Ledinis
-
Posts
368 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Ledinis
-
-
I really hope that PVP2 doesn't get merged into PVP1. I've played in a Sat Trafalgar battle on that server, and my frame rate dropped to 6 and 7 FPS. It's unplayable.
From reading the posts about how to solve problems like too many 1st rates in port battles, it would seem fairly clear that there are already too many players on PVP1. I doubt that adding more is going to make things better.
Hate to break it yo you but FPS has nothing to do with what server you are playing on, but is based of your PC. If that was the first ever big battle that you participated in and your PC cant handle it try adjusting your graphic settings. Other than that your only other options are to upgrade your PC or participate only in small battles. As for the population on PVP1 it has fallen quite drastically from in the past few months form full server during euro prime time to 1100ish players (witch is still playable) and around 200-300 during US prime time, witch is a wasteland.
-
31 ships sunk.... yes but really sir, are you really thinking loosing constitutions, trincomale, 3rd are something we are care about ??? Just in my guild we can loose 10 4rate by days without considering it like a loss sir.
And this statement tells us exactly how fucked up the game is on terms on to easily acquired ships... #AllShipLivesMatter
-
People are talking on PvP3 Global, for which nation to pledge on PvP1.
I believe it could help, if we could see the census from PvP1? If not much, I believe that would improve the server balance at least a bit.
Pirates and British are by far the most populated. Spain, France, Danish (whom have the majority of the Russian speaking community) are mid populated. Dutch have a small but quite dedicated community. USA was one of the larger nations, but lately from their activity seems like they cant field people against the pirate onslaught. And Sweden... i there was a Nation that should have hard difficulty listed when creating a character it should be Sweden. they have quite a small community also, but they are situated in a place between 2 nations that are pummeling them with little directions to retreat.
Also a suggestion to pvp3 players, specially those who are thinking of joining Pirates or British, bring over as much resources and ships instead of gold as possible. You will be surprised just how expensive these things are on PVP1. Most people that come over from either pvp2 or pvp3 keep nagging for a week before they come to terms with the prices.
-
Unpopular opinion, but would much rather prefer if you could leave a battle only when you reach a certain distance from the enemy. It is borderline stupid how you can literally be 1 meter away from the enemy and warp jump if he doesn't hit you for 1:30 mins.
-
2
-
-
That wouldn't change anything. They would still conquer the map like now. Only way is a completely overhaul which is in progress.
A PotBS mechanic would still work. No need for countless tp. They already attack only 2 nations. And they are already everywhere. Maybe the travel system isn't perfect but at the moment it works.
And to the topic: to be honest I didn't read the whole thing but I don't think it's a good idea to hide names. It's like hiding in post battle screen and jump and gank on other players just with the difference you don't need to hide in post battle screens.
In history the captains were very aware of pirate ships. They were some kind of tuned ships with alot of crew. They pretty knew when a pirate crossed their way.
Just imagine pirates hiding in green zone and ganking everyone who tries to leave the capital. It's another way to force new players to quitt this game very fast.
Good point, maybe a limit of having them to travel a certain distance from friendly ports before they could change their colors ?
-
...What new indiaman?
There have been a few ships added for testing by the small patch that came this week it seems, currently they are not available for the public, but most likely they will be here soon, one is an armed trader vessel with a name Indiaman and a small 18 gun brig or small frigate Rattlesnake
-
Given the introduction of the new indiaman I thought it might be a good idea to get some randomly routed and rare AI treasure fleets. About 5 Indiamen escorted by SoLs? It would give something for the new pirate not-a-nation to do. Any suggestions on mechanics would be more than welcome, but its just an idea that would improve PVE imo.
The developer already spoke about adding something of a similar matter (treasure fleets) quite some tie ago in a Q&A on some pirate players stream, so im quite sure its in the to do list already, not sure about where its priority wise. But seeing as the economy is in shambles with the inflation caused by insane high level mission rewards and the unexplained change to AI having static set prices for goods, a treasure fleet to even be considered a treasure fleet should carry something like 100 million on board
-
Would like to thank everyone for their input so far, and to apologize for not highlighting the main reason of this suggestion. I am not suggesting different rule sets for the current pirate nation, since i already stated my opinion if you keep them as a nation you either A ) Make them have different game-play mechanics - which leads to a lot of balancing issues and endless whining from one side or the other or B ) Keep them as close to other nations in terms of game-play - which is wasted potential for enriching the game. What i am suggesting is changing the current pirate nation into Portugal or what ever other nation (yes i know historical Portugal didn't have any ports in the area at the time period but this is just an example of the top of my head) and making piracy an integral part of each and every nation - meaning there would be British/Spanish/Danish/French/Dutch/USA/Swedish/Portuguese pirates praying upon their own or other nations in secrecy. Meaning you could be a well respected Spanish captain that finds out about a clans plans to transport a lot of resources from one port to another, secretly you are also a part of a small pirate brotherhood. You inform them of this shipment, go out of the eyes of other captains raise the black and after meeting up with your fellow outlaws pillage the trader's you had information from before.
Of course there needs to be other changes for this to work like no teleporting traders with their full cargo and such, but this would enrich the entire game play for each player regardless of nation, by adding extra content and if done correctly enriching the possibilities of diplomacy.
-
I know topics about pirates are more abundant in this forum than the amount of compass would being sold in the current broken economy, but what bothers me the most is that all of those posts (although some of them have quite good ideas in general) are all focused on keeping pirates as a nation, which is a waste of a huge game content potential.
The problem with pirates being a nation, is that there’s two ways to go about it. A ) Give or take away distinctive features that would differentiate them from other nations (stuff that is often proposed like limiting pirates to not be able to craft ships, only capture them). B ) Keep them with minimal difference from the current nations. With option A, making them have distinctive features would result in a lot of balancing issues, and having a big part of game content striped away from a huge player base. And option B … Well that’s just a lazy excuse to say that - yeah of course we have pirates in a sailing game.
Reimagining them as a game mechanic is mostly inspired by games that people here most likely have played before, like Age of Sails: Caribbean Tales, Port Royal/Patrician Series and such. And by the ideas already proposed on these forums.
So the core of it all is that each and every captain would have the ability, once out of port and sigh of others to raise the black, which in turn could differentiate them into two categories: Pirates and Privateer. I doubt many here need explanation to distinguish them, but still Pirate – any captain committing crimes on the seas usually for his own personal agenda, Privateer – an individual granted a license from a governor to attack enemy ships. Both of these would deepen the game experience greatly.
Pirate – would be the choice for the person who wishes to either gain personal wealth through any means necessary, or for someone who wishes to destabilize a nation. The main features for the players who would choose this route would be as follows:
- A pirate name different from his national name, to hide his true identity. Back in the days captains didn’t have the ability to see the captain’s name just by right clicking on the ship and telling the entire server about it, and a person innocent until proven guilty. So this mechanic would be mainly to simulate the event where a pirate captures an enemy ship, and is not lenient enough to release the enemy crew, meaning his true identity is not revealed. While at the same time letting a trader go if it surrenders its goods, the said trader running away could have a percentage chance of revealing the true identity of the captain, since there are witnesses left to describe the ship and such. Naturally counter boarding a pirate should have a 100% chance to reveal his identity.
· If the identity is revealed the player becomes hostile to everyone regardless if he is flying his national flag or a pirate flag, maybe even have a bounty placed on his head to encourage other people to hunt him down.
· All national ports close entry to the said captain and assets he had in them are confiscated by the port authorities.
· If the said captain gets caught and killed while his identity is blown he losses a portion of his XP.
· Releasing ships that surrendered their good, or escaped ships, should have a bigger chance to identify larger ships, it would be much harder to keep tabs on all the pirate sloops while a pirate line ship would attract a lot of attention.
- The ability to create pirate havens. A choice to establish sort of pirate towns anywhere on the map away from national cities, that would be upgradable, unlock extra game mechanics for the ones that choose the pirate life and be totally destroyable by any nation that attacks them. The main functions and ideas of these pirate havens would be:
· They can be built anywhere on the land. That would lead players that don’t want to have active piracy near their ports to explore the world to fish out and destroy these lairs.
· To create such a lair one would need a huge amount of resources and labor hours even for the basic state. After witch it could have upgrades that would require more investments. i.e one could build a Tavern or housing to attract sailors to the haven, a dock where one could acquire pirate specific refits for small ships like sloops and frigates, or defenses like batteries, towers and such that would give a fighting chance to defend the haven in case of an attack.
· They could be attacked just like normal ports, but maybe with a smaller player cap like 7-10 ships max per side.
· Would offer pirate specific missions, like smuggling, or trader capturing
· Could be a place to store stolen goods and fence them.
- The ability to create pirate clans, that would have entry rights to the pirate havens build by their own, could participate in its defense and have the ability to sail together in groups to hunt down their pray. These should be limited to small numbers 10-15 players per pirate clan.
Privateers – would be the choice for those who wish a safer way of earning a prize without intervening with their own nation’s well-being, and don’t want to risk becoming an outcast amongst his own people. By receiving a Letter of Marque to act against the nation’s enemies, these captains could discretely harass the enemy, while being allowed to keep a bigger portion of the prize money for their effort than a captain sailing normally under his nation’s flag. A reputation system could also be implemented for these captains – where as acting upon the governor’s request would increase you reputation with your nation to unlock specific upgrades (be it unique ship upgrades, cosmetic stuff or something in that line).
These are just a few thoughts of the top of my head, and I hope to see more suggestions or problems and workarounds for these suggestions in the comments.
-
6
-
Not sure natural ship drafts (read swallows and varying harbor depths) will be able to be done due to technical reasons, unless you want to buy everyone a quantum super computer. Some things would be great but are still out of reach technically. So the question is what can be done now with the tech and coding we have?
A lot of work for the developers to code it into the game i assume, but where are you getting the idea that people will need quantum computers for something that adds almost no graphical intensity to the game. Even "Age of sails" back in 2006 had shallows. So im quite sure unless someone is running a xerox alto, they wont feel much of an influence in regards to game performance.
-
But it is still better than only 140+ gun creep like right now
Guys - get reasonable and think things through.
- Current system only 1st rates are valid (only 2 choices in any port battle)
- New system - at least some frigates and 4th rates will be useful (2x better than old one). And it gives choice to those who hate ships of the line. And dont like sailing them.
Comments that there are only going to be constitutions and ingers in some of the battles; Yes it might happen but it is a better situation compared to today. It is making consitutions and ingers and other heavy frigates finally viable in port battles which are not fit for ships of the line because of depth.
Regarding ship differences
The only way to make all 135 best angle frigates viable is to make them all 12 knots and 5000 hp
If we go for at least some historical performance people will choose the ship with most guns and speed for OW and most guns and planking for PB.
Taking WW2 analogy - what is the point to drive Pz -2 with machine gun if everyone else drives a Panther
The main difference in ship performance was crew and motivation related. (it is hard to manage 300+ men) and better leaders fought better even when their ship was worse. It is impossible to replicate crew management psychology and motivation without adding a football manager game and a lot of RNG removing skill (gunner fell on the blood during battle broke leg and started asking to send him back to his wife on land).
The part that is better with this is the fact that lower rank captains will be able to participate in PB, witch specially in a testing stage is good on that i agree. But as you said they will always choose to sail the best that they can so why not limit the availability, be it through remaking crafting so that everyone can craft only the most basic ships, and get rare one time use BP's by some means to craft any better ships, or making them so resource intensive that people will actually start to reconsider whether its better to field 15 frigates or 1 1sr rate. Another popular option from the forums would be to add shallows, though that i would imagine would require quite extensive work so i guess it wont be here to soon even if you decide to implement them, but if you actually make punishing shallows, like not the open world kinda shallows where you stop but, actual shallows where you would wreck or get stuck in your big ass ships if you didnt pay attention, then in these kind of Ports i would assume smaller ships would become quite more useful.
But as i said in terms of more ships used it changes very little, but gives access for more people to try this feature out, so its not a bad change, it just doesn't affect the core diversity of ships that get used by that big of a margin. The negative thing about this change for me personally seems that, after you made NPC ships uncap-able, last week, i felt for the first time at least a hint of war attrition, big as British clans that have well established crafting branches were contacting outside crafters cause they could not keep up their production with the losses, now when you change the meta so that 80% of the ports require ships that take 2 times less labor hours to craft, at the same time having 4 lives instead of one, at the same time reducing the frequency of port battles (this in itself is a good thing, since all people were getting burned out but 20 port battles a day, but it does at up to the problem im pointing out), you are returning to a point where attrition is once again non existent.
To sum it up i would much rather prefer Line ships being limited by - Crafting (needs an entire crafting system overhaul though); Expenses (needs an economy overhaul, inflation has reached such a level in pvp1 that i stoped selling stuff for gold in most cases of how useless and easily acquired it is); Actual gameplay limitation (needs an entire battle map, game mechanics overhaul).
-
1
-
Yes,
Throw away the whole labour hour system and instead, when you finish gathering all the materials needed to build a ship and start building it. It should take you X minutes/hours/days to build it.
During that time, your Shipyard is occupied and you can't produce any other ship. Which would give every crafter a very nice reason to own multiple shipyards to build multiple ships at the same time.
Problem with this would be that if you more or less keep the current time it takes to build a ship, and allow simultaneous ports of the same player build them spitting out 8 line ships at once, would be a bit overkill.
-
Although an attempt of getting a bigger diversity of ships into the actual meta is commendable, do you actually believe that limitation like that will change much ? It will just go from a power creep of Santisimas to a power creep of Ingermanlands. I really hope you guys come up with a crafting system that would make higher tier ships rarer to acquire and thus making all of them an asset to your nation instead of implementing 100 new ships whilst only 3-4 of those are used.
As for the port battles themselves i would much rather see a system where the attacker needs to assault the actual fort. Like batter it to an actual pulp until all of the forts defenses are down and then send troops to conquer it via a group boarding operation, not a copy of world of warships domination mode, with a fort in the background that is there just for the looks.
-
2
-
-
So does this mean that somebody like my self with almost 500 hours and rear admiral rank will not be able to vote because i always take part in the screening fleet rather than fighting in the actual port battles?
Its plain to see in the original post, that you will have the ability to become a lord for open world pvp, not just port battles, or by more or less buying the title.
1. Free diplomacy create opportunity to use Megazerg: England, USA, Pirates makes alliance and own everything. Diplomacy in game shouldn't be free. Period. It must roll or had to being restricted for abuse of ethernal empire domination.
This alliance is as likely as an Axis, Soviet and the Allies alliance to take out Burkina Faso
2. Binding labour hours and crew regen to winners you rise zerg even more, besides promoting Megazerg-alliance idea for get more money, lh etc. Weak side in war MUST get something for counter their fails, or you will see billion pirates and 10 man swerige. Promoting winners two times as much - bad idea.
I may have misunderstood it, so correct me if im wrong, but your idea is that the side that looses should be rewarded and the one that wins should get a malus ? Yes small nations will most likely not be able to stay neutral and will have to ally themselves to one of the larger nation, in witch i see no problem what so ever.
3. Minor clans worth nothing and must obey.
They posted that everyone from clans who will do port battles, to solo pvp'ers to guys like me that prefer to win wars by buying out the enemy will be able to acquire voting power
4. Nation control trough fast-cap + fast-farm + fast-PB-pvp. What I see, there is lot of possibilities to take full control over nation by one large clan, making a race for it. Bought lord title is on of ways. PVP win is second, since doing PB faster than others, you will get land, money and kills. Members of one clan could be lords in everything. If I remember correct, devs said that PB won't flow so often. In other words, when I keep in mind that ability of allies to enter PB and that "not so often", one little question appears in my head: Who exactly will partipiciate in PB? I feel there is chance to get "golden" PB slots and "golden" boys.
Again theres more ways to get voting power than just port battles, and before you doom-say maybe lets wait for the devs to announce how the actual port battles will work in the first place.
5. OS pvp worth nothing. Time-reward-influence relation seems very imbalanced to PB side. What if I'm not intrested in PB?
6. Potential Alts abuse with buying lord titles of smaller nations.
If someone can abuse a nations vote by buying a few alts, i doubt that nation is important enough for anyone to abuse in the first place
7. What if "all loves Oscar" happens? France, Danemark, Swerige, Spain want to be friend with Britain and voted for it. Britain have limits of friends. And... What? Same question could be attached to wars declaration. What if all hate smallest nation in game to get easy win?
8. Rebels could blow up whole nations collaborating with enemy or leave to another. More hate coming. In fact, any viable option of revolution will harm nation to the death. This mechanism will not be used ever, or kill nation in case when rebels rly will have potential, or will be used to collaborate opposite side. All options is bad.
My suggestion is to use rolling alliances or something around ideas told in Diplomacy&Loyalty thread. Here http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12798-diplomacy-and-loyalty/?hl=loyalty.
And do not boost winners with labour hours and crew, please, for sake of good gameplay for all.
Edit:
Removed insulting part, dont structure your post as insults. - Moderator team
-
I play Spain on PVP1 and the problem with your idea is simple math.
400 Brits online.
150 Spanish online.
Of those Spanish, 50 are diligently waiting somewhere to join requested reinforcements.
10 Brits jump a lone Spaniard. 10 Spanish join in! Now 40 are waiting.
5 Brits jump 2 Spanish. 3 Spanish join in! Now 37 are waiting.
[...]
10 Brits jump 4 Spanish. All available Spanish are in other fights. There are simply more British than Spanish so some Spanish are left-over at the end with nobody to join in. The 4 Spanish get ganked.
Meanwhile, when the tables get turned, there are always more Brits to join fights than Spanish players can start.
Your solution only works for the overpopulated teams.
And have you even actually seen these 100+ ship ganking armadas near any port ?
-
Surely there is a balance between the two extremes. 10% full versus 100% full..... How about 50% full?
By the way, you might want to clock yourself at capturing an AI ship. Having become quite good at it, i very much doubt you can do it in 3 min each time. Remember that you have to find said trader first too and that alone can take a few minutes too.
The 3 min marker was the time it takes to cap them from the start of battle, but go to any enemy territory and you will find highways of traders. Even now traders take no time, no risk and you can get up to 50k gold worth of resources from one. I wouldnt mind if they introduced bigger, armed traders that you would actually have to work for to board, or traders with normal fleet escorts, then yes they should carry equivalently more. But as easy as it is now, traders reward more than enough.
-
Surely you will understand that to offer more gold, you need to get more gold. And a trading vessel is supposed to be trading, and therefore be reasonably full of content. Again, one should not have to spend tens of hours to build up resources. I can understand that players that have built up their resources and formed barriers to entry to new players would want to maintain the status quo... that basic economic competitive behavior - but perhaps you should consider the huge turn-off it represents to people that try to join the game. I did not experience this on pvp2 where i have a large amount of assets built up. Recently moving to pvp1 one however, the mechanic is not welcoming.
Look at it from both sides, it would be a turn off to just as many if not more people that play this game if an AI trader snow that literally takes 3 mins to catch would give you 1000 silver ore, resources would loose any value whatsoever and the game economy would be fucked.
-
Played both.
Low pop is actually worse when it comes to ganking because you can form a team of 10 people and probably not run into any group that can really fight you.
That said, most gank victims do it to themselves. If you are out solo grinding in a live oak ship, you are basically just a big "FREE KILL" sign.
The assumption that you play one of the dying low pop servers is because you believe that the "low population" nations couldn't even field a reinforcements. Witch isnt even true for the Dutch and Swedish in pvp one, and no offense but im more interested in the balance of a server that actually has people in it
With the reinforcements being players you would still be able to gank people that are further away from ports or further ports in general. The only difference is that those Ensigns and Midshipman doing missions 20feet away from the capital would be able to call upon help.
-
The overpopulated team can. The underpopulated team will have the problem of sometimes needing help and it's simply not available (all available help was already pulled into other fights).
The current system actually lets underpopulated teams form small hit squads that can go into an overpopulated enemy's territory and actually get kills.
Ganking is just the nature of open world PvP. If you don't like ganks, you pretty much don't like open world PvP as a concept (here or, likely, anywhere).
Also, forcing "fair" fights creates additional problems, chief among them being "my friends and I can't play together". You brought 4 people, we brought 6, so....2 of my guys have to sit out? How is that fun? Or their fault that you didn't bring more people?
The current system is fine.
Not a sensible solution. Underpopulated teams will get ganked in their home waters regardless but now you're saying they can't take it to the enemy or realistically get any kills in fighting a guerrilla war, either.
I have a distinct feeling your playing one of those 200 peak time player servers....
-
Every time I was in enemy territory, in-between sinking or capping prey there were long times of running away from posses created by these nations.
Without timers at all, these posses would come and kill us in 25 v 4. There would be NO deep-strike PvP nor small scale PvP. I cannot imagine why anyone would want that.
Mostly because you, me and almost everyone knows that its not 4v4 or 3v3 battles that you and most people are looking for but to find a solo new player to seal club him with 4 trincs
Though in all honesty i would preffer reinforcements being brought back in the game in the form of calling players in not AI. The gankee gets pulled in to combat against 5 ships, he can call reinforcements to even out the BR of players from close by cities (witch also instantly closes the battle from more players joining) and bingo. You have a fair pvp fight instead of sealclubing on one direction or the other.-
2
-
-
Someone already proposed this earlier, but it would be more than enough if shipyards increased the dock size and let shipbuilders have more than 5 ships in their production city.
-
1
-
-
Provided they were in an acceptable radius that they could reach the fight, this sounds like a good idea.
Also, they could possibly still require you to sail to the location, but hold open the battle to allow you to join long after the 2 min current countdown.
Part of the reason the instances close so fast is invisibility jumping and friendly grief/capture behavior. If you had a dialog on who you were letting in however, that could solve some of it.
Each city already has reinforcements radius i believe, so they could make it so that players that are in the same cities reinforcements radius would be able to join. But yeah we need as little AI and as much player on player interaction in this game imo
-
How about make it a win win situation and make reinforcements be actual players ? Say you get attacked while on a mission or near your port, you can ask for reinforcements, and all close by players get a pop up with the opportunity to join that battle to help you out. Would encourage more pvp than seal clubbing and farming brain dead AI + make it safer for people to do mission near their most populated areas.
-
1
-
-
I'm not talking about the fire, I'm talking about when you're vastly out numbered, taking heavy damage and the only conceivable outcome is defeat. Not many folks would try to put out a fire in that situation, especially if you can take some of them with you as a last ditch effort.
Quite certain most people would prefer to fight to their last or fall to their knees and beg for mercy, not sit there idly while burning alive.
Though in all honesty i would preffer reinforcements being brought back in the game in the form of calling players in not AI. The gankee gets pulled in to combat against 5 ships, he can call reinforcements to even out the BR of players from close by cities (witch also instantly closes the battle from more players joining) and bingo. You have a fair pvp fight instead of sealclubing on one direction or the other.
Forthcoming patch changes - Wednesday 25th May
in News Announcements & Important discussions
Posted
So will the assault flag cool-down be active only for the first 3 days after the port is captured or after it is successfully defended also ?