Sven Silberbart
-
Posts
807 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Sven Silberbart
-
-
Weiterhin werden deutschsprachige Spieler gesucht, die sich nicht scheuen sich der extremen Herausforderung der schwedischen Krone zu stellen.
-
Polulation of Players in a Nation should lead to a maximum amount of ports the nation can have at the same time.
Lets say..
..Nation of 100 Players: Max 30 Ports
..Nation of 200 Players: Max 60 Ports
..Nation of 400 Players: Max 120 Ports
..and so on
If the Ports have a fix amount of resources per day, like Teak Wood or Crew, then everything is fine.
Such system don't allow big nations steamroll other nations when they come to their limit of ports.
-
1
-
-
Dont see a Need to Change. This game ia a bit of simulation and no combat game.
Maybe increase the sail damage from the front/back cannons to make those situations a bit less use of time.
-
-
Cival Wars are a huge risk. Lets say there ist a small nation, which really needs alls its players and allies to survive. Just some players who are not willing to accept a nations decision can always start a civil war. This nation will never be able to to stand on its own feed. Player will leave the nation. Lets say this rebel players are send from another nation to infiltrate the nation and start civil wars. A nation needs goals and all players should follow it, pushed by the game system.
If a civil war will be implemented, please make sure, starting such a civil war needs a really big and high ranked player base and is a high risk for the rebels if they fail! Maybe they should give all their money and goods to the nation or something. I dont want to see that civil wars are the most seen thing in the game, this should really be a rare event in the game. The nation vs nation wars are main dispute in game.
-
-
Horrible idea . No "power to the guilds" please. Proposed system gives equal chances to everyone, good guilds and good players should obtain power by good play , this voting system allows winng by zerging a battle with numbers and vote his pre-chosen candidate.
When i see players fighting for their nation against the enemies i often see the same names every evening. Those players, mostly organized in PvP Guilds wich are connected with other pvp guilds, are the soldiers of their nation. This guys should get the control over the nations lead so i think the voting after a Port Battle is a very good idea to protect the interest of the majority of the players and eleminate the problem of the players just jumping into PBs to get those points and blocking slots for much better ships or real teamplayers.
-
3
-
-
Nothing more to say.
Looking for brave men to join the holy roman empire!
Wir sind ein deutsch sprachiger Clan auf Schweden Seite. Bewerber sind gern gesehen :-)
-
First of all: I really like the base idea of this system. It is the right direction. It gives the players who fight for its nation the votes and this is generally the right way. It motivate players to fight for their nation in PvP.
National decisions are enforced by design.
If captains don't like national policies - capture more ports and change the decision. Maybe a large guild in opposition to a government should get an option to become a rebel, starting a civil war allowing them to capture ports from existing owners getting votes to change national decision deposing a current ruler. Foreign nations can incite civil wars and pay rebels to weaken enemy nations
With this opposition and rebels thing i fear it has a really big potential to destroy a nation. Make sure that ONLY really much players base is needed to start a civil war. And no ALTs.
How do you try to avoid that alternative Chars of an enemy nation starting a rebellion?
-
I also cannot see navies, historically, sending 7 ships to take down 1. Waste of resources. Maybe they would send 1 or 2. But I may be wrong as history is not my forte.
In WW2 somone called "Sink the Bismark"! The Royal Navy send all available ships to sink the Battleship and the Prinz Eugen. Much british Ship vs. 2 german ships.
-
Maybe he, like me, likes the thrill of sailing in enemy waters ,,
There is no thrill anymore, if the game is full of restrictions that gives protection to players like the BR System did before. Thats one point why i didn't wanted that.
-
Well, then put a diplo system in if you want your ganking RvR tactics:
Nations in war: No BR restrictions
Not at war: 1.5 BR
..This is a thing i could accept. But better are no restictions :-)
-
..Numbers combat is here to stay, say bye to skilled PvP in Naval Action...
Join the arena battles. Not much waiting time for enemies. fair balance. U can feel master of ur great skills. That's what u want, just do it.
-
Hell yeah! Lets get some big gank squads going to celebrate. Fun for all.
No, jk.
But however, I personally would much rather see a reputation system. Serious gank offenders should get minus rep and lose access to bigger ships, quality and mods.
This would mean you can't just gain access to bigger ships by PVE on a PVP server. You would need a certain amount of rep points with your crew xp level.
And if all you do is gank your rep would take a hit meaning you lose access to bigger ships. Promote PVP on PVP servers. Less PVErs who just power level in PVE and only gank, and have not a clue how to PvP.
I must say, Ive had some priceless fights with BR system. Those who used to only gank and mouth off who got roped into a 1,5x v 1x BR still outnumbering us but showing how bad they sucked at PvP. No wonder some people didn't like it. Shows what happens when their large group of buddies couldn't magically teleport a fleet into a battle with a time compressed open world.... lol
I think u didn't (or want to) understand the motivation of the most Anti-1,5x players, yet. Ganking isn't generally a bad thing. Come out of your small scope of the battles and do a more global view of the game and it's gameplay options. This isn't just another Arena Game!
-
5
-
-
I agree with an open system as we had before, but to protect the Devs from all the reports the invulnerability timer must be increased to 120 seconds so to prevent Result screen camping, which apparently was the biggest motif behind the changes.
Absolutely correct!
The invulnerability timer should prevent this kind of ganking when it is same or longer than reinforcement timer at battles.
The same after leaving town, and this two things are history.
Nevertheless we also need to have a timer for the Result screen. Nobody should use Menu Screens to hide from enemy, never!
But please remove this 1,5x bulls***
-
3
-
-
In anycase I dont even understand this whole ganking idea and why it is so bad?
1. If in foreign waters. You will get attacked. Take measures to be ready for that. Sail during rain, sail with a fleet...
2. If in own territory. You should get enough reinforcements to rebel the attack if needed. Period.
3. If your nation is under attack and under war. You should not sail alone. And even with reinforcements you might still loose.
The game should follow these simple realworld like rules and that's it.
100% Agree
-
2
-
-
I didn't found any arguments against this:
- "Use the small and large battles to start balanced fights, this is why they are exists"
- "Do a arranged fight somewhere at the big map if u want a fight with ur rules (ship types, numbers, start positions..)"
Can anyone of the supporter of this restriction explain me, why they dont use this mechanics to do their wanted balanced battles.
-
3
-
-
Deutsch sprachige Spieler auf Schweden Seite sind bei der [hrE] genau richtig :-)
-
I really dont like the new 1,5x BR System!
We want to play as organised group. We do a meeting point and start to OW.
It wasn't easy before the patch to dont split the group an now it is much more harder!
Every evening we split up and i hate this. Yes, we can sail the same ship types and build
a ball all the time but this kills strategy like:
- groups with mixed ships to combine the advantages of the ship types
- building a line or network at OW to find the enemy ships faster
I want to make unbalanced and balanced fights. But the balance of a battle have to be controlled by the open world strategy of
a player group. And if this strategy leads to an advantage for the atacker it is good. Was the enemys startegy better and the group have to
do a battle against the a much bigger fleet it is good. If players want to play like a wolf pack and attack enemy single ships, let it be. If the wolf pack
didnt see the much big escort of the enemy ship and get completely sunk, let it be. But dont let the BR rule destroy this kind of gameplay, please.
I also dont like hiding in batte screen, logout screen or Harbour to gank a enemy player/group, but this System kills much more
than this of the gameplay options.
-
3
-
Privateer Class Ideas
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
Before thinking about privateers und pirate stuff u need to make the career as trader much more interessing. Without the player-traders there are nothing to hunt. And coz of the traders has all the risk they really had to make large profit if they are successfully do a transport.