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

4,555 Excellent


About Anolytic

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

4,026 profile views
  1. 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:
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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?
  5. Anolytic

    Patch 29. Preliminary information

    Cut off date is release I believe.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. Anolytic

    Empty sea

    We already tested severely limited ships of the line in Summer 2017, and since then I think only a small, but vocal group - players that don't do RvR and don't themselves sail big ships - has asked for a repeat of the experiment. First Rate Spam hasn't been an issue for most players for over a year. After conquest marks became abundant, but still required participation to get, First Rate accessibility became quite balanced. Patch 27 broke that balance. Because he might be able to afford 1st rates, but his clanmates/nationmates who do not have the time or motivation to grind for doubloons cannot. And because even if he builds 25 1st rates to give away, he still needs 24 clanmates to log on and sail them. It doesn't help to have a few very rich players when they have nobody to play with. I see fewer and fewer people log onto my Teamspeak and in my clan each day as even the most dedicated and optimistic players tire of grinding the patrol zone for doubloons and see no reward in the form of end-game content. And the prosepect going out in big fleets again like we had so much fun doing before seem farther and farther away. The grind to fun ratio has skyrocketed for anyone who play the game now mostly for the end-game (RvR). I have probably 30 2nd and 1st rates in my docks, and I sometimes take them out alone or with 1 or 2 friends. But even so I am acutely aware that the risk to reward ratio makes it outright wasteful. Replacing a 1st rate means at least a couple of evenings of boring grinding just for the doubloons. This is completely different from having to maybe wait a couple of days for another Victory Mark, which can be bought or borrowed in the meantime if you cannot wait, or having to collect and sail resources which is a completely separate type of gameplay which brings its own risks and joys, and which a clan can help each other out with. This might be a Prussian problem to deal with, but it is not a general RvR problem. Most RvR-clans craft ships in their own nation, and no clans would rather pay tax with their alts to an enemy nation for valuable resources than own the port themselves and collect the taxes themselves as well as being able to use the alts for something else.
  13. Anolytic

    A Slight Tweak to Contracts to Encourage Those Who Sail

    It's a novel idea, but in practice there would be no valuable woods for whoever sailed to those ports anyway. Goods would be monopolised by players with more time to teleport in and buy up all the stock at regular intervals (or an alt permanently stationed that just needs to be logged in a few times a day. This would only serve to make contracts absolutely useless, as there would be no resources left over at maintenance to deliver to the contracts. The good thing about contracts is that they facilitate price competition. This makes it an actual auction rather than everything going for a set price from AI. What is wrong with those with deeper pockets winning the bidding war? Merchants would never hold onto their stock just in case some customer came by and sell it dirt cheap at that, rather than making a profit by selling to the highest bidder. People with contracts also have to transport their goods out of the ports when their contracts are filled. Unless they craft in that port, in which case other materials need to be brought in. There is no less open world sailing if you sail there and are guaranteed to get what you need, or if you sail there to pick it up only after you have stockpiled what you need. The only way your proposal could work would be if: Contracts only fill at maintenance. AI stocks the port with goods during the day. However to buy a resource directly from port without contract you have to pay 100% above the current highest contract bid.
  14. I support the theory that the location shown in the picture must be St. Petersburg, and not Valletta. The flags on the ships being both Russian and Maltese could indicate either location, however, if this picture was of Valletta, why would any building there be flying a Russian flag? The flag all the way to the right in the image, which seems to fly from a building, looks to me to be very much Russian. Something like this flag here: Or the top 5th from the right here: There seems to have been some variations of these anchor themed flags used by the St. Petersburg admiralty around 1780-1800. Edit: Also, the ships are all carrying 3 Russian flags, including the imperial flag, and only 2 standard Maltese flags at the bow and stern.