Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Eyesore

Members
  • Content Count

    317
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

188 Excellent

About Eyesore

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant

Recent Profile Visitors

876 profile views
  1. Then why do you even want to defend it? Reasonable suggestions? I only make them once. How many suggestions do people/devs need? We've been giving suggestions for years now, and this 'problem' was pointed out on the first day the portboni were announced.
  2. yeah, it's a lot of work capturing ports from ai, very hard work indeed. Casuals and solo's can not participate and thus get nothing, just the generic stuff ... and people expect that newcomers will stay for that? Fight against an even bigger geargap (that obviously doesn't exist) or a bigger handicap. Again, what is the positive about locking nationplayers out of the use their own ports? They are only good to trade in them so they can fund the clan for free? To pay for some clans timerfees and whatnot? For the rest they can just piss off and leave the game i suppose? Really strange that so many rvr-clans /players have so many alts? I geuss they don't use the ports and bonusses either and they don't buy up and/or harvest whatever they want? But yes, that solo or new guy can stuff it, no way he gets to get a chance to compete with the same gear, because 'the clan' did all that hard work of capturing a port ... But yes, solo's and casuals are the parasites, alts are to be supported (you know, because of all the hard work it is to level them, lol).
  3. Meanwhile, many (new) players/clans will not or cannot participate in the rvr-stuff (they cannot invest or fully use their nation-ports). Why is it again that you have to get on a friendly-list? What is the benefit of that exactly?
  4. oh yes, lets feel sorry for everybody that have to level (some) alts ... Maybe provide them with some extra's because of all that extra work they have to do ... Wonderfull idea?
  5. I understand, but it is a choice between cholera and the plague ... both choices have backlash. For competitive pvp, yes, I understand the books and bonusses are important. But retain them and you get bad reviews from the other side ... I'm sorry, I can't see a win-win-scenario in this, either choice has negatives. If we reason from a standpoint that hardly any new players will buy and and play the game after release, then i can see a reason to retain knowledge (because, indeed, what would be the difference?). On the other hand, if we reason from the standpoint that many new players will buy/return and play the game ... which would be the devs preffered outcome I geuss, more money to be made ... then those negative reviews from (a few?) testers about not getting to keep their accumulated knowledge during testing probably wouldn't interest a new player, probably even makes him think he's starting on even ground (yes, i agree, in reality the skillgap will be there/big). Thus, from an outsiders point of view (PR-wise), it looks a lot better/fairer to be able to say that everybody starts equally.
  6. Happy with full wipe for pvp and partial for pve. We all knew this was coming. The campaigners for knowledge-retainment have made their case as did the others, devs made a decision. End of story. Let it go, suck it up, get over it and continue to play or not.
  7. The ability to extinguish sternlights πŸ™‚ would work nicely with that. Although, some will just change their gamma on their monitors ...
  8. That's what they don't want you to do, it is a form of leeching ... you know, the clan did all the hard work ... and now people want to use that port? What are we thinking? Clans seem to like to do everything on their own (like solo-players?) and then complain that everything is too expensive ... You are of no consequence, you stupid casual leecher :-p They don't want you to work together with them, imagine that they'd have to share resources and portbonusses? The outrage! (I geuss i'll add 'sarcasm'?)
  9. Well, leeching is a harsh word, the point is that making/providing usefull actions which contribute to the port and/or the controlling clan doesn't make it leeching anymore? How is it leeching if they pay for the porttimer for example? Is it not better than just having an alt in some obscure(?) unknown(?) friendly clan, because they have 'invested' once during the development of the port (and supposedly keeps their right to keep using the port even if they are removed from the friendly-list)?
  10. Maybe, to support a port and gain acces to its upgrades, what if players, not on any list, could get somekind of permit to build x-amount of ships, or harvest x-amount of resource? Maybe by delivering goods (portmissions?) to maintain the upkeep(?) of the upgrades or maybe help to pay for a timer (a mission which directly helps the owning clan)? So, (small/big) clans/solo's/casuals/whatever can contribute when they want/need to? Many casuals will probably want to help in defending their port where they have their shipyard. Would they not be more likely to help defend (even if it is only screening, or counter hostility) if they have a serious investment/interest made in this port? The controlling clan could perhaps select which kind of buildings and/or resources are available to all? (although i think the basic materials should be freely available, so only the rare items could be restricted to outsiders, clans on the friendly-list are always free to use any upgrade offcourse?) How realistic is it to expect a clan to hold many friendlies (20?, 40?, 60? with a full server?) on the list, to keep up with who is who and what changes or new arrivals/players happen in those clans? How does it keep alts out of the port or atleast hinder their acces to it? (I'm sure it is fairly easy to act as a new player and join a big clan and be able to stay under the radar ... πŸ˜‰ )
  11. Russian pranks? What do you mean?
  12. Here is the guide on how to do it :-p https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/27018-a-tiny-guide-on-afk-fishing/
  13. if you still have time left on the delivery, you don't need the mission to collect the rewards. Just deliver the item and right-click it to complete the delivery and receive your rewards.
  14. You could add a smallspeedpenalty (or ac-/decelerationpenalty) when equiped with thicknessmods? As thicker means more wood, so more weight/mass, which has an influence on sailingcharacteristics? It doesn't make your trigonometryproblem go away (I don't see how to get around that? Not really a problem, it's just trig? I don't see that as a problem?). Anyway, it may be enough to compensate for the penetration/thickness 'flaw'? (I'm not sure whether i would call it a flaw ... you can't argue with math? and the penetration/thicknessdiscrepancy was/is there in real life aswell? (but maybe I misunderstand?)) I don't think removing mods completely is the best way to go ... we'd lose some 'content' (even with marginal bonusses they'd still get used and searched for?) Some people just like to make 'specialized' ships, which is very natural if you'd ask me, as long as we can't make 'frankenstein'-ships ... Definately lowering the bonusses is needed (in my opinion anyway, also the portboni). As many have suggested already, more balancing ( i read that as lowering πŸ˜‰ ) and adding negatives (or diminishing returns when stacked) to the mods will be necessairy (admin said that they will get to balancing the mods (soon?/before release)?) ).
×
×
  • Create New...