Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

The Ghost of Sir Edward

Ensign
  • Posts

    109
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Ghost of Sir Edward

  1. If the proposed mechanic is relatively easy code to and implement than I would say add it, The game is in Alpha so why not just test it if it is practical to do so.
  2. Why can't I quit this game? It's like cocaine, COCAINE! But yes the redeemable DLC Hercs and Reqs are a broken game feature. I escort three Indiaman in a Buc and I am regularly attacked by both of these ships, both die readily enough, but the fact that they attack is complete idiocy and shows that there are no appreciable consequences for doing so.
  3. Fleet ships need to be buffed, re crewed with humans or have dramatically improved command options. One of the single most annoying aggravating/infuriating elements of NA is the utter uselessness of fleet ships to do anything more than carry cargo. And before anyone uses the counter "just sail with clan mates", I'm in a clan, a Rear Admiral & rich, yet it is still almost impossible in today's NA environment to find any player in a clan or otherwise, who will escort your 3-4 Indiaman for 3-4 hours at a time.
  4. Questions related to generating hostility and port battles How is hostility generated to create the conditions for a port battle and what is the duration of the hostility generated, 2 hours, 24 hours? Once hostility reaches 100%, how is the port battle set up, is it automatic, or do you set the time for the battle to begin. What happens after a successful port battle, is administration automatic or are there certain actions the winning clan need to perform?
  5. Why not just rework the war supplies feature like the OP said. Instead of war supplies they could be called Infantry Regiments or something similar. Each regiment would have a weight of 400, which would allow only larger ships to be used as transports. An invasion flag (port specific) could be substituted for the smuggler flag, with the objective being that the aggressor would be required to land a certain number of infantry regiments into the port within a certain time frame. The defender's task would be to prevent those troops from landing. Hostility could still be used, but the port battle itself would be rendered obsolete. The only downside would be that either the number of troops landed would need to be very high, to prevent swarm tactics, or a smaller time window utilized.
  6. That's what I'd like to know. Sometimes you sail a long way in a battle and it be very realistic if that distance wasn't lost. Maybe the game should calculate the distance travelled from the point of entry and then give invisibility for the time period necessary to make up that distance in the OW. This would allow players who put in the effort to have a better chance of avoiding contact after leaving the instance.
  7. One of the pleasures of Naval Action is crafting and sailing the different ship types. If you restrict the number of 1st rates a player can own at one time you restrict one of the games more interesting features. The realism factor, important as it is, is more threatened by other game mechanics currently in place such as the teleport feature, extensive in battle repairs and fleet ships that disappear in patrol zones just to name a few.
  8. That might be true but I cannot imagine a situation where a player would discard gold or silver currency won in a fight. They would load it on their ship and thus become a target themselves.
  9. Increasing the risk to PVP gankers by forcing them to carry their rewards home is a good thing. Like the admin said traders have all the risk now so why should PVP players get a free ride.
  10. Perhaps make it necessary for the port battle ships themselves to carry the infantry or marines, which they must land at the end of the battle to take the port.
  11. Imo I don't see these changes causing people to quit. Super mods that can only be acquired by the PVP elte, fleet ships that disappear in patrol zones, etc. these cause people to quit, I don't see the creation of physical money as a deal breaker for new players.
  12. That is all true and there are even accounts of pirates passing fake checks to buy supplies. That said, there wasn't a magic transfer system in place, the coin still had to be moved by ship at some point so that those transactions could be settled. Port upkeep could be solved by the issue of credit from a national bank that clans could settle every month. A single ship or group of ships would be loaded with the necessary amount of coin and then travel to the port to make payment to the bank issuing the credit. It could also be arranged that the clan wouldn't need to make payment in the port in question only at the national capital or even county capital and then it becomes the banks responsibility to provide the currency via ship to it's port branches. And perhaps that transfer could take place in the form of player missions.
  13. I'm for this. I trade and use four Indiamen and go long distances with them so this would effect me directly. Risky yes, but I'd like to try it out.
  14. There shouldn't be an exclusive list of favored clans. This would give the larger and/or older clans a significant advantage over smaller or newer clans and would probably stifle competition in this area. Historical currency sounds good so long as you can get it by trading or combat.
  15. You can all ready get your distance by using the trader tool so I don't see how this suggestion would be a bad thing.
  16. Geographic points on the OW map, including capes, headlands, bays, rivers, inlets, coasts, islands, etc should be named. Named places would enable easier points of reference in communication and increase the overall value of the OW map.
  17. You cannot successfully force people to adopt your play style and that is all this is. You want more RVR so you want to make other plays change the way they play the game so that you can have more fun and not care at all whether or not they are enjoying themselves too.
  18. Having erratic ping rates in the mid U.S.A. Ping will go from 65 to 350-3400. Also ships will freeze for two-five seconds every few minutes or so. Issue is on Global Server.
  19. I already explained the reasoning behind why I believe Padre Eterno would be a good choice. If it did not sink at sea, the ship would have probably lasted well into the eighteenth century. There are no plans because there were no plans. Ships during that period we're built to a set of builders rules not plans. The ships design could be reasonably reproduced based on it's dimensions and tonnage.
  20. Plans of a ship built on the same design : See http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7327-discussion-player-ship-selection-1st-half-2016/?p=140545 None of those ships have any historical interest. As far as the lack of plans, Portuguese galleons during this period we're generally built to the same lines. As for being out of the time period of Naval Action, the ship was built only a couple of years before Wappen Von Hamburg. Galleons as a ship type we're actually built into the early 18th century.
  21. I suggest the Portuguese Galleon Padre Eterno, Launched in 1663. 2000 tons displacement, she was built as a cargo vessel but later sold to the Portugeuse Navy. At 53 meters on the gun deck, the ship is only slightly longer than Bucentaure. The Padre Eterno is listed as having an armament of 144 cannon, but I believe that no more than half of these would have been heavy cannon. If you compare the Padre Eterno, to contemporary ships such as the Dutch Gouden Leeuw (1666) 80-guns 50 meters on deck. The French Lys (1669) 70-guns, 46 meters on deck. The French Thérèse (1665) 58-guns, 51 meters on deck and the HMS Monmouth (1667) 66-guns, 45 meters on deck. And take into consideration that Padre Eterno was built as a merchant ship, it seems a reasonable assumption that she would have carried an armament of between 70-80 heavy guns and the rest would have been smaller swivels and falconets. There is no more famous Portuguese ship in this time frame. No plans or drawing exist for Padre Eterno, but since most galleons of this period were built to similar lines, it would not be difficult to create a very close approximation of the actual ship.
  22. Yes player A is an a-hat and I doubt any game will reset that reality. But what about players c-z who don't have alts and who don't farm gold? Why do they have to deal with carebear ROE and game mechanics that only exist because there are a handful of player As who have an extra 39.99 and dream of mountains of pixel gold?
  23. Damage rewards need to return, capture rewards need to return, and PVP rewards should be double than those for given for NPC. But nothing will get better until there is more PVE content. The game does not have enough players to create the content by themselves and there needs to something to do while your waiting for someone to show themselves.
  24. Another option would be to create buyable Port Invasion flags. Port Invasion flags would have a lifespan of 24 hours from their time of creation until they were required to reach the port specifically designated for the invasion. Once the flag reached the target a 10k zone of control would be activated around the port for a period of two hours. During this time the attacker must transport and land a number of Infantry units into this zone of control. Infantry units would be craftable and specifically created ,for and only during, the lifespan of the Port Invasion flag. These Infantry would delivered (or landed) to a designated circle within the zone of control and would only be landable within the zone of control if the attacking fleet had a BR of 2:1 or better over the defending ships within the zone. Once a favorable BR ratio has been established within the zone, each ship transporting infantry would be required to come to a full stop for 3 minutes in order to land their infantry units. Only one infantry unit could be landed at a time from each ship (this would simulate the required landing time for an amphibious assault). Infantry units would have a weight of 510 allowing them to be carried by most 5th rates and up, but trade ships could also be given a role due to their ability to carrying more cargo. Each port in the OW would be given a defending infantry garrison size based on the importance of the port. Any attacking infantry would need to be perhaps four times larger than this number in order to assume a successful attack and the conquest of the port. An attack against a standard port might require 20 of these Infantry units, while an attack against a regional capital would require 40. If during the 2 hour Port Invasion Window the required number of infantry units is not landed then the port is successfully defended and the invasion fails. In order to counter the Invasion the defender would need to preventing the embarked infantry from landing by either sinking the ships transporting them, by disrupting the attacking fleet so that only a partial landing is made or by preventing any landing at all by maintaining a favorable BR ratio against the attacking fleet within the port invasion zone of control. Within the zone of control it would be the attacking fleet's function to either sink the enemies ships or force them to withdraw thereby allowing a favorable BR ratio, which would then enable the landing of the infantry and the conquest of the port.
  25. Grinding combat marks to build an Indefatigable, frigate or indiaman is not a matter of indifference to a person who wants to primarily craft, or trade, and who also wants to build their own ships to do those things in. Going through ten 5th or 4th rate missions is a huge investment in time doing something you do not necessarily want to do, in order to do something you do want to do.
×
×
  • Create New...