OneEyedSnake
-
Posts
852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by OneEyedSnake
-
-
Just now, Wraith said:
There is no such thing as too far away. Look at what the Russians have done. Establish a forward operations base and go. Come on man, don't expect the dev's to do all the work for you. The merge has been universally a good thing and there was no need for a wipe to get back into the game. Do some recruiting, make some friends, forget about the value of pixels, and quit you're whinging.
russians have how many players now? large nation. not a problem.
I have tried recruiting for 2 years.
and it isnt for me, its for everyone.
-
Just now, Jon Snow lets go said:
Well you dont have to stay in your little corner in south of the map and there are some ports set with US prime time timers. You could go and attack those.
they are too far away to sail to i am afraid, with no where to sail out of. we tried. we got ganked. we all died. wasnt worth the time. thats the problem with the game, it isnt worth the time.
3 minutes ago, Teutonic said:sounds like you just want to flip ports
i do, we do. we want to flip ports so we can have a real fight! we want to flip ports in our time zone. when other players are on, and our players are on. we dont want empty pbs. we want to be able to part take in the main part of the game so we have some form of a chance to earn a spot in the world. but we just cant right now. If there was a map wipe we could go get a couple of ports around the map. and do exactly as jon snow suggested, at least in our prime time. which would encourage more activity with the dutch, and perhaps allow us to grow.
-
1 minute ago, Jon Snow lets go said:
I get your point and I know Dutch population is super low, but I fail to see how a map wipe will help you. Because even then you only have these 5 or 6 players for PBs which is too few to do anything really.
If you have some more people online you can tag an alt near the PB and leave the fight when PB starts to avoid
griefingscreening. Some think its dirty but its your only option which might help.Or maybe you should abandon your country and play somewhere else with more people.
or maybe these larger nations should tell lesser clans to leave to smalelr nations
but if we could put ports into our US time zones, not only by us, but by other nations us US dutch players could attack, because we have enough on in US evening to have a decent pb. not full, but definitely a decent size with some chance of winning.
-
4 minutes ago, Jon Snow lets go said:
So you dont want to fight you just want to flip ports? Or what should I take out of this?
what to get out of this post however is this. Do a map wipe so we can set up as a Nation with multiple time zones so we can better defend ourselves and attack other nations. US and Aussie players are leaving the game right now because there is no RVR for us. Smaller nations like the dutch, have an EU playerbase that is losing faith in the game because we cant help them as much as is needed due to this. We can not compete and therefore there is only a pvp aspect, to which it always just turns into the enemy running for literrally hours. or us getting massively ganked.
That is all pvp is, run and gank. run and gank. Very few players stay for a fair fight. those that do, like some swedes, I admire greatly and respect a lot. Thats fine and all, but I think youll find a lot of players grow tired of this when they are not part of some nation that can field the amount of players needed to counter this.
-
Just now, Jon Snow lets go said:
So you dont want to fight you just want to flip ports? Or what should I take out of this?
we tried that Jon Snow. I know you know nothing, hehe, about us dutch, But literally if we go out at prime there will be 5 or 6 of us capable of going to where there is some pvp. I have been urging more players to get ports to where we can get some more out to do stuff. But in terms of RVR there is no way. When you cant fill a port battle, let alone get around a screen of 3 times the amount of players you can bring why even try? What nation do you play for again? Because it doesnt seem like a small one.
-
Just now, Jon Snow lets go said:
Not saying the situation is great for you, but at least you can attack EU ports on weekends at around 1 or 2 pm your time.
If we want to retake a port we have to set our alarm to 4 am and start grinding hostility xd
when all the eu players are still online at server max? and we are outnumbered 10 to 1? We have tried actually. But my time right now is mountain, so perhaps your mean Eastern, at which case its still pretty bleak to be honest. like right now, 1:30pm est there are several danes sailing in our waters that we cant do much about since we dont have the amount of players they have.
-
1 hour ago, rediii said:
Did you just complained about nightflips?
its quite a bit more complicated than just that. You EU players always complained about night flips, but in the PVP2 server thats all there ever was. was night flips. Its less about that rediiii and more about we cant night flip them back and were unable to do anything about it since we were not given the chance to capture our own ports. But you dont read do you?
-
44 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:
Stop spreading disinformation. Jeheil stayed plainly in his thread that he was taking a break for a few weeks due to the holidays and nothing else. He also said he would be back and making further episodes of LTtK....
Trying to use others to make your argument is pretty silly.
this is also false, he said he was going on a vacation yes, but in his last two videos he stated that he had lost almost all interest in Naval Action due to real life and maintenance time period.
"weekday play is impossible with the shutdown"
so troll spotted? or just a liar, I do not know. And you should stop spreading *misinformation.*
-
45 minutes ago, Davos Seasworth said:
If there is a map wipe there needs to be a complete wipe. Nations like Russia, Poland, and Prussia would lose access to all their ships except the ones at Shroud Cay since we have no permanent port of our own. All the deep water ships we own are left in ports we have no idea if we will get back. If anything it punishes EU oriented clans in these nations who put the work in to forming the nations they have today.
actually this is completely false. You can access your ships in neutral ports.... and teleport to neutral ports... So no. If anything it allows these nations to carve out a better base of operation.
-
Every day it becomes clearer that you could literally give less shits about Aussies and Americans. Why the EU map wasnt wiped when the servers were merged so everyone got a fair shot is beyond me.
This is why. Take for example the Dutch right now, we have 2 port Battles happening within 2 hours of each other this Friday morning. The Dutch nation can field 25 players, but at the times of these port battles the aussies have either a 3am or 5am pb. which they wont show up to, and us Americans for the most part have jobs, and as such we cant show up to them.
To state the obvious I am aware that we can set our own timers, but the clans that owned those ports did not have that much gold because trade is pretty hard for actual Dutch players since there are so few of them after the cowards left for sweden and their time zone is bogged down by constant port camping by numbers far superior to their own.
Where this becomes a problem is that us Americans and Aussies from Global can not play the game to what you Devs claim can be played. We have swapped over a couple of ports to be ours by the generosity of the current dutch players, who are truly a very nice group of individuals. But we cant go take ports owned by other nations since before the merge since they all changed their port timers to ridiculous times. Which is fine, so long as Americans and Aussies both got the same opportunity. Which we didnt. We didnt get the same opportunity because the map wasnt wiped before the merge which was suggested often and just swept under the rug by the decision making team for Naval Action. It sure makes it feel like us Americans and Aussies are not wanted in this game to say the least.
Take for example Jeheil, who advertised your game, Naval Action, to an INCREDIBLE extent. A truly well done series that was fun to watch and inspired people to play the game. He quit doing the series, and the game, Naval Action, I believe all together. This was due to several things that basically came down to real life> game life, and the team running Naval Action made it to where if anything was to happen, it could only happen when he was sleeping, or at work. This is the case for most Aussies so I have been led to believe.
What I am calling for is a map wipe, like there should have been, and possibly looking at the maintenance schedule again. I believe then we could truly see action across all time zones, with a better blend for battles across these time zones, and possibly for players to have another chance at switching nations, testing new waters, etc.
Perhaps it is to late now, which would be a bummer to say the least, but please consider it to balance out our time zone problems.
-
14 hours ago, pepsifreddie said:
#3: Slave trades, a good source for clan to make money, a clan will get slavery trade routes upon purchasing the routes, however the ships will show up on the map, thus vulnerable to attack by other players, the routes can be defended by the players or buy purchasing extra ships of war to defend the running ship, you can use a class of ship to transport, beware! If another clan captures the ship, you will lose that trade route, so its best to send out a small fleet of trade ships at the same time by upgrading your fleet sizes for the traders. you can have up to 5 defending ships.
I do not know this word. slave trade? Do you mean Labor Hours?
Seriously though, what do you think labor hours are? hahahaha.
From a company standpoint they could never add slavery into the game on the grounds of making a lot of people very angry.
-
Base stats of ship 1)
Broadside Weight- 765lb/880
Speed- 12.3 kt
Turn Rate- 2.46
Side HP- 6500
Side Thickness- 68
Base Stats of Ship 2)
Broadside Weight- 669pd/876pd
Speed- 12.0 kt
Turn Rate- 2.34
Side HP- 6525
Side Thickness- 71
Between these 2 ships, what should have the higher BR, or should they be the same?
-
1
-
-
Orr just any of the top 3 nations are disabled to switch to.
You complaining people left to the dutch is irritating to me on a degree that makes me have irrational thoughts. We have always been small, prior to that there was no chance of us having a port battle fleet, and our economy was dead due to swedes and danes camping our regions because we didnt have even close to the numbers to compete. Still dont. But you know., whatever. hello kitty the dutch i guess.
sorry for my rant, truly I am. But you can see why switching nations shouldnt be limited to time, rather just take it away from larger nations so smaller nations like Prussia and the Dutch can grow.
-
2 hours ago, jodgi said:
You don't copy/paste?
its easier to tell clan mates 3 digits for speed purposes
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, maturin said:
Heel =/= list.
however as your pointed out yourself.
23 minutes ago, maturin said:owards the side you are flooding on (port), you just heel more to starboard. If you come about on the other tack, then of course the water will shift, and you will heel more to port.
So the only effect of flooding should be to increase heel angles, whatever they would naturally be on that point of sail.
and in terms of the titanic, it was proven that her compartments doors, which had windows FAILED. She tilted upward with her stern. I only pointed that out because it related to what YOU said
25 minutes ago, maturin said:Now ships would often sink bow-first or stern-first, but this was not predictable. I just read the account of a schooner that was rammed by a steamer near the mainmast. She sank by the bow, and the stern stayed afloat for hours. There was probably air trapped below or something.
6 minutes ago, maturin said:There's nothing incorrect about the game. It's how a sailing ship would sink in calm water, if flooding gradually from multiple shot-holes with no sail set. Most of the time.
I guess the wind in game is fake, and i dont have my sails set ever then? Also in storm battles which are a bit unrealistic in game, the ship sink vertically. There is no
27 minutes ago, maturin said:they roll heavily and lose stability. Flooding ships should have exaggerated reactions to waves in the game and possibly even capsize.
Thank you for your great insight Maturin! I believe you to be correct on how listing effects ships, so lets implement it into the game!
-
1 minute ago, maturin said:
There are no compartments or rooms. On a frigate, any shot-holes would cause flooding on the lower deck, which has no compartments of any kind, except flimsy cabins at the stern which would be struck down into the hold. So the water falls onto a wide-open, uninterrupted deck. From there, water runs down to bilges, where it collects at the lowest point of the ship.
The hold does have a few rooms, such as the bread room, sail room, spirit room, magazine, etc. But all of these are placed symmetrically, and the midships area is left open for barrels etc. So a ship floating on an even keel would be disposed to sink on an even keel.
Let's think logically about what actually happens. If you take a shot-hole beneath the waterline to port, that logically means that you were heeling to starboard. The water will flow to the starboard side of the hold. So you don't list towards the side you are flooding on (port), you just heel more to starboard. If you come about on the other tack, then of course the water will shift, and you will heel more to port.
So the only effect of flooding should be to increase heel angles, whatever they would naturally be on that point of sail.
Now ships would often sink bow-first or stern-first, but this was not predictable. I just read the account of a schooner that was rammed by a steamer near the mainmast. She sank by the bow, and the stern stayed afloat for hours. There was probably air trapped below or something.
What actually happens to sinking ships is that they roll heavily and lose stability. Flooding ships should have exaggerated reactions to waves in the game and possibly even capsize. And sometimes the bow or stern should sink faster, but that could be randomized, and not too common.
"The angle of list is the degree to which a vessel heels (leans or tilts) to either port or starboard. A listing vessel is stable and at equilibrium, but the distribution of weight aboard (often caused by uneven loading or flooding) causes it to heel to one side." Wikipedia
"Certainly some ships wouldn't list because their hulls didnt have such compartmentalization on purpose or not. " ~ me
Please read my post before commenting and an increased heel is by definition listing.
This would cause a gradual increase of water intake as more holes fall below the water line increasing the effect potentially parabolically, depending on where the holes are on the ship.
Certainly your point on how ships sink due to taking on water by the bow or stern, take the Titanic for example, and the way it split due to its own stress from its angle, is a very good point and insight on how this should be implemented! Regardless however, the way ships sink in game currently is completely incorrect.
-
9 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:
All you need a room, funny thing I was like why would I want a list of what's on the ship when I saw this post, you get that when you go check the cargo/board. Than I read and was like OHHHH LIST....I think this would cause it to sink faster and they all ready back to sinking to fast with the new wind profile and leeway it's a pain to get to most ships that sink.
all the more purpose to use battle sails in my opinion.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Hethwill said:
First step towards this is that structure ( that middle bar thingy which represents the beams, main frames, the keel, the bottom, etc ) may not be repaired at sea - for gameplay purposes, may not be repaired in battle instance. OW timescale repairs ok.
or implementing the idea of hard and soft health at the very least.
-
8 hours ago, Jean Ribault said:
Probably makes more sense to add listing if you combine it with the removal of the visual health bars of the enemy ship (as has been suggested before). Then in battle you know where to target more based upon actual visual feedback of the ship, instead of looking at the health bars. I wonder if that increases the complexity or difficulty of battle to much for the average player though?
Oh, and yeah, OneEyedSnake for president, I'm all in too.
I didnt even think about removing health bars. I probably wouldnt simply because the listing would be gradual and with proper repairs wouldnt be too visual until the structure is very low on health. As for being too complex, i dont think it would be either way.
Also, thanks
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Wynkyn de Worde said:
I would like to see One Eye replace Admin as the voice of the devs. He is a deep thinker who can see a positve future for this game.
my vote was for you. but thank you for the flattery
-
1 minute ago, Farrago said:
FINALLY someone actually gets this game and understands what is needed more than anything else! OneEye, you will save us. You ARE our hero.
.- . <3 much love
-
1
-
-
With the introduction of heeling to such an extent I believe it to be time that we have realistic listing models. Most ships in this game should list when taking on more water on one side than the other due to their compartments, rooms, etc. Certainly some ships wouldn't list because their hulls didnt have such compartmentalization on purpose or not.
Listing would add a new dynamic to the game in the way that leaks become critical should they be ignored. As the ship lists new leaks would occur as old holes in the ships submerge, escalating the situation further. As the ships list further cannons would be disabled as they go under water, or are elevated too much to be of any use to the battle.
Further graphic development is also a plus, as sinking ships currently just look stupid as they sink flat. A listing ship would truly be a more REALISTIC, and graphically pleasing element to the game.
-
7
-
-
either is fine if you build it as a tank for pve. the ocean is a better tank, so id probably go with the ocean. its also slightly cheaper.
but if you hate a sluggish ship then the santi has a larger broadside weight and does turn better than any other 1st rate right now.
-
my guess is some sort of schooner. what throws me off is the name, combined with the Austria-Hungary Flag. I am curious as well
but if we could put ports into our US time zones, not only by us, but by other nations us US dutch players could attack, because we have enough on in US evening to have a decent pb. not full, but definitely a decent size with some chance of winning.
Map Wipe
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
freetowns are a death trap and you know it. especially when you dont have that many players.