Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

About Mansen

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman
  1. The solution seems quite obvious to me - Leave missions locked off initially, but change the overworld sword icon to something if an enemy invades the battle, and let anyone join in to defend the defender. That way people will be able to get help in missions if attacked by "outside" forces - And would be helpers don't have to click every single icon in range to find the right one. The difference in icons gives it a sort of urgency and focus.
  2. Sorry - I just don't agree with you OP. I am a fervent supporter of the near-EVE style economy.
  3. Yeah... except for the part about not being possible to ban anyone for having multiple accounts.
  4. The ingame map is pixel accurate to the actual ingame representation of the gameworld... I don't believe I ever said anything about the real world. Charts of that era could not claim this - least of all in regions that weren't travelled by one and all frequently. Nor are shallows an issue in the game.
  5. On the other hand we have pixel perfect compasses, pixel perfect maps. Both things they had none of in the "age of sail". Oh and we can plan ahead of wind and direction too.
  6. The grind is too much? If anything the grind is too easy if you ask me. It is permanent XP, not based on your individual character.
  7. Several people ARE in fact asking for GPS. Not that the F11 exploit is an excuse either.
  8. There's a need for external tools? What? I regularly make the journey from west to east on the PVE server, and I have not once needed to chart anything.
  9. In a perfect system that is the way to go - But considering we can't simply do it like EVE with practically endlessly large battles (and time dialation), we're going to need to balancing measures. I can't be bothered to repeat myself in full, but being prevented from reinforcing a battle because it is already filled is not the way to go. Clans are going to try their hardest to avoid any kind of large battle simply because there's a very real chance that they'll be locked 10v40 with twice that waiting outside of the battle. An alternative is to introduce actual reinforcements - Fill of both sides with 25v25 and have ships in a spectator queue spawn in if a friendly ship is sunk or surrenders.
  10. Come now - WoW hasn't had any meaningful PVP cross-faction warfare (least of all any that warranted "spying") since before Battlegrounds were introduced (yes - that long ago).
  11. People aren't looking for a fair fight - They're looking for -A- fight. As long as there is a technical limitation of the number of people who can share a battle instance, we DO need a numeric balance. If people bring 25 cutters, that's entirely on them. Bringing 40 ships, but only being able to actually fight with 10 of them because the enemy joined faster is not a fight - It is bad design, and very harmful to pace and balance. It stops being about the battles, and becomes a game of "who can click join the fastest"
  12. Being arbitrarily locked out of a battle because the "other" side joined it faster and filled it out isn't "PVP" either. It's just bad design - If there's a limit of how many ships can be in a battle, it needs to be equal for both sides. Not "Whoever joins first will get a numerial advantage...because limits". It's the only equalizer anyone can expect to have - Battleratings, ship classes and so on is entirely on the players.
  13. Ideally you'd go to an area devoid of your own colonies - That way you shouldn't run into any traders from your own nation (that don't have a contraband label) But that of course means a higher chance of other nation players.
  14. It is a known issue - I've seen at least four separate threads on this on the Steam forums. Players who don't have matching nations on separate servers.
  • Create New...