Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

MasterBurte

Members
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About MasterBurte

  • Rank
    Landsmen
  1. If you combine this with limited repair ability as in my other thread. You can't just stock pile repair kits and get back to 100HP. This would play well together.
  2. I don't intended this to be a winner collects afterwards mechanic. Here are a few examples (all has to be balanced -> more realism = better): 1. A enemy is sinking. If you want to get his ship, you still have to fight his crew. You can't stick your ships together while there is still enemy crew aboard. If it's worth for you to board the enemy AND afterwards prefent the ship from sinking is your decision. But there is no real benefit. The crew remains aboard as long the ship is still recoverable. 2. A enemy is sinking in shallow water. The crew can remain aboard as long as the
  3. Hi captains, i just read the thread about multi durable ships. That brought me to the idea, that we could get the ability to recover ships that sunk or are still sinking. It is always frustrating if you lose a ship that costs a lot. It was frusttrating for me, regardless that i had only tier 6/7 ships so far. I loved my heavy rattlesnake... :-( If we slow down the sinking (what is realistic) we could recover a sinking ship, if we fix it to another ship or two. We could than tow it somewhere or fix some leaks and remove water. At shallow water we could even recover a completly
  4. I don't see where the fun is lost when i have to plan the ships load ahead. As some comments tell us, most ships had plenty of ammunition aboard. In most cases there would be no need to rearm in a battle. And if the battle prolongs that long (hours) that you need to reload your ship is probably in a bad shape at this point. It's nothing that is 100% nessecary for this game, but it adds to the immersion. I can't say it often enough. If a game just wants to meet current gamplay standards it's ok, but nothing more. To be a great game, there is more than just meeting the standards. For those
  5. Hi captains, recently i was in a battle, where i was unable to run away/leave battle and i had no chance to fight the superior enemy forces. In this situation i would have loved to be able to surrender to the enemy. But as long as the only benefit from surrendering is to skip an otherwise impossible battle i see no resean to ever use this option. When you look films about pirates and naval battles, surrendering is often the last option to save your own life. If a pirate attacks a trader that has no chance to win the fight, i can imagen that usually the trader would surrender. He migh
  6. In todays world games with only acceptable standard won't be attractive for very long. If you don't want a dropping player base you have to do something special that attracts many players. Your goals should always be higher than what you could possible achieve, that's the only way to achieve the impossible. This game is very interesting indead, but the question is, is standard enough. I don't think so. This game has the potential to be a AA historic correct naval battle simulator. Trible A only if they get more money = more players. Look at Star Citizen for example, what it achieves for t
  7. @Hethwill If you are the one that often engages into battles with multiple enemys that outnumber you, than you are not neccesary on the short end of the stick. Just take more ammunition with you. You could think, well everyone would take as much ammo as possible. I won't believe that. First ammo cost money and loosing a ship with enormous amount of ammo cost more. Second more ammo needs to have a drawback. A major drawback would be the heavier load, what makes the ship slower and less maneuverable. On the other side higher ammounts of ammo increases the chance of fire and ammo explosion (an am
  8. Another thing that would become a part of the game would be traders trading a load full of powder. Just think of the suprise, if you shoot him and he blows up... 8-)
  9. @Sir Lancelot Holland Boarding can get really neccesary if you run out of ammunition and the opponent if full stocked. You could even (if boarded succesfull) transfer ammunition to your ship.
  10. Hi captains, me again with another suggestion. Currently the hull repairs are much more expensive than the really cheap (to cheap) repairs at the habours. For me the hull repairs are something you would need to make temporary combat damage repair (CDR). To balance the running costs of ships more to a steady cost instead to, if i have to use hull repairs i lose money, i would make both repair methods completly different. 1. Hull repairs get way cheaper. They no longer repair the ship with the same performance. Every damage you repair only gains 30% of its original strength back. You c
  11. It's intended to refill balls and powder. I wouldn't find this annoing. The opposite, i think aiming get's even more important. Big ships of the line think twice to "waste shoots on smaller targets, what would benefit the gentelmens agreement, that you shoot the ship, that is your weight class, if possible. Another thing that would be made possible (with damage model adjustment) are ammo explosions. I don't think it is a good option to refill everything automaticly after a battle. Quite the opposite, i want you to pay for the shoots you fired. At the moment there are no real running costs
  12. Hello captains, after a while playing now, i find it strange to see limited ammonition on double shoots and charged shoots but unlimited ammonition for the rest of the ammonition. I played another game "pirates: caribean hunt", these games are very similar but there is one major difference. The ammunition is limited to what you bought in a habour and loaded on to your ship. This works very well in my opinion. It also lays a small layer of complexity on the econemy. What seems to be necessary is that we get some values how much powder is used in varios gun types dependend on th
×
×
  • Create New...