Navalus Magnus
-
Posts
566 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Navalus Magnus
-
-
The idea of having seasons - e.g. a period of 6 months, - in which nations compete for domination of the map is interesting i think.
But a wipe at the end of them should be compensated in the following ways to avoid frustration and more people leaving the game:
1. All xp should be safe (rank, ship xp and crafting xp)!
2. Sufficient resources should be granted to each player as redeemables, to build up again every building possessed at the end of the former season.
3. Every player should recieve a forged paper to be able to switch nation.
4. Players of the winning nation should recieve a reward (e.g. Victory Marks).
This way it might be possible to lower the need of a new grind an thus Frustration to an acceptable level. While the game would recieve a new impulse every now and than.
-
1
-
-
Storms would be great content Imo!!!
Possible additional decissions captains could face in heavy weather:
- how many sails should i set (full sails in storms would sooner or later cause masts to break)?
- which gunports (deck-wise) should i open up for how long (open gunports under water would cause fast leaking and eventually sinking)?
- which bearing should i steer (big waves hitting the ship at it‘s long sides could damage its hull)?
-
3 hours ago, DeRuyter said:
For 2&4 we need to have variable weather conditions. (and storms back in battles). Right not the conditions are pretty calm so you won't see much of this. We do have #1 it depends on the ship are sailing and of course with higher winds you'll see more heeling.
Even with the actual "waves" there should be (more) spray comming over the bow of a ship that sails 10kn + imo.
-
First of all:
Yes, there are more pressing concerns than graphics, because the overall graphics of NA look fine imo!
I especially like the detailed ship models and the water is also ok!
But i wonder if graphics couldn't be done even more vividly and thus immersive:
If i watch videos of sailing ships or boats i notice some details that make sailing so dynamic and enticing for myself:
1. If ships sail in a certain angle to the wind they heel over.
2. Ships rock / pitch when climbing waves and going down again.
3. With increasing speed a vessel also throws up a bow wave of increasing size.
4. Depending on how fast a vessel sails and how high the waves are, bow waves turn into quite impressing splashes of water, when the ship crashes into waves.
Imo NA captures 1. in a satisfing way!
But 2. and 3. could be done better (more dynamic) and 4. is missing completely!
Could you enhance 2. and 3. plus implement the splashing water to make this game's graphics even more immersive!?
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, rediii said:
Priorities
Sometimes I wonder if thier priorities in the last few weeks have been „vacations“!
-
14 minutes ago, vazco said:
It would be probably best for the game to fix PvP zone and disable an option to fight around capital altogether, in order to direct everyone wanting PvP to a single spot. If reinforcement areas are blocked before PvP zone is fixed though, this game dies.
That would be a good step forward!
Plus: It would be rather easy to do, isn’t it!?
I really wonder why you haven’t fixed the PvP zone and reinforcement zone problem yet!
-
@admin Where is my critical comment gone?
I posted it about 2,5 hours ago in this thread and even got one like for it.
Technical issues?
Would appreciate it, if you would be able to restore it!
-
8 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:
whats the difference from now? Screeners get no marks right?
Haven't said the current mechanics are fine!
-
33 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:
The thing is that they are either not rare enough or so hard to get it becomes a pain in the ass. I don't know... Maybe only give everyone in the port battle 1 victory mark for winning and not on a regular basis.
What about screeners than?
Wouldn‘t be ok imo to just hand over VMs to people inside a PB, when others also contributed to thier success.
-
@admin Seriously devs, watch this video and admit that the current reinforcement zones are:
1. Misleading new players:
Somehow they think they are in a "safe" zone.
Why? Maybe because good games do have effective ways of protecting new players and they hope NA to be no exception - although the steam reviews tell them a different story.
2. Coded badly!
Even if the reinforcement zones aren't supposed to be litteraly safe it seems like a joke to me, that enemys are able to evade fighting propper reinforcements just because they joined a lot later than thier vanguard of small-vessel-friends!
3. And thus contribute to a bad image NA does have if you look to steam reviews.
I say contribute, because NA is badly lacking content also!
So please ...
a) at least fix the problem described in 2. as soon as possible,
b) get the UI done,
c) ad new , exciting PvE CONTENT to the game (!!!)
I don't write such comments to piss you off!
I just want the game to be successfull because the combat can be thrilling, the OW could offer so much, ... to make it short the game could be a very good one!
But there's still lot of way to go imo!
-
I think a better ballance between the ships of the line would be fine, but should be achieved by carefully adjusting the stats (hp and thickness mostly). Every vessel should have it‘s place and 1st rates should stay superior to every other class when it comes to big engagements.
The task to find the sweet spot isn’t that easy and that’s why a limit for SOL should also be set imo - you might not want to have 1st rates nerfed that much, that 3rd rates stand too good chances against them in big fleet battles.
-
8 minutes ago, Oberon74 said:
2, 3. In reality a 1st rate wouldn't take much more room than a 3rd. They were built upwards, not necessarily outwards. HMS Victory in Portsmouth is surprisingly small. Might be shorter than Constitution...
You could make the dockspace available a matter of expanse:
The square-meters a ship would require for docking could be better suited for the intended purpose of Hethwill - but would need more complicated coding.
-
5 minutes ago, Hethwill said:
Quick and Dirty fix, imo.
A 1st rate, by its sheer volume, occupies way more dock real estate than a schooner.
Think about it. How many brigs can you dock in the space you could dock a Victory only ?
Also like that!
15 minutes ago, rediii said:1st rates have too much HP in my oppinion. They were strong but 3rd rates were able to fight them, in this game they cant at the moment
Yes, that's certainly true and should also be fixed!
-
1 hour ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:
An idea would be to give each nation a maximum number of First Rates, distributed as slots between all clans of that nation. So, if there would be a max number of 25 First Rates for one nation and six clans with, say, more than ten active members in the last month, each clan would get the Royal allowance to contribute four First Rates and the rest (1) by one of the smaller clans. Maybe this would lead to less port battles or just another composition of battle fleets participating there. A single port battle would gain importance. That's fine, because so often they really did not take place in real life.
That's a fine idea!
But imo it's downsides are the exclusion of single players which want to have a 1st rate too.
Possible solutions imo might be:
1. Limit the number of SOLs every player can possess - like i mentioned above (and in the attached link in more detail).
2.
45 minutes ago, Percival Merewether said:I'd suggest giving players a 1st rate allowance - as a rear admiral you can redeem one every month and will be lost when you lose your ship. That means players are only "permitted" to lose one 1st rate per month.
... or week, or ... - that would need to be discussed and maybe tested!
What i would like to add is this:
Make that allowance nescessary to get a 1st rate in every way!
a ) You want to craft a 1st rate? Fine, where is your allowance?
b ) You want to buy a 1st rate in the shop? Fine, you need an allowance!
c ) You want to trade a 1st rate from player to player? Ok, ... but where is your allowance?
-
I think the game wouldn’t gain much by cranking up maintenance costs for the big boats - but it might lose very many players because of that!
In my opinion neither stick nor carrot would be a solition.
I think every player should have limited slots for the SOLs to reduce the number of them, but keep it possible for everyone to get a 1st rate.
I already suggested a system like this - feel free to comment and enhance it:
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, the Kidd said:
I mean you can force f.e. a trader to fight, why should the revenge fleet not been able to force you also to a fight...
Because in most cases they wouldn’t even know you‘re there and thus wouldn’t sail to the spot of the battle!
But, yeah ... having the possibility to log off after a battle would surely and sadly lead to exploits 😕
Maybe it would be a bit more fair to remove all exact coordinates, so that nobody - and foremost no revenge fleet - could be sure where a closed battle takes place!?
-
8 minutes ago, Sovereign said:
Yeah, the ports could be temporary but permanent would also be fine as long as there are enough. Not having them on the map makes them hidden / secret enough imo...
I like this idea for the non permanent hidden port / hideout varient. You can build them in certain places for rescources that have to be transported there ( like shipyard and workshop ) but they can be raided and destroyed by enemies. Some sort of mini RvR with no need for timers but instead you have to hide your ports... this would definitely bring more life and PvP to the OW.
A nice idea that @admin should see.
Great idea!
I don’t know if it is feasible in terms of coding, but it definitely would make the OW more interesting:
Temporary outposts could be set up by captains which equipped thier ships with building materials and vanish after one or two days without anybody using them / ships docked there.
-
5 hours ago, asuspiciousbear said:
Looking at these forums it seems that most people are upset about the port battles with everyone in 1st rates, but dont seem to realize that a fleet of 1st rates would have fewer ships in it than a fleet of 3rd rates. That difference of guns can easily change the battle.
No, mate!
If you have more ships with more speed and better sailing profiles you can win a PB, because of circles captured and points gained. But you can’t withstand an organized 1st rate fleet with lower rated ships in a battle where captured or sunken ships dictate the result!
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, asuspiciousbear said:
I'm wondering why there is so much hate on first rates, seems to me that they are balanced pretty well.
I don‘t hate 1st rates, I really like them!
But i‘d prefer to keep them special, because they were special. Right now there are just too many of them imo. That’s one reason why I think the ships in game are still a way from being well ballanced.
-
1
-
-
1. In reality it was an economic problem, granted!
But this is a game and I don‘t know if there would be enough players that would invest so much time to be able to afford a close-to-reality maintenance of a 1st rate. What I do think is that many of them would like to have one though. This problem might lead to another loss of players and could be avoided by a simple limit like the one I mentioned above imo.
2. I completely agree, that this game is out of ballance concerning the use of 5th rates and below. A nerf of determined defender and the thickness of the big boats is also needed imo.
-
13 minutes ago, ElricTheTwo said:
The issue really goes back to the PB changes. It used to require 4th rates or smaller for many of the battles - now most 4th rates are gathering dust. If port battles and hostility missions were mixed to use the different ships it would be a better spread of ships.
- Shallows hostility missions should only have shallow ships
- 2500 PB hostility and PB's themselves could be 5th rate max
- 5000 PB could be 4th rate max
- 8,000 PB could be 3rd rate max
- 10,000 PB 2nd rates
- 12000 PB 1st rates
I like that too!
But 1st rate ganking fleets inside of PvP zones wouldn’t be touched by that.
26 minutes ago, Jon Snow lets go said:The problem is 1st rates are too strong thats why everyone is using them.
Yes, that’s true!
A thickness nerf of them would be a start imo:
All 1st rates back to the level of the Victory for example.
Or an even further reduction, so that the thickness from a 3rd to a 2nd rate and from a 2nd to a 1st rate just increases by one point each.
On the other hand: You couldn’t nerf 1st rates that much in a reasonable way, that a (ganking) fleet of them wouldn’t be superior to any other fleet composition, when battle instances include a shrinking circle of death!
-
Recently there has been some arguing in this forum about 1st rates being used a way too much.
Thier sheer number has been deemed unrealistic.
I agree to that and thus suggest to implement a mechanic that regulates the numbers of 1st rates in NA:
1. Point of reference – how was the relation of 1st rates to other ships that participated in battles in the age of sail?
Taking the Battle of Trafalgar as an example wikipedia states the following numbers:
Type of ship*
Numbers
Percentage**
1st rate
7
9,5 %
2nd rate
11
15 %
3rd rate
38
52 %
4th rate
4
5,5 %
5th rate
9
12 %
6th rate
4
5,5 %
Altogether
73
100 %
*I’m using the ingame rating of NA here: 100+ canons = 1st rate, 80+ canons = 2nd rate, ...
** Values rounded and thus not exact.
2. Suggested mechanic:
I’d implement a limit of how many 1st, 2nd and 3rd rates a player could own depending on his / her dockspace.
This limit could be tied to the above mentioned percentage of ships in the Battle of Trafalgar for example.
This would lead to the following restrictions (numbers not rounded):
Dockspace
Allowed 1st rates
Allowed 2nd rates
Allowed 3rd rates
5
0
0
2
8
0
1
4
11
1
1
5
14
1
2
7
17
1
2
8
20
1
3
10
With just one tow per day it would be impossible for all to get 1st rates out to sea wherever they want!
And 3rd rates would actually become what they've been - sort of the backbone of the navy.
Please comment and suggest other ideas of how to address the problem!
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, admin said:
Like in pubg - if you die you dont keep anything. Also we had battle circle of death BEFORE pubg.
regarding lineships
what does not work? I dont understandEverything works to my opinion.
Losing first rate is somewhat painful - check. (but not really painful if you have production setup)
Replacing first rate is hard(er) - check (but not really painful if you have production set up)
It is the design . Working as intended
If you don't want to feel pain from the loss - sail a frigate (free from the NPCs). Or join a clan. Multiple large clans lose their first rates every day to prussia or @rediii and recover them with ease.
1. PUBG vs. NA:
In PUBG you enter an arena, collect a few things that come in handy and fight. If you die, so what!? Start a new match collect things and ...
In NA you can spend hours in sailing, trading and thus collecting the ressources you need to craft a 1st rate. Than you equip it with nice upgrades. If that boat sinks you have a far more timeconsuming way back to where you've been (the nicely built and equipped 1st rate).
--> Imo you can't say these two games are similar to each other, if you focus on this particular aspect!
2. I don't have a problem with getting a replacement if i sink a ship!
BUT i am a member of one of the biggest and best organised clans in this game - at least that would be my guess.
Plus: I'm in a nation that has most of the time been on top of the conquest ranking for the last months.
That means i have all the ressources at hand needed to build big boats (including VMs).
If i lose a 1st rate i just need to call "@Suppenkelle please help!", and in most cases my new shiny ship would be waiting for me before i fnished the sentence.
I just try to view NA through the eyes of players which ...
- are quite new to the game,
- play alone,
- play in small clans without the means of being able to incidentally replace well built 1st rates.
And i could imagine, that such a player would be quite frustrated if he or she loses a 1st rate although he or she just wanted to have a quick and relaxed PvE match after work / before going to bed.
Without the ability to decide where a mission spawns, such a frustration would be much more likely.
-
2
-
-
30 minutes ago, admin said:
Thats not a problem. If you lost it its always your fault.
Your account is not wiped on death. You dont lose xp. You are not corpse camped, you dont lose skill points, you can capture this ship from others. You can sail it any time you want (not like in real life with 5 first rates for the whole navy)Believe me it is the problem of your comparison of NA and PUBG!
What you wrote simply doesn’t work imo!
Stuck in loading screen.
in Support
Posted
Same