Dalai Lama
-
Posts
167 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Dalai Lama
-
-
1 hour ago, Slim McSauce said:
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.
Well alliances inbetween player factions... but a nation in NA is not a player faction per se, Clans are. I am not against implementing an alliance system, but was merely pointing out that I don't like it to limit the sandbox game experience but rather augment it. Please read my post thoroughly.
More practical: As in EVE the alliance system has incentives for players/Corps/Clans(not Nations) to create one, but I do not like the idea of limiting my actions. So why give me a physical barrier not to attack my ally in OW, but rather suffer consequences of my actions. Isn't that what a real ally is, having the ability to attack you but rather chooses to support for a common goal (incentive), or maybe even having an own agenda ? Motivation rather than limitation.
Isn't that what made it so intetesting to play DayZ in those early days? Not knowing if the guy will backstab you after looting together for hours.
-
I do not understand the context of this discussion.
Are we discussing lack of players? Because for me this has nothing to do with the amount of nations we have. Of course it might be harder to fill the BRs of a big portbattle, but then shouldn't we discuss an adjustment of BR of ports.
For me a bigger issue is the size of the map and the amount of ports compared to current amount players , but then we shouldn't design the game for a pre-release playerbase but create the requirements to sustain a healthy amount of players.
Even though I like the idea of subfactions and more distinctive nations with special traits, which will have to be heavily balances tho.
Part of my fascination for RvR is the unregulated sandbox politics with no rules in place. In my humble opinion, if we create a diplomacy system it should not cut the freedom of this sandbox experience.
-
Achievements could be nice but I wouldn't tie it just to play time as its easily exploitable but a title system you can add to your name like known from World of Warcraft or other MMOs sounds cool and would def. create more end game content. Even reward some special paints or boats could be nice... do an epic just with 4 instead of 6 e.g. or defeat 5 players in a single battle etc.
-
2 hours ago, JG14_Cuzn said:
let’s not get into the limited port discussion here. The map is way too big to limit the amount of ports we have.
As to getting people out of the R zones....
Simple answer:
make Ai non taggable in zones.
well whats the purpose of a R zone then? just make the 1-5th rates Ai untaggable
-
1
-
-
We have to make people want to leave the zones. I agree that the current game design doesnt promote moving out from zones too much.
But I've always been a promoter of using motivations over restrictions.
Lets put the end game content away from the zones, no matter pve/pvp/rvr or trade. There should be no or little content for a rear admiral in his 1st rate near capital zone.
-
3
-
-
I already suggested to make trade more rewarding... the thrill if you will make it with those valuable goods into MT during primetime should be rewarded by a big profit. High risk = high profit. Also creates content if done right. And you can very well defend yourself as trader, even alone... wouldnt hurt though to give traders/trading some more love though like special rewards/skills/books.
Adding player delivery contracts could pice up things too.
-
2
-
-
Welcome to NAL
-
I agree it's totally healthy for a mmo when players have no intention to move around and sit in a spot fighting npcs on a pvp server.
-
1
-
-
I don't see how reducing the amount of woods will improve the game... it will reduce the diversity of crafting and depth of the game/combat.
I would rather increase the amount and/or make the differences more distinctive to promote different playstyles (as partially implemented with e.g. fire risk = fireships).
The fact that some woods are cheap (in sense of value and performace) and some are valuable as limited in certain ports, creates certainly immersion and content for RvR.
At the moment we have quite a few combat relevant ship stats connected to wood. I guess buffing some of the stats apart from armour thickness, armour/hull hp and speed would increase the desire for those currently "useless" woods. Make bermuda great for mast thickness e.g. or increase stern thickness combined with crew protection for cagurian.
I agree with the oak 'problem' having no purpose other than being cheap and available. I would rather place it a bit closer to where cagurian is now and make cagurian scarce and give it a distinctive boni as mentioned above.
-
1
-
-
Hey van Veen, great ideas. I think more depth to economy and RvR is a brilliant idea and could open the game to a much bigger player base. Not sure though how keen the devs are on adding some proposals like yours to the game!?
-
1
-
-
You are repeating your argument and we are still talking about a game right? I am not asking for a complete overhaul of ship balance. I think it just needs a bit of love (speed) to make it competitive. Also the Pavel is the only boat which is quite unbalanced, apart from maybe the Wapen.
-
15 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:
I hear ya, but is that really reasonable? In order for every ship to have an advantage that no other ship has, there would have to be an enormous amount of work done and probably a severe limit on the number of ships in the game. Is it worth it?
Never said there should be an advantage no other ship has. Just it should be good/useful or even decent in/for something!?
And of course it does require a bit of time to balance ships but I rather see a bit of diversity in ships and thus in playstyle than everyone sailing in the same boat.
Would love to see more than just one 3rd rate in game too.
-
14 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:
I agree here. This discussion crops up periodically on behalf of different ships. "Make the (insert ship) great again....". Somebody has to be the goat.
I disagree, every ship should have some purpose/role otherwise we can just remove it. But of course not all ships should be good in everything. There should be a diversity for good BR/thickness -> RvR... fast->hunter/OW PvP... cheap ship -> PZ
Pavel isn't even cheap
-
2
-
-
The St. Pavel got nerved in speed a while ago. It was fast. You could build decent hunting ships and it was used as such. Now you see one occasionally in the PZ if someone found a note in an epic event.
Well a Teak / White Bellona is faster than a Fir/Fir Pavel... so whats the point of having a ship which has no raison d'être!?
Teak/White Cristian 11.4 kn, 74 thickness, 7990 side armour hp, 2.9 turnrate
Fir/Fir Pavel 11.4 kn, 58 thickness, 7270 side armour hp, 2.9 turnrate
T/W Bellona 11.8 kn, 72 thickness, 7667 side armour hp, 2.9 turnrate
while the bellona has 260 pds less broadside you should consider the 144 pds of pavels 6pds easily bounce off a the bellona's 72 thickness in any angle
-
Unfortunately the St. Pavel at its current state is one of the most useless boats in game. I would love to see the St. Pavel rebalanced to give it some purpose.
Whats wrong?
Even though I like its balanced crew and high turnrate it is way slower than a buccentaure, has less broadside weight with a usless weather deck having only 6pds/24pdrs carros which cant penetrate much at this class. Not to mention the quarter castle, and it has no front chasers. It is by far the worst 2nd rate (maybe even worse than 3rd rates?)
It is easy to leak, cannot even compete with a 3rd in a 1v1, has no role in portbattle or OW PvP.
How to improve it?
My suggestion would be to keep the good handling and crew balance, keep its lower broadside weightbrates but make it the fastest 2nd rate (somewhere half way inbetween buc/cristian and bellona) and give it some front chasers. Maybe upgrade the 6pdrs to 9pdrs or 24pdrs to 42 pdrs carro. To make the quarter castle more intersting give it 68pdr carros?
This would make the Pavel a good hunting boat compared to it's bigger and more powerful brothers.
What do you think?
-
4
-
-
9 hours ago, van der Decken said:
The testbed server had some. It looked good, the rewards just need to be better and varied between reals and doubloons, not just doubloons.
I was more referring to player driven delivery contracts!?
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:
Yes, that's why I'm saying books aren't good and the grind for ships slots isn't either. If the initial grind is so bad then maybe starting out is bad, new or old?
So you're suggesting to shoot the patient because he is sweating? Maybe he's just out of breath?
Grinding books and knowledges is boring? Grinding for that rare armour in other MMOs can be a big motivator for new and seasond players. So instead of trying to fix a symptom, maybe we should make the grind more challenging and interesting? Unless you prefer a pure skill-based game.
-
32 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:
A full wipe is in turn showing a sort of respect/confidence not only that you accept the old game was but a test for the real game, and that your new population's will benefit from it the fresh start across the board. If you don't wipe your game than you're pretty much saying "hey, pretty much the same game as before so it doesn't warrant a wipe" or worse "hey, we did everything so perfect that we don't need a wipe"
I agree with wiping reals and so on as there were plenty exploits but isn't it a bit naive to think that there will be a "new population" or the game changes drastically just because it's released?
Of course there might be some influx on new players but will it be more than on a sale? More likely some vets are coming back to give it another try and I am sure they are happy to get some redeemables. The playerbase we have now will be for sure the core playerbase after release.
In my initial post I was just pointing out that a wipe or not won't change much apart from the initial couple weeks.
Shouldn't the experience of a new player be always good no matter if joining right after release or half a year later??
-
1
-
-
I think its a decent idea. What comes into my mind though is delivery contracts!
-
1
-
-
I dont understand these dicussions all the time.
The game has to be balanced with a certain "end-game" population with money/books/skills/ships... a full whipe just creates something "abnormal" which occurs only once in a game (at its launch). NA shouldnt be made for just that moment but balanced for a diverse population with parameters to adapt to the amount of players. Otherwise we should get rid of gaining advantages through time spent in general, which btw offsets skill for less skilled people if they spend more time. And casual players will be always in a disadvantage through lack of training compared to a trained player even in a pure skill-based game.
We should rather balance the game and create opportunities for casual or less skilled gamers as well as content for elite and hard-core.
-
3
-
-
would love to see (or in this case not see) more than just visibility change though. waves at least in battle instance and different/rapid wind behaviour/change could be quite challenging. Huge forces on sails with the chance of demasting or capsizing if you do the wrong move.
-
2
-
-
agreed, would love to see some realism in weather condition and possibility to open close gunports deckwise in order to stay afloat in harsher conditions. Even could imagine some special events like a mysterious galleon always appearing in a large storm with special loot.
Epic event get kind of dull after a while.
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, vazco said:
when you flip a port, you have to pay 30.000 doubloons to activate a PB. You get them back once half of PB's BR joins the battle the next day. If you don't join, doubloons are redistrubuted to defenfers.
I think this would decrease RVR quite a bit!
-
I don't see the problem here. We set our timers to a more favorable time when we are able to defend them against an aggressor which has 10x more players and is weirdly fixated with hate and salt. We are a multinational nation, as every nation I guess. A cool-down on changing the timer to decrease abuse wouldn't hurt though.
-
1
-
Content - Special Nation characteristics
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
I think giving a certain faction a starting bonus in a specific way could be nice but we should keep access for everyone to everything.
e.g. you have to buy certain blueprints others might have from start.
Another way to give nations a more distinct spice could be to treat them more like classes of rpgs with special traits, but give the ability to change allegiance and sail under diffetent flag while keeping your 'race'. DLC would still work as a changing class.