Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by vazco

  1. vazco

    Black Veil Griefing

    You made your case, now let GameLabs staff decide.
  2. vazco

    Black Veil Griefing

    Please read your sources with understanding before quoting, and carry on yourself A defensive tag was never forbidden and is not ment to waste person's time or cause anger, thus is not griefing.
  3. vazco

    Black Veil Griefing

    This quote is about joining a PB and leaving without a fight, from times when it was still taking slots. It's not connected with OW fights. Please don't manipulate quotes by putting them out of context.
  4. vazco

    Very Low quality PvP

    ROE in OW is one thing - they should stay as they are if we want to have some realism. Right now though doubloons promote ganks even more. You won against a nice gank and earned a lot of doubloons? Great, now the same guys will wait for you with their friends, to get your prize back. If you defeat them next time, no problem - they'll bring more numbers and get more doubloons from you. Solo hunting is discouraged, ganking is encouraged. It's also an issue that there's no place on the map where players who want even fights could have quick PvP. If we had eg Patrol Zones without ganking, gankers could still have rest of the open world, or simply try to catch ships trying to go into the Patrol Zone, while people who want somewhat even fights would have somewhere to go to.
  5. vazco

    Christian VII - what a beautiful ship!

    It's been proposed and discussed before and it's a good idea. The only issue is that clan crafters can buy them and supply ships to everyone, which limits number of buyers. Limiting how often you can get a permit could solve this.
  6. vazco

    Muskets, the new golden marines?

    I'd bet that if it's not mentioned on forum, it won't.
  7. vazco

    Moderation rules

    Dear @admin, today I've learned that discussion about reasons for moderation of particular posts is forbidden, as stated by mod at the bottom of this thread: I hope discussion about this rule is not forbidden as well, as in my opinion the rule of uncommented moderation may be responsible for a few significant PR issues of Naval Action, and in result generate substantial alternative costs for GameLabs. Changing this rule may in my opinion improve financial situation of GameLabs, which is also the goal of the community. The more time devs can spend on their game, the better for people who love it and try to support it. PR of GameLabs improved greatly in time, but it's still imperfect. I know a bit about crisis management and I would suggest to adapt forum policy to rules of PR crisis management, for better efficiency. Some basic rules can be found eg below: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2017/06/20/13-golden-rules-of-pr-crisis-management/#c3c1ca21bcf3 The most relevant harming scenario in my opinion is for a discussion on an uneasy topic being muted on forum. Usually a result of such approach is that negative comments or negatively attituded people don't disappear, but rather move to a forum which can't be controlled by a company - here GameLabs, where GameLabs can't get in front of the facts. Examples of such forums are Steam comments, Twitch streams, reviews and others. A much more effective approach involves using PR crisis management to quash the crisis before it spreads and change people opinion before they move to other channels. I believe that with different approach - which would require changing rules of moderation, Naval Action would sell much more copies already, and can sell much more copies in the future. That's my three cents.
  8. vazco

    Moderation rules

    It's almost always still better to keep an original thread, rather than spreading this content over channels which GameLabs can't control - which happened each and every time, including recent events. Recently one person had some negative opinion about last patch and made a comment which was considered rude (as I understand). Banning this person made 5 people react. Closing a thread made 20 people react and made discussion reappear in a few places, which made most of the community hear about the issue. It doesn't matter so much that the content of an original thread is not there any more, the PR damage was already done. Relatively not many new players read forum, compared to other sources. It's a fairly safe place for discussion. Spilling discussion over other sources though has more impact. It happens mostly through opinion of players, not through what's written here.
  9. vazco

    Moderation rules

    Thank you for a reasonable reply. I think with Liquicity however something really minor was interpreted as something much bigger - I guess due to a difference in language interpretation. Liquicity is a guy who created best grade of content in this game in the past - in form of a tournament, or revival of Prussian nation. He's always helpful in the game and mostly promotes it. His feedback was included a few times as modification to the game. He's one of the least toxic players, definitely from those who are known in the community. Giving him a permament ban is too harsh in an opinion of many. In my opinion it's counterproductive. It would probably suffice to warn him, or ban him for a week or two. Judging from signals I get, lifting his permament ban would help promote better image of GameLabs in the community. Now I'm done with my statement, thank you for allowing to express it. That's kind of a reaction I wouldn't myself approve of from a moderator. Moderator shouldn't troll, he should prevent trolling - especially in critical topics, such as this. Similar topics in the past created backlashes outside of the forum and directly influenced sales of Naval Action. It's wise to pour water on them, rather than a gasoline. Deleting a thread is also simply not efficient in terms of PR. It's much better to give your statement, check reaction and close thread. It's even better approach to understand reasoning and if needed, eg propose a simple adaptation, check reaction and close thread. Now I'm done advising/suggesting as well.
  10. vazco

    Moderation rules

    I don't care really if I get banned or not, it's just a forum of a game I give advice, it doesn't need to be followed. I don't care if people decide that my advice, or advice from Forbes, is wrong. This kind of attitude is an issue from point 12.
  11. vazco

    Forum post deleted

    I can't access old forum post any more: https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/27461-release-liquicity/ I'm guessing it was deleted. What was the reason for it?
  12. vazco

    Naval Action Meme collection

    That's kind of rough... To be fair, there are some great things in a new patch as well
  13. Data is an ultimate argument. Please however recheck it, as my experience while talking with people from multiple clans and nations is opposite. You can get 400k reals in 30 minutes in a repeatable way. To get 40 k doublons you would need weeks, unless there's a hole somewhere in the system that I don't know about. PS. Maybe those are doublons from alt account, or gained by selling assets players had from before the patch
  14. That's true. It's far from self sustaining though. At some point you will need to grind doublons to participate in rvr)(mostly due to hostility needing 1st rates), unless I don't know about some ways of getting doublons.
  15. There is an alternative. Eg you buy alt account. With some friends you go to a capital where you have alt and bring a trader. You start a battle, loot with your trader, after battle leave through a trader doublons in you alts port and continue a fight. You just need to sail a trader all the time. There are other walk-around as well, some more gamey.
  16. The problem is that there are no places other than Staingrads. Capitals will get you a revenge fleet. Patrol zones will get you a revenge fleet - I know for a fact a few clans actually aim at ganking people coming from a patrol zone fight. Offensive RvR most often doesn't give you rewards, as you have to focus on sinking enemies, not on looting. Other places don't give you fights, as you can't find enemy (maybe it's just me). Probably the most reliable way right now to get loot in PvP is sitting around, waiting to be attacked or waiting for a target you can gank. People find overrides for those issues - eg. they have specialized ships to handle loot and complex systems to share it. That's however boring, complex and gamey.
  17. I guess it will discourage people from fighting even battles and encourage them to gank people who are in such battles. Much less even fights, much more searching for someone to gank, waiting in OW and boring running engagements. What was fixed by pvp marks is removed now, there's no reward for the risk. Ganking and running will be meta. Previously Admin wanted for a single vet to be able to defeat 10 noobs and get reward for doing so before being sank. Now Admin wants for a single vet to get nothing and get ganked to kingdom come if he actually gets some loot. @Liq Its admin's right to build a game he wants to build, so don't object. Just join revenge fleet and have some fun. If it's not fun for you, just work on yourself to change your attitude, or grind some AI to calm your nerves.
  18. vazco

    Exchange Doubloons <--> Reales

    Maybe you haven't noticed, but what you propose is already implemented in a simple and neat way. Everyone can buy/sell doublons for reals in ports. Supply and demand will stabilize the price, which is way better than anything devs could arbitrally do. Right now price for doublons is appros 150-350 reals. It will stabilize with time, as now most people don't have a lot of either reals or doublons.
  19. Worse than that. I can join in LGV on the side of your enemy in 20 vs 20 1st rate battle and loot ships you sink. You can't even report this, as it's not against the rules. In an even battle I should be able to get most of your rewards and noone can even complain.
  20. The best solution would be to give loot to ships which participated in the kill relative to damage they've done, and provide the loot to them automatically after battle, without a need of looting, which is simply a boring activity with multiple issues. Imagine that two nations fight a third. A player from first nation did 49% damage, a player from a second one did 51% and got a kill. It's unfair that first one got nothing. It's also unfair that enemy can bring a fast requin to loot all your kills, denying you reward. It makes fighting against the odds completely lack rewards and will soon dominate some type of fights. We're right now in the process of solving things which were already solved with PvP marks. Just reuse solutions from PvP marks, which were polished through years of improvements.
  21. Sure, old flow (not interface) was less ergonomic. Since you're working on improving flows and interface though, it's reasonable to make them good, not just slightly better. You should look into statistics, as I'm pretty sure most people craft guns when they're needed - at least everyone I know does it this way. Crafting guns beforehand is not an efficient use of resources and warehouse slots. Maybe it's required now, with a new interface. Maybe people will adapt. You need to check what number of guns you need to craft for a given poundage for every ship, then craft them separately. That's cumbersome - regardless whether you're crafting a ship youself, or taking guns from clan's warehouse. With a good (and not even best) scenario it's 12 clicks to equip 6 gun slots. You don't need 18. Ok, I'm done with giving you helpful feedback. Clearly you don't want to receive it, as you're being both defensive and agressive in receiving it. I don't have an internal need to prove you anything and being attacked for giving feedback is not exactly a good incentive for me to put more work into your game. Preparing videos is out of a scope of my interests. I'm usually well paid for similar help, I'd at lest expect respect when helping you for free.
  22. It's not you. If something requires 68 clicks, 9 searches (3 very hard), 5 hard calculations, 5 inputs, 6 drag-and-drops and knowledge about at least 5 unique unintuitive things, it's simply too overwhelming for beginners.
  23. Speak for yourself. I'm fed up with this interface to the point that I had to take 3 approaches to craft a ship. If I was a new player, I'd be completely lost and would probably give up on crafting.
  24. It's very simple - if I sink while fighting a guy who sank a trader, I will have to replace my ship by doing PvE. If I sink him, I will get only slightly more than just by sinking an AI trader, which is risk-free in comparison. In terms of incentives, new system gives me incentive only to gank with a fleet which is able to return doublons safely to harbour. It's discouraging people from taking risks and fighting against odds. If this is the case, total number of battles will lower, as noone will want to fight against the odds. Old system was giving more rewards for such fights. Of course I don't know this for sure - we'll see this in a few days.
  25. In my understanding PvP player won't be able to do only PvP, he will be forced to do PvE. That's something we already tried before, with bad results. From what I understand none of those PvP activities are profitable if you get 2000 doublons from killing an AI trader brig: fighting noobs in capital waters most likely won't bring you anything, as you'll get ganked in the end in RvR if you loot, you die. Your doublons will sink with enemy ship. Even if not, you'll get 500 doublons for 1st rate PB on average, much less than sinking a single trader OW hunting usually ends with ganks. If doublons get sank with your ship, it will stop being profitable The only sustainable PvP will be ganking, however still less profitable than killing AI traders from what I hear.