Warrax
-
Posts
27 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Warrax
-
-
Punishment for any exploiter or cheater, and any clearly enabling cheat-like behaviours could be on a graduated scale of various degrees of harshness.
Also, i would suggest the combination of any below
1. Craft level wipe / roll back
2. Resource wipe / reduction
3. Exp wipe/roll back
4. Wipe of Outposts / reduction of outposts
5. Siezure/wipe of all floating assests (ships)
6. Seizure/wipe of all materials
7. Wipe across all categories
8. Shaming, ie if name is "Bob", temporary name change to "Bob [of shameful repute]"
9. Publish a closed forum page and outline offenses, (no names) and outline punishment handed down
Be creative ... Banning is lame. Shaming and in-game punishments advertise to others that cheats, hacks and exploiters will not be tolerated
-
[sarcasm starts here]
Sure, and let's all squeeze into this little box, so we can have more limits on gaming fun.
[sarcasm ends here]
Be Careful what you wish for.
-
Sure ... Contracts make perfect sense. Contracts facilitate trade and enable activity remotely within a certain range of pricing.
However, in some game economies now, an organized group (or a single, multi-playing exploiter) can actually halt economies.
For myself, i am here to play a game. Play, and to have fun. But ... If the economy can be bent and exploited this way ... Well, we have a serious distraction on our hands ...
Perhaps a solution would be to reduce all contracts to one per player until the self manufacturing economy is established.
-
One metaphor to sum all this all up:
"When you butter both sides of your bread, things get a little slippery"
-
PVP = Consequences
Surrender means there was no fight.
No fight = no damage = no XP
But ...
Surrender means that the loser lost. Cargo - lost. Durability - lost. Ego - takes a hit.
PVP ... remember?
-
4
-
-
There's no reason why two ships both traveling 8 knots should not be able to grapple each other. in fact it would be easier for two ships at the same speed to grapple, rather than one ship being stopped and the other coming alongside at 4 knots.
Once grappled, the speed of the combined ships would have to fall away to below 5 knots before actual boarding could commence.
[sarcasm ... read on]
... Sure ... And how about we just make everything else super easy too, so no skill at all is required to excel in the game.
In all seriousness, the requirement for 3.5 knots requires skill, boarding is challenging - even given ideal circumstances.
If grappling is too easy, the gameplay would be very different.
This proposal to make easy grappling would force most players to permantly scorn the carronade option.
And remove all sense of reality ... Ever try to impel 500 tonnes with a hemp rope? Ya ... Bet a dollar you did not meet with much success.
Careful what you wish for ...
-
1
-
-
No durability, but the option to take out insurance policies (of varying level of cover and cost) on your ships, which will pay out money or a replacement ship in the event of loss.
Pah ... This game needs to have a level of risk.
If there is NO risk, it rather makes the whole game pointless
-
Multi accounts ... Ah ...
The recipe for cheats, deceivers and chronic abuse.
-
1
-
-
Ball ammunition was "one shot". Sure its entirely possible, and in-game losses seem in line with this (when using Ball). Dismembered limbs were as common as a seemly beheading ...
Grape, on the otherhand, dispersed its force with hundreds of ball bearings that would rip through flesh, skull and ... well ... more flesh.
Bear in mind, that Grape has no penetration power, where ball or carronades do.
Have fun, play nice
-
We already have multi-boarding in the game - its called "You disengage, as i Grapple. Let me know to get ready to "Press G""
But seriously, would this even be fair, in an PVP to simultaneously fight off two player opponents?
Not to mention the wierdness and bug-management issues on the programming side ...
... Be careful what you wish for ...
-
Why do we need a "System" anyway?
Why not let social networks and "beyond programming" mechanisms augment play?
For example, during a recent Port Battle, an enemy brought his Cutter Fleet (x2). In Teamspeak someone announced "10,000 goes to any player who runs over either Cutter".
The result: two dead cutters, a heap of fun, good laughs, one Renommee and one Surprise Captain are each richer by 10,000.
-
In the strongest terms expressable - NO
Crafting Hours as they currently stand create a truly democratic element in the economy.
Crafting Hours present a unique requirement for:
Teamwork
Community
A common "Rarity" in the market place
A system whereby all players become valuable in terms of the larger clan system
A critical source of revenue for some newer (or even veteran) players
Significant changes to the Crafting Hours system will put crafting out of reach for a vast number of players
As well, changes to Crafting Hours may also form exploitable opportunities for Monopolozation, Pricep-Rigging and Rent-Seeking tendencies.
-
I do appreciate the suggested colour scheme.
However, i doubt her lack of popularity has much to with her less than inspiring colours.
As the game evolves and fleshes out a bit more, i hope that we could see an alternative at this level.
Cheers
-
"Vive la France !!"
Congratz
-
I support this
Yes. The Sons of Britain are a rowdy, yet disciplined bunch.
To a man, Hearts of Oak each among them ...
"Steady boys, steady ..."
-
1
-
-
A great clan.
-
1
-
-
Bernard Cornwell's book, Sharpe's Trafalgar, the account is pretty vivid.
i recommend it highly.
-
1
-
Pirates going on the Account
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
Kind of an irrelevant question really ...