Mormegil

Think they release the Trinco DLC on 3rd of August because on that day in history HMS Shannon, a class-sister of Trincomalee, was launched. Not getting in game though afaik.

Thanks for the stats. Looks quite balanced. I especially like the Locust-Live Oak tradeoffs with Live Oak being slightly better in Thickness while Locust is slightly better in HP. I'm only not sure if Locust should not have the same speed value as Live Oak. With Locust being slower and having lower thickness i assume most people will prefer Live Oak... I also like that every Planking has a positive Speed Bonus, so it will always be better speed-wise to have a Planking instead of Crew space. I'm not sure about the Mahogany-Teak Interaction for Plankings though. Is it intended that both woods are nearly the same with Mahogany having a 0.1% speed bonus and Teak a 1.3% Thickness (1.2 for Seasoned Wood) Bonus? All other values are the same except for splinter resistance and repair time which are slightly better for Mahogany... I've honestly never really used Mahogany or Mahogany S, so i don't know how it compares, but i feel they are really similar now, maybe too similar (for Frames they are quite close as well).

The Tricomalee is a really good 5th rate and I really like sailing her (5 knowledge slots open) but she's not really useful in most larger PvP groups, where bigger ships are more wanted. She's great for hunting solo though and can beat a redoutable if you play your game correctly. @admin Please don't be mad at me for writing this, but you are not very good at managing expectations, which causes upsets with the community (or at least large parts of it). I will try to objectively explain why many (not all, of course) players are unhappy about the trinco DLC announcement and give a suggestion on how to avoid bad feelings in the future. Objectively nobody has a right to be mad about getting a ship for free. Obviously, your announcement to give out a ship worth 40-50€ as compensation for reducing the price of the game was appreciated by nearly everyone. The problem with this is the clear statement of a price tag. The only comparison players had for the price tag were the existing DLCs. Compared to 4th rate DLC ships (~34€) and the redoutable (42€) a price/worth of 40€-50€ produced an expectation that the free ship would either be a really strong 4th rate (which would have been a problem due to being the strongest ship in her rate) or another 3rd rate. Since you announced at some point that you wanted 3rd rates to be among the most commonly sailed ships, that was the more widely expected option. Combined with the denial of making the admiral de ruyter craftable (which also upset many due to going back on a promise - again expectations - ) many probably hoped the admiral de ruyter would be the freeLC ship. The Ruyter is a really nice ship with a different focus than the redoutable but currently impossible to earn and therefore never seen on open world due to being a collector item. Giving it out to everyone would have been a really nice gesture and given more variety to the server as people could choose between the sturdier redoutable and the faster and better armed but squishier ruyter. Instead a nice but already existing ship was chosen. This offers no real additional value to most, as it is already available in game for a very low price (100-200k really, I.e. nearly for free of you play actively). Since the Trinco is a 5th rate, a price tag of 40€ also seems off, compared to the prices of other DLC ships and the expectations people derived from those prices. So people are obviously disappointed because they expected more. Technically you did what you promised, but technically you could also have chosen the pickle (as an extreme example of a ship that was not expected for the compensation) as the free ship and slapped a 45€ price tag on it, since you are making the prices and just need valve's approval (which they will probably give since they earn their share on every sale). The one thing I actually fear is that you will also get a lot of negative reviews on the Trico DLC, going in the direction of "don't spend money, get it in-game", "get a bigger ship for a lower price with rattvisän" etc. This would be sad as the Trinco is one of my favourite ships. So all in all it is still nice of you to give a freeLC as compensation to everyone. However you should try to read your own announcements from a player's perspective and write in a way that major misunderstandings and high expectations are avoided. I know you always say "expect the worst". But always expecting the worst when being told you'd receive something (patch, gift, content) is a mood killer, not fun and generally not in the human nature. And after all we are all in this great game to have fun and care deeply for Naval Action, which is why we are so critical of your decisions. Thanks for reading this rather long post and good night. Mormegil

Proposal Category: User Interface Proposal: Player-defined ship tags Reasoning and detailed description: When having several ships of the same type with different builds, it is impossible to see which ship is which without hovering over the ship and checking the stats (woods, upgrades, etc). It would be really helpful for going into action quickly to see at first glance which ship is for what purpose. For that reason I propose that players shall be allowed to define tags for their ships to describe them in short words (maybe limited to ~15 characters). For an example see the attached edited screenshot below. Players who dislike descriptive tags could also use the tagging feature to give "names" to their ships (Intrepid, Interceptor, Dauntless, ...) to differentiate them while improving immersion. Possible negative consequences: None, if the tags are player-specific and not transferred upon trade/capture of a ship and the character limit is not too restrictive. Estimated programming effort: I assume pretty low, a few hours maybe. Might be more, depending on how much in the UI needs to be changed to implement the feature though. Additional info: The tagging interface can be opened via the right-click interface of a ship. Additionaly the tag could also be shown in the ship pop-up right of the ship name (between "Indiaman" and "Standard"), this is not necessary though.

Okay it seems i found the root cause. I got a new internet provider and a new router. The required ports were not forwarded so they blocked the access to battles. EDIT: Maybe not. It seemed to work, now it does not work any more again. I did not change anything.Too tired to try again for today. EDIT2: Still not found out what the cause for this behaviour is. Interstingly if i get into a battle once, all other battles afterwards seem to work fine. if you have any idea what causes this behaviour, it would be really appreciated... EDIT3: It works again now. I have no idea why. I did not really change anything. Whatever, i'll enjoy it as long as it lasts I also did another connection test: NAS-1349974. If you see any suspicious or blocked stuff in there, please tell me. Thanks!

Sadly it seems the workaround did not work on my PC at home. I cannot join battles, even the Tutorial Endurance Exam causes a similar behaviour to the inital post. Instead of DC to login screen i just get sent back to the harbor. Interestingly the gunnery tutorial works. Maybe because is loads less assets? EDIT: Just tried the different tutorials several times... Endurance worked after 4 tries. Final Exam took ages to load and then showed me a sideway view of the battle.. i could not do anything and saw the NPCs move and attack "my" ship. Suddenly i snapped onto the Surprise and could do the exam. Only that my front was obviously already opened. Really wierd behaviour. Seems it is really a loading problem. Will try more now with moving the game to a different loaction etc. Already reinstalled Steam, Naval Action, did the workaround above (twice), etc..

Thank you very much for the workarounds. I think it helped. Will try again at the weekend when i'm home at my place again. Currently on business trip, so i can only test with the laptop. And obviously I have another internet connection here, which is not as good as mine at home though. 1) Was already done several times before even asking here 2) done 3) done, but your post is not entirely correct. The path (at least on my machine) was %HOMEPATH%\AppData\LocalLow\Game_Labs\Naval Action (instead of Game-Labs) You might want to change that in your post so others following the workaround dont have to troubleshoot that. I always noticed that the first time joining a battle takes longer, I assume this might be due to assets being loaded on first battle start. This is gone now as well. Battle load was really fast! Good Job, Ink. IF the problem persists at my home, I will post here again. If not, consider the case closed.

Only the clan founder and the clan diplomat are able to add and remove other clans from the clan's list of allies/friendly clans. AFAIK that is the only difference.

Good evening, since yesterday I encounter a pretty wierd bug. The first time I try to join a battle after the client has been started/restarted I will get a connection loss during the loading screen. I have to wait to be sent back to the login page, if I log in again from there the problem is gone as long as i dont restart the client. As soon as the client is restarted the problem will re-occur. I have the game on an SSD so the speed of the harddrive should not be a problem. I also tried with both my main and an alt and on both my PC and my crappy old laptop. Both show the same problem. I furthermore have a 100 Mbit/s internet connection so that should not be a problem either. Also tried with different graphics settings, which does not make any difference either. For documentation purposes i attached a few screenshots of the problem (screenshot names are the date and time so you can see the timeline of the events as well): So my question is: Does anyone else have this wierd problem? Does anyone have an idea what causes it or how i can avoid it? Edit: Did a connection test as written in sticky thread, report number: NAS-1345842 Thanks, Mormegil 22:51:47 22:52:49 22:53:40 22:53:52 22:54:01 22:54:11