Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

George Burton

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

41 Excellent

About George Burton

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

355 profile views
  1. That's such a silly assumption to believe 25 players could win a PB. That simply is not true and defies even the most basic understanding of Naval Action and the player-base. The Russians are in such a position where they could easily wipe most nations off the face of Naval Action and no such reaction would be enough to combat the continuous expansion. Even now, regardless of what the ''Big'' clans say, they aren't actively engaging with the Russians. (Britain, specifically.) Meaning the Russians are uncontested in their expansion. Big clans that say otherwise are those who have made deals with the Russians. Only recently there was an engagement at Daguilla where a supposed ''Port-battle'' was to occur, and whilst the British outnumbered the Russians 2:1, they still lost. Numbers don't mean everything, teamwork & coordination do. Britain as a faction is not centralised, most players do not actively participate in any meaningful way that contributes to the overall growth of the faction and leads to stagnation along with imbalances of power. I have been around for such a small amount of time, yet, I can smell so much bullshit it's ridiculous. (Not referring to you, but much of what I have seen) Lastly: Restricting the population of factions is not a good idea, but introducing a coalition system would be ideal for combating uncontested expansion. It's bullshit that the developers refuse to acknowledge this issue and monopolise on DLC instead of resolving issues that effect the future of Naval Action.
  2. Speak for yourself. You've posted nothing that otherwise suggests you have an understanding of the situation Naval Action currently resides in.
  3. ''Imbalance of power'' - This suggests many things in-terms of power. Specifically that of organisation, experience, teamwork & coordination. Population means nothing if the player-base is not centralised and merely do things on their own that contribute nothing for the faction and playerbase of that faction.
  4. The game as we speak is inherently unbalanced and no amount of bullshit from players can change that reality. As DreadPirateBob has stated ''It's not about forcing players to fight'' - People have no incentive to fight a nation when the reality of the situation is being outnumbered in a battle 10:1. This unfortunate reality is brought about because of a nation having a significant advantage over them all and nobody being able to fix a solution that could otherwise balance a severely-tipped scale. When you play a nation such as Great Britain, France or Netherlands you'll realise what an imbalance of power is. However, if these claims are true then a lot of clans need to get their thumbs out of their asses and start actively participating. Supposedly there is an agreement between the ''Big'' clans and the Russians where their expansion into British Central America is halted as long as they get dibs on the players and can gank as much as humanly possible for XP. If these allegations are true then by god that is pathetic. All this does is develop a power-vacuum that nobody is able to quell. Obviously, considering the current climate & state of affairs nothing will change and the player population will continue to dwindle until no competition remains. I hope these are not true, but what I have seen suggests otherwise. This is ridiculous blobbing that nobody is attempting to quell.
  5. We should switch off the care-bear server entirely. An AI's aggression should be based off of strategic importance (Capital Zones) or BR Rating. If an enemy ganker approaches a port, say, Kingston, then the AI should develop hostility towards that player and intercept, including other AIs within the vicinity. If the AI aggression is developed right it will quell the efforts of gankers, and just not end up a general nuisance.
  6. Which one of you represents the clan? If you want PM me and I'll invite you to the discord, a joint-training session sounds fantastic.
  7. Perhaps people post the same threads over and over in an attempt to actually gain the attention of the developers. You know, something that everyone with an idea for improving the game wants. I understand that the game may be technically limited when it comes to optimisation as one of the previous users commented. If that is the case then I suppose we'll have to wait and see if they can implement better waves in the future. I'm only here to suggest improvements. Not make smart-ass comments.
  8. That is understandable. Are they not working on that at all?
  9. Great Britain What do I love? As much of an oxymoron as it sounds for a player like me, is the ability to find player-vs-player combat just outside Kingston / Port Royal. I despise the gankers for targeting relatively new players and those trying to actively work on improving, which is why I made the ''West Indies Coastal Squadron'' - We have had a fair amount of success at keeping Kingston safe. However, it never is enough. What do I hate? Great Britain constantly receives an influx of new players without any developed teamwork or communication. Most of the time when I try to communicate with new players or recurring members of the faction it gets me no where. Often when I join a battle with a friendly who has (unfortunately) been ganked they refuse to listen to advise and insist on getting themselves killed. Not to mention the fact many players have no interest in dealing with the gankers and would rather complain. The thought of them losing their ''pride'' is too much for many to handle, and I can never understand why. (Pride = Ship)
  10. It should not be reintroduced as a constant, but rather a variable. Only during storms should these sort of waves be produced. I do not intend for them to change the waves to something like that in-general.
  11. Guess who's back with another suggestion, obviously, me. What am I proposing? To reintroduce storms to Naval Action as a means of adding dynamic to a dull player-vs-player experience. Why am I suggesting this? From what I have observed both in reality and within Naval Action waves had a varying degree of effects when it came to Naval Combat. They were both your best and worst enemy and should never be taken lightly. Secondly, from personal experience when it comes to Naval Action player-vs-player the environments are incredibly dull and uninspiring, really nothing ever changes. What I propose is for the developers to reintroduce these sort of waves. Why? To make the game feel more dynamic, bring the life of the sea to Naval Action. I don't really know what else to add here, other than what I wrote above. Feel free to contribute. Do I feel this feature is necessary? It's a double-edged sword. That's all I have to say.
  12. It is incredibly irritating hearing people mention GB as the ''Strongest'' nation yet fail to realise how plagued the faction is with inexperienced players without coordination/teamwork experience. The total amount of players on a faction means very little, especially when the majority of those players don't actively participate in helping the faction but rather remain on their own. Which as a whole weakens the entire faction because they lack the means to do anything effective on their own.
  13. I actually like the idea of seeing convoys transporting cargo from one port to the other, perhaps escorted by higher or similar rated ships. I'd definitely say that would add a lot of life to Naval Action. It would give people the opportunity to get more active with a high-risk, high-reward attitude again.
  • Create New...