Ruby Rose
-
Posts
130 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Ruby Rose
-
-
this is what most players not all want. u have to think on it there is only a handful for hardcore players and alot of casual players
-
revamping the eco patch onto the test best for more then a month and test out changes there from the combat mechanics to the economy and see what works best for most of the players. it is ultimately up to the players in developing a game, the devs just need to listen to what the players want, and then place it in a test server to try out and get feedback on. they implemented the eco patch too early before working out the flaws in it.
-
54 minutes ago, LIONOFWALES said:
maybe they can change it then for the PVE server only... then PVE players could have their content and PVP players could have theirs which already exists... two separate sets of gameplay and economics, one for one server, the other for the other server.
In an ideal world this would seem to me to be the most logical solution, lets not soften the PVP server though... we die hards don't like easy game play.
This way we have two servers and two entirely separate styles of game play and, a server for both types of players equals more happy players yes?
problem with ur suggestion is it gives the devs more work to do making 2 balanced eco patches one geared towards the pvp server which has pve elements and the pve server which lacks pvp elements, the major flaw in making 2 balanced eco patches is the work the devs have to deal with, and the potential to loose even more players incase something goes wrong as it did with this eco patch. what needs to be implemented is a patch that satisfies the majority of the players not just the hardcore pvper's or the laid backed pve'ers
-
a portion of the player base is on the pve server with the current changes to the economy we effectivelly destroyed the pve server in the process. this game has 2 servers not 1 no major change should cripple 1 server over the other. the way they did this patch inadvertently destroyed the eco on the pve server. and crippled ship building of 3rd rates and up on pvp more then on pve. not everyone has the time to spend hunting fleets all over the map to get dubs and not all players on the game have the time to spend with a no reward for the hours they spend playing. the reward system for hunting fleets is now more geared towards the dlc ships and 5-7th rates rather then an even balance between 1-7th. in my opinion this patch ruined the game, unless changes are made i see many if not alot of players leaving NA for better games
-
first off congrats on breaking the game.
right now how the eco patch was implemented killed the game its on life support at this point.what the players want is simplified shipbuilding. simplified crafting, but the pvp and combat mark system we dont need that changed it had a working system which would of matched perfectly with the eco patch for just crafting changes. the missions are a nice touch but removing marks from pve combat not a cool move and these huge prices with dubs isnt helping players keep faith in ur judgements for future patches.
WHAT PLAYERS WANT.
1. simplified crafting
2. revert back to combat marks and pvp marks.
3. create a cost to convert combat marks to pvp marks.
4. npc missions rebalanced to fit their descriptions and rewards. eg. (old system battle with 8 4th rates yeilded around 150 combat marks and a decent amount of gold and exp) current system (lousy amount of raels moderate exp no dubloons unless u loot every ship and get lucky) battles can take up to an hour and a half to complete if there is no incentive to hunt those fleets down with guaranteed rewards the new missions become useless and the old system gave better rewards for time spent in battle or looking for food.
5. rebalance npc spawns, having only ur nation ships spawn nearby ur ports and very little npc's of other nations, sure forces players to leave safe waters but also causes a lack of port battles. high risk with lil to no reward. no point taking ports near ur own capitals as it would hinder npc's spawning of other nations. effectively removing RvR combat from the game for the most part.6. pvp cap could be implemented like say every 24 hours a single player can only accumulate up to about 100 pvp marks, and any other pvp marks earned is converted to combat marks or exp for the ship in use. this way we have less gankers outside capital ports they wouldnt be earning as much as if they had no limit.
7. current prices for dubs and shipbuilding are ridiculous what used to be able to replace a whole fleet of firsts is now down to about 2 or 3 at best. effectively crippling shipbuilding.
and 8. if dubs become the true currency it should be available in all forms of combat this includes where the combat marks were earned from not just missions but also from killing AI guaranteeing getting dubs from pve kills rather then by chance from looting would be a better incentive to go out and hunt for ai or pvp.
-
1
-
-
flags are so before eco patch now its about salvaging the stupidity of the patch
-
1
-
-
if flags are the topic why not introduce a custom flag specific to clans, that way each clan can have their own unique flag rather then a bunch of flags of history, allow clans to make their own flags and have it set as a custom clan flag like a coat of arms, i could then see that as worth buying dlc for flags
-
5
-
-
if the devs only want money put a ship for each tier up as DLC there u make alot more that way then cosmetic flags that u can only see in battle
-
4 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:
Nothing in game happens that fast, if the connie rolls in front of you you hold fire like you should regularly instead of lighting him up.
Surrender, which awards your ship to the enemy for free, v green on green scuttling which denies marks and the ship, as well as things in hold.
scuttling doesnt prevent people from looting ur ships for upgrades and cargo
i also gave an example. we could of gone with niagaras and herc if u want speedierif u wanted a faster example 25 vs 25 enjoy the mirror damage
-
Just now, Slim McSauce said:
It's positive in that the players who do it can effectively deny kills. That's the only reason why I can see someone would want to keep the ability to do damage to friendly ships, since it is infact not against the rules to do this to deny marks, or troll a fight.
That would require a mistake on your part to fire into your friendly. Even if someone was blocking shots.
lets make an example of intentional mirror damage, ur in herc and an ally is in a connie connie rolls infront of u knowing u are about to unload a broadside now u have just unloaded into the connie and that damage is now reflected right back at u causing serious damage. or perhaps finishing u off. larger ships could effectively be killed in the same manner by shooting thru sails of an ally or over the bow of an ally into an enemy and that damage is reflected back on the big ships.
this would force large fleets to only fight in line formations to prevent shooting allies. dulls the game
as for intentionally denying kills there is this button its called surrender, it does the same thing as shooting each other to deny kills if u havent taken damage it will do the same thing as killing eachother also. what evidence can any player present other then an audio recording to say a ally verbally consented to us shooting each other to prevent a kill. when a tribunal comes up on team killing , the tribunal will be full of green on green reports because unless its stated by both enemy ships ingame chat the devs and admins cant verify its was consentual -
1 minute ago, Slim McSauce said:
so remove the only positive function of green on green, which is to deny kills. Once that's gone what do you have left?
Punishing others or getting punished yourself for your teams mistakes aka friendly fire.
or
The person who makes the mistake is the one is punished via mirror damage, which can put you on advanced timer or a temp ban, saving the tribunal process and the frustrations that go with it.
the fact of green on green was forbiddened before was to stop team killing, hence why they removed the ability to shoot ur own nation in OW.
mirror damage would be exploited to the fullest with blocking shots to intentionally damage ur allies -
4 minutes ago, TheHaney said:
...Are we talking about PvP or friendly fire? As far as I'm concerned those are two separate subjects.
If you're stuck on the whole "let's sink each other to grief the enemy" thing, the ultra-simple solution is to do what most other games do: friendly fire doesn't count towards scoring. If the enemy gets ONE shot on the target and the rest of the damage is friendly, that kill goes to the enemy with the one shot.
people would exploit that to the fullest one player hits u with a random shot at range then a whole fleet jumps in and closes the distance now u kill urselves and only 1 player benefits from it. plenty of ways to exploit that type of mechanic
-
doesnt stop players from shooting eachother while part of the same nation thats a fact and anyone can say they had verbal permission to do so and the devs wont be able to do anything about it thats a fact. what they need to do is have a port option that enables or disables FF that way all parties are satisfied and give incentives to have it enabled
-
i can tell u pretty straight up why alot of players left and its due more on the lack of proper patches and content, as well as the merging of servers and lack of player population, i can tell u that merging the 2 pvp servers resulted in about 250 or so players quitting the game because of loosing their clan and all their progress. i can also tell u there are half a dozen other things in the game that are unrealistic. but thats not for today what this topic is about is disabling friendly fire. i believe in the best interest of the non hardcore pvp players that the game shouldnt purely revolve around the pvp players interests but should reflect the pve players as well. this change doesnt solely effect the pvp server.
-
see historically the captains of the 2 ships dont ask for permission before they sink u admist a battle. they dont go hey can i sink u to deny them the kill. no they shoot u regardless cause thats expected when going into battle. especially to prevent pow's
-
then tell me where did most of the players go then we started with over 5000 players and now have less then 400 actual players the game became not worth playing compared to other simulator based games. if FF is necessity then remove the no green on green then u cant complain when ur intentionally sunk by an ally
-
well if the devs only care about how their game looks this wouldnt be an alpha but already at full release so its completely on players to really develop the game into something majority will enjoy
-
2 hours ago, TheHaney said:
1) Friendly fire is good.
2) If someone in your fleet is constantly hello kittying up in this regard, don't bring them again.
3) The tribunal needs to go if this game is ever going to be successful. Attacking friendlies should not be something the admins have to personally enforce; that's unrealistic long-term.
4) As far as I'm concerned, once you're in a battle instance all is fair. If a friend turns on you, tough shit. Make better friends.
u cant prevent players from joining battles
-
put it to a vote if majority in favor of removing FF then remove FF make it simple see what the players want
-
what naval action really needs is to go F2P its the only foreseeable way were going to boost our player count at the rate were going i give NA about 2 years at the very best before most of the players have quit the game due to stagnation. we started with over 5000 players and now were at just over 400 actual players on the pvp server. this game is dying, free to play set it up that way and u'll have a much larger player pool. get it that way and upon release then put a price on the game. that way u get those that loved the game to pay to keep playing it
-
but it kind of defeats the purpose when most of the veteran players can already tell which nation a specific clan is with the whole flag thing is rather pointless, especially since u can check which players joined and what rank they are at u can pretty much instantly tell what nation they belong to.
we dont have enough players to really make a flag dlc worth having at this stage. all its going to do is make peoples flags more nice to look at but they give nothing really to the gameplay
-
why not remove friendly fire from the game then u cant damage ur own nations ships while in combat, it would then harden the rules regarding green on green. and add a feature that before leaving port whether to enable friendly fire to ur ship or not and make it a port on option. this way only those wanting to take allied damage can and those that dont wont. also can add perks or incentives to have FF turned on rather then off. like more gold or higher mark gain from kills. this way it satisfies all parties those that dont want FF and those that want it more realistic. cause if were going realistic alot of game features would need to be removed and many more added. like trader window u wouldnt have upto date while at sea of market rates or whether that port is overflowing with a specific good that would need to be removed then there is where on the map a port battle is happening outside of ur nation that wouldnt be knowledge every nation would have. not to mention wind direction in OW where is circles counter clockwise regardless where u are in the caribbean thats not realistic either. there as so many unrealistic items already in the game might as well add a FF on or off switch to the list.
-
i have inquired with ink on this matter and hope to have a resolution to all the loopholes in the green on green conflicts, as it stands right now in the game rules green on green is forbidden that rule has not changed, doing so intentionally is against this rule. i have not seen a rule on scuttling during pvp combat added the games rule set. till then i'd advise on not continuing this type of behavior till ink or other devs get back to us on this issue
-
whats the point of having these flags as dlc when u can already alter the game files to display ur own customizable nation flag that is only visible on ur screen and those that have the same modification. if the devs want to add something worthwhile bring back paint schemes for the ships or sail color packs or even crests for the mail sails. something that would be worth spending money on.
eco patch rebalance
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted · Edited by Ruby Rose
steam reviews mate alot of people hate the new update and steam charts watching how many people login
not to mention the forums as well not alot of happy campers with this new eco patch
just read thru the new eco feedback pages u'll see the real view of the players