US server. And I'm willing to bet that the brits on the US server are bffs with "the you know who" nation (the guys who need warning stickers on everything in RL to survive).
*Miss you all so much*
-
1
-
-
PvP EU, PvP Aussie vs Asian and PvP - America f... yeah! Those names gives a more accurate description of the server population..
But seriously server location should be in the name imo.
-
Tease..
But now that I know we are not getting it, I want it even more!
-
On 28.1.2016 at 1:38 AM, Fluffy Fishy said:
Can we have the option to have gun port hatches closed on the open world, there's no reason why they would be open.
I thought I should search before I posted it, but yes! Just for OW give me closed gun hatches. This is a minor detail and I get that it is not a priority at this point, but some where down the line please add it. When I see ships without cannons at all it looks so wrong and at the same time a bit stupid that we are sailing with the cannons sticking out all the time. It might improve the OW fps also.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, The Red Duke said:
Of if a raider decides the tag is bad even after making some damage ? Sometimes rewards are quite indirect. Example being a trader LGV being jumped by a Snake, if he fights off the Snake forcing it to retreat...well.. he doesn't lose his cargo.
The key word here are more than 60 minutes and more than 75% damage to it. If a LGV does that to A Rattle Snake, and then the Rattle Snake is the ship that escapes the battle, that LGV just won a glorious victory imo. He could have fought off black beard him self ffs. I'm sure he learned something form that battle and that his trading company would reward him for succeeding.
The assist reward for an escaped ship like I'm suggesting can be hard capped, so you never get more than 5% of the XP/gold for example. The point is you did something, you tried and why not give us a tiny clap on the back for it?
So if players want to exploit this, they would have to put at least 60 minutes into it each time and they would never get more than 5% xp and gold. That is a time consuming and not very rewording, so who would bother exploiting this? Right now PvE is more rewording than that. My only reason behind this is so we do not leave a long battle with nothing, because that is game breaking imo.
20 hours ago, The Red Duke said:What if the opponent decides that the encounter is leading nowhere and decides to call it off and escape ? Not all battles must be a win or lose contest ( depends on captains of course ).
If the fight has lasted for more that 60 minutes and you have done more than 75% dmg to a enemy war ship, and it then decides to run away from you and escape the battle. IMO you have just won that battle. You forced the enemy to run away.. It is not a complete victory, but when you leave that fight with 0 gold and 0 xp it will be very disappointing.
To justify it a bit more. After a encounter that last more than 60 minutes and you do more than 75% damage to a enemy ship, where the end result is that the enemy ship just runs away and escapes. You must have learned something after that. You might want a faster ship, you should have focused on masts, maybe you want mare sail repairs next time you leve port... And Kontreadmiral's/Rear Admirals got payed for doing their job back in the day right? So what is the issue here?
-
3
-
-
In real life the enemy captains in this particular battle would all risk demotion for not succeeding in a battle they should have won easily. Also the damaged ships that escaped would all be at risk for ending up as a ship wreak on their voyage to a friendly harbor. Then consider that they would have to stay in port for several month or even years to repair, do we seriously deserve nothing for destroying several SOL's so much they had to escape?
In real life we would have been knighted for our heroic survival against the odds. Then we would have got to marry some danish princesses and the king would surly have hand out some land areas to sweeten the deal.. We got NOTHING!
If we only get rewards for sinking enemy ships, we will all avoid entering battles where we are not guaranteed to win. This might be how most NA players in larger nations already operate. But for players from a small nation that is how we normally fight. We are used to fighting against the odds and we belive we can win each time. While we are stupid, we do provide other and often larger nations with game play. But if we not have no chanse of winning when we are outnumbered, and are not rewarded for trying, this part of the game will disappear. And I fear that all that is left is ganking battles.. And the Zergs and ex EVE online players loves that shit, but for me that is not interesting.
Back to the battle that ruined test bed for me at least. Imagine this scenario, there is a demasted Victory with 400 crew left, has no armor left on any of it's sides and just a little bit more than 2 bars of internal structure left. It is sitting 250-300 meters away from you in a battle and because you can't shot him/her for a couple of seconds he get's to escape!?
Then imagine that it happens again within 5 minutes with another Victory in a similar state.. Even the Renomme was half dead and joined in a "tactical retreat", but who cares about a Renomme in SOL battle anyway..Am I the only one who get's annoyed when a enemy ship that is badly damaged can just escape from the center of the battle field, because we forgot to tag him? Where is the logic in that!? Enemy ships that are in close proximity of each other during a battle should not be able to leave. We had the control perk that kinda this out. The only problem with that was that is was made a perk. It should just be standard ROE for all.
Warning to all Americans! This last section here is not a serous suggestion.
And then I have a contingency suggestion in case nobody likes my original suggestions (based on pure brilliance and logic I might add). What about demoting all players that escape battles before the timer runs out? They do retreat, and that is losing. It would have an awesome instant effect. Like 1 rank each time you escape a battle.. Might increase the amount of afk sailing we do, but if it's implemented at the same time as the the new patch. I doubt it will effect the overall afk sailing stats much..
Warning to all Americans! This last section here is not a serous suggestion.-
1
-
-
While playing/testing on the Test bed server we encountered something that IMO is very discouraging for PvP. We had a PvP battle lasting 1,5 hour on the test bed. We where two Victorys and a Agamemnon VS 3 Victorys, a Renommee and a basic cutter. During this battle we lost the Agamemnon, but we damaged two Victorys and the Renomme so much that they where forced to escape to save their ships. So in the end we where two Victorys vs one enemy Victory, but then the battle timer run out.
So after a 1,5 hour long battle, where we where out numbered and outgunned do you know what we got?
Well the Aga player lost his redeemable ship and cannons (-250.000 gold est. for cannons alone), and we who survived got -25 xp, 0 gold and 0 xp! It was a really good fight, and yes we should have focused the damaged ships so they could not leave left the battle. But giving nothing at all for damage!? We lost money on crew and repairs..The devs might be developing a brilliant solution for this issue, or they might not consider this an issue at all. But if we get nothing for trying and only a massive penalty for failing. Then PvP on the PvP server isn't looking very tempting for me at least..
That got me thinking, why do we never get anything when we damage a enemy ship so much that it is forced to escape from the battle? If it's because of fear of abuse, then just smack a timer on it. We should get a reward for removing a enemy ship from the battle IMO. It does not fix the 0 gold and 0 xp for damage issue completely, but it gives at least some sort of reward for the effort..
Lets say the enemy ship needs to have lost more than 75% of it's armor/hp and have been in the battle for more than 60 minutes. If it then escapes, assists and handed out those who did the most damage. If somebody want's to exploit this, they need to stay at least 60 minutes in the battle, and that is a very time consuming exploit option. Not to mention you would only get the assist, not the kill.
Anyone see a obvious issue with this?
ADDED suggestion: Make the control perk standard ROE for all players. The range could be reduced, but enemy ships in the middle of the battle should not be able to magically escape right in front of you just because it is not taged. That is not realistic at all, just bad game play. And we should not be forced to use perks to obtain a more realistic battle experience imo.
-
11
-
-
So the diplomatic drama is building up, thats going to be very helpful.. Remember we represent the civilized part of the world, we are not Americans. So behave!
I fear this will insult Kierrip (<3) and that is not my intention. But for future diplo talks/meetings it would be a comfort to us, if you are accompanied by an extra french vitnes. When Groslulu77 or Dugay are involved, it is usually less drama involved in the aftermath..
-
4
-
-
Will not this give TS users a even greater advantage?
-
1
-
-
I vote speed nerf on LGV and Indiaman!
-
First off the specs of your ship has as a huge impact, but a speed built LGV is never easy to catch.
On test bed we now have the option to escort our own trade ships with a warship. So imo the the game is ready for a more realistic weight penalty for trader ships, according to their loaded weight. Would also make it easier to "see" if the trade ship is fully loaded or empty for enemy players. The only issue is that I have seen devs posting that it would make it to easy for players to capture the trade ships. But because you now have the option of escorting the trade ships, it belive it is a balancing feature. And it will make traders think before going out in 3 fully loaded traders.
I'm imagining a player sailing with 3 fully loaded Indiamens doing max 9 knots in battle..
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, JazAero said:
Get rid of the rotating wind. You need to include realistic wind and wind directions including Tradewinds and realistic tides. this will have the additional effect of creating natural bottlenecks forcing players into close proximity just as they would in real life.
Bring back real world weather including real-world storms, not this watered-down version we currently have. Sailing into a storm should be a very bad thing to do. if done, it should be done properly bow into the waves and reduced sail or risk broken masts or worse, being capsized.
With regards to maps and charts, get rid of the premade gridding system. Give players the ability to chart their own course and annotate their own maps. Give us maps we can markup.
Ships need to be given the ability to extinguish their lights at night to give them a chance to run away from a Pursuer.
I agree with some of it, but for me this game is about the combat.
The wind is boring and to predictable. Having areas with "trade winds" for speedy sailing would be awesome and good hunting grounds.
I miss the storms and when ever a battle starts when it is stormy in OW, the battle just looks like if has a cloudy weather.
The map we have now has made it a bit to easy to get around, with the coordinates that show our present location at amy given time. If we could just click on our location and then click on the place we want to go we could get a vector to follow. Just like burning sails does it, would be better and more interesting imo.
I want to ability to put out all the lights on the ship so bad. Not that I need it all the time, but would be very good feature on those rare occasions you need it. -
Hold your horses until we get to test the new damage model, but I do agree. Demasting and boarding is the way to efficient atm.
-
1 minute ago, Powderhorn said:
Agreed. Difficulties should be replaced with population estimates.
That sounds like a good idea
-
2
-
-
42 minutes ago, Christendom said:
I and many others have no desire to remain cordial with a group of players that are now going to cause the developers to fracture the player base and probably kill off the game in the process because they can't accept that the game is played at times when they can't be online. How selfish.
Any whiff of these players staying or planning on returning and we'll stay right where we are.
They went and pissed in their pool and the devs decided to make them another one while the rest of us are still swimming in their water. Don't come back, we'll clean up the mess
You guys have a funny way of twisting your interpretasjon of reality into something that makes you look like the good guys. We can with ease point at Christendom as the single player with most of the responsibility for this server split.
And if you do not have the power or connections to persuade you own nation to vote out of an alliance, why are you the nations voice?
And threatening to "stay right where we are", is this your new nuke button? Like you have threaten to continue the night flipping in the past, if everyone did not bend to you will.I see not other choise here. I'm going global and US, after the wipe!
-
3
-
-
Nooooo! I was so looking forward to getting the PvE on the same saver as the PvP players. Would make the leap from PvE to PvP less challenging, so it made perfect sence imo.
-
3
-
Eliminate Port Battle Requirements
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
I do not agree with the OP.
What we need is new shallows that limit the 3. - 1. rates to enter the area/region around 4. rate ports. It makes perfect sense because it is realistic. The hulls on 3. - 1. rates would run to deep so they can not enter the area.
I do not see any reason to change the line up or implement BR limitations. In 1. rate pbs we have 3 ships to chose from. They all have pros and cons. It should be as balanced for the 4. rate and 6. rates as well. Then we can pick what ship to use according to our own play style and we would get more variety.
If I end up having to sail a f...ing Snow when my mates are sailing Ships of the Line, just because you guys fancy watching more mixed fleets fighting ingame. I will come back here and rage until I get banned!