Farrago
-
Posts
1,569 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Farrago
-
-
1 hour ago, Greysteak said:
I don't know about king of the shallows but I've done a little pvp in one a while ago and remember it as ranking on the more fun side of the scale.
Brigs and Rattlesnakes (both regular and Navy) are very fun to sail but tough against some of the heavier shallow ships. 6th rate events would be a blast.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, admin said:
Dont keep neglected ports in your portfolio. If Raiders see a neglected port they take it back. You have a counter - invest. If you invest more than others your port is safe. I know some don't like it. But i don't like lazy port owners too. Dont capture the port if you dont want to invest in it. Leave it to other nations.
Perhaps if a port is captured by neutrals, it should then able to be recaptured by any nation, not just those within the regular close distance of being able to create a port battle. Surely that will spur more desirable PVP activity rather than just PVE grind activity for one or two nations. It might help shake up the map a bit.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, admin said:
How do you define a dead clan. Mathematically?
It seems like there are numerous ways and obviously you could adjust the numbers if you saw it was going to cause too much disruption but...
How about if clan officers average less than 3 hours per week in game for 3 out of 4 weeks? So, if it happens for 3 weeks, they’d receive an in game email telling them to get sailing or risk their port turning neutral.
-
I believe it’s still in game that your chances increase if you craft in a capturable port.
-
Rather than a new player receiving one Hercules note upon completion of the final exam, they receive a Hercules DLC which can be redeemed every 24 hours as a regular DLC but only for a period of one week.
Too often new players get the ship and are still not experienced enough to not lose it. Let them use it enough, really learn to sail it, and maybe even buy the DLC after their week is up.
Obviously this should not be retroactive for captains who have already passed the exams.
-
Tax the rich! (more)
-
33 minutes ago, Maculosa said:
LOL
A Le Req with an Indiaman... when you want to be slow and stay slow.
-
37 minutes ago, Despe said:
mine i 17kn lynx too
With a Lynx or TLynx, I think the only upgrade you really need to keep from getting caught and staying caught is an alarm clock. I think the only time I’ve been caught on a run was while AFK.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Never said:
You wouldn't see those players asking for compensations if they lost those ships in a PB, they were made for that and now can't be used for that.
Why?
There has been no announcement that port battles were going to be restricted to only builds that you don’t own.
Maybe your enemies also jumped the gun in their rush to build meta so they will be sailing the same ships.
I suspect you are not new to the game, but when Devs say numbers are not final and they create a thread for feedback and testing reports, things are going to change. They also always repeat “Expect the worst.”I apologize for singling you out for my reply but all these demands for compensation are ridiculous, especially following a week of one of the biggest wealth and power bonanzas in game by captains just safely planting 3 test flags in exchange for a wood chest, admirals chest and doubloons!
Fair sails. I suspect captains who were able to invest so quickly and heavily into what they thought would be meta will do just fine.
-
4
-
-
Sounds like a great idea and an opportunity for in-game fun for both the teachers and the pupils. It’s a fine example of captains creating content in a game that is far more fun when captains add their creativity to the mix. And it may result in some better sailors as well!
I wish the Academy much success.
-
3
-
-
-
All new woods — and all trade goods — should be carried by AI traders. The ports receiving the new woods should change around. The info on which ports might be receiving that day would be in the trade tool. This would create PVE hotspots which creates PVP hotspots as we’ve seen happens during special ship events. Then those special woods would have to make it to your ship building port. More game opportunities!
-
5
-
-
Not speaking to anyone in particular...
Is there a reason that your ships are obsolete but your enemy magically is not in the same situation?
Obsolete vs Obsolete might make for some pretty good battles. In fact, if you try, you might even forget your ship is obsolete.
-
10
-
-
26 minutes ago, Salty Banana said:
I propose that the claiming of combat marks from the daily patrol zone is automated
- The current version requires manual claiming of the combat marks. What is wrong with this is that players often forget to claim their combat marks for a whole variety of reasons - intend to return the PZ later with friends, had to log out and wasn't able to make it back into game before maintenance or they simply got into a conversation sailing back from the PZ, or were asked to come help a friend in battle and simply forgot
-
The rationale is that the combat marks were earned by the players actions in combat in the Patrol Zone and not by remembering to click on a UI once in port - while it is the responsibility of the captian to claim their combat marks, it isn't a positive experience to realize you messed up and your hours of hard work will get no reward - this can be particularly demoralizing for newer captains who we want to see come back for more pvp, rather than subconsciously think it was a negative experience and not do the PZ anymore
also if a captain claims his combat marks out of fear he might forget later, and then friends ask if he wants to come join them in the patrol zone, he might decline since he has already closed his rewards for the day -
Proposal on changes (there are two):
(1) when a player has done enough damage in the Patrol Zone, upon leaving the Patrol Zone a window pops up asking them if they want to claim their combat marks NOW - they can do so or click on "LATER"
or
(2) the server database already keeps track of everybody;'s damage done in the Patrol Zone - script it so that at maintenance the database tells the server who gets how many combat marks and sends them to the player's DLC/gifts/rewards UI and the captain can claim them from there
Please vote in the Admin’s thread. It’s unclear how much he will be reading outside those thread. This suggestion is there.
-
Is the day's PVP Zone location somewhere there in the data you use? It would be kind of cool to be able to check the location without having to go through the whole game login process.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, jodgi said:
True.
What about an opt-in chat that no player has activated by default?
If people use an opt-in chat to rage-type, would it matter?
Yes. You’d think if I have to turn on protractor on the map each and every time it shouldn’t be too hard to make it where I have to turn on Global Chat to use it.
-
7 hours ago, Comrade FrosT said:
Thanks for existing.
You’re welcome. It’s usually a pleasure.
-
On 6/1/2020 at 1:22 AM, admin said:
Caption?
-
3
-
-
13 minutes ago, Macjimm said:
Not impossible. Restoring one's reputation must involve harsh penalties. If the fine can be worked off in hours, or a few days, it would not be a deterrent. 5k Doubloons would be nothing.
5,000 Dubs is about 1.5 million Reals
50,000 Dubs ~ 15 million Reals
500,000 Dubs ~ 150 million Reals.
150mil Reals can be earned in less than a few weeks of trading. 15mil Reals is less than the cost of some ships and can be earned in a couple days of trading. The penalty to restore Karma needs to be strict, not just a cost of doing business. The point is to create a disincentive for unwanted actions, not to make a pay-as-you-grief system.
To buy back NRP Karma a second time the cost should get much more expensive, and perhaps also include loss of dock space and outpost slots.
I’ve never seen 150 million reals and only had 15 million for a very brief time In the past. I know that some players have much more and some clans have much much more in their warehouses. But I wonder if the players with that sort of wealth are the same players who might want or need to reset their karma. They’re probably players very dedicated to trading or grinding AI elite fleets and marketing the rich spoils. How much wealth does the wealthiest clan have? 5 billion? I truly don’t know but 5 billion is only 33 of your expensive resets using your pricing. And I don’t think we could assume that the price of doubloons would remain so “low” when adding a whole new demand use for them.
Listen, I get it. You don’t want to make it easy to regain karma. I don’t either. But at some point the punishment has to fit the crime and if the crime is just declaring war or living a chaotic evil sort of life in game, we have to be able to restore some normal relations or changing alliances.
-
13 minutes ago, Macjimm said:
This thread is morphing into a pro-pirate topic. Admittedly it relates to NRP Karma, but perhaps we should start a new thread.
NRP Karma must apply to all players, including pirates, otherwise it allows pirates to join battles and grief. The solution, that is sought by this change, will only be happening in those battles without pirates. Anyone who wishes to continue joining battles and causing problems can simply become part of the pirate nation.
Also: If pirates become more than just the name of another nation, there must be limitations to balance the special pirate privileges. No port conquest. No 1st rates.
Also: The cost to buy back damaged Karma must be extravagant. 5,000 Doubloons is trivial. Such a meager sum is a trifle and is not a deterrent. 500,000 Doubloons is more reasonable.
I pointed out in my original proposal that giving the ability to be enemies to all without some sort of negative or constraints on Pirates is not a good solution. I’m all in favor of reasonable constraints and other elements to make Pirates unique. Many ideas have been floated in the past.
500,000 doubloons?!? They might as well just make it impossible to join third party battles because that would make it impossible to repair karma for all but the very richest players. Perhaps there’s a number somewhere between mine and 100x that would work. I’d say go ahead with that rule of not joining if we had a lot of players but often, joining battles in-progress is the only action available. Do you define anytime one joins a third party battle as griefing? I know there are instances when it is, but it hasn’t been my experience that it is always like that.
-
2
-
-
I see a chance to finally (again) have a special Pirate mechanic: a Pirate should be able to be and remain enemies with everyone except other Pirates, no matter whom you happen to help or attack on any given day.
But admittedly this would be a big advantage for Pirates without a corresponding negative.
But another thought...
Perhaps this could be an opportunity to introduce letters of marque into the game. By default, everyone gets a letter for every other nation. That’s where we are now anyway. If you — a third party — enter a battle between two nations, you lose the letter. You would then have to buy another letter or marque for that nation in order to restore relations. It should be expensive, but not impossibly so. Say 5000 doubloons. Repeated necessary purchases would go up in price. Additional, higher levels of letters could be sold for higher prices which grant additional benefits with that other nation.
-
1
-
-
I am warming to the idea if — as I think I understood admin to say — it’s a first step to a Reputation system. That’s something I’ve wanted for a long time.
I would prefer it to be a good or bad reputation you earn or fix over time rather than it being just pay a penalty and it’s then all good.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Anolytic said:Anyone who wants to be practically invulnerable better just bring a friend from another nation sailing with them while raiding. You see a gank squad or somebody chasing you that you don't wanna fight, just attack each other and you then have a better than even chance that your pursuers won't be able to join either side of the battle at all.
Although under your scenario, after the two friends have done this once, they will no longer be able to mutually aid each other as they will have bad karma for that opposing nation.
-
54 minutes ago, admin said:
Of course..but we have unbiased solutions for national chat but we don't have unbiased solutions for global.
We have ignore. Communication can be disabled. Does not work for some reason.
- Player excites another player (deliberately or by accident)
- Another player crosses the line and gets reported
- Another player gets banned in game chat
- That player then CRIES harassment by devs/mods, claims unprofessionalism and freedom of speech - we get negativity on forums or in reviews
-
Community CAN police those reports, by reporting them to valve as breaking community guidelines or being off topic, BUT They don't. And we are basically doomed whatever we do.
- When we act on reports (which supposedly should be supported by the community) community does not help us when the chat banned players complain in public. And blames us for heavy handed moderation
- When we dont act on reports - community blames us for toxicity of the chat
The effects on motivation of the dev team on reading reporting is real
Toxicity leaves an real impression on new players. Toxicity is mentioned A LOT in reviews. Some here suggest moderating and banning?Ok.. but those people then complain in reviews.
You can save global and battle chat, but this will take real action showing real result.
For example
This guy is claiming we remove accounts (he was chat banned for illegal name)
https://steamcommunity.com/id/ray270382/recommended/1307440/ - 130 people found this review helpful
What did you all do to stop such reports as a community? Did you flag it to valve? (there is a button to report it as breaking rules). Why should i police chat if you don't help me. For me it is 10x easier and safer to just remove the global.I certainly don’t want your team to have to devote hours to dealing with toxic chat. You’ve got more important things to do for this game. But communication in a multiplayer game is important. I feel we’d lose more by losing Global Chat than we’d gain from less mentions of toxicity in Steam reviews.
Is the idea of player moderators completely ruled out? Surely there are players who spend a lot of hours in game and have good reputations that you could tap. I’ve found in moderating online groups ever since way back in the Compuserve days that just a word from a moderator often quells the problem at least temporarily. If it doesn’t work, a one day mute sends a message. Repeat offenders can be muted longer or even outright chat banned. Usually the offense is so clear cut — if the rules are clear — that things don’t have to be decided by committee.
Anyway, I’m not trying to tell you your job, but it would be a shame to lose Global Chat because a few bad apples can’t carry themselves in a civilized way.
Timber Feedback Thread - PINNED
in Patch Feedback and General discussions
Posted
I agree. The prices are insane. I play at least 10-15 hours per week, sometimes a lot more and will never be able to afford them.
But on the other hand, you just described a lot of targets too.