Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


vazco last won the day on August 7 2018

vazco had the most liked content!

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

3,112 profile views

vazco's Achievements


Commander (8/13)



  1. People seem to realy not like this payment part. I suggest to make this payment a real-money, instead of reals/doubloons. People spend their valuable time in game to get reals for ships. I get it that they don't like to spend it to join PvP. Let them enjoy the full PvP potential, that is after they pay and support NA and new GL games with some real funds.
  2. Maybe they're ugly, but at least realistic. Since IRL I'm currently infiltrating pirate possessions in the Carribean, I can share this piece of intel with you:
  3. @admin you can find a post about quality of life changes below. All those changes meet goals you set, and should be relatively easy to implement:
  4. If they do - which also means gathering an RvR fleet able to match the swedish one - they could be a thread. WIthout it, they don't have an option to threat Sweden - they can just slow down how fast they loose ports. It'd be in the good interest of GB to start thinking how to get peace now, when their position is still not as bad. Better yet, it'd be better for them to not start the war. It's a bit too late for this though.
  5. As a side-effect of any additional ranking, you would get a lot of moaning as well though, as encounters in NA can't be predicted: when a seasoned-wood 1st rate is attacked next to a fort, it's different than a shabby AI-captured 1st rate being caught in the open when in a group fight a smaller ship doesn't score any kills, but chains everyone and keeps enemy from escaping, he's a valuable player, but invisible for such a ranking when a fireship explodes and wins a PB for a team, it's invisible for a ranking A new ranking would change the behaviour of players. Hard to predict how in detail.
  6. The current ranking is perfect, based on gamification principles. People want to get on the list because of renown, and they want to do better, as it's not only time based - it's time and skill based. Both things are good for the game, and current raking worked well for a long time. If you want to add a ranking, it should be a new one. The only other reasonable one I know is ELO-based (chess), where you get more points for sinking someone with your rank or better. NA is different than chess though, as it's not always a 1 vs 1 game. This would also need to be included in such a rank - you should have no points for ganking a same rank player, and much less points if you have a higher rank already. WIth such ranking, you would have a few advantages: additional progression goals for players incentive to fight non-gank fights. Since they're more fun for everyone, it's good for the game option to reward more for sinking renowned players much higher than you, which would empower new players as well If GameLabs made such a ranking with a help of a mathematician, it could be a great addition.
  7. With those stats (radius, guaranteed explosion and damage to sails) 100% fireship fleet, or a mix of 50% fireships will still probably be the most efficient screening strategy. If this keeps being the case, RvR will be blocked, as an AI 1st rate can be acquired within 20 minutes, while crafting PB-ready 1st rate requires much more time. I guess we'll test it...
  8. I was commenting only effect exploding ship had on other ships, not on itself. You're right.
  9. Ok then. My feedback is that explosions right now have no counter and remove the validity of all other tactics, as proven in two port battles / screening fightsd today. It's good that you plan to change them. Explosions as we had them before last changes were well balanced - a fireship could turn the battle around, however wasn't reliable enough to be used repeatedly, invalidating other tactics. Just changing timing of explosions, and leaving all other statistics as they were, would be an improvement good enough to make them fun, but not overpowered.
  10. I'm confused. Do I understand correctly that we shouldn't comment explosions here? If so, is it indefinite, or time-limited?
  11. I withdraw my statement. They were so bad, that they needed those numbers. It was more or less a fair fight.
  12. Just a standaed WTF stuff. They pretend to prepare for 1 vs 3. Once tag starts, 3 more jump out to join
  13. The correct translation is: Birch has the greenest leaves of any shrub; Loki was fortunate in his deceit. Possibly then eg a flag which disguises you as AI
  • Create New...