Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Anolytic last won the day on January 14

Anolytic had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,558 Excellent


About Anolytic

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

4,028 profile views
  1. I've come across more sources on historical Russian flags, not that I can make much sense of them since I don't read a word of Russian unfortunately. The three last flags here should all make it into the DLC someday. The middle flag here for some reason has both the Russian tricolor and the Jerusalem flag. Another cut: This is from a book: https://dlib.rsl.ru/viewer/01008918049 I did now find several sources showing the Russian Galley flag from the DLC, which I thought I hadn't seen before, but must have just overlooked or forgotten: Here are some more versions of the Tartar flag, including another Tartar flag with an owl: Some other interesting flags, like the flag for Isle of Man SWEDISH FLAGS: This plaque of flags from 1805 in Swedish I found particularly interesting. Sweden has a rather poor selection of flags in the DLC, I guess because they were historically unimaginative with their flag, but here are a couple of variations of the flag that I hadn't seen before: I think it might be worth including for Sweden the flags of Riga and Reval (Tallinn) as seen on this plaque, as both cities have been under Swedish rule until about 1710, the beginning of this game's timeframe. Also the Strahlsund flag, as Pomerania was Swedish for a while until about 1807. There's also some of the variations of the Swedish flag on the top left side that aren't in the DLC and could be added in the future. I also have been thinking for a while that this Swedish flag should be added to the DLC, even though it might be too early for the game timeframe by just a few decades: There's also 2 interesting Danish flags on the above plaque.
  2. I quit for 5 months earlier this year when RNG was added back in crafting, but I've been back for a few months now even though it's still there.
  3. Anolytic

    intentional Green on Green

    Leaving the other disagreements above here aside, which are off topic to the matter of the tribunal - and for the record non-consensual green-on-green is always a matter for the tribunal regardless of wether or not the victim sank - where is the proof of what is claimed in the OP? I'm not saying that these allegations are untrue, I have no reason to doubt them. However the accuser fails to provide even a low standard of proof. The screenshots in the OP could be from literally any battle. They don't even show that the accused was in the battle that this case is about. Tribunals are not "proof optional". How hard can it be to take a screenshot of the tab-screen to show who was present in a battle, make reference to an F11 report made immediately after the battle so devs get a timestamp and a collection of relevant data, and provide a screenshot of the admission that OP alleges to have witnessed? Not just to this OP, but as a general observation, if people keep making tribunals but fail to help by supplying any proofs, then valuable developer time is wasted looking through logs. I know that not everybody has recording software running, but it is not that hard to take screenshots. You might be lucky and find Ink in a particularly helpful mood so he actually looks through the logs and finds the evidence for you, but the rule says that without evidence, the case will be dismissed without judgement.
  4. I would really like to see the "hanging" St Andrew's Cross from 1710 in the game. As seen here on the Poltava: Source: https://flot.com/publications/books/shelf/flag/3.htm Also, I haven't seen this exact flag in any sources yet: But I really hope we will see in-game the naval jack where the St Andrew's Cross is thicker and in blue:
  5. Anolytic

    ALOHA+BF exploiting game mechanics..

    How can Banished be at fault here? According to the screenshots he got tagged and is therefore the only one who had absolutely no choice in what side or any to join this battle. There is a question about what considerations players should make in choosing what side to join in a battle. Based on precedence I'm not sure the rules are clear enough on this and I also don't know the circumstances well enough regarding why BF-players ended up on the opposite side of ALOHA. As far as what happened once inside the battle it is hard to find a case for any specific rule violations. As long as there is no green-on-green fire or ramming, and no intentional blocking then beyond that it is hard to make any judgements on any possible behaviour in a battle without severely limiting player tactical choices. Regardless of what was the reason here, it is often reasonable in a PvP-fight to pass heavy ships without firing while fully reloaded, and instead fire on smaller ships in order to get more guns out of the fight faster. Worth noting on admin's post that is referenced above here is that if viewed in context it is clear that it refers Port battles. Besides, based on the screenshots, all accused players got several assists and kills, so it cannot be said that they did not fight in this battle.
  6. As they should. But please reduce the relative price of 3rd rates significantly compared to 1st and 2nd rate ships. 3rd-rates should be the workhorses of the open sea, as they were historically. And give us more ways to meet those costs. RvR should (almost) be able to pay for itself if your team is averagely successful. Apart from buying and transporting resources each player should not be forced to do a ton of PvE/Patrol zone grind in order to fund his RvR. In RvR, logistics should be the bottleneck, not grind.
  7. I would think that if admin or others was actually using this tool when reading the forum, it would have become very evident very quickly from every now and then complete misquotes showing up in replies?
  8. Anolytic

    Patch 29. Preliminary information

    Cut off date is release I believe.
  9. Anolytic

    Patch 29. Preliminary information

    Cool. Interesting, however I think the shallows might rather loose some of their charm with a bunch of 5th rates sailing around. I still think this is very good to test however. Especially now that tutorial allows everyone to bypass the lower rates and jump straight to 5th rates if they wish to. One thing though: Make max rate (for earning rewards) 6th rate in the shallow patrol zone. Hmm. I'd rather not to be honest. Why are we going back to this exactly? You have me waiting on pins and needles.
  10. It was a good idea, and devs implemented this feature in a very good way. But the gameplay results just weren't that good. It focuses RvR very much on very limited parts of the map, quickly creates a winner-takes-all game, and most importantly: RvR-gameplay is imposed on those players who have little interest in it. As much as possible, RvR should be an autonomous and self-motivated system that does not affect non-RvR players overly much. Non-RvR-players don't care if they pay taxes to one clan/nation or another. But they care very much if they cannot sail the same quality ships as their counterparts for reasons that they have no impact on.
  11. Anolytic

    weekly line ship claim

    AFAIK it will still be there when you log on next. You definitely don't have to claim the reward on Monday. It is only the first opportunity to do so.
  12. Anolytic

    weekly line ship claim

    You cannot claim the reward until after maintenance on Monday (next). Your reward is based on your rank on the leaderboard after the whole week.
  13. Personally I don't think that the incentives are the main problem. The cost, i.e. risk, is the main factor. Considering it is easy for absolutely any conquered port now to make profit for the owner with little effort, the owning ports is actually more profitable now than before. The problem is that the rewards do not match the risk, and the amount of grind required both for rising a port and for building the ships. If successful RvR would offset some of the grind, i.e. by rewarding owning clans with a pension of doubloons balanced to allow rebuilding RvR-fleets that are lost. Another option is clans that own ports will have extra insurance on their lost Lineships. Insurance that also recovers say 60-80% of doubloon cost of a ship. Those who want to use a Lineship only to grind AI in reinforcement zones can afford to grind a couple of thousand doubloons to build their lineships. Those who want to do RvR every evening cannot afford to have to spend 3-4 evenings grinding doubloons for every lineship they have to replace. So the insurance would work that as soon as you participate in RvR your RvR-ships have extra insurance. Screening is definitively a problem also, exacerbating the risk/reward factor. This has been pointed out an endless amount of time, but if we ever get back to a well populated server, most port battles are never going to happen simply because it is extraordinarily easy to screen out any attacking fleet now that all ports have very limited BR rating. Sounds like a worthwhile idea, but I don't see it as really changing that much. Currently this is not necessary. Again. Ports can easily make profits now with relatively little effort from port owners. With a higher population, ports will automatically be profitable. Your plan to improve the economy to implement distances in trade goods profitability - if you also implement it to make trading equally profitable outside of capitals - will make most ports on the map into potential gold-mines. I don't agree that this is a factor at all, but I nevertheless agree that Victory Marks should not be possible to convert from doubloons. I would rather seriously consider making the reverse conversion possible though, turning victory marks into doubloons. It would expand the RvR pension as I suggest above, with much less coding. Yes. For ships - NO. Just no. I do not get why we are constantly getting back into this track of suggesting changes that enforce certain playstyles. I want my playstyle enforced on other players no less than I want others' playstyles thrust upon myself: I refer to your post in the link above. Moreover, we simply cannot have the (semi-)clan-based RvR that we have now and then add on top of that RvR-exclusive ships or content. This will give to clans the ability to arbitrarily restrict core content in the game from players. Giving control of RvR to clans is a good thing as we have got now. But then you must be careful what dependencies you build between RvR and other content. It is bad practice to tell people who want to sail all the ships, but simply cannot get into an RvR-clan for whatever reason (teamspeak, past history, general likeability, etc.) that they have to go re-grind on the PvE-server to get access to some of the content. YES. Absolutely. Docking fees sound potentially interesting. I do however completely oppose the idea of ports locked down by clans. At least for as long as there are RvR-strategic crafting-resources with limited availability. In RvR everybody has to have reasonable access to the same strategical resources and modules. Otherwise those who do not have access will feel like they have no chance and cannot get ahead even if they work hard, and that will tear on communities and in the end reduce RvR and challenges. Maybe the clan that owns i.e. Cartagena should get some drops of Tar for free, or have access to cheaper bidding. But RvR-important resources such as for instance French sail and Cartagena Tar should be available to all that can afford to buy it. Winner-takes-all sounds cool until the looser tires of it and quits and then there's nobody to challenge the champion. This is boring for the winner as well. Whoever is the dominating fleet on the server at any time needs to be constantly challenged, and for that to happen it needs to be easy to challenge them and recovery after a failure needs to be quick and easy. Even the winner has more fun successfully beating back attacks 19 times only to be finally defeated on the 20th run, than if the challenger has to give up after 7 attempts.
  14. Anolytic

    1st rate challenge weekly event

    It is a know bug. You do indeed claim it after maintenance on Monday, so before maintenance you would not have been able to anyway, but if you are not able to claim it now then it is a bug. Try accepting the new event, then just try to click into the event and the leaderboard a couple of times and it should eventually claim the reward for you. If not, make an F11 report and contact Ink.