Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Farrago

Members
  • Content Count

    1,399
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Farrago last won the day on August 13 2019

Farrago had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,167 Excellent

2 Followers

About Farrago

  • Rank
    Commander

Profile Information

  • Location
    : I inexplicably have fallen into a life of crime as a Pirate.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,126 profile views
  1. I'm well aware that there are descriptions of the nations available on player selection, but thanks for the screen shots. My post DID NOT propose that a player should choose a nation based on who owns the most ports. My post proposes that it is counterproductive and bad for new player experience and retention to hide the true situation from them until after they have made their choice. Some will choose what appears to be easiest (with the most ports). This game will probably not retain that type of player anyway. But why inadvertently mislead them into making a choice based on static written descriptions that may or may not be true when they are making the choice? If a player wants to play the easiest nation, let them. If they want to play the hardest nation, let them. But hiding the true situation so that their choice is based on false assumptions helps no one.
  2. 25 Jan about 07:45 UTC in battle with a Loki. I'm not sure what you define as long. I think this was about 15 seconds. I sent a F11. Nickname is the same.
  3. @admin it would be helpful for new players to be able to see the map along with port ownership and starting ports PRIOR to them having to select a nation. It is not good for new player retention to have them be surprised after joining a nation. Thanks.
  4. I’ll make a post in suggestions but They really should include a current port ownership map on the screen where players select a nation.
  5. It’s been suggested over and over including the option to limit it to a preapproved list of names. As far as I know, it has never been addressed by the devs. This ability would make a hell of a DLC.
  6. Note that Naval Clock is not a book but a permanent mod which means it can be installed on just one ship. The three most desirable books are Gunnery Encyclopedia (better accuracy, reload speed, and penetration), Art of Ship Handling (better speed and turning) and Book of Five Rings (better crew survivability). Each of these are crafted from a collection of specific other books and it’s a good idea to know these components because you don’t want to read the sub book if you plan on using it in the recipe for the better book. Use the map resource recommended above to find out the components. These sub books can cost more than a million each.
  7. That would be great however it seems like a player instructed open water AI would open a whole new coding project and devs seem to indicate that such game overhauls are not going to happen anymore in this version. Honestly, I think the true fix to a trading economy is impossible because it would involve some aspect of all of the following and they’re not going to happen: 1. Clans could not create resources in ports where they don’t naturally occur. You can’t build ships with the resources of just a couple of really close ports. This would force the movement of ship building materials. 2. Make mods buildable but only in capital ports but remove the magic upgrade chest to hold them. Put them out on the water too. This would combat the influence of ALTs as well. 3. Make ports have needs of basics and luxuries to keep them stable and happy. The transport of trade goods and protection of shipping becomes important to the nation as a whole and not just a source of independent wealth. Economic warfare becomes a thing. Unstable ports become neutral susceptible to capture or use as a Freeport. This will put pressure on potential zerg nations. Once a port’s needs have been met, the price of that good should fall — not to 1 real — but fall. 4. Devs manually remove short and yet still extremely profitable trade runs. 5. The money supply, as influenced by unending AI supply and unending AI consumption of trade goods needs to be monitored and squeezed as necessary. Note that, in my opinion, such changes as I described will make it more interesting to be a trader and attract more players.
  8. As someone who does a lot of solo trader hunting, I would love the ability to send trade ship prizes to port after capture. But I wonder if that would instead be the new exploit: I’m a Pirate. My Russian alt trader leaves Vera Cruz loaded with goods. 5 minutes later he surrenders to my Pirate who sends the prize to Mortimer. Bam. 5 minutes = big bucks. It would be nice to see the amount of time required to dump cargo increased. I capture a lot of empty ships.
  9. Sort of related: forts and towers which are damaged/destroyed in a port battle should require the defender to repair them later. Sometimes prolonged siege (repeated multiple port battles) needs to be the answer.
  10. This would be good. I’d love to see more frigates in the water and real captains sailing them.
  11. While I agree with your post, it is incorrect in one thing: Loki do have chain.
  12. I get what you’re saying: Kent’s Bolithio does feel like lighter, easier reading. I’m unusual and just getting around to Aubrey-Maturin. I’m about 2/3 way through Master and Commander. I find it tedious at times and have yet to decide that Aubrey’s my hero. The guy’s a self involved ass and not a particularly complicated one at that. But the jury is still out. Anyway... Alexander Kent... have you ever read any Louis L’Amour westerns? It’s sort of like that. The tales are wild, the heroes are real, the villains dastardly and there has been some research involved to give you a feel for the era. Fun.
  13. Makes sense tho didn’t they nerf leeway to almost nothing after testing it. I’d love to see it back.
  14. There should be an incentive to surrendering but not one where you get to keep the ship UNLESS the player you are surrendering to agrees. Idea: Surrender brings up a trade window with the capturer and the captive. On conclusion of a successful trade, whatever the captive has left (possibly the ship and any remaining cargo) is transported back to nearest friendly or neutral port. Obviously if he gives up the ship, all of his cargo is lost as well. This would allow the capturer to be paid a ransom in cargo, the ship AND cargo, some cargo, reals, doubloons, or victory marks. A minimal reward in reals is given to the former captive based on the number of crew lives he saved by not having them go down with the ship.
×
×
  • Create New...