shaeberle84
-
Posts
464 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by shaeberle84
-
-
Yes. This is odd.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, admin said:
wind changes in port battles, so if you are stuck near shore you have a chance to move away eventually
We will change wind in instances over time too (we will update it too)
What you need to do also is to introduce an ANKER to prevent further offshoring in leeway coasts.
-
1 minute ago, Hethwill said:
No. Ship attitude remains unchanged. Just course position "slides" downwind.
Yeah but to hold a course I have to stir against the wind, right?
-
3 hours ago, admin said:
3. Leeway will be added
Will this just results in the need to sail more upwind? Then everything will slow down ...
-
7 hours ago, Timothy Bonaparte said:
I just exited the game after losing two battles. I really see no point in me being pitted against a surprise in a cerberus. He is a better ship in every way and no matter how well I manouvre he just has more firepower and more protection and he will prevail in a prolonged fight.
And to top it off, you get no money whatsoever for a battle where you scored 200 hits and badly damaged two vessels before being forced to retreat. You do however have to pay for the damage you'd sustained.
Edit 2: I forgot to mention that I often get to fight a frigate as well. And there is no way that's reasonably possible to complete for an average player.
Assist XP similar to NAL would be great, too.
-
19 hours ago, admin said:
Good points by @maturin
use carronades and just try to use your better maneuver and stay on one side
cerberus eats Renommees for breakfast - just needs a bit of practice
use planking or reload mods (even if they slow you down)you can also hunt in the open sea in the cerberus - picking targets to your liking (even pickles)
Or you could introduce 2-3 more 5th rate mission ranks, similar to 6th rate missions!?
-
3 minutes ago, Liq said:
I think ships outside a BR range of 200 do not get matched with each other (Except when in a group), that's why I am kind of bored at the moment - Want to play frigates, but there are not many other frigate players, so it's PvE for the most part.
I think it would be worth testing to get ALL ships in queue together in a battle, and let the BR balancer try to, you know.. balance it. Result might be terrible but worth a try
Worth a try.
-
25 minutes ago, rediii said:
Multidurasystem has not a single benefit.
cheaper ships > multiple duras
Ships are not even the problem. Mods and Refits are even more expensive. This is because the ressources needed for them are in limited supply by the ports, not player-produced. If rare woods / refit ressources would be produced by a supply-demand-system with flexible prices (and flexible supply), we would have cheaper ships (and modules) and no rage-quit was needed.
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, victor said:
Higher rewards for everybody generally imply inflation risk, that will hit new players (so, after a sale that put in the game a lot of newbies it could be a risky path).
My general position is that now that PVE rewards (Missions, fleet farming, trade and crafting) are more or the less OK, so - if the majority of PVPers actually think that PVP rewards are too low - I would rather just enhanche PVP gold or combat mark rewards.
So I agree with you that the rewards between PVE and PVP should be rebalanced in another way than what I have proposed.
However, we strongle disagree, and I am not alone, to say that the different PVE rewards are not balanced and that there should be design changes to rebalance these.
Finally, I am not sure whether inflation hurts especially newbies, since a lot of items they need are not affected by inflation. For instance, NPC produced ships and medium cannons cost the same, no mather how high the PVE rewards are.
Newbies are hurt since more experienced players can earn higher PVE rewards and "ruin" the player-based economy, meaning that player-produced ships and cannons and refits/modules/books are more expensive and cannot be bought by new players.
However, I do not think that any new player or even the average RvR player does need all the best items. Port battles or fights are mostly lost because of other reasons than purely better ships.
-
9 minutes ago, victor said:
Sorry for appearing rude, but it's a concept that I repeated a lot of times in several threads.
When Devs put into the game features that actually reduced the rewards or the freedom for carebears, it happened that - in a few weeks - the playerbase of PVP EU fell down to really low numbers (thus affecting also the gameplay of PVPers).
After the mega summer patch, PVE mission paid very low rewards and there were no safe zone ... and, BAM, the server begun bleeding players a a very fast pace.
Now, your proposal basically will give the carebears the following option: either you got paid off poorly for a mission or you have to go in unsafe waters.
I fear this situation is very similar to the one that occurred with the mega summer patch.
I hope I explained enough.
I see your point.
What if rewards were generally higher, so that losing a ship does not matter that much anymore for the carebears?
Edit:
But you are in line with the gereral idea of balancing rewards through flexible prices and the forces of supply and demand?
-
2 hours ago, victor said:
No, it will result in an empy PVP server.
If this is the solution, better raising gold PVP rewards.
Please elaborate instead of saying "no".
-
Just now, rediii said:
Fully agree.
More dynamic mechanics are needed. Also to get people ojt of the safezone so they see the potential NA has
Yeah @rediii likes my post (first time ever I think =) )!
-
1
-
-
The Problem:
Missions and trading rewards are fixed right now, that is the problem.
The easy fix:
Missions give the exact same amount of money, no matter whether there is 1 guy doing a mission around a town or whether therer are 100 guys doing missions around a town. If mission rewards are based on supply and demand, they will get lower the more people do missions. For example every town generates missions day on day one for 100% rewards. If they are being done, the town generates 50 more missions the next day with only 80% rewards etc. If the missions are not met, they are postet the next day for 120% rewards.
Then, suddenly, trade becomes more attractive if missions people think missions are more rewarding. They do more missions and mission rewards go down to a point where trading becomes more attractive.
The system balances itself out, to the point where missions and trading becomes similarly attractive when comparing rewards and risk.
Futher benefits:
With mission rewards depending on supply and demand: If missions are more profitable in remote ports and less profitable in safe zones and highly populated areas, we get more people out there, who are more likely to do PVP.
Other side of the coin:
Similarly the profits from trading are more or less fixed right now. I have posted this multiple times already. If a town has a need for a trading good and this need is not met, the price should increase by, say 10-20%, the next day until profits are so large that traders supply the good.
To balance supply and demand, the production of trading goods should also be more flexible: if port-produced trading goods are not bought, prices should go down, but also supply. If trading goods are sold out every day, prices should increase, but also supply. This is a simple supply curve (Economics 101).
Summary:
Making mission rewards and trading profits follow supply and demand will results in an equilibrium, which benefits all, especially the @admins, who do not have to constantly react to these kind of topics and change mission rewards every two weeks. =)-
3
-
-
Same problems.
-
22 hours ago, admin said:
Please vote on limited use of repairs in battles
Current state of combat favors faster ships with lots of repairs who can disengage and return to combat. Battles are in general longer and escape is easier with the unlimited repair usage.
We propose to discuss the limitations for repairs for example (3-4 uses per battle across all repairs) saved on the ship (so you can capture the ship who did not use the repairs and continue fighting in it).The current system is realistic, I think.
Maybe the problem is not the number of repairs, but how much they repair when it is possible to stack repair mods and skill books. So start reducing the bonuses first maybe.
The problem with escape is rather super accurate stern chasers who can shoot down the sails of the hunters faster than the hunters can shoot down the sails of the escapees. Make stern chasers only use carronades and this problem is solved. No need to tackle repairs for that. If escapees want to burn repairs before they are inveitably hunted down, it is fair game.
Edit: If you want to limit repairs, just increase the cooldown!?
-
8 hours ago, CoyoteJohn said:
I personally feel all cannon ammunition should be limited. I read somewhere once that HMS Victory carried something like 27 tons of ammunition, which comes out to about 46 broadsides (or 23 volleys of all guns on board), assuming there were equal amounts of shot available for each class of cannon on board.
All special ammunition should be limited, yes. But if we limit ball, it only takes the fun away and even more fights will end up in boarding parties.
I think the new repair system (multiple repairs, and also chosing which type of repairs to use) is good, but stacking repair mods and endless rig repairs also reduce the fun / slow fights down / prolong fights.
So yes, limit both chains and repairs, but to a sensible extent.
-
1
-
-
Reduce reinforcement BR. Problem solved.
-
Yes and yes!
And why should clan not also be allowed to increase the battle rating limit? =)
-
1
-
-
This is a very severe "feature" to the economy.
Again, a good example how fixed prices (at least for NPC production) do not work. =)
-
18 hours ago, qw569 said:
Too many ports do not mean high revenue
Incomes and outcomes for all nation according to today's data
Nation Tax Cost Revenue Captured Ports Pirates 1029587 940000 89587 9 Danmark-Norge 1778755 3360000 -1581245 31 France 1652142 2340000 -687858 22 Great Britain 4557252 5058123 -500871 43 España 612050 1340000 -727950 13 United States 1413119 2110000 -696881 15 Sverige 3232587 2523801 708786 19 Verenigde Provinciën 1263134 2089282 -826148 18 There has to be further incentives for port capture other than trade hubs. If the system stays as it is, the map wil turn grey (neutral) again. Players have to grind missions to finance ports noboby needs.
Easy solution: make production buildings increase in costs, the more buildings are in a town. That way you have an incentive to produce in different ports (= cheaper).
-
1
-
-
I would love to see mission cap vanish. Back in the days we could teach new players how combat works by taking low-level missions, so they could learn. This is not possible anymore. Sad.
Also, why are fleet missions always the sam size, no matter how many players join? I would love to see a dynamic BR increase, the more players start a mission.
Furthermore, compared to the gold and xp gained from sinking ships, the rewards from the missions are ridiculously small. They could increase with the distance between mission and port, indicating that missions further away from ports are more dangerous.
-
4
-
-
Selling player-made ressources to NPCs is a bad idea in an economy that already lacks LH to supply enough ships, cannons and repairs.
-
40 minutes ago, admin said:
current minimal fee is 100k per day. So if your clan controls 10 ports it will amount to 1 mln per day.
38 minutes ago, admin said:Most players already lost access to their set up production lines due to previous conquest. New conquest is no different, but with safe zones for some nations
Production happens to 99% in the five ports around a nation's capital. No need for further conquest, no need for RvR. The only ports you need is the rare wood ports. As long as production buildings are not unlimited and as long as ports cost money to maintain without further benefits, RvR will be dead due to economic reasons.
-
1
-
-
Why are refits possible to carry in the captain's chest, but books are not? That is very unintuitive. Both represent a sort of 'wisdom' and should be carryable between ports.
Information on the open world patrol missions
in News Announcements & Important discussions
Posted
Keep the circle of doom but allow for an escape. If you have bad tag or something strange happens on OW so that your friends cannot join a battle, this should not be necessarily punished by death. The incentive to fight are strong enough.