William the Drake
-
Posts
949 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by William the Drake
-
-
While sir patrick stewart would be good for the english, i think personally i would prefer Stephen Fry
If we're speaking strictly of a "Royal Navy" voice, I think Stewart is more suited (although I wouldn't much object to Stephen Fry either) Now, if there was a separate voice for English companies/traders, Fry would definitely fit the bill there
-
1
-
-
Who would you recommend for the French, though?
Tcheky Karyo (French officer from The Patriot) is the first to come to mind.
-
2
-
-
A old clanmate and friend of mine posed a rather interesting and amusing question the other evening on TS:
"Ok, so who would you pick to be the narrator for the English nation (for missions, tutorials, etc.?), Brian Blessed(narrated War of the Roses, among other things), or Sir Patrick Stewart?"
Oh was I split. But I came up with a compromise: Why not both! Sir Patrick Stewart would definitely embody the Royal Navy, no question, but I feel that Brian Blessed would sound very good as the Pirate narrator! (If I had to pick one for just England it would probably Blessed, but when choosing one for pirate and one for England, Stewart definitely has a more authoritarian air about his sound.)
So who would you pick as the voice of each respective nation? Here are my votes so far:
England: Sir Patrick Stewart
Pirate: Brian Blessed -more serious. David Wenham (300/Deadliest Warrior) -less serious/smuggler.
U.S.A.: Gary Sinise (would have loved Edward Herrmann for this but, alas, he is no longer with us.)
French: Tcheky Karyo
-
Do you pvp? If so, you wouldn't put this. I recommend you try pvp. That is where the content is, that is where it isn't repetitive, and that is where you have to use your brain. That is, if you attack larger ships and sail around in 5th rates or smaller. Try solo or small group pvp. The game shines in solo or small group pvp, and the organized Trafalgars.
Prater?
This is NOT a thread for questioning my game-play or posts like this.
DID YOU DO THIS ? DID YOU DO THAT? WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID? WHY DON´t you enjoy the game?
Prater in no manner attacked you or insulted you. In fact, it appears he genuinely was hoping to direct you to something that make the game more enjoyable for you. He gave you a recommendation, and then gave a reason as to why he thinks you should do so. No attacks, no insults, no flame. (Honestly this is very nice to see considering the National News just next door.)
Furthermore he's right: half the fun I have had was engaging in PvP/RvR with fellow players. It's a whole new gaming experience beyond harassing NPCs. Coordinating with and having to adapt to a live, thinking enemy really is a thrill.
-
2
-
-
There does seem to be a bit of confusion: I know that when you try to attack a larger force, you get a message stating "BR Difference too high" does this pertain only when the attacker is the lower BR, or only when attacking NPCs?
Regardless of the fact that a privy can sail at beam and upwind better than square rigs, having a system that discourages seal-clubbing may be necessary. But as always, it is finding the balance between absolute freedom and restriction is the hard part.
-
2
-
-
Yeah the pro status quo pirate guys will say anything to keep their bland pointless pirate faction going as is.
Too bad that by all accounts the Barbary Corsairs where funded and legitimized by the Dey of Algiers, as well as the other quasi-independent Barbary States/Kingdoms, some of which were vassals of the Ottomans and almost all of which practiced state-sponsored piracy. "State-sponsored Piracy" i.e. Privateering sans a Letter of Marque.
Wait, if anything this is promoting a "non-nation pirates". Is that what you are arguing against?
-
1
-
-
Make Admiralty orders a dark green exclamation point, make battles dark red crossed swords, crossed cannons?
The current color for admin chat (gold) is good. For mods, perhaps dark blue? (To match their "moderator" tag in the forums?
-
Very happy to see an old enemy! Good luck!
-
Sigh... allright!
Forcing player to go through artificial hoops before he can join a faction he wants to - that he will be able to do - is terrible game design.
Better? Because the point still stands.
I'm amazed how people still thinks that making things annoying prevents people from doing stuff. That is terrible game design.
[...]
But more so... You should see what people is capable of to overcome any wall you want to build in front of them if the goal is worth it.
But here's the thing: having people take a specific action to "go" pirate as opposed to simply starting out as one isn't preventing or blocking them from a mechanic, it's delaying them. The mechanic is still accessible to everyone. It's the same as lineships: everyone can sail them, but everyone also has to jump through some sort of artificial hoop to get to them, whether it be leveling up to get the crew for them, or the actual crafting of it. The content is there for anyone and everyone who is willing to work for it.
Let's look at ArcheAge, who's pirate system could probably work very well here: in the game, players start on 2 opposing factions. Each player can commit various crimes: killing friendlies (known as "purpling), steeling crops, etc. When a player who has committed crimes is killed, they are sent to a trial. A computer (bot) led trial with an all player jury. Based on evidence that has been collected and reported by other players in the world, the jury can decide if the defendant is innocent or guilty, and if guilty, how long they spend in jail (an actual, in-game jail where a player cannot perform any actions-even emotes- for the entirety of his/her sentence, Real-Time). Once a player commits and is found guilty of a certain amount of crimes, they turn pirate.
ArcheAge was the first game my clan came across when we made our exodus from PotBS. It wasn't a perfect fit, but as a F2P MMORPG with naval combat, it was enough. And if there were pirates, we were going to be pirates. Or at least so we thought. The process of becoming pirate was no joke, and you were KoS for any of the other 2 nations, including their OP NPC guards. Furthermore, you lost connection with everything: all the land you had, any clan you were in, gone, and you were sent to the pirate island. As a clan, this was too much to ask from both our members and our leadership. Once we established ourselves, going pirate was no longer an option simply because we were well situated. There are still some plans to go pirate, but it is less of a need and more of a want now.
In ArcheAge, when you came across a pirate, you knew that player had put in the work to be a pirate: gave up everything and committed a ton of crimes and spent a lot of time in jail. And that was intimidating. And that's how it should be; pirate players should have a reputation, even for just turning pirate.
And if you think it's not possible for whole clans to switch to pirate in this system, many in ArcheAge have, multiple times.
Again, the hope is to avoid Pirates turning into the PotBS Pirates, which were in fact just another nation that was pointlessly under-powered.
-
Then why have surrender at all if you plan to sink em anyway?
That's the point: In PotBS, you could be [somewhat of] a troll by accepting the surrender (thus accepting the loot offered for the surrender) and then sink the other player regardless. Here it should be done automatically: if you accept the player's surrender, they are immediately taken out of the battle.
edit. I don't know if any kind of reputation system beyond your actual reputation on the server would be much use or help. I have never seen an game mechanic driven reputation system that would have had any correlation with reality and that couldn't be exploited. For example, lets say a player uses all his time attacking new players doing missions in basic cutters and shows them mercy so on the paper he would have a great reputation of fair and merciful pirate but it could not be farther from the truth.
Reputation and bounty systems have been discussed for a while here. I hope that development of International relations (war & peace mechanics) will facilitate a need for some of these.
-
Sid Meier's Pirates! Live the Life should dominate the #1 spot in these lists, if only for the replayability and addictiveness that is to be expected from anything Sid Meier's (looking at you civilization). But seriously, Pirates is the universal pirate game, because everyone at least knows of either the original original '87 game or the 2004 remake, both of which are pretty awesome.
Otherwise, AC IV is definitely up there, if only for Ubisoft recognizing the sailing potential from AC III as well as the beautiful graphics and shanties.
East India Company and Commander: Conquest of the Americas would be a middle contender (the two are basically the same game, just in different areas of teh world. Unlike Empire: total War, these two focus specifically on overseas trade and combat. They are not spectacular; the naval combat system is somewhat lacking for being such a key piece of the game, but the games are rather challenging overall.
Similar could be said of the Port Royale series.
PotBS, only because it was my first MMO. Back in the day it was good, but a toxic community, ill-conceived economy patches, and almost no moderator or administrator presence pushed my society and I out of the game.
Tropico 2: Pirate cove. A city builder, but technically an Age-of-sail city builder, and you don't come across those often.
-
Beware the Kraken gents
-
So it's actually a thing: I have a mate playing it on TS and downloading it myself right now. It's real: you can sail ships.
Now if they're serious about actually developing this past April 1st, I have my doubts
-
Forcing player to go through artificial hoops before he can join a nation he wants to - that he will be able to do - is terrible game design.
But that's just it: i'm saying pirates shouldn't be a nation, or even like a nation: we need to be separate, unique, fun! It's less of another play type and more along the lines of a next-level sort of thing.
-
1. Do not make the Pirate Faction joinable as a new Character, Make it so that people must first join another, regular Nation then can only become pirate by attacking a friendly faction member, making it less appealing for players to immediately join.
Just out-and-out removing pirates is hardly the direction to go. Pirates are a fact of history and the time period. Pirates can be done, they just need to be done right. At the moment, yes they are more of a nation, but hopefully there will be some changes in the near future that address this.
1. People just join any nation and then go pirate as soon as possible, so it changes nothing
I disagree: as stated in my post on the subject, this would simply be a first step; something that provides some sort of barrier, however superfluous, that creates a known separation between the nations and pirates, and one that may even reduce players who simply "start" as pirates. Furthermore, it would be an initial system whereas later down the line of development, there could be a pirate mechanic like in ArcheAge where to go pirate you must not only commit X amount of crimes, but also be convicted of them.
-
Where are these stats from?
The 2nd Development priorities poll
http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12471-development-priorities-2/
-
1
-
-
Just saying every day its the same people talking about this crap. The silent players are enjoying the game for what it is. Think about that.
At this moment, approximately 53.37% of players feel this way. So I'd say it's pretty important
-
2
-
-
Wipe, Nerf, Penalties... These words make a lot of sense now.
Have a look around this forum. Many mechanics will be changed and diplomacy, war and pirates role are the next the devs will work.
My real concern is this: while the devs have shown they want to work on what the community deems important (and we, in turn, have shown, that addressing diplomacy and piracy are by far the most important) will we have any input on how this will be done? I really don't like making assumptions or false accusations, but given Wind's quote here and the general lack of discussion by the devs, it seams as though these decisions are being made at the administration level with little-to-no communication here (i.e. I haven't seen an admin poll "Types of possible Pirate changes" or some such). The rather heavy implications of "nerfs" and "limitations" without any admin-community interaction is rather unsettling. I have not seen any posts by the devs that clearly state or outline change in mechanics (if there are please direct me to them, I am legitimately curious)
I seriously think we may end up taking a step backwards if things are pre-decided when it comes to the most populated and, in my opinion, most broken faction of the game. At least give us a formal "heads up" instead of hearing it through the grape-vine.
-
If the surrender aspect could be implemented as an end-battle screen, and the option is given to set the ship free, then the invisibility and invulnerability should give the victim a chance to get away and not be trolled by the attacker. Possibly there could be an additional invisibility time if an option such as that occurs, to prevent a gang of griefers from harassing one player over and over.
I meant that when they offered a surrender and the surrender was accepted, the players would not be automatically taken out of the combat instance. So in PotBS, one could accept a surrender and sink the person in the same instance, no re-tagging required.
-
They will get wiped soon.
Uhm uhm uhm uhm, can we get a little more detail on this? Just pirates? Everyone? Ports? And will it just be a simple wipe or will they be changing any of their mechanics?
-
1
-
-
So...you're Canadian?
-
4
-
-
It is becoming very apparent with the current Development Poll that diplomacy and (more importantly) piracy war by far the mot popular aspect of the game that the community at large feels needs to be addressed. While on somewhat of a tangent, I believe that the current "Surrender" and "Capture" mechanics are somewhat lacking, and proper implementation could very well assist in starting to separate pirates and nationals in gameplay- both long and short-term.
The Surrender Mechanic
Now I've only ever resorted to using the Surrender button once (When it comes down to it, I prefer to go out in a figurative blaze of glory, or a more literal blaze caused by a shot in the magazine). I was in a basic cutter, carrying nothing. I think I lost a durability. I'm not sure if my opponent receive anything, be it gold, XP, or otherwise.
Now I believe Surrender should be a viable option, however it should have some different possible outcomes. PotBS, when a player surrendered, the player who was surrendering was given an option of how much of their cargo they would surrender (I found this rather amusing, imagining the banter between captains: "Stop shooting! We surrender! Please don't sink me!...But I'm only giving you 25 percent of my cargo!). This was somewhat viable, as the attacker would most likely receive more booty than they would had they simply sunk the ship (if they intended to capture it, there was little incentive to accept a surrender). However, I feel the choice of mercy should not go to the attacker, not the one surrendering.
A player can offer to surrender, and when they do, the attacker would be given a list of options on how to handle the surrender
- A: Ignore the Surrender ("Damnation seize my soul if I give you quarter, or take any from you!")
- B: Accept the Surrender; commandeer(plunder) goods/repair kits/modules. Surrendering player is allowed to leave, no durability lost.
- C: Accept the Surrender; Commandeer Ship. Player is effectively "Sunk", loses one durability. Player loses all goods, modules, etc. The Attacker takes the ship as though they had boarded it.
- D: Accept Surrender; show mercy. Surrendering player is allowed to leave with everything in tact; no cargo or durability lost.
The last 3 options could have further implications should a sort of reputation system be implemented: showing mercy would garner a large amount of good reputation.
Now, I'm not one to sing PotBS's praises. Like, ever. However what I did find interesting/amusing, was that when someone offered a surrender, the Attacker could accept the surrender, receive the loot from it, and be able to go back on their word and still sink the player. This was something that seemed like the most piratey: "Ok, we accept your surrender, you can go...Lolz, I lied"
Now, as much as I loved the piratiness of it, I seriously believe this is not how it should be implemented here. It is far too susceptible to grief and trolling.
The Capture Mechanic: "Send to Admiralty"
- The ability to "capture" and "take command" of a ship is reserved solely for pirates. Captured ships have one durability, and retain all the characteristics and permanent modules of the ship that was captured. - 1/2 way there,
- When a ship is captured, the quality of the ship and permanent modules are all degraded.
- Pirates can use resources to "craft" an extra durability for a captured ship (obviously the resources needed to be equal to what is needed to have build a ship of equal quality from scratch, then adjusted based on how much durability is to be added. Example: if ship A, of Fine quality needs 50 planks to be built with 5 durability, then crafting 1 durability for it once it is captured requires only 10 planks. refilling durability in this manner can only be done by pirates. Similarly, pirates can use resources to upgrade the quality of ships and modules
The reasoning behind this is simple: the pirates need to be weened off of mass producing ships the same way that the Nations build ships. At first, pirates would still be able to produce all ships. However this mechanic would allow them an alternate means of acquiring ships, thus pulling them away from the shipyard and out to sea to plunder, where they belong. While pirates should eventually have limitations on what ships they can build, pirates should have the ability to capture any and all ships.
NOTE: I do not think pirates should "want" to sail large lineships, however until mechanics change that shift pirate gameplay focus to smaller ships, they should not be limited in the ships they can command.Nationals send captured ships to Admiralty- The Nations' only option for acquiring new ships should be through production and trade. They should not be able to commandeer other ships. Any ships they capture should be sent to the Admiralty, at which point the player will receive one (or be given a choice) of a number of possible rewards, all based on the quality, size, rank, etc. of the ship captured. Such rewards could be - 1/2 there, As of Patch 9.7, all NPC ships are sent to admiralty.
- Reputation
- Resources
- Sums of Gold
- Medium-High Grade Modules (Only temporary? Only permanent?)
- Ship Tokens: tokens to be traded for a free ship of medium-high quality. (Example: 5 tokens gets you a Privateer, 500 gets you a Victory). Tokens can vary in grade: Token of Service- to be traded for rank 7-6 vessels (given for capture of ships of similar rank), Token of Valor- to be traded for Rank 2-1 ships.
Now why this difference? Because there needs to be some give-and-take here; there needs to start being some differences between pirates and Nationals that don't simply limit one or the other. Instead this will place some level on restriction on both, while providing some sort of trade-off.
A pirate can easily capture any ship, but that ship would end up being of a lesser quality due to it being captured. Pirates can still field exceptional ships, but they must do so via upgrading captured ones. Whereas Nationals would have the ability to purchase high grade ships with Tokens, essentially for free, but would have to capture a large number of ships of the same quality to be able to do so.
~Cheers
-
6
-
The free camera is the "Home" key by default I believe. Press it once and it will be completely under your control. Press it again to have it compensate for the direction and speed of our ship, and press it a third time to return it to the default camera.
You will be able to control the camera in the 2 free modes with the standard direction WASD keys. You can control how fast the camera moves via the mouse wheel.Hope that help
-
1
-
-
Me observing the rocky coastlines
-
1
-
Patch 9.7 - Land sighted
in Patch notes
Posted
Does/will this pertain to pirates as well?
Because, historically, there was no "Pirate Admiralty" (and odd phrase just to type), so pirates should retain the ability to capture, at the very least, small-medium vessels.