Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Bach

Members
  • Content Count

    1,108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Bach

  1. 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 is going on. You don't really need that port, that one kill or anything bad enough to discredit the game itself. It isn't the game masters fault for not putting in a rule to force players to play honorably. That is a choice we make on our own.

    • Like 4
  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 Rattlesnakes that are really fun. After that let nature take its course.

     

    • Like 4
  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 interesting fix, however requiring more programming, would be to have NPC fleets begin attack a nation with a lot of ports owned. The more they own the more they get targeted by NPC fleets attacking their ports. This both creates content and makes owning large swaths of ports problematic. Not to mention it would open up neutral ports now and then deep inside what used to be safe money making terrain to the zerg nation.  Just some suggestions but I think fixing this in game without taking things away from all players indiscriminately would be more agreeable to the game population in general.

  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 Porta Espania are the coast off Carricou and the gap between Porta Espania and Guiria. To avoid the lazy hunters at Carricou you had to plot an open ocean route around it. For the Gap you needed a look out or parked in El Toco till you got one. Under the change @Ink made you can now tow directly into Porta Espania from across the Gap. Now un lazy hunters could sit at the tow to Espanis spot instead of the Gap or both. Merchants can also trip them up by towing to Guiria to get past the gap and loop south out of sight to Espania. They can wait at Nuprima and visually see lazy hunters sitting in front of Porta Espania.

    Any way, the point is that no matter what you do about thus feature you can't 100% fix it to un exploitable levels and still keep the aspects of it that help new players that get lost, stuck or just frustrated at sea. By the same token lazy hunters will always be able to sit on top of Nuetral and friendly ports and the local authorities will let them dock up any time even though they are hunting their commerce. Neither of these functions are really game breakers. The game needs a place for lazy hunters and lazy merchants whether the rest of us like it or not.

    • Like 2
  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 how competitive it must be with Santa Fe being the only producing port south of Cuba. Not to mention it is a shallow water port so moving the goods is an extra hassle. If this is a problem for you just capture the port and end the Santa Fe to Havanna furniture market.

    far worse than this Econ travel distance saver is using tow to port fir combat purposes. We have used it as France to get past screens, paratroop on top of PB fleets and to just plain safely dock into blockaded ports. You think an entire nation competing for one furniture port is worse than all that? Tow to port is just a fact of life in the game. It is semi exploitable like a dozen other necessary game functions. Can we just move on to the bigger things so we can get some players back?

    • Like 2
  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 for smaller groups to shape the environment.

    Dominance by select groups is to easily maintained. When the leaders of these groups decide to stop creating content, be it by alliances or otherwise just sitting stagnant, it is to difficult for lesser groups to replace them.  They can literally just log in to maintain their ports and otherwise not play.

    Suggestions:

    Allow Econ to be used as a back door method to destabilize or flip ports, increase maintain costs or stifle tax collections.

    Allow players a way to shift trade routes (ex: Parisian furniture) from always being the same ports.

    Allow small group raids to have effects on ports be it stifling tax collections, increase maintain costs or shifting trade routes.

    Allow player contracts for goods to be seen globally so Econ players can create valuable trade runs and less need for Alts.

    Make screening an activity only declared allied nations can perform. It's rediculous for France to be fighting Prussia daily only to have France screen Prussia when it comes to port fights. There needs to be national consistency in who defends a port.

    Increase maintenance costs on ports? Something to deter players from just sitting on the same ports and only logging in to defend them in PBs. There needs to be benefit for players that play every day creating content vs. those that don't.

     

    Just thoughts

     

  8. 37 minutes ago, Dragonfire said:

    Ok so we were useless helping usa nation....check

    You and your clan are way more skilled than the FIVE of us...check

    You are extremely butt hurt we moved on quietly without doing what your doing here...check

    We now as a nation free to attack you are doing so with 4 guys against all your clan and the usa nation and your butt hurt about it ? ...check

    You said we did nothing, helped no one, disrupted the usa nation, and were useless ( I remind you again we were 5 guys at the time ) and your upset we are leaving ? Why uyou making such a childish big deal out of this ? 

    AHHHH Drama that's it all you want is others to see you as a power in the game so go ahead it is all yours.

    Do what you criticize others as being incapable of doing , don't cry because 5-7 guys moved on we will consider sending you alimony if you truly can't make it on you own , move on ,stop crying the soap opera is over all attention is now on you and your clan start the next chapter and lead them to VICTORY Chris, you is the mannnnn it's all about you now gl.

    No reason to even miss what you have more than once pronounced as inferior players.

    :)

     

     

    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 themselves from "the newbs".  So as a result the USA/GB coasts and Mortimer town become the farm lands of everyone else.  The Prussians, NA French, Swedes and select pirate clans even move to have bases right next to their home ports because it's just that easy.

    The only equalizing force these new comer and casual player base teams have is numbers. They have less skill in general but have greater numbers. So what do the elites do when this one advantage is utilized against them? They cry like babies that they the victims of multi-flips that are destroying the Game OMG!  So they recruit the other elite groups in an alliance for the day to stop the dreaded multi-flip by the big bad newbs wrecking the game. Total rubish. The smaller elite clans can easily take those ports back any any later date they wanted even if they lost. What it is really about is simply never losing and keeping the weaker skilled teams down in "their place".

    So US team has decided to join France. Great but don't expect any trophies for taking the easy road.

    VCO has decided to snub the USA team Senate. Not as easy of a road as leaving and hunting your former team mates but also not the most challenging path.

    To the remaining USA Senate. You've just had two active group split ranks. If you don't think there is something wrong and in need of repair in your current leadership model then I'm not sure how much of a clue you need. What all you guys should do is join forces with GB and the Mortimer pirates to multi-flip the crap out of the games current elite power barons till they cry uncle and things reset a bit. In any event it would get rid of the stagnant power balances and some of the chest beating. LOL

  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 play habits to a large degree. The TS rooms show you whom is online, how many and combined with the previous team knowledge you likely know what they are doing and where to find them.  If UWS is attacking USA team players on the USA coast, as referenced above, then leaving TS and Discord pages would be the only way to make it fair. So far it does not appear that VCO is leaving the USA nation or attempting to hurt the USA nation. Assuming members of the USA nation may still work with VCO in ways that may not be directly related to senate activities then it might be wise to keep them on the TS. Unless VCO starts making alliances counter to those of the Senate.  You boys may have to work that out.

    • Like 1
  10. 14 hours ago, Aster said:

    Was a bit busy outside the battle. #Creating Content

    3AEBBD52B3A17D7919A378FA5678FA4E1C436A49

    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.

  11. 4 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

    You can kind of think of it that way how we have it now. Capture circles, points go up. Capture a circle, you're landing troops that flood into the port until it hits 1000. I guess an easy way to do this would be put some lines of troops that move from the landing area of the circles to the port, and what would make this different is that smaller ships could fire on these troops, slowing progress to taking the port. 

    This way you open up a bit more tactic in PBs more than just cap circle and sink ships, and promote ship variety.

    This!   It's not that I think we need a troop function. It's that the battle itself needs more tactical variety.

    • Like 1
  12. 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 campaign. Then you didn't know what to do next. Some went to other games and some just complain about not enough content. But they don't create more.

    The sand box mmo world is cyclic. Power block group form, dominate and eventually either fade away or catastrophically collapse. Then others need to rise to take their place for the content to continue. Long term alliances and peace really screw up RvR war games. Once campaigns are over the alliances all need to be wiped. Player base tends to shuffle on its own following a collapse. Some group needs to take the bull by the horns and create the next campaign by setting new goals for its nation.

    Anyway, you get the idea, we won't have fresh battle content until some of us creates some.  I would suggest the game needs a new villains and new heroes. Someone needs to step up.

    • Like 1
  13. 16 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

    Lets keep it to the waters only, it is called Naval Actions after all not Naval/Land Action.

    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 ships would provide additional content and tactical considerations.

  14. 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 actions skirmishes to port battles that are normally just all hvy weights. 

     

    • Like 4
  15. I find it hard to see this attractive as a 10 point perk.  I think it's got some potential but not as a 10 point perk.

    You have to give up all other perks you would normally fight with so you are somewhat gimped in non duel situations.

    Finding a ship on the OW that is same rate, also duel perked and sailing alone at the time is a lot of "ifs" in a game where we can currently sail nearly a half hour without even seeing another player no matter what ship he is in. For this reason alone I would favor a duel room that finds the opponent for us.

    • Like 3
  16. 14 hours ago, Fenris said:

    This will not work properly in long terms. Boredom and lack of content is what kills RvR. Locking a region or a port only for 1 clan, is like having a rare toy, ultimately 1 day you get bored of it, and you toss it away.

     

    Not really. EVE locks blue prints to specific lotto winners. This does not stop the proliferation of elite ships made from the blue prints. But it does create very rich players that pay for a lot of goods to be hauled to ship producing sites.

  17. 1 hour ago, Intrepido said:

    But this is not good, very few clans can actually field entire port battles.

    And what about those who help in screening or hostility?

     

    No mate, my idea will work far better. A list for friendly clans that can take advantage of the port ressources.

    That would work as well. Either way the clans that can become owning member can sell the ships with the bonuses to others and it creates a bit of an industry for the larger clans. More incentive to be a larger clan than to be a bunch of small clans mostly made up of ones own alts running around.

  18. 3 hours ago, Fenris said:

    Something else..With taxation feature, some kind of economic warfare is possible. This just needs to be extended in a propper way. Port needs to be VALUABLE, needs to be SUPPLIED, and needs to GENERATE MONEY, needs TAXES from POPULATION, then it has a real VALUE.

    Cut the supply, population goes down, TAXES go down, NATURAL DISASTERS, BLOCKADES, RAIDS, UPRISINGS, foreign PROPAGANDA, all these things might influence TAXATION.

    Same in opposite direction..SUPPLY inhabitants with food, luxury stuff, POPULATION can be increased, and taxes go up, treat them well, they won`t follow enemy..and so on.

    That is a real reason for a war, not a regional bonus, where every player can buy an "alt", open outpost and shipyard, and craft same ships as enemy.

    Nations already now, fight for MONEY ports, not so much for teak/white oak ports. Why? Because money is still THE exchange medium for activities in the game.

    You can probably avoid most of the "alt" issue if the bonuses ONLY apply to the clan owning the region.

    • Like 2
  19. I like the new forged papers mechanic and I think $20 and a 1/month switch is good. However, after getting it I discovered the shift does not come with a name change option. Who wants to play a Spanish captain with a French name?  Why would a reformed pirate in the British navy still call himself "Black Dave the Pirate"?  

    Is there a way to change name with the forged paper mechanic that I just missed?

    • Like 11
×
×
  • Create New...