Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Aquillas

Members2
  • Content Count

    1,129
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Aquillas

  1. Maybe, with less Dutch gankers around KPR, there will be less counter offensives around Tiburon, and it will be less difficult to group British players for providing mutual screening helps in some coordinated offensive(s) against the <Not to be disclosed> nation. Targets to be set by diplomatic channels. I know that RVR and PVP are not the same thing, I know that a RVR agreement is not deemed to cover PVP, even against traders, etc., we all know that. I know that a new player who is daily attacked by some nation in his capital will never go screening for this nation the
  2. The most important thing is to fulfill your objectives in game. The one who wants to join a clan just for having RVR capacity have the choice among a dozen of big enough clans in GB. The one who wants to make sure of having PVP in a strong and serious organization just have to read above, the most serious, competitive, constructive and challenging ones. There are several, among which BASTD. Players who whish to have PVP in a fun, seriousless and anyway competitive band can join BASTARDS. After an evaluation period during which we will check if the candidate is serious or not (mandato
  3. We just need the same rules for the loot than for the ship: available for the one who got the "kill", unless this one makes it "available for all". Present non-rules are just promoting bad behaviours, hate in the same faction, division between players who should work together, all that being at the opposite of the behavior of most players. And also contributing to erase the player base numbers, because these outlaw rules are really the contrary of attractive.
  4. May be, port battle limits (BR), should be daily adjusted during server maintenance, taking into account the max/average game populations during the last 7 days. A new routine to write for developpers, but this could be an exit way from this RVR max BR concern. Self adapting to the future population. We could reach again 25v25 when the population will rise-up again (saying optimistic).
  5. Another way would be to remove the priorities between county capitals and related ports. But this means that all crafting developed ports will become vulnerable. And none of them are fortified (at the contrary than real life). So OK, but this is a complete redo of port development rules and of RVR. With such a system, each nation should be allowed to attack a limited quantity of ports, in the same list whatever the port in which you are taking hostility missions. Otherwise, it would be too easy to attack one port, jump 4 and attack another one, jump 4 again for the next atttack,
  6. Is there a next update? I was told about a future update.
  7. Is this one small enough (I've smaller! )
  8. N'insiste pas, c'est incurable. En pratique: Moi y en a dire à la bank de Kingston Port Royal: ji veux des g'os billets. Eux donné moi un bassin...
  9. There might be a form of reaction when some"big" nation will take a really important port to another one, leaving the smaller nation without practical solution. Santiago, George Town are not really important. Losing them hurts, but this will not wipe a nation out of the game. But the loss of some particular port in game could do it. Are we ready to see several dozens of players going out in a day? Are developers ready to take this risk without anticipation and without mitigating the risk? Mode SURVIVAL ON, or OFF? Why is this game based on this risky RVR only? Why is the possession
  10. This"gank" is far from being the worst one in this game (BR 250/270). But that's true that BR values should be reviewed totally. For instance, how to explain the BR 180 of the pirate frigate, vs 215 for the Hermione (which allows a quasi permanent reinforcement of the pirate frigate side in case of 1v1, denying 1v1)
  11. Agree for that, if really developers want to keep on port bonus. In addition, a completely developed port should be defended by fortresses. Having fortress is not limited by the deep of the port or by the local crafmanship / industries. When you develop a port IRL, you defend it by fortifications, like Brest in France, Plymouth in GB, Scapa Flow or Pearl Arbor. Please give freedom to players! This will give players to game!
  12. Nice to see this battle, especially for captains who are desperately searching for some motivation to come back in game... Thanks. Next time, can you please register too the instructions given on the Team Speak by the PB commander. This, and combat maps, are the post interesting parts of Port Battles. Thanks in advance!
  13. LOL! Please remove any kind of protection for new players in capital areas. We have too many of these in game.
  14. They will know it, either before the raid or during it. Otherwise, no PVP out of the raid. The will have at least 30 mins to organize the interception of raiders on their return way, and probably more. But I wonder how a small group of players can get out of a big nation main port (in terms of tax income) without being scrapped out, losing the Indianman and all their ships. In other terms, I wonder how the raid cannot be made for the only benefit of the big nation, which was initially the raided one. Want to see that on YouTube...
  15. My reason is simple. Only Wasas, Trincomalees and DLC ships can be seen in OW. Along with Surprises in shallow water area. Remove permits to allow diversity. Maybe rebalance of some ships will be necessary too.
  16. Remove permits for all ships below and including 4th rates. Add systematic permits, but not linked to any form of rng system, for all ships above and including 3rd rates.
  17. This was never refrained earlier in game. There is no game mechanic to stop or limit that. Such exploits are clearly encouraged in game by (no) rules of the game and by the "jurisprudence" of this Tribunal. Precedent cases where unpunished. This strategy (losing fights against NPC) is encouraged and is a valid one in Naval Action. Players who don't like it, as I don't, must live with it anyway or quit game. As I did.
  18. Violence can never solve your problem. Especially if you don't strike hard enough.
  19. Probably because of poor rules of the game, poor protection of casual player base which pushed them out, exploits again and again, unprevented and unpunished (i.e. encouraged). All that made the fair players go play something else, waiting with less and less hope day after day some change, and getting answered by another proposal for a new DLC... There is so little ways to get fun here that the remaining players try "everything", in fact anything, for getting something to do. May be a player problem here, but I don't think so. The RVR rules of engagement, the port bonus,
  20. Hi Louis! If you think Lego's post is insulting, as I think it is, just report it, as I did.'
  21. All players joining Russia can't be a solution. Blaming, spreading infamous comments ( @LegoLarry) or just laughing at players who seem as bad with the game as APO Burgundy seems to be, all that are simply kid behaviours. This thread is just another warning, and a strong one, about the present unviable status of the war server. @APO Burgundy: maybe, it time for you to have a break in game. Or to relax and consider it as what it is: not real life.
  22. Even if I don't like the behavior of some former French who now have the utmost pleasure in killing French players, even if I don't like previous answers by the leader of the NN clan: Not all the NN clan behaves like that. Not all attackers of the French faction are NN, nor even Russians. This is clearly not a tribunal issue.
×
×
  • Create New...