Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Bach

Members
  • Content Count

    1,108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Bach last won the day on May 21 2018

Bach had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,363 Excellent

About Bach

  • Rank
    Commander

Recent Profile Visitors

1,487 profile views
  1. Bach

    Fun > Winning

    Some forget it's just a game. Even when it's a game you want to win. I think we all agree more population would make the game more fun. We even have the fall sale going on in steam. When new players read about "OMG Russians using hostility exploit to flip ports" and similar stuff it acts as a negative review on the game. They may think why continue investing hours if older players are just going to cheat? It doesn't really matter if an event matches the exact rules on being an exploit. Just looking like an exploit is bad enough. Let's try to clean things up out there at least while the sale i
  2. In any game you only get the first 10-20 hours of game play to hook new players. Lets be honest, NA first impression isn't perfect. The tutorial is hard and many player feel they have to complete the "final exam" to play. That exam is very hard for virgin players. The step where you gain the Rattlesnake should be renamed as "the final exam". The steps to get up to the Hercules should be renamed as "officer training" or some other name that implies extra credit stage. Next we need someone to put in a little extra effort to create some mission new players can perform in those Rat
  3. Though a map port reset would solve the zerg nation problem it would only be a temporary solution at best. Worse yet it actually exacts a penalty on all players even if they didn't propagate the zerg. Having to re-grind all the ports and higher level buildings would leave many player disappointed in a fix that punishes them for doing nothing wrong. I might suggest actually fixing this problem in game rather than outside it. If the GMs simply implemented either a cap to the number of ports a nation may own it deters the RvR viability long term of a large zerg nation. Another more i
  4. I like the idea over all. One suggested modification to address the concern HachiRoku has would be to add a degrading BR for people that get sunk. Just spit balling here as I am not 100% on the rules in the zone. But if the supposed low skill new players repeated get killed the system could assign them a lower BR for the zone that eventually they will be able to get into fight where they can watch others, assist and probably get a win to raise low spirits.
  5. I think you have all proven that the tow to port is a commonly misused tool but of minimal grand effect to the game.. That and that the "lazy hunter" is also a true fact of the game using mechanics to reduce risk. I'm am not sure that opening up tow to port to county capitals and national capitals wouldn't cause worse problems than moving cargo ships. Cargo ship movement is actually the least of the potential problem I see. Especially when the "tow to port" locations are known to all. For example: the two most dangerous spots in the French Parisian Furniture route from Fort Royal area to Por
  6. I doubt this particular issue is worth all the drama. It is certainly NOT worth spending development time on that could be used to get us closer to release and more population. In the case of Spain, the player has to sit in a known spot for 5min not moving. That's a good target at risk and we all know where to find it. Also, I highly doubt anyone is making lots of gold off Parisian furniture from Santa Fe. Just based on my French experience the competition for the furniture of our multiple deep water ports is so high I rarely get a full load of P Furniture every few days. I can't imagine
  7. One of the more disheartening things repeated throughout the forums is players complaining about lack of content in a sand box game. It's probably that most of them haven't actually played many or any sand box games before. In a sand box the Players are supposed to generate most of the content. Not the Devs. The problems I see with this are as follows: Players are to limited in their ability to shape the environment to create content. Player generated content is centered to much on port conquest and little other means. Port conquest often requires to many players to allow f
  8. Well drama generally takes at least two parties to achieve. In any event, I hope you US clan guys realize that one more clan of guys hunting the USA or GB coastlines on NA time zones isn't really all that helpful. There is a rather stagnant dynamic noticeable on the NA time zones. it's been this way as long as I can remember. USA,GB and pirate team tend to pick up most of the new and casual English speaking players. These are the loosely organized guys that mostly NPC hunt and occasionally RvR. But not the hard core band of inseparable brothers types that generally look to separate
  9. Just my 2 cents- Everyone should play where they feel happy about playing. If US team don't like playing USA then moving to France may be a good thing. If VCO don't like the alliance restrictions of the USA Senate then they shouldn't have to abide by them as long as they make that known and don't try to play both sides by hiding behind those alliances when convenient. Unfortunately for Rax and clan, TS permissions and even discord pages can matter when leaving a former nation IF you intend to hunt them. Why? Because we all know what bases our former team mates used and we know their
  10. Weren't you the defending team? What is that mortar brig doing in there?
  11. My math may not be that good but I don't think you were ever getting those x7 Oceans, x2 Bellona, x2 Wasa and no mortar brig into that teeny tiny port battle. Well played indeed. <salute> It seems you got the yanks right where you wanted them all along.
  12. This! It's not that I think we need a troop function. It's that the battle itself needs more tactical variety.
  13. It's a sand box game. Or at least it's supposed to be. So the ultimate goal is player created content. Honestly my eyes start to roll into my head these days reading the forum complaints of not enough content. You are supposed to be the content makers in a sand box. Most of the guys that have risen to leading the current nations just suck at it. for example, just read the thread above. When players decided to wage a campaign at Carta area players created a big bad nasty nemesis of content. Other players rose to band together and fight that. 700 players had fun. But then one side won the c
  14. As someone who has been in the navy, I seem to remember all those marines onboard were there for something. The idea that we actually capture towns and cities with just ships isn't all that realistic. It seldom works that way. We can certainly raid a town or city but a holding garrison has to be brought in. If we were going for realistic "naval actions" to conquer an island there would be an SOL fleet, a landing fleet and escort/skirmish squadrons assisting both. As well as communication packets/cutters running around. I'm not saying we need to simulate all that crap. But troop movement
  15. Just to add some new dimensions to port battles. Add a small circle or two along the beaches outside the gun range of the forts/towers. If a cargo class vessel carrying sufficient Warsupplies/troops makes it into this circle for a certain amount of time it is considered to have landed ground troops. This results in silencing the nearby fort(s). Could be interesting to see a use for Indiamen in port battles and a cooresponding use of 5th rate interceptor ships. Make it challenging by putting the landing zones far from the point circles where the main fleets are at. Might add some frigate act
×
×
  • Create New...