Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Raekur

Members
  • Content Count

    481
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

266 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I am still puzzled at the fact that when multiple people who span half the planet are still the ones at fault for having the connection issue. Got to love the "Not me" attitude.
  2. Actually Ink, it occurred to myself and several clan mates just yesterday while in the patrol zone. No less than 6 of us loss complete control of our ships, I personally got to watch my ship literally slowly spin in a circle while still moving the same direction. This is an issue with the server and not the players this time. During the entire time I was able to discuss the situation with the other members of my clan on teamspeak. The situation developed first as my cannons would not fire, shortly after I was unable to change course. After decades in the tech field I know the first response to an issue is to believe that your network is stable and that the client is the issue. This is not the case.
  3. Raekur

    fort and mortar

    From what some have mentioned, Towers now fire further than the MB so doing a solo assault is impossible unless you have someone willing to take fire from the tower. Some people feel it is acceptable that the MB should have someone there to cover for them instead of making it where the MB can be self reliant in its task just like every other ship is, it is also believed that the MB should require a spotter on a different vessel (hence the reason the devs will not fix the targeting circle once it reaches land). I do not agree with any of this crap as there is no reason for any ship to have to rely on another to do its job.
  4. Ok, so far we have disproved two possible theories, well done all. I think the most disturbing part about this investigation is no longer what we are investigating but the accusations of it being either false or fake news by the admins. If it was occurring the specific method would be reported by a white knight long time ago. This is not occurring. There is is no safe exit.Stop spreading false rumours. To let you know, yes this in fact IS occurring and THREE of my clan mates watched a player vanish after being tagged. So that will rule out them being out of visual range and as tested prior it was not due to a mission. So before you start accusing the players that are trying to find a solution of doing something wrong, you may want to actually assist in finding a solution. This issue IS an issue and to try to brush it off or bury it could easily be seen as either condoning the action or wishing to ignore it until it "goes away".
  5. Raekur

    Can't close outpost

    This oddity may be due to people inadvertently deleting ships by not paying attention when removing outposts.
  6. Ok, thank you for investigating and ruling out one method of how this is occurring. A fair number of players know this situation to be true, so the next question is how is it happening. What other theories can be tested and ruled out? I think the hard disconnect concept has yet to be tested. What about using the wait timer and cancel twice before letting it continue, create possible multiple entries in the db for the client disconnect timer. Or would it overwrite the prior ones?
  7. A simple query of the data base to compare player location and log off time should also be able to confirm this. This was the reason I suggested that as soon as someone pulls this little stunt that the people chasing should send in the report, this should record not only the time of the incident but also the location or at least the close proximity. If it is in fact bringing up the options again to reissue the cancel, then maybe just a code fix to remove the prior command may resolve this.
  8. Have you been able to pull missions from a hostile port? Thank you for your input on the matter. Perhaps as the issue becomes more public a fix will be implemented. The issue yesterday they actually had stated a the countdown timer and the person vanished before it finished. That is how bad this issue is.
  9. True, but when are you able to get a mission is open world not near a port (yesterday's issue) or as today right next to an enemy port?
  10. Today in tribunal there was a post regarding a WTF player vanishing while being pursued. The person was within visual range and is not a situation of reaching the boundary of rendering. This is the second occurrence of this happening in two days. The official answer was that without video there is no case. While this reply is normal it can not be the only thing that can be done. It would be foolish for the moderators to expect every single player to have the hardware, skill set, and capability to video record their entire game or every time they started pursuing a player. I am sure without even asking that some players lack at least one aspect of what is needed to do so. So I offer the following process as it is the only thing that every player should be able to do. If a target vanishes while being pursued use F11 to report it as that will log your current position and time. A simple query against the database should reveal any player that logged off near that time and position. This should also show if that person would have been within range of the group making the report. An investigation of this manner should not take more then 10 minuets ( I know this from personal experience as I do actions like this on a daily basis at my job). How this reported action is accomplished is a matter of debate currently and may require some testing of different possible theories. While freely discussing how it is done may increase the number of occurrences for a short time, it will also speed up a solution should the developers decide on a way to fix it.
  11. While this is what should happen you are forgetting one thing, you cant build ships when any attempts to move materials to the shipyard are intercepted and sunk by 14.2 speed raiders. Chasing them also is a gamble as they just run until any heavy hitters are so far away that they will be unable to join any engagement and that is IF they even find it. It is rather difficult to turn away raiders that have consistently shown up in ships that are at least one rank higher and are able to assault 3 different areas at the same time in ships that far exceed the capabilities of the defending forces. The only good thing is that over time the advantages that the raiders have will slowly diminish as the defenders slowly increase their capabilities. But this process is costly due to losses sustained while trying to achieve any advancements. Russia vs Britain right now is a losing battle for Britain simply due to economics. One of russia's ports alone generates over 10 million on a daily basis and it is done when the server is quiet and there are few on that can intercept their traders. British traders are on during times that the russian, danish, swede, pirate, and even spanish raiders seem to be online and are hunting running the entire coastline from tumbado all the way to great corn. So your solution of just run out and attack them seems like a good concept, it is in fact doing exactly what they want. It is expending ships that are now hard to replace vs a nation that can easily replace any losses in seconds. So the only way to actually protect british traders would be to start having a large number of escorts to each trader. While this is true in a tactical sense it is not exactly the way most want to play the game spending HOURS just sailing along and accomplishing NOTHING for their own characters advancement. Add to that the question of how many escorts do you assign to each trader that happens to be going different directions? Since the raiders have shown up in fleets of 7 wasa's and a herc, what do you send with each trader to combat that when as a nation you might barely have that number and are very reluctant to commit what would be your port battle fleet to the lowly task of escort. How do you convince about 10 to 15 players to stop playing the game how they want to escort some traders for a few hours, then multiply that by maybe 6 as you have resources that need to be moved to different locations. It is not as easy a task as you seem to imply. Right now what you have is players logging in, checking combat news and then logging off to go do something else. This will continue until the population either drops to pre release levels and lower or players will simply accelerate the issue by changing nation to the stronger side. If the devs wish to stop doing their best impressions of Bethesda and actually think of the game tactically, MOVE the damn capitals to locations that open up the map instead of crowding multiple nations into a cluster leaving about 30-40 ports wide open for whoever can get their first (which every time will be the impossible nations since they do not have a core location to protect) and instead place capitals evenly across the map and drop the pathetic excuse of "well this is how it was historically". History may have been how it was, but history shows there were a hell of a lot more than 100 people defending a region. While it may not solve the core issue of A-Holes who love to seal club, it will at least lessen the frequency of it occurring.
  12. Since a system usually is applied to both servers, perhaps modifying this to where the lock only applies to the attacker's side only. This way it would only be used on the war server when the attacker feels like he does not need assistance.
  13. An alliance system may work but how do you avoid the issues that stemmed from the last time it was used. Pirates constantly complaining that nations were ganging up on them, that they should get the same ability as the nations do? What is to prevent alts from being moved to a nation that is to be the target of an attack thus preventing them from forming an alliance? What is to prevent an alliance from being formed and people switching to the nation thus making it the largest? Players from allied nations being able to still attack each other, if they do what punishment is dealt to the offending party? A warning is not enough to curb such activity. Perhaps the introduction of a nation less group where the offending party can be banished to for 2 weeks after which they are placed back into their original nation or prior to the elapsing of the 2 weeks they can switch to a different nation There were times that a nation wanted a temporary alliance as a prelude to an actual one (waiting for the vote cycle to come around) and other members of the nation would continue to attack. No real solution to this one except open up communications between nations once again, preferably a mail system that can include any player regardless of nation. Voting for an alliance, what is to prevent alts from being used to undermine the desired outcome? The only way I see it is that the only votes permitted are by the clan leaders. While this may seem unfair to the casual / solo player not part of a clan, it would prevent alts from being moved into a nation for the sole purpose of influencing the outcome of the voting process.
  14. While I agree that players don't have the privilege of knowing the outcome of a tribunal, I think that some indication of action being taken would go a long way to show that the rules are being enforced. On a Freelance server i used to play on the admins were very forthcoming with the punishments being levied against a player for their actions. This not only showed that the rules were enforced it also showed that the admins were not playing favorites. While mistakes can happen and the occasional hits on friendlies may occur, blatant intentional acts should be made public so that future incidents do not occur. Laws that are not enforced publicly are not seen as laws, and mistrust and suspected corruption will replace any respect that is given.
  15. While in port, hit N to bring up the ship list, click on the ship you want to arm or change weapons on. Click on the gold gear. From that same list you can also access the ship hold to add repairs and cargo as well. A ship can being either Docked, Main, or Fleet.
×
×
  • Create New...