James Roberts
-
Posts
38 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by James Roberts
-
-
1 hour ago, Anne Wildcat said:
I suggests a full wipe.
(ducks for cover)
I do hope a full wipe is coming before release. I know most of us are waiting for that while the game gets its mechanics worked out.
-
2
-
-
To the OP,
I think anyone who reads this post is probably speechless at your outrage.
1. If playing this patched game on the 16th was so important to you, its strange you would so easily choose to never play it again because of a patch delay.
2. I have played PC games for decades and the notion that a delay in development is somehow new to you is astounding. I do not recall one project in game development that has ever been on schedule, I am not defending the industry.. it simply is what it is. I highly doubt this is news to you.
All of this leads me to believe your outrage is actually based on some sort of personal revenge rather than an honest post over developer delays.
In either case, I feel like you only succeeded in looking like a fool.
Regards,
Roberts
-
10
-
-
Sounds like a good plan Dev.
-
1
-
-
Definitely moving in the right direction, but I think this smacks a bit too medieval and too heedless quick in nature. "You are a lord today, tomorrow you are not, Sunday you are a lord again"
Yes there were lords and estates and rulers in the early 1800's, but perhaps more contemporary and Caribbean terms could be used? Our "rulers" are all in Europe. For instance, the British the leader was known as the Commander-in-chief, Jamaica station, etc.
-
A quick look at the system used in "Mount & Blade" will depict a solid system where you recruit peasants, train them over time and pick their specialty, spend money to upgrade them, and replace them when they die.
Its almost a game within itself. It provides value to experienced crew vs a rookie crew and its organically grown.
-
4
-
-
Rather than "war effort points" ending the war and giving ships, money etc; I submit that this is where you actually "win" the ports that you have captured permanently.
Ports taken during the war should be considered occupied and not available to the original owner, but not yet given to the occupying nation. Only after the war do the ports officially change hands by use of these war points.
This will allow global mechanics to assign a point value on which ports will actually change hands, thus helping to balance weaker and stronger nations by use of a handicap. i.e. if a nation only has three ports remaining, claiming one from them (33% of their power) would be expensive in comparison to a nation that has 87 ports.
-
Of historical note, when the Pirate invasion of the French happen, WIS had ships in the area. We even had a few skirmishes around Bridgetown. Instead of helping us when the pirates landed, they gobbled up the ports in the area that were not defended and continued to PvE north of St George. I thought there was some outreach to them for help but we did not get any from the British nation until the fated Battle of Aves. WIS then couldn't stop the tide of pirates which flowed into the ports they had captured. No French help could be given because we were "all hands on deck" at Pedernales.
In this French captain's opinion, WIS missed an opportunity with the French and the British nation missed a opportunity for a valuable ally.
PS. PORT TIMERS. Set your port timers if you want a Port Battle fight even if you are outnumbered. Prime French Example: Pedernales.
Sir,
That isn't remotely accurate. We appealed repeatedly with the French to work together against the Pirates; but several prominent French captains and some British captains with other units made that nearly impossible.
After Aves the French national character became largely pirate, thus sealing your reputations with our nation.
Alas, RvR in this game is messy and unmanageable and needs much development.
-
1
-
-
The only card you have is the "we lost face by underestimating the pirates" one. The shieldwall you ran into this weekend wasn't even planned, we totally wigned that defense. The only thing you managed to do is pump moral tenfold. Keep working the undefended ports near Mort, that's all you guys can take. Might want to work on leveling your scrubs, half of your guys were undercrewing hardcore.
Mr. Bruce,
As you regale this tale to your friends at the pub, how do you explain fleeing your own capital to attack the mighty forces of France? I am not suggesting it takes the wind from your hard fought conquest, but it certainly raises a few questions about the amount of glory you deserve to tout.
W. Roberts
-
1
-
-
good luck to your clan but the whole idea of a "US" server is simply silly. there is no need to split the community as they are there is a need to expand one large server so everyone from every timezone can play together, Do what you like but its only exacerbating the issue.
Yes it is silly... but who named the server "US"? The game developers did that.
I suppose we should find it flattering that the people on PVP1 care so much about us leaving, but it is increasingly annoying. We felt the writing was on the wall on the future of that server. It happened to us before and it appears to be happening again.
I wish the splitting of the servers wasn't done, but it was. If you look through my past threads you can clearly see that I was concerned the moment a "US" server was created for the very reason we all agree on. Now with people constantly contacting us, writing on our recruitment page about how sad it is, coming into PVP2 to trying and coax players away, basically telling us to ignore the fact that there is a "US" server and ignore the fact that the port battle timers on PVP1 (in our ENTIRE experience) were set to mid-day "US" time. We adapted to the game mechanics so we could play the game.
So again,
1. There are "US" and "EU" labeled servers.
2. On the "US" server we generally fight PB during 6-12pm Eastern Standard time.
3. On the "EU" sever we would have had to take off of work and attack at 1 PM Eastern standard time.
We dealt with reality, not wishful thinking.
As to the out of place comment about us and other British players on PVP1 I can only say you blew that out of proportion. Our only beef was with one group's leadership, not more, not less. It is on that matter you are clearly misinformed. If you want the full details I will gladly give you a timeline of events, what was said, and what was done; and then you can pass judgement. If in some way you are asserting that our relationship with that leadership had anything to do with us leaving you are quite mistaken, thus, it has no place in this discussion here.
Regards,
W. A. Roberts
-
7
-
-
-
-
-
Could we not find a more appropriate term for player ran organizations?
-
5
-
-
Do any of you actually have the game?
This game is not yet in any condition for general use, thus we are not trying to recruit new men nor ruining the fun of existing members with playing this game until more of it's potential can be realized. To bring in new players only to have them burn out on testing doesn't seem to be in the best interest of anyone.
Regardless, it is a wise thing to be polite, and a stupid thing to be rude. To make enemies by unnecessary and willful incivility is just as insane as setting your own ship on fire.
I appreciate that you gentlemen are testing the game.
W. A. Roberts
-
Most games, and indeed what you are asking for, is not really "insurance". What you want is guaranteed repayment for guaranteed losses. No insurance company would make that deal.
-
Gentlemen and Fellow Countrymen,
Being appointed, through the Favour of our most excellent Governor, to raise a Body of Men for the service of his Majesty; It is the most happy Circumstance of my Life to be the Instrument of leading you forth to Honour and Renown.
-
1
-
-
As in all of these linear fighting computer games the formations often tend to break apart frequently and can look like masses of men rather than brigades having individual units struggle to maintain position. I wonder how it would appear if "companies" would lag or surge in relationship to the entire unit rather than individual soldiers.
-
The graphical style is really fresh, and to the point; I'm glad you haven't gone for an all-grit approach like a lot of other Civil War games. A game has to be enjoyable to look at, as well as reflecting the time period it depicts. The particle effects are nice and fluffy too.
Agreed, I would love to see a revolutionary war battle on these maps.
-
Post your most wanted sequel to ultimate general no matter how insane they are.
in General Discussions
Posted
Co-op multi-player would be fun.