Slim McSauce

Yes, testers must give way to the full game. This is the right way to go. TRUST THE DEVS! THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING!

Yes promotion is too fast, no you don't really remember the jump from rank 6 to 7 in terms of what you did to get there. It's nothing, the lower ranks are almost something you go back to, you hardly learn in them, that doesn't start until 5th and up and from 5th and up it's a grind plain and simple. Yes there is too little content, you can't disregard the feeling of regret of dumping thousands of hours into this game, people put thousands of hours in many other games and outside of the raw amount of time put into it, you have what you spent in those hours which in NA has always been a sort of 50:50 sailing and combat, and that's generous, you're often sailing for much longer than you are in combat or doing something you'd consider "fun" unless you have a good netflix series on the other screen afk sailing isn't that much fun. What people miss about the lack of content argument is that it's undeniable and raids is the prime example of this. Type raids in the search bar and see how many results pop up, some from even the admin himself making promise of adding them in the future, more later down the line to say it's not possible or feasible to add raids how we want, or that they're no longer planned. RVR is a 1 dice game, 6 combinations. Raids would make it a 2 dice game, 36 combinations. For as long as we've played, we've waited for a spontaneous aspect of RVR which doesn't need heavy planning, that you can assemble a group for and go do right away. This isn't asking more than the basics here, RVR sure needs that to stay dynamic and fresh. A sandbox without toys is a desert, and an ocean without depth is a puddle. The lack of content is what should be there.

How can you be so sure? name 1 (one) other MMO with more than 5 factions. What benefit is there having nations with only 1-4% of the global population which can't compete in the large scale warfare of RVR? Isn't that setting them up for failure? Not only that but new players may pick this nation, play into it and later find out there's only 30 or so other people with them and be stuck in the pit. That's after they get mowed into redundancy by the mains 4 where people flock to. Ironically this is the better idea and solves the alliance problem. As long as clans can war other clans within a co-olition than it works.

It's very funny when 2 idiots sink each other, it's just not fair when one idiot subverts his doomed fate, they should both sink imo.

That's unfortunate. In this scenario I'd rather see both live than both die. Luckily one of you made it out but that's only because you were lucky and got a good tic on the server when you should've sank. I do not like ships being held from sinking while in boarding, I think it's unrealistic and honestly I don't even like that ships sink the way they do. Ships should surrender at 0 health, not sink. Sinking should come from leaks and fires, not just any damage. If I want the ship to sink I'll put a broadside on the lower hull post surrender.

The sandbox is a lie. E.V.E is the greatest sandbox in the world and it has alliances. Lack of features is not what a sandbox makes.

easily one of the most universally accepted proposals on this forum.

Better ranking system. It takes what, 2 months to get to rear admiral? Beyond that there's no recognition of skills, renown, or influence. Poor ranking makes everyone appear the same. Not saying just because you have 4k hours means you've done anything, but for people who have there should be some kind of reward.

Sounds bad now but when hostile AI is introduced this change in spawning is going to make sense.

WHY I SAY!

I miss Jeheil's vids, he had all the info for weekly events.

I still remember the olden days of OW being dominated by speed built connies, bellonas and wasas. This has always been a problem and nothing that has been done since has been able to fix speed capped heavies. This I think will and though I think balancing woods to not be so extremely, and removing the redundant ones would be better, this is also a good suggestion.

Then you should like the idea in it's entirety, otherwise there would be no benefit to repairing in the OW, and after a single battle in the new dmg system you can expect to be out of repairs and returning to port.

Also OW should have the option of repairing without using mats, but it takes 5 minutes of anchoring.

1. I do because I've been playing the testbed for like two hours now doing just that 2. Why does it matter? It's called an urgent repair, it's 15% of your health. 3. Yes and that's pretty good. 4. Then nerf it to 6 minutes 5. Your video does not represent the game 6. Part of the problem. Read the OP.

What are you refuting? Demasting is a part of sea combat, it happens often which is why you need secondary repairs specifically for masts. Why is that so hard to understand? You just want to lose your mast in the first broadside and the fight be over which is the exact problem with demasting right now.

no, you're stupid. See how easy that was?

Do you only say no because it's shorter than yes?

Lets weigh the options, what can actually be done about demasting? The obvious first thing would be buff masts, but not in a direct way but make it so rigging needs to be weakened before demasting is viable, that way people aren't chopping bottom mast when they should be fighting the hull battle. Second thing which is also somewhat obvious but hasn't been tried, lessen the accuracy of cannons! We know the effect of stern v bow cannons, we've all felt the difference. Lesser accuracy, lesser mast sniping, it's simple. Third thing, which is more of a principle. Demasting will always be a part of the game. Some may not like it but it's a part of the experience. If everything was realistic, from damage to HP, then demasting WOULD be quite easy, maybe a few direct battle to before a mast is hanging by the rigging. That out of the way, we can only have that IF accuracy against masts is true to how it was in real life, that masts were not AIMED for, but they were a result of aiming high into the sails/rigging/spares. All in all, I would say mast HP feels right from a realism standpoint, what makes it a problem is that cannon aiming and accuracy are not realistic. It's very easy to focus down a mast. It's where realism and arcade intersect that demasting has become a problem.

Yeah well that's not a good solution. Losing a masts is a part of the battle, mods like elite french paired with navy bands or whatever aren't adding to the game. They're the result of already disfunctional demasting meta to create an all or nothing solution. Masts are either impenetrable, or they're paper. Demasting is a thing and adding mods and skills to make it not a thing doesn't make it right, it's a splint on a broken leg. Demasting should be a consistent and fair approach to a battle, it shouldn't be the first thing on your mind neither should it be the last. Adding a kmiriti masts for mast immunity is ignoring the problem that has around since forever that hasn't had a serious attempt at solving.

A small change, "urgent repair" should repair downed sections of masts up to 15%. This would be topsails and topsail gallents, or the bottom section of full mast. I would also say also an option to repair internal structure 15% as well. This would be an option, you can choose emergency repair masts, or emergency repair structure/modules. This has a few benefits. One, it helps balance out some of the extremity of the upcoming DM for ships. One broadside can leave you half stucture with which very well may be death. 15% stucture isn't much but it's enough to help negate some of the speed mallus you get from losing hull integrity. For masts it's much more noteworthy, demasting has big issues with the combat model because historically demasting wasn't an official tactic, sure it was nice when it happened but masts weren't aimed for, the goal of aiming high was to damage spars, rigging, perhaps a masts. Cannons being very accurate it's very easy to focus down entire sections of masts and people use it as a main playstyle to quickly end battles. This is unrealistic and gamey. Masts don't specifically need buffing, but losing masts, since it's so common, should be more manageable. That is the aim of this suggestion. What do you think?

Well when you have monetary realism, but are still limited by outposts in an unrealistic manner then yes it doesn't work. Cherrypicking doesn't tend to work when it comes to reality. It would actually make sense to not sail too far from home, and build up resources in outer territories but instead we only have room for capitals and freeports to station from. Maybe then natural fronts would be established.

I distinctly remember this being the original intention, carrying your money around even a Mint to create notes for credit.

If he knows there is supports 5 minutes away, then he can wait for it to be within fighting distance without tagging. Otherwise everyone throw out their idea of time compression and keep battles open, with no limits for 10 minutes since tagging, and retagging is a way to get around this aka an exploit or generally non-intenional function of a mechanic.

This one will likely fail too then, it's the same design as the old one, split currencies, money printing, it taking roughly 2 weeks to become a billionare through mindless trading, thus infinite ship printing, yeah this will work out fine.