Crimson Sunrise
-
Posts
287 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Crimson Sunrise
-
-
On 7/12/2019 at 6:37 PM, Raf Van Boom said:
You both still deserve to be demoted one rank. in my opinion anyway. If you had no intention of fighting the swede you should have left.
i'm a pirate i was sailing with a sweed player yesterday hunting outside kpr, its not against the rules of hte game to work with friends in other nations
-
On 7/11/2019 at 11:10 PM, Koveras said:
I think he's trying to say that Capn Rocko joined the battle killed the bot on his own side and then left - effectively cancelling Nakomuros ability to get xp for the AI.. I think..
except u cant kill AI on ur own faction when in battle, a patch prevents doing damage to ai on ur side of the battle so u cnat do green on green against friendly ai
-
On 7/10/2019 at 3:26 PM, John Sheppard said:
Ok from tomorrow then i ask everyone to do the same in british waters then
I came in a cheap trinc with no mods coz i wanted to fight not run and kite and we did get a fight after even tho we were out-gunned we won coz the russians were in fir/fir ships
lol i was outside kpr in a fir/fir ratt and no one came to play with me i was there for hours chasin ships
-
On 7/10/2019 at 7:20 AM, John Sheppard said:
In RvR this allowed coz it's the only way to screen. But if everyone does this in Open World to "protect their waters" as some of you say this will only ruin the game coz we all can have our alts sailing around with fir/fir speed trim hermiones or something else and keep any enemy we see in battle for half an hour or longer without any intention of fighting
This guy did not only NOT fight but he actively prevented us from leaving the battle , in multiple battles by shooting keeping us tagged with single shots from 2 miles away , yet every time we turn to fight he ran, both in OW and battle
Why didn't i dock? coz i was raiding in an enemy area sisal-campeche and there was nowhere to dock , After multiple attempts to dissconect (some of which resulted in him pulling us in battle and running again) we finally managed to disconect after 1 wasted hour
Again if you guys think this is ok i can apply it on a very large scale and see what you think about it thenso ur words is he fired at u in an attempt to keep u in battle this not a simple tag and run for the whole battle u gave chase probably firing at him to so he fired back basicly he had the intention to fight but on his terms.
-
so u ran into and enemy ship and an ally accidently ran into u and u got boarded and sunk and call it unfair
-
a clan ship dock as well thats tied to the clan warehouse so that clans can properly store ships that are being crafted in a clan warehouse port. like having 12- 18 slot capacity added to the clan warehouse menu for ship deposits, that way clans can store ships for members rather then taking up the shipcrafters personal dock space.
-
3
-
-
and from the first post its evidence u seek just look at the video it clearly shows that those that got sunk didnt shoot at the AI, but still manuevered to get sunk, this is no afking, this isnt dcing this isnt family emergencies this is a clan intentionally dropping hostilites so another clan doesnt get that port.
-
4
-
-
10 hours ago, z4ys said:
Why not add both.
- Mission for regional cities can only be taken by clans on the friendlist of region capital owner
- Hostiliy missions can only be joined when on the clan list of the defending and attacking side
Because It works both ways. Even the attacker side can be joined by alts that sink themselves and say "its not against the rules iam just a noob"
with this u just removed every small clan from the game able to do hostilities, since there is a limit on clans one the friendly list, any large clan can take port and then dictate who gets what port from that zone, it also works in reverse say and alt clan takes a valuable port now those ports cant be touched by anyone thats not allied to the capital owner. short and sweet now u have neutral ports that could be untouchable by the nation that owns the capital because that clan doesnt have anyone set ot allied
-
1
-
9 hours ago, Despeinao said:
I dont see an issue too, but is not the case. He cant use bracing because he shoot, maneuvered and increase his sails HP all time.
if thats correct does it also pause the repair cooldown
-
2 hours ago, Msk said:
You are sitting on the forums, adopting this woe is me mentality and spamming everyday multiple times false accusations against 2 seperate clans. Never ONCE has the US nation attempted to attack. The posts have grated on everyones patience so much that all sympathy the nation had was squandered.
The other thing is this assumption that the nation is being unfairly picked on and would normally be exceptionally safe. It is only 2 jumps out of a free port till you are breaching the capitals of the east coast.
The last thing is we were forced into this situation not by the United States, but rather by the game. SA has been our capital for the last year for our clan, that means the work that went into retaking the port and ship losses was FAR less then the required work to move the assests out of the port. Even today after taking the port I have 6 boats that have been just rotting in the port.
If there is a full assest wipe as well as saved ports or during release will be the ONLY time the frontline mechanic can be properly tested. You have to see what the buzz coming out of Shroud will be like, people wont be able to have line ships pre posted in various docks in free ports to allow nations to just super rapidly take multiple ports. People will have to level up as well as just do these various things in smaller boats. Last but not least, you wont have mad dashes where nations just cap out ports in the first week of the patch and replace entire fleets.
The overall salt while fun is being spammed to much on various posts, lets just create a US salt thread, and keep it contained since you cannot seem to grasp this is still testing AS WELL AS not a realistic outlook on what the game will be atm. When release happens (i cant speak for the other damaged party in this VCO) I know WO will have to secure our ship building, do missions and level up to use boats meaning yes the East Coast MIGHT be safer for a time. That still doesnt mean that especially with diplomacy to get possible port swap, you cant conquer up to Sav in less then a weeks time with only doing a single PB a day.
considering that with the map wipe and introduction of the frontline system your nation should never of had access or ability to take SA in the first place without owning a nearby capital that controls that port hostility missions. the fact the devs let u keep it after clearly being taken using a old mechanic that was supposed to be removed when the frontline system was added in. was a mistake on the devs part.
not to mention that the frontline system should of been thoroughly tested on the test bed server prior to being added to live servers to weed out these kind of exploits and unintended legacy mechanics. -
9 hours ago, Wraith said:
No one named in this Tribunal post has used a legacy mechanic beyond the initial testing and port acquisition. So your entire premise is DOA. Perhaps you may want to reassess your attitude here?
Why exactly should we "return" a port (they were ours already) that was acquired by something other than "cheating," as we've already established, and for which will be wiped upon release anyway? How exactly has the community been "hurt" by these actions beyond the content being provided to those players on both sides who should be happy that there's PvP being generated? Seriously. This is the War server, we are here to get fights, generate RvR, and test mechanics while providing feedback to the developers. We are testers, period. We are not here to play a final, released game. Get over yourselves.
actually its pretty damn accurate legacy mechanic is once the exploit or unintended legacy mechanic was found and not quickly patched out its been getting abused by many nations and clans as part of "TESTING" is a bit of a stretch as we all know it has not been patched yet so its being abused rather then tested. if we so called testers are testing the game we know the mechanic wasnt intended so that part of the testing phase is done no need to use it further. as for player population it is likely to decrease as an exploitable mechanic is being abused to acquire ports by using alts to pull hostility or to use other nations to start hostilites for another nation.
whats to stop these players from abusing new found exploits when the game releases if the behavior during testing isnt quickly rectified with a equal punishment for abusing the system.
-
On 5/6/2019 at 11:59 PM, Raekur said:
The only issue with this idea is that 2 coalition groups could in fact just keep going back and forth over a single port for the sole purpose of generating victory marks. With the settings you are asking for (no outside influence) there would be no way to prevent this from occurring on nearly a daily basis (using 3 ports instead of 1). It is exactly the same as someone using an alt account for generating combat marks. I think this is going to be the biggest hurdle to overcome with getting this idea to actually have a place. While the idea of a group being able to self regulate it's members it does come with a bit of a price in what method is best used to achieve the desired goal without that same mechanic being able to be used in ways it was never intended.
the problem with your reasoning to the PB's is only for those that win a PB or those that successfully defend a pb. get credit for the VM, if the players that did take the pb arent the same ones that defended the pb the ones that took it the first time loose their VM on that pb because they didnt participate in its defense.
-
that is true with just the 5 choices its no different then droping to 5 nations but with this u have more variety to the flags
-
1
-
-
i would assume if this idea gets used more national flags can be added in without a whole lot of coding or fixing needed which would put less strain on the devs
-
1 minute ago, no one said:
Add Portuguese empire in the Britannia flags.
portuguese nation isnt currently part of the 11 nations in NA atm
-
14 minutes ago, Crimson Sunrise said:
a better idea might be to reduce the number of nations to 5, 1 from each coalition and apply the flags to that coalition so instead of being a US player u would be a Western Coalition player with access to the flags of the nations that would make up that coalition or alliance, this way everyone gets what they want, we get 5 choices to start in, but still have access to the various nation flags for that coalition.
Northern Coalition Flags -- Dutch
- Sweden
- Denmark
- Poland
Western Coalition Flags -
- USA
- Spain
- France
Holy Alliance
- Prussia
- Russia
Britannia Flags -
- British Empire
Pirates Flags -
-
Pirates
so each nation is represented but gives the player base less choices of nations to join and still satisfies the feeling of being part of a specific nation. by allowing each player to fly the flag of their preferred nation by being apart of these coalitions and alliances.
with current nation starting ports, under this idea would become permanent coalition/alliance ports and a specific port will be chosen by the devs for the primary starting port. this way the coalition/alliance flag would be used for discerning who owns what port but will encompass multiple nations in that coalition. so instead of USA owning this port the western coalition would own that port. cutting down on the clutter of nations and making it easier for newer players and returning players to choose where they stand.
-
1
-
15 minutes ago, Ser_Slack said:
Wasn't that right around the time admin requested positive reviews for the possible release of more ships? Pretty sure it was.
*Edit* I think it was July of '16 as reflected by the Steam reviews graph.
requesting positive reviews by the players and offering a reason to do so is against steam's ToS for games on their site.
-
On 4/18/2019 at 5:48 AM, --Privateer-- said:
Not necessarily, for example my steam name is Lord Admiral Privateer.
if i make a review it wont show my ingame name it will only show my steam name on the review so anyone and u cant really call it a fake review because someone went with privateer as their steam name, u dont own the rights to that name or word. so in regards to that review your post here hold no reason for a tribunal with game labs when its a steam name not a game name.
and the admins here cant really go after a player over their steam name when posting a review. -
On 12/28/2018 at 6:55 AM, Slim McSauce said:
yeaah yeaah yeaah whatever bub. USRS has everything N of Jobe locked down tight, and if you and your guys even entertain the thought of coming up here, it's open season on all of you scrubs
dont pick a fight we know the US cant backup, especially with another nation you have a neutral standing with, dont make an enemy at one of the largest active nations on the war server. or do we need to share screenshots of the epic fail the US nation did against 6 french first rates when u had over 40 ships attacking them u couldnt sink a single one and yet lost over 12 ships to them
-
the battle report the devs can pull up will be all the proof they need and the battle log
[2018-Dec-14 16:54:19.116330] Tocriad: WHY
[2018-Dec-14 16:54:26.931490] Ruby The Reaper: i'm looking for woods
[2018-Dec-14 16:54:48.927099] Ruby The Reaper: which one u want the snow or the brig
[2018-Dec-14 16:55:02.761637] Tocriad: ill take the spaniard first
[2018-Dec-14 16:55:08.538012] Ruby The Reaper: they both spain
[2018-Dec-14 16:55:16.435820] Tocriad: guess both mine
[2018-Dec-14 16:56:04.964635] Ruby The Reaper: looks like ur new to that ship
[2018-Dec-14 16:57:17.725613] Tocriad: why are you such an asshole
thats chat log so the devs can find the specific battle tocriad said why at the start of the battle cause he got pulled in when i tagged a Tbrig and pulled a Tsnow in as well. shouldnt be hard for the devs to find the battle log
and to further prove this wasnt altered
[2018-Dec-14 17:07:24.207994] Ruby The Reaper: do u really want to play by our fort
[2018-Dec-14 17:07:54.015225] Despe: where is your fleet?
[2018-Dec-14 17:07:57.575668] Despe: a bug?
[2018-Dec-14 17:07:59.451897] Ruby The Reaper: i dropped it
[2018-Dec-14 17:08:11.877301] Ruby The Reaper: was a tbrig i just capped
[2018-Dec-14 17:08:46.432201] Ruby The Reaper: did u really want oak logs that badly
[2018-Dec-14 17:08:59.501057] Despe: en español, porfa
[2018-Dec-14 17:09:07.621642] Ruby The Reaper: i dont speak spanish
[2018-Dec-14 17:09:08.607623] LMM: i dont know if posible do this...:))
[2018-Dec-14 17:09:18.301979] Despe: no es mi problema
[2018-Dec-14 17:09:36.570684] Ruby The Reaper: u didnt think that thru with the square fort
[2018-Dec-14 17:10:48.056630] Ruby The Reaper: have a nice day
got jumped by spanish before getting back to port with the tbrig -
8 minutes ago, traitorous mctraitoro said:
Stating facts isn't being toxic. Lack of evidence doesn't mean I won't say anything. I can't stand hypocrisy. Or bullying. Screw the evidence. You and your friend teaming up on that guy after you started it. This is the wild west baby, grow up and stop being a snake.
Now that's being slightly toxic
i started what the battle i was the first ship in i was also the one who tagged the ai and the one that boarded it and capped it. it is not i who am teaming up on this player i am simply following the rules and stating facts, if facts and reality make me toxic because its not nice then so be it, i stand by my statement. and my evidence proves the truth. and i was only talking to tocriad after he got out of a battle with another BAIT member who he shot in that battle intentionally he was in a battle with Skinny Dave from BAIT see dave started that battle and tocriad jumped in and only shot him when dave was boarding that ai. so from our perspective tocriad intentionally shoots allies. which isnt tolerated. the devs can easily look at battle reports from the 2 battles and it will clearly show him doing damage to our ships.
and tocriads comment on nation chat wll show he didnt care about shooting his allies.
see when most players i know we apologize for doing friendly fire whether ingame chat or over voice chat. but unlike us he didnt show remorse or even bad about shooting allies. -
Just now, traitorous mctraitoro said:
If you refer to my earlier comment
"I don't care about the rules"
I won't let someone hide behind rules, especially if it's toxic.
you have no evidence other then my evidence proving he broke the rules regardless of how new his account is. the only one being toxic is u and tocriad who dont care about the rules.
-
1 hour ago, traitorous mctraitoro said:
You reap what you sow.
I don't care about the rules. If your going to gang up on someone new, start a tribuneral because clearly he won't have an account to defend himself, and tell half a story.
In my opinion you should grow up. You deserved what you got. Man up and except it instead of being a snake because you didn't get your own way.
Leave the guy alone.
and ur proof is what ur not even the one who is even part of this green on green action concealed one, its between me and tocriad and the devs
u say it was a new player how would u know he was a new player could be someones alt, he doesnt have an account to defend himself he can easily make one and tell his side with proof other then his words, i am simply following the rules and posting intentional green on green with evidence as the rules state to do. if u have a problem with this then u should bring evidence instead of screaming like a child about something thats not fair.
-
28 minutes ago, traitorous mctraitoro said:
Only half the story, they started it, hes just new and got angry.
Bullying him in my opinion. Especially bringing it to tribuneral expecting noone to say anything. Cowardly
green on green isnt tolerated i dont care if he's new or not its against the rules and he did it intentionally
not just to me but to another member of BAIT
if the devs check nation chat around 30 minutes later should see he admitting to shooting another ally player in another battle and not caring he did it
clearly showing he doesnt care about following the rules
Loot stolen
in Tribunal - Трибунал
Posted
i agree too privateer we need outlaw battles back