Pelennor

Wow, that nerf is real now ! Well, they ask for it...

USPvP server just crashed.

Well, that will hurt A LOT our (Dutch) nation who is already so much outnumbered by enemies... I cannot be happy with that announcement. But I understand your meanings so... have fun, see you at sea.

PLEASE NERF DUTCH NATION HIGH COUNCIL ROFL LMAOOOOOOOO

Hi, I report multiple cashes on PvP2US at the moment. It's 04:53 server time and we experience the 3rd crash in less than an hour.

Rofl, that would be so epic, think to the confusion of an enemy seeing a stern charge ! Haha, nice post.

Isn't that game rated pegi 8+ or something ? Such a childish post.

Merci pour ces infos dans la langue de Molière. Tout me parrait claire et l'idée d'une zone pour débutants me parrait excellente. Edit: une question cependant: il se trouve que j'ai un outpost à William's Bay, la future ville FR. Jouant français, puis-je donc m'épargner de bouger cet outpost comme demandé plus haut ?

Hello everyone, Following our defeat in final stage, UGLY is out of the tournament: that means it's time to draw up a review ! First, I would like to thanks the organization for permitting such an event, I know their implication is considerable. The idea of a tournament proposed and leaded by the community is a sign of good health in this early access. I also would like to thanks all the teams we have played with: it has been a real pleasure and a challenge, with some happy moments and some sad ones, but always in the excitement of battle and mutual respect with all contestants. Otherwise, it is very pleasant to follow the games on youtube/twitch, thanks again to make this effort, it is still a delight to watch such wonderful games and I look forward to the incoming battles. My general feeling about the tourney is excellent, I have fulfill my envy of great fights versus skilled players, and I definitely want more ! Nevertheless, I still have a few remarks about what happened during my matches and the ones I have observed. Concerning tournament organization: I have already said it, but I maintain that such a small tournament should have been played in a shorter amount of time. I will not develop my arguments, but be sure I have many. Personally, I can't see IRL (we all have) and GMT (being GMT+11 myself) as an excuse for a 3 weeks group stage of 3 matches. Secondly, some rules were unclear (is kitting ok or not and to what point?), some situations not covered by rules (capturing and transfering crew to ship, wich BR is taken to account ?). But it's not a major issue, I am particularly confident the rules will be improved for next event since a lot of particular situations have been met now. Last, I also consider short matches have particularly favored carronades and brawls game-play during group stage. I wish next event include the complete 1h30 timer since the beginning of the tournament. To the developers: This tournament was obviously a very interesting way of collecting data in multiples aspects. I will not talk about unsinkable ship issue. I agree the combo pump/planking/inventor should be nerfed, but it has been discussed above. The main point I wish to focus is the obvious advantage of caronnade over long guns. Forgive my arrogance, but I must noteUGLY is the only team who played long guns pretty effectively until now, and we were the lasts (stupid enough ?) to persist this way. However, in 3 matches, we have sunk NO boat, and were not even close to sink one. No doubt we, as players, have a part of responsibility for that inefficiency, but I strongly recommend an up for penetration of long guns. More than many words, I have put below 3 screenshots to illustrate situations where I get no penetration at all at close rang. Some of you may found that situation normal, I don't. I am conscious it's a personal point of view about balance between guns but if long guns don't penetrate hulls and are doing far less dpm than carronades, what are they made for ? Only sails ? That is insufficient. 9pd vs belle poule at point blank 9pd dbl charge vs surprise 9pd vs cerberus http://imgur.com/a/q0qxL An other point I will raise concerns the highly criticized determined defender officer perk. It wasn't obvious from outside, but DD was a main factor of our last defeat in final stage match, the whole opponent team were playing with. I will still be opposed on that kind of arbitrary perk who works because "yeah, it's magic, you can't board me". No arm meant against the players who used it, they simply use a tool granted by the devs. Otherwise, I suggest to remove gold/xp on tournament matches, and add the "ship cannot be lost" terms. Nobody cares earning xp/gold in a tournament, and it would be nice and appropriate not to pay the price of loosing multiple ships/officers during a tournament. A last remark: I m not sure of what I am saying, but having fought until timer end with our most recent match: I have see no clue of the circle of the death. To me, the circle wasn't reducing at the end, but I may be wrong. I don't want to finish my post on those critics... I already consider this tournament as a success, and it still has much to go. I wish good luck for all the contestants remaining, and have fun for everyone !

Despite the fact that dutch tried to wipe french several months ago (I am french), I agree with the topic statement. Wipe a nation have negative consequences on the less motivated/new players and this is profitable to none of us.

Having you crew 50% of Marines is already a true choice since they penalize your ship in all game aspect but boarding (gunnery, sailing, pumping and repairing).

That's seems a good and simple initiative to create such an event. I can't promise to join the challenge, but it sounds interesting.

Merci de m'avoir rensegné avec autant de précision, appuyé par des références fiables. La Grande-Bretagne, dans Naval Action, possède une population de joueurs d'approximativement au moins deux fois suppérieure à ses rivaux (cf. les sessions de vote qui donnent une estimation de la répartition des joueurs). Cela consitue un avantage écrasant dans le RvR. Que "IRL", la Royal Navy ai été une formidable machine de combat, personne ne peut le nier... mais nous sommes dans un jeu, et inutile de donner un quelquonque bonus à une nation déjà en position de force. Note que je ne suis pas non plus pour le nerf des nations les plus peuplées, ce que certains réclament. Quand à l'attribution de bonus nationnaux, cela à déjà été proposé plusieurs fois, mais me parrait très délicat à équilibrer.

3 alliances should be allowed: on PvP1, FR/DAN/ESP/SWE alliance is profitable to the server balance. GB/VP/US alliance remains the most populated one: there is no need to penalize a 4 nations alliance, this is just common sense.

Yeah, you may be right, maybe I m to exited to play

Ah oui, je l'avais oublié. Mais là encore, la majorité (54%, c'est sérré je te l'accorde!), souhaite protéger le joueur vainqueur.

Puis que tu me le demande, je te confirme que je trouve anormal que tu ai pris la décision de camper 1 jour et demi. Mais bon, c'est ton choix, tu fais ce que tu veux de ton temps. Concernant le sondage, moi je n'en connais qu'un. La majorité a décidé d'enlever la perk sous sa forme actuelle (60%), et les devs nous ont écoutés. Sujet clos pour ma part. Le sondage: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/15937-social-perk/ Mais si tu en connais un autre, link-le, je l'ai peut-être loupé.

Tu réalises que rester dans l'écran de bataille répond à une nécessité et n'est pas un choix par plaisir ? Tu réalises qu'en te regroupant avec des tiers pour camper la sortie d'une instance.. c'est TOI qui abuse de la mécanique d'instance ? Dis-moi.

Dois-je rappeller que le temps est accéléré en OW et les distances raccourcies: le réalisme appelle le battle screen ! Pour protéger les joueurs en instance de bataille qui ont connus un espace temps handicapant au regard de ceux se déplants dans l'OW qui, au regard de la théorie de la relativité, ce sont littéralement téléportés sur place. Qui fait de l'anti-jeu !? J'ai confiance dans les devs pour éviter que tes veux se réalisent. Ils disent vouloir "traiter" le battle screen. J'espère qu'il s'agit de ce qui a déjà été évoqué à savoir: Un TP dans le port allié le plus proche sous un certain délai. OU Une invisibilité prolongé au sortir de l'instance. PS: inutile de polémiquer, j'ai initialement évoqué le réalisme sur un ton humoristique, tout comme ici, faire appel à la relativité est logique, mais dispropotionné: il s'agit plus de bon sens. Nous savons tous que le réalisme n'est pas intrinsèquement créateur de mécanique de JEU.

A rule says: the more time you give somebody to achieve a simple task, the less eager your request will be considered. In my opinion, this tournament takes way too much time to complete. Group stage should be realized in 1 week, final stage in 10 days. 2 teams out of 3 have played 1 match or NONE so far... I understand this first tourny act like a test so don't take it as a personal critic for organizers/judges: be sure I am, and many other players are, really pleased by this event. Thanks for the time and energy you spend for us.

Hé oui, avec la suppression de cette perk, la balise GPS et la radio longue fréquence n'est plus ^^ Rhalala, comment pouvaient-ils bien faire à l'époque !? Certains historiens révisionistes prétendent même qu'ils n'avaient pas internet ni de chat nation. Bon, sérieusement, la disparition de cette perk anti-pvp est une très bonne chose pour tant de raisons qui ont été exposées en long en large et en travers sur ce forum. L'admin a mentionné sa réintroduction sous une autre forme: on peut penser que la bataille resterait ouverte jusqu'à ce que le BR soit équilibré, ce qui parrait un juste équilibre entre joueurs fan de PvP et péteux joueurs plus pacifiques.

Sorry if I haven't be clear enough, English isn't my mother language : I m not talking about 3 sided battles. I basically suggest a minor graphic modification concerning flags in battle.

Hi, Example of actual situation: If a US player, allied with GB, join a GB vs Spain battle, he will raise GB flag during battle. Suggestion: The US should keep his original national flag in battle. Why? There is actually many way to identify if a ship is friendly or enemy: - name color top of the ship (green/red) - players list (tabulation) - battle map - proximity map - name color when you point camera on ship (white/red) - flags Before diplomatic patch, every player were able to join a fight, regardless his own nation and nations involved in battle. That situation justified the fact that flags were important to identify friendly/enemy ships. But since diplomatic patch, situation is very clear, everybody knows who is allied with who. So, the GB player of my example above will necessarily identify US flag as friendly and, if not, many others way to recognize enemy from friendly exist, as described. Conclusion: Flags are, I think, a capital part of ship personality and, just like in reality, should not be removed for any situation. Battle beauty and intensity will be enhanced with different colors fighting side by side for their cause.

Les améliorations que tu suggères sont purement cosmetiques. Les devs sont une petite équipe, et à mon humble avis, quand je vois la masse de boulot qu'il reste à faire sur les mécaniques de jeu elle-même, notament en RvR, les PB, les méca Pirates, les event serveur et l'équilibrage... je prefere largement qu'ils se concentrent sur ces points qui FONT le jeu.