Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Stilgar

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    449

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Stilgar

    Maybe time change snow BR?

    in Patch Feedback and General discussions

    Posted

    If I remember well there was an idea (by dev team I think) to introduce different wind strength in battle instances. The theory was that harder wind would put small ships in disadvantage: sailing and gunnery would be more challenging. Anyway, if there is a way to properly simulate impact of rough(er) whether on control of smaller ships, that would certainly put (very) small ships to their place.

     

     

    Noobs and casuel players need a break

    in Patch Feedback and General discussions

    Posted · Edited by Stilgar

    On 5/6/2020 at 1:09 AM, Gregory Rainsborough said:

    Why not go on both PvP server and PvE server?

    I think beginners have to be encouraged to join PVE server to learn mechanics and get to a certain rank (500-700 crew). Then rank (but also craft XP and ship knowledge; why not?) to be transferred automatically to PvP server, thus allowing players to get the taste of PvP server experience but in a better starting position. 

    Additionally, would be good if players on PvE server could opt for allowing loki in their battles vs NPC and have a PvP zone perhaps, so players get a taste of PvP. All that might actually create a healthy flow of better prepared and motivated players to PvP server. Win win for both beginners and veterans.

    Disclaimer: I never played on PvE server and not trying to push any changes on PvE server, just thinking aloud about improving quality of life for beginners. 

    • Like 4

    New feature proposals - Proposals on too many nations issue?

    in Feature proposals and Gameplay Help Q&A

    Posted · Edited by Stilgar

    @admin I assume  map reset would be an option in this nations clean up? Otherwise, I see no way to do it properly.

    Anyway, to proposal ... I'll keep it short and will add a few more comments later.

    Basically the idea is to merge all the minor nation in one generic nation, which can be called Aspiring Colonial Powers (or such). These will be all nations aside from Brits, France, VP, Spain, and US. So, once joining such a nation, player can choose a flag / minor nation (the old smuggler mechanics could work perhaps?) and go on the loose. Players should be able to switch flag within such a nation once a month or so (to avoid exploits), but this should not require DLC. 

    I will cut this short for now, but I hope you can see that such a nation creates a play ground for clan wars and still allow an option for challenging major nations. I would strongly suggest to still limit the conquest by such minor nations, e.g., by max number of ports/regions each minor nation can control. Such an approach will allow players to sail under their nation flag if even they do not hold ports. Sort of national pirates, if you like.

    As for pirates, it is a separate topic, but they should not be a major nation with all the attributes.

     

    Forthcoming patch information

    in Patch notes

    Posted

    16 hours ago, Liq said:

    As far as I know removing player names was introduced for two reasons; one being players not running from more known players from the start, the second one being to cut the possibility to trashtalk someone for running straight away. I can see both NA chats and the forums becoming a whole lot more salty when you will be able to see playernames again. Right now its just like "meh I cant catch this guy, whatever, ill go back." However if players know who the player is that "is too scared to fight"...

    I for one welcomed the removal of playernames in OW

    Very good point. 

    No names in OW and no chat in OW (and no chat with the enemy in battle! if you ask me). Much less salt and much better experience that way.

    • Like 5

    An Opinion of New Feature Proposals

    in Patch Feedback and General discussions

    Posted · Edited by Stilgar

    I agree new format gives it a better structure, but there is a chance for good ideas to be down-voted or ignored. 

    @admin some popular requests are clearly win-win for all and can be implemented w/o additional discussions (e.g., cannon looting), but a bit more far reaching or expensive to implement popular changes might require additional discussion in a dedicated thread. We all know democratic decision is not always the best one :)

    • Like 3

    PvP zone - post-battle tow & battle group mechanics

    in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions

    Posted

    Cannot say I am a big fan of PvP zone, but it’s a shortcut to pvp action, which I as a casual player can appreciate. Still good fights are too few between.

    Two proposals, which imho can improve the quality of pvp zone experience.

    1)     Allow under certain circumstances after-battle tow (with all you have in hold) to the nearest friendly/free port after a lengthy PVP zone battle.

    Basically, if the battle is finished or a player can escape not earlier than 1 hr after battle started (to minimize abuse), option to tow to the nearest friendly or free port appears. So, instead of a battered ship w/o reps being ganged in OW, sank and deprived of the hard-fought loot, player earns the right to safely return to the nearest port. Such a possibility would encourage players to sail again to the zone and for solo players or small groups to adventure to the zone. There might be some ways to abuse this mechanics, but as long as this works exclusively in pvp zone and is though through, potential harm will be negligible. N.B. I would not connect this post-battle tow to the daily tow permit, although it might make sense to limit it to one per day / patrol event. Needless to say, this would be a savior for the players who cannot stay 3-4 hrs continuously on line, but have 1-2 hrs gaming window. 

    2)     It would be great to have some sort of battle group mechanics in pvp zone.

    I would suggest to create a group pvp missions with a pre-set BR. After being taken the mission would appear in the zone. All sail to the mission site and join as a group, provided the BR of the group is not above the mission limit. The mission become visible in OW and remains open until the BR on the opposing side is filled up. Missions could have pre-set BR (say 750, 1500, 2500, 5000) or perhaps players can choose the BR value. To raise the challenge for the group the opponent side BR gets a +10-20% BR bonus to compensate for organize vs random group disadvantage. This should in principle help in creating more interesting and less unbalanced fights and hopefully introduce some variety in ships players sail.

     

    • Like 1

    Forthcoming patch information

    in Patch notes

    Posted

    On 4/16/2020 at 11:27 AM, Aquillas said:

    I won’t develop that too much, because it is off topic and I don’t want to be negative against a game on which I spent so much time. Two main reasons:

    Ships:

    I am a user of small ships. Just have a look in my YouTube channel. Since the release, I used one time a 1st rate (NPC captured), one time Le Redoutable (by obligation, instructions received by the clan, and I got single shot bored about this brick), a few times Rättvisan (in screening), a few time L’Hermione and Hercules, one or two fights with Trincomalee. I have no slot free in any 1st, 2nd and 3rd rates. Two or three slots in Rättvisan, L’Hermione, Hercules. All slots in most 6th and 7th rates, except the bogged gunboat.

    But there is no more content in game for small ships. I made, in the last month, a tour of all towns in game (377 towns), with traders Lynx, Lynx, Traders Cutters, Pickles… The last tour resulted in 15 fights, among them 8 were unarmed traders (I let them go, even the Indiaman, not to sustain a boring pseudo-fight), 5 were players trying to counter me in Connies, Redouts, etc. (so stupid!), and 3 fun fights. You have to “visit” 120 towns to get an interesting fight?

    CLAN based game:

    In real life, I have (ad nauseam) to organize, control, coordinate, build efficient teams, share and teach tools, check action results, etc. I have to report and ask reports, I have to receive and give instructions, I have to do all that things related to IRL jobs.

    When I come in a game, my only whish is to get FREEDOM and INDEPENDENCE. Not enslavement by a Clan. Not doing in the game what I have to do all day long in my job. But in Naval Action, you can build efficient ships only if you are in a clan. :( 

    Naval Action is a RVR & CLAN based game. RVR means 1st rates, CLAN means second job. End of the story.

    Have to agree with both points. The game needs to be made more friendly for smaller (around 10 people) clans and solo players. As for getting frigates back to sea, I am afraid that train already left, with 4th/3rd DLC ships. They still have their use, but it is indeed much more difficult to find content on frigates.

    Hope you'll stick around and find some motivation to play the game, Sir. 

    • Like 2

    Forthcoming patch information

    in Patch notes

    Posted

    2 hours ago, John Cavanaugh said:

    IYes. And it is. The thing is that the statistics of ships give lee way and wiggle room. Suppose that I have a Christian and somebody else has a christian. Mine is 5/5 and I have Mast Bands and elite french. I can maneuver in such a way that I present stationary or relatively stationary targets of my masts at even very close range without worrying about them being cut as a result. Suppose that I have seasoned woods and my opponent does not, resulting in me being 15-20 centimeters thicker. This means that I can bounce his shots on a less harsh angle, and therefore mistakes I make in maneuvering may be entirely forgiven by my stats. Speed and acceleration are another problem, if I can, with a very high speed ship, stop myself very neatly, fire, and accelerate into a turn before you can take advantage of my position, I can give fire without taking it at any great risk. The longer a fight goes on the more those little differences add up. If that 2% difference in repairs between Crew 3 and Crew 4 gets 2, 3, even 4 different repair cycles to add up, that can be hundreds of HP difference. At the 45 minute mark, Crew 4 vs Crew 0 can mean the difference between having enough HP left in your sides, enough breathing room to repair Sail instead, and a little bit of speed, coming through a tack in 10 seconds vs 30, can mean the difference between win or lose all by itself.
    Best I can do to prove the point is Pic Related. I had the gear advantage. French vs no mast mods (1 extra hit to cut my masts vs his). Marines and muskets vs Bo5R. I made 3 mistakes, Dron made 0, and the fight last 8 minutes. An obvious skill gap. One player who is competent, another whose name I imagine you recognize even from the PvE server. And yet If my Wasa had been LoS/WoS, with heavy rig and navy mast bands, I could have played every step exactly the same, made all the same mistakes, and won. That is why people give a damn about 5%. #MicDrop

    Very good point, Sir. Skill decides a lot, but make no mistake this game is becoming increasingly gear driven since the gap in stats between a regular and fully equipped ships was gradually increasing. W/o skill you cannot win. W/o gear you cannot afford any mistake. 

    • Like 2

    Forthcoming patch information

    in Patch notes

    Posted

    16 hours ago, Quiet Assassin said:

    New trees for ship construction. Will this make future ships better than those with seasoned woods?

    Before seasoned woods, I had 20 ships. Seasoned woods made them all obsolete instantly. Is the same thing going to happen now to my current fleet of seasoned wood ships? Do you realize how long it took to trade, grind, etc. to build a fleet? Then have it out of date in one day?

    Not sure about that change... 

    New trees type is clearly to give incentive for continuation of the grind, trade, crafting etc. and perhaps an attempt to fix issues related to introduction of S woods in the first place. On a positive side, we might see lifting of the S wood grind burden. At least I believe that is in order.

    Screening Yes/No?

    in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions

    Posted

    Mostly for better, than worse, screening provides content. In my experience screening could be more fun than PB itself. If screening is removed, hostility part should provide an alternative or even improved content. In other words, if hostility part of the game is done well and provides reasonable means and time of countering, then tp to PB makes sense. If the hostility part is just longer and more tedious version of the current hostility mechanics, then tp to PB is a bad idea.  

    • Like 6

    Forthcoming patch information

    in Patch notes

    Posted

    Thx for the update. I am very curious about the slower hostility mechanics. As long as that is properly balanced, free passage for the PB fleet is fine.

    Btw, haven't heard a word about the improved battle sail mechanics for a while. Any update on that?

    • Like 2

    Seeking Good leveling tips

    in Feature proposals and Gameplay Help Q&A

    Posted

    I'm sure you'll enjoy sailing 5th rates as well. You cannot go wrong with trinco: a capable pvp/pve ship and no need for permit to craft. You can hunt small 5th rate NPC groups (to open a couple of slots) and also join some pvp action. Herc is probably the most useful DLC ship that allows to join pvp action in pvp zones with little hustle.

    • Like 1

    PZ battle exploit

    in Tribunal - Трибунал

    Posted

    2 minutes ago, Liq said:

    Lenin )

    Don't know the full story but sounds shady. Heard of other occasions where players just surrendered in PZ Battles because they didn't like who joined them..

    Not sure if punishable really though

    Looks like they surrendered ships to the opposing side just to give hard time to the Swedes they happened to join. In principle, this is sort of indirect (or a rather perverse form of) green on green. Punishable or not, this is pretty lame.  

    • Like 2

    PZ battle exploit

    in Tribunal - Трибунал

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Ленин said:

    Это репорт на кнопку сдаться?)

    Это репорт на изменение сторон в битве. По суте дела пассивно-подлый green on green. Не хотели помогать шведам, так выходите из боя и ганкните их в открытом море, как все люди.

    Port Bonus'

    in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions

    Posted · Edited by Stilgar

    IMHO the port bonus system should have been implemented as ship yard bonus system, so solo players, small clans, big clans could eventually have access to them if they dedicate enough time to leveling their skill and leveling ship yard. 

    Solo shipyard: can choose 3 out of 5 shipyard bonus at the same time (1 for each shipyard level?). Player will have to invest into shipyard to get bonuses to max level, but grind would be acceptable / manageable. Importantly, solo shipyard can be built in any, even unconquerable port. 

    Clan shipyard: can access  all 5 shipyard bonus types, but with much more significant grind / investments required, to encourage coop game play. Clans will have then to defend their investment. Cannot be built in an unconquerable port. 

    Alternatively, solo and clan shipyards would allow access to all 5 bonus types simultaneously, but have different number of investment points (30-40 solo, 40-60 clan).

    Btw, I also liked the guaranteed regional (capital) bonuses (instead of random refits). Those would spice things up and make it more difficult for alts to get access to all the benefits of a given nation.

    Smth to consider for NA 2.0 perhaps?

    • Like 1

    Mast hits / health revealed or hidden

    in Patch Feedback and General discussions

    Posted

    On 3/11/2020 at 4:22 PM, Licinio Chiavari said:

    The point is: if you know how many men there're on board enemy ship (as his hull and sail conditions) you should know his mast conditions... as you should know YOURS.

    Or we hide all damage (and hide hits too - to avoid counting) or it's reasonable to have all damage dealt and received visible.

    This is a very good point, although I feel complete transparency on the state of the masts will not necessarily be beneficial for the game play.

     

×
×
  • Create New...