Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Horatiou

Members
  • Content Count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

47 Excellent

About Horatiou

  • Rank
    Landsmen

Recent Profile Visitors

452 profile views
  1. What really hurt the population of the game was the lack of communication between the developers and the playerbase. Suggestions went unnoticed by the developers who are more concerned with the amount of paints in the game than actually balancing and adding content. Which, could otherwise bring some amount of life to a rather ''shallow'' game. Personally, the lack of open-world content is what encourages me to sail blindly whilst doing cargo missions. There is simply nothing out of the ordinary that would otherwise make me sail in-game and take the time to indulge within the amount of wor
  2. 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.
  3. That is understandable. Are they not working on that at all?
  4. 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.
  5. 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 noth
  6. 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.
  7. That sounds like a good solution. Restrict certain ships from using specific wood combos.
  8. I'm glad to see I am not the only one concerned about the ridiculously fast Wasa's. I tried looking up on the max speed a Wasa (Vasa) was capable of but could never really find anything. Personally, I am tired of the Fir/Fir meta. At least try to balance this out, especially for the higher rate of ships.
  9. When it comes to games like Naval Action, I believe the little details are important. Whilst I love seeing sailors walk around the decks of the ships and operate the cannons, I want to see a bit more of a variety in uniform and duty. Perhaps a Captain manning the wheel. - Recoil to cannons when fired. - Greater amount of men on the top decks to bring more life to the game and battles.
  10. The randomisation of ship names is a much more appealing idea in contrast to leaving the players on their own with something potentially 'deadly'. - For instance, what has been recommended multiple times, the ''random name generator'' is perfectly feasible. There is no real connection to ones own ship, especially when their are five of the same name'd 4th rates in the same battle. I would not mind seeing five of the sames ships named differently as it adds flavour and variety to an otherwise dull naming experience.
  11. The whole ''Lack of communication'' was referring to the general lack of communication between the developers and player-base. I do not know as to whether it's because they're busy with the amount of games they are developing or just lack of concern. However, from what I have observed it's 50/50.
  12. I took the initiative by assembling a KPR coast-guard that is steadily growing. We have a discord and coordinate our defences accordingly. We are there to defend new and recurring players because we're tired of the ganking. But, the effort of a small group is nothing compared to a full-fledged clan. You expect too much.
  13. If the alliance system were to utilise all of which you just said, I'd say it could work out. Thank you for providing feedback unlike the user above you.
  14. Its difficult proposing a solution to a growing cancer that plagues this game. I like the idea which has been suggested multiple times such as the ''Front-line'' system or what you suggested. Understandably, the alliance system would not be perfect and with me being somewhat blind in that regard, might not change much in the long run. But, to implement a system that encourages nations being attacked by the same enemy to work together is what I'd like to see. Sort of a ''The enemy of my enemy is my friend'' - A coalition system, if you will. Or something that could prevent gankers from con
×
×
  • Create New...