Mrdoomed
-
Posts
2,597 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Mrdoomed
-
-
On 3/31/2017 at 0:30 PM, Jean Ribault said:
Welcome back to the forum Doomed, haven't seen you in a while.
Have you gone to navalaction.com to read the entire description of the welcome page? As of this post here, what is written is almost entirely correct, I'd wager at least 95% of it. For a game in Early Access, which is supposed to change, I'd say that's pretty good. Are they supposed to update the website with every change to the game? If people sign onto an early access game, a game under development, and then complain whah-whah the game changed, then geez let them leave the game, since they aren't smart enough to understand the terms, and I don't really want to play them. This IS a changing game, it's under development. A negative review because a game under development changed, is ludicrous and laughable and not worth your time to read.
Not the NA homepage. The steam page where it is for sale.
People are free to give negitive comments if they are justified imho. For instance in my review said the game WAS but then as the game changed it WAS NOT so i at least clarify that it was two seperate games to me and if you where still looking for the no holds bared sandbox ffa that it used to be and is still sold as in steam ( or was when i made my review) then you wil be sorely disappointed.
To me anyone warning other players looking for a true sandbox, ffa, no gimmicks spells, special zones kind of game should be comended.
Anyways I still visit the forums every so often seeing if anything changes to make it fun for me again or anyone talking of other 18th century game they play.
Oh and PS i dont know if a company is " supposed to" update thier site to keep up with changes but if i ran a company i know I would take the few minutes outa my day to change a description on a website if it was my game.
Even the clan websites we used or use are easy AF to edit so if i ran NA i would definitely update it. To be fair my review was a steam review not a NA site review and when i made my review steam still advertised NA as a game it wasnt anymore amd i thought peope deserve to know before they drop 40 bucks on a game they will hate.
-
20 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:
Some day.....maybe. I'm in a couple of EA. I think this game is more a chance than say DayZ ever going live. I gave up on that game a long time ago. You going to pop back in after the patch and grace these new Pirates with what a real pirate should be like?
I keep my eyes open and if there ever comes the time when we can play freely without the little babies getting thier pretty pretty princess hands held by devs I would love to come back and play.
As for now if i want to "play" a game where pretty much everything is restricted so nobody loses i will play swtor. At least that theme park has Sith.
-
9 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:
I have rarely ever given a game a bad review and that includes this one. Though I have reviewed it a good time ago and I think I even added in a few negative things about it in it's current state at that time, but the review was a positive one. I might bitch and moan a lot on here but hay that is my opinion if I don't like something I can give it, but I also back a lot of things I thought was great too. Though I have noticed a trend on Steam of the up/down votes of certain folks that make reviews and of how a lot of the content in those reviews is very out dated or flat out BS about the game. And I get our Devs aren't all ways get along with and the points across too, it's not my first rodeo of a dev team from that part of the world.
Now what I hate is the folks that just cry, "I DON'T LIKE THAT. I'M LEAVING AND I'M GIVING YOU A BAD REVIEW." Most the time it's over something that was suggested and not even put in the game yet (recent PvP/PvE merger). Like I said I don't like ever thing in the game and they way it's done, but I'm not going to run off and write a bad review. I'll wait until the game is released and I'll prob do an updated proper review of the game at that time. Right now mine is very short and to the point that it's an EA game that is still in Alpha stage of development and there are a lot of work to be done before it's released.
If the dev team would change the description on steam to what the game is now instead of what it was supposed to be a year ago it would probably stop most negitive reviews. I after thousands of hours played gave a review that was mixed at best BUT did sayit used to be fun when it was as advertised. Now if today i discovered NA read the description then played i would give a scathing review of it. I think people read the game described then play it and find its not anything like they thought.
-
On 3/30/2017 at 10:09 AM, Sir Texas Sir said:
The problem is we HAVEN'T HAD A PATCH IN 5 MONTHS. And well just about the majority of the player based have stopped playing and won't be back until prob after April 20. So effectively once again like they did with the regional patch which they said would be out in a week and took a month, killed the game for a month. Cause lets be honest do you really think with there track record they will have anything ready by the 10th for testbed and the 20th for live server? Sorry I hope they suprise the hell out of me, but by there past track record I don't expect this patch until May.
So instead of waiting to do every thing all at once, they can throw us a bone and give us what was tested the last MONTH on testbed to test on a larger scale. Like I would love to test the structure thing on a ship I would build instead of the crap ships they gave use I would never be caught in builds of those types. Gives us a good reason to burn all these mats we have sitting around right now. Yo know since every one has ZERO CRAFTING AND ZERO MATS ON TESTBED.
Do we still think its going to go live? I keep up with the news in the hope of a miracle that NA will listen and learn and revert some horrible mistakes it made and go back to a fun game for more people.
-
On 3/29/2017 at 11:18 AM, Captiva said:
I agree with Borch on this one.
Anytime I see someone use tired, overused and adolescent terms such as "carebear" or "just saying", I immediately become suspect. I would guess that most of the players of this game are long time Naval Action veterans who have cut their teeth on games such as, 'Arma 3,' 'Battlefield', 'Assassin's Creed' and many military style tactical-strategical games. Using the term 'carebear' to describe someone you know absolutely nothing about personally (or their intentions), is the height of arrogance on anyone's part. These days it is used solely to intimidate someone into shutting down their arguement. Let's leave this tired and meaningless term where it belongs; on the adolescent forums of other game sites.
The average population is in the 30's most of the day? I'm online almost every single day and have seen it rarely dip below the 270's. In the distant past I have seen it dip down to the 20's but that was a long, long time ago and even then it didn't stay there "most of the day". I think this may be an exaggeration on your part.
Wouldn't one think that the current low population is due more to the upcoming wipe than to players being unhappy because of the Developers bowing to the wishes of 40-50 "carebears"? Again, a gross exaggeration.
The 'teleport to nearest friendly outpost' in the after-battle screen solved a huge, negative issue that was frustrating most Naval Action players. If you are unaware of this issue - or if you are aware and still don't understand the logic of the solution for it - then I believe that you are not being honest with yourself or again, you simply didn't understand the issue. It was truly hurting the game.
No the game dies a little more with each politicallycorrect footsteps the dev team makes to cater to carebear cryhards. The fact that you consider battlefield and assassin creed " military strategy " type games and are upset by words like carebear is why there is no players.
95% of the gamers who would have kept this game going on for a decade or more where run off by military strategist who consider assassins creed a war game.
Usually when a game is released, eve early access, ut sticks to its original format and plan. In NA case its not even the same game that was released. Unfortunately its still advertised as the original but now its carebeae creed. Thats why gamers left and bow give horrible reviews after buying it. It would do the dev team well to change the description on steam.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, JonSnowLetsGo said:
Ofc its a sandbox or do you think its an arena/lobby based game? And about immersing: Do you want 100% realism? Weeks of afk sailing until you MAYBE see a single ship?
Hahahahaha if you think this game is still a sandbox game then you probably think pac man is sandbox. You should play swtor it would be the biggest sandbox you ever seen. Btw this issarcasm because im sure you wont get it.
Since you have ZERO clue what youre trying to say let me tell you what NA has become its now what is called a Theme park game. Obviously if youthink any game that is not arena is sandbox you undoubtedly will have no idea what im referring to.
-
1
-
-
On 3/17/2017 at 7:59 AM, JonSnowLetsGo said:
Game description from steam:
Naval Action is an exciting, realistic, and beautifully detailed naval combat sandbox immersing players into the experience of the most beautiful period of naval history - when sailing ships ruled the seas.
Maybe try a single player game rather than a MMO focussed game around combat?
Exept its neither sandbox or immersing, unless teleporting ships, invisible free port to port ship moving , and fleets ofbdozens of ai ships pulled into your battle because player ships have speed boosts is immersive.
-
On 3/16/2017 at 5:51 PM, Neptune said:
PVE Zones? What really? Come on you are seriously going to turn the only good servers on the game (PvP) Into PvP & PVE? What is this PoTBS 2.0? Sigh............ Words cannot express how annoying this is.
Seen this comming since no cooldown teleports where added. Even got suspended and comments removed for saying it was turing into world of warcraft on water.
This game was so good at start of open world and WOULD have kept a small stronge long term population, 4 r 5k probably but i and others called what was happening. They just tried to please everyone which we all know pleased nobody.
Maybe NA 2.0 wont be a dud but i definitely wont pre buy it.
-
1
-
-
52 minutes ago, van der Decken said:
Here's a test, have 2 servers: one for OW and one for arcade arena tournaments.
The OW server would remain the same allowing for conquests and such. The arena server would be the battles only part. And characters from each server would not be usable on the other server. So your rank and ships unlocked in the arena server will not carry over to the OW server, nor would your rank and crafted ships in the OW server carry over to the arena server.
It needs to be something because after a year of play and trying to make suggestions on how to keep ow players happy and not just clickers i have given up. Not one update has helped make players who enjoy ow combat happy but every update seems to make portbattle and teleport more the play style.
So for now i have even quit the game. I was the last in my clan of ow true pirate players left so for now all of us have quit.
-
1 hour ago, Todbringer said:
Anyone who wants to play a trader will have a chance to sell their goods where they know most buyers will come. and buyers will come if they know they can easily and quickly move the goods they buy. Why would i buy anything in Habana if I have to sail three times for an hour and a half to transport it to my other ports, all the while risking to lose a ship?
Lets face it, OW sailing is boring. Nothing to do. And it takes forever. And I think people don't want to risk sailing with goods they need for 2 hours just to have their ships sunk or captured.
I only use free town deliveries and just buy a ship at free town, load up what I need and do a quick dash to nearest port, make an outpost and build the ship I need. I have no intention on being in OW any longer than absolutely necessary.
But until then i will only sail shortest and most empty route possible with any ship other than basic cutter. And if I hear that there is an enemy sighted anywhere within 30 minutes sailing time from me, i log off and go play something else.
If they fix it so i can transport cargo in fleet ships and protect my traders and fix people waiting hidden in battle results I might go back and sail again.
And that's why they should let people be able to trade and craft the way they like and not try to force pvp on everybody. Each person has his own way of playing and enjoying the pvp side of the game and the game should cater to them all, not just force people to fight and risk their stuff when the game demands hours of your time to do anything.
If it took 10 minutes to sail from one side of the map to the other and I had large enough ship to transport enough goods then i would risk it. 10 minutes is not that much. but if i have to waste 2 days to sail in the stuff and then transport it, then i'll do it the safest possible way and i don't like the game forcing me to risk wasting 2 days of my life just because they think that's the way their game should be played.
i quit reading as soon as you admitted to being a moba dweeb.
Its a moot point for me now since it seems after admins latest update news that this game won'tsurvive 5 months before servers are shit down . Plus after reading that ships can now slow teleport between ports soon, im officially done with the game intill launch or a complete rethinkiny of ezode (which wont happen).
Enjoy your win and enjoy your empty world and instabattles filled with 3 of people. lol.
Adios .
-
3 hours ago, Aegir said:
Good.
Hopefully this will make capturing enemy ships work out better - instead of simply teleporting their/your ship out, you now have to add it to the fleet (with minimum crew) to get it out, and provides an incentive for people to reconsider their AI fleet usage if they have to scuttle a ship to bring back a prize.
I hope this is what he is talking about instead of what the attention deficit disorder crowd is hoping for.
Your way brings realism thier way finishes off the game for real players. So that probably means you are wrong.
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Mrdoomed said:
Pretty vague on how this works. Are you saying its kinda like a " follow" command where one ship on the open world tows another one or is like invisible slower auto teleports to remove the last 2 players left on the ow?
Quoting myself cuz i havent seen an answer and im very curious .
In all honesty if its a new way to teleport ships and empty the ow, then im basically done with the game.
I dont do port battles so there is nothing left for me our my clan here.
-
Well if people would utilize the faction chat that would help.
Not sure how other factions work but pirate faction chat is abuzz with enemy activities . ....well it was when there was anyone on the server.
-
Pretty vague on how this works. Are you saying its kinda like a " follow" command where one ship on the open world tows another one or is like invisible slower auto teleports to remove the last 2 players left on the ow?
-
3
-
-
12 hours ago, Todbringer said:
They should allow deliveries to be sent from capitals (not to them), lower the cost a little bit and increase the number of deliveries allowed. Then capitals will become trading hubs where people will sail in their goods, and others will come and buy there knowing they can deliver the goods from it without hours of sailing.
Shouldnt it logicallybe the exact opposite ? at least if everything is sent to the capital /trade center rather than everyone vacating the capitals goods?
Your way would eliminate the last 2 players on the open world.
Of course im against this in either form.
-
1
-
-
When our server was 900+ the world didnt seem vast at all. In fact it was unrealistically crowded imo. I think the map as it is is perfect and that 500 players is abut the perfect amount.
Now before yall lose your minds hold on. The world IS big and there should be emptiness that a player can use to be alone or go around trouble etc. The new regional system acually encouraged players to " own" a region and stay and that is a step in the right direction . The world wont be vast or devoid of pvp when players are anchored to a "home region" and and enemies fight for it smuggle in it raid in it etc.
I personally do not want it like it was with 1000 players where i couldn't even leave one of my eight ports ( including mort) without 30 enemy sitting there. I like the big world and i surely dont want groups of 30 going FFWD mode.
Now all that said , YES you are right but only currently . The real problem is A no population on server (mine is below 90) and B thestupid rookie zone is where most players are so of course there is no pvp anywhere and C THE PROBLEM I CALLED OUT MONTHS AGO.....if you give everyone free teleports at will and no need to ever acually BE ON THE WATER then nobody will be on the water . Try hards simply afk sail in free cutters to set up an outpost then teleport thier ships there for pbs.
I warned them they was creating a PB simulator and was ignored by everyone because at the time PBs where easy to set up and do. Now that they take some effort everyone is seeing what i said comming true.
Bottom line: we dont need fast travel, we need travel period and a real reason to do it.
PS many many many players myself included have suggested hundreds of ideas to bring the open world to life. maybe soon they will listen.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, 'Sharpe said:
I like keeping OW. But I think the game needs to be flexible about some previously held beliefs.
There is just not sufficient playerbase for a world this size. I started playing this game last year and have always been treating the world as a place that will come more alive once the playerbase increases. If this increase is not going to happen, the OW is always going to seem sterile. I'm not sure if the answer is increased OW travel speed once a certain distance from shore, making it easier to go where the fights are. I'm not sure if it's increasing the impetus for such fights to occur, via a notoriety system, or better rewards, or other.
But the reason OW is disliked by some is that when populated by 150-600 players it doesn't feel like a robust, living world. It feels like an inefficient use of space if the intent is to get people to find each other and fight.
Players who dislike open world or having to move in it are simply players who lack the competence to survive on thier own and need protection in numbers where thier lack of skill is compensated by others who Excel at it.
Wanting faster open world speed can be debated but those looking to avoid it all together are just hiding thier true desire .
-
3
-
-
I wish i could say what i wanted to but i cant.
Basically you whiners have gotten your way and destroyed the ow. You are now sleeing in the crap filled bed you made.
So so so so many of us horrible , hated , and shunned players said we would quit if you made ow impossible or pointless.
Well they did and we did. Enjoy your game of 40 players. Once you get your battle only game and realise people wont playba progression game where battles take 2 hours each.
Again . congrats to you 40 players left and your greatgame.
-
4
-
-
Unless they find players to play its all gonna be moot.
-
To the guys we was teaching and working with, sorry nobody been on for a while.
Zero players in ow outside of newb zone so we have zero reason to log in.
We'll be back if a reason to be back comes.
Good fights with some of you guys we helped with gold,ships and fun. bbl
-
2 hours ago, fox2run said:
Well... I have suggested a lot of stuff. Unfortunately I have mrDoomed and Co on my tail everytime. They clearly want a game without action. Many players can't afford the time to sail for hours without any fun. The latest patch note give some hope back to this title. I have been playing pc games since Sid Meiers Railroad Tycoon and Civilization (1).
Good games always build up around a fun factor. Ask yourself: is this fun? everytime you try something out.
In February the action in OW was easy to get. Hence it was a good pvp game.
Now it's dull.
That can be fixed. I'm giving you titles that are fun to play. Adapt, learn, develop.
Regards a pc player with 30 years of gaming experience behind me.
Mrdoomed isnt on you because you suggest an idea. its because you say the exact same thing every post every day every time.
Edit:
Captain watch your language and tone towards other Captains, remember rule 1.
- Moderation Team
-
1 hour ago, fox2run said:
Im also taking a looong break... NA was still more FUN in february....
~ Thank you for saying other games ( by naming them all the time *sigh* ) are better, for the 1000th time. ~
~ Please stick to Naval Action and be as objective with good breakdown suggestions. ~
The Moderation Team
+1 to moderation team.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Hodo said:
unfortunately isolating rookies on a special rookie server does nothing to help them. They will have to start over when they come to the real server anyway. And they will have no experience with the actual playerbase which is half of the fun of coming to a PvP server.
Acually my idea is to let them keep thier xp up to level 3 thier gold to a dev appropriate cap and a number of ships up to lvl 3 that the devs deem appropriate .
True they will have to pick a team and learn new players but lets face it all we hear now is how these players pick on them. Nobody would have to pick a starter /rookie server so they would know what they where getting into. its no different than any other tutorial other than its a mmo tutorial.
I personally dont even think rookies need a "noob zone" and warned they would simply be fish in a barrel for the hoards of sharks to feed on ( or 3 people if its pvp2) and suggested a tutorial server for them.
I still think its better than this stupid chunk of historical map being cut out by aliens and having its own rules.
-
5 minutes ago, Edward Canaday said:
No no, you'd know if it was me. The names are the same. It's almost pure jealousy. The constant resource collection, the disappointment every time I look at my collection of fine woods (nowhere near 400). Then to see you asking "What will I do with ALL of my spare fine wood. It's a humble-brag and you know it.
Hahahaha well most of mine was aquired via the hard work of others like you. My humble one port building has given me a wopping 90 fine logs since day one.
All the rest where from "other means" I definitely appreciate all of your hard work though
Damn its good to be ah gangsta
Have you gone to navalaction.com to read the entire description of the welcome page? As of this post here, what is written is almost entirely correct, I'd wager at least 95% of it. For a game in Early Access, which is supposed to change, I'd say that's pretty good. Are they supposed to update the website with every change to the game? If people sign onto an early access game, a game under development, and then complain whah-whah the game changed, then geez let them leave the game, since they aren't smart enough to understand the terms, and I don't really want to play them. This IS a changing game, it's under development. A negative review because a game under development changed, is ludicrous and laughable and not worth your time to read.
Black Sails
in Tavern
Posted
I was very disappointed at the ending. I guess every female lead being gay/bi wasnt enough so they had to dig up the gay captain flint story as a final middle fingure to everyone who raged in season 2 when they made him gay but then after backlash never mentioned it again.
I guess for a story to get awards 100% of the people in it must be gay . Game of thrones is the same way. Every female is bi/gay and half the men are too. Wierd that less than 2% of the population makes up about 90% of tv shows now.
I will say im glad that it ended with Calico Jack sailing out. Him and Anne Bonnie where always my favorite pirates of that time.