Neads O'Tune
-
Posts
130 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Neads O'Tune
-
-
5 hours ago, admin said:
If crafters are such a powerful force why in KPR players cannot buy a good cerberus? I saw the guy who could not find a crafted cerberus, in the most populated nation.Because you have a silly habbit of announcing upcoming wipes FAR too soon in advance and a lot of the crafters have just stopped playing until post wipe. They don't see the point in stock piling resources and money for it to be wiped in a couple of months.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Tom Farseer said:
This statement currently is, always has been, and hopefully always will be: wrong.
Yes: Upgrades and Mods will tip the balance if the opposite Captains are anywhere near even in skill.
No: They are not an instant win button. #I personally am FAR from being the best PvPer on the War server. And I also am too stingy, often times simply too poor to put all the best upgrades on my ships. Yet I still am a very regular player in GBs RvR fleet and tend to do alright even against players of my own skill level.
I hat to start sounding like some of the old 'git gud' crowd but mods are OP is in most cases a cheap excuse....
Yes and no I have to say, if a player is not in a successful clan he or she is somewhat limited to "basic ships", whereas the more successful clans will be able to build their ships to be stronger, faster, better faster ships.
We all know what it's like coming up against a 5/5/very sturdy ship loaded with repair mods.
yes you can often overcome these situations if you know what you are doing but at the moment those kinda ships are rare because they are RNG based and as such usually one or maybe two in a fleet have those kind of ships. If a few of the "elite" clans are able to keep churning out those ships on a regular basis then it is going to create divides (especially combined with the really crappy wood distribution system we have currently.
-
2
-
-
Sorry if it's been asked, if a clan fully upgrades a port and that port is taken will the new owners get a default port of the upgraded one?
-
2
-
-
@admin If may just suggest something, please make the cost of the forts reasonably high (as high as is practical) if the cost is too low then it isn't really going to change things
-
2
-
-
Finally! Those forts are a pain in the arse! Now if we can just get a slightly more reasonable damage model (where a Indef isn't demasted in FOUR BLOODY SHOTS by a Belle Poule!!!) we will have ourselves some fun open world hunting again! No more Lineships running to the forts as soon as they see you!
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, admin said:
what? @Ink asks you for your testbed name and you switch the subject to talk about real life wars? Do you know where kiev is located or you are as clueless as your posts?
Admit it, you just spat coffee all over your keyboard when you read that
-
9
-
-
3 minutes ago, Henry d'Esterre Darby said:
@Neads O'Tune This is a valid complaint about the RoE. Please allow Admin and the OP to get any issues settled out. Thank you.
Correct, there was a valid issue raised as a result of this, but that doesn't make me wrong about the motives behind the original post
-
1 hour ago, Liq said:
I think his "problem" is that they assumed solo patrol RoE only applied for 6th rates, and thus 5th rates could still tag each other without solopatrol RoE but normal patrol RoE, so they could join the battle
So again, he is going to a support section to complain about not being allowed to gank?
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Sir Max Magic said:
...just to be the smartass here: not true !
Look at the statements below, made on Page 27:
Not to be a SMARTER arse, but I see no mention of the word "ship"
-
To be fair, Admin never mentioned "ship contracts"
You guys just made assumptions
-
I for one am looking forward to this, I've had ships on sale in Pepsicola since before AHOY left GB
-
On 3/4/2019 at 1:21 PM, PG Monkey said:
How many times did you jump in and out of port to get that one?
-
6
-
-
The lesson I think here is, don't try to get around attempts to accurately test and in the process skew the results of a new system.
I mean we are all splitting into separate clans to keep an extra 100k each, but if admin then said that clan warehouse will have to go tomorrow for whatever reason then again, we wouldn't really have right to complain about that either
-
8 minutes ago, Lord Robert Calder said:
This has been the modus operandi of the Naval Action development team since almost literally Day 1. I get Early Access, etc etc but after several years we are well beyond the point at which changes should me minor tweaks and nudges instead of to use the phrase "reinventing the wheel" each major patch. I think had they not done this repeatedly, development would be much farther along and probably would be out of Early Access by now (which it honestly should have been a year ago).
We shouldn't get hung up on "should've released on day X"
These guys do not have the same funding and manpower as AAA devs and we shouldn't hold them to the same deadlines
-
30 minutes ago, Galt said:
I agree with the rest of your points but this one is a little odd, I think. Of course an O/O isn't going to stand up to the rare woods, that's what makes those woods valuable. This game does have a problem with everyone having an "only sail the best" mentality (Which I feel stems from the inherent hardcore nature that only people who play this game have. To be competitive in RvR, you do need the best; but I feel with the new damage model, that cheaper ships may actually be the way to go. You're going to be losing a lot more ships so maintaining that mentality is only really going to handicap you. But I guess that's your choice.
There ARE a lot of the "elite" players that will only use these woods (the same ones that wont go into battle unless they have a purple or gold repair mod stacked ship) and going up against them is just pointless for most people
My point with is one is, in a single patch they made ships sink easier (that's not an opinion, that is just fact) AND also made it harder to get materials replace those ships.
But let's not stray away from the orginal topic, that was just ONE example of the behaviour mentioned in the original post
-
Unfortunately this game's dev team has a habit of chagning both sides of the equation, leading to extreme results. Please consider only changing one side at a time and making adjustments as you go.
Three prime examples:
Last year you increased the mission reward payout BUT at the same time you reduced the cost of things in the admiralty store. You should have done one OR the other.
Currently you have made 5th rate group missions more difficult and reduced the reward BUT you have ALSO removed the ability to use the one ship that stood a decent chance of being able to do it with the new model. Forcing players to use weaker ships. Again this has led to an extreme change instead of just changing one variable and seeing how it worked out.
You have made it even easier to lose ships BUT have also made it harder to replace those ships by restricting access to materials. (And please don't tell me that Oak is easily available as an oak/oak ship does not compare to a teak/white or live/white equivilent ship)
There are more example of this but these are the three that stand out for me
-
7
-
-
@admin I apologise if it as already been said before (it's hard to find stuff amongst all the whining about XP wipes) but can you confirm, if the rare woods (teak.white/live etc) are being wiped with this first patch or is it just the basic resources?
-
Its a known issue, admin said will be fixed next week
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, staun said:
So ok to keep garanty something repeately. Say the are not that kind of developers that go back on there words. Ppl actually bought games on there promis. But tjeck on thats ok. Then I know that what we can expect.
Ppl are not complaining abouth the wipe of ressources. But plz enlighten me on the wipe of rank will have a great impact on testing trading and crafting.
whinners always nice when ppl think name calling lift Them High above the rest.
They are not wiping XP as part of the Eco patch you fool! They are wiping XP at LAUNCH.
You don't even know what you are complaining about!
-
1 hour ago, Irenicus said:
AI ffs. I got 5 alts with about 30 1st rates. Each sell will net about 50k so 30x 50.000 = 1,5m in starting Capital. And that's presuming I don't use what Labour hours and dubs I got on me atm + the 35 L'Ocean permits, 30 santi permits and 20 vic permits I got atm..
Well woop de doo! Not everyone does and if you wanna go hello kitty it up for everyone else then feel free
-
2 minutes ago, Irenicus said:
Except by keeping the ships, and telling everyone 8 days in advance to use their permits they've basically unhinged the entire economy. Who wouldn't make as many crappy oak/oak first rates as possible, sell them immediately post wipe and buy up all the crafting ressources/Trading goods?
IF they want to do an econ wipe - then make it a total wipe so we actually get to test the new system without the current docks Spaces, ships, outposts, Clans, clanwarehouses etc that ppl have invested in to max out their Clan/personal potential.
Sell them to WHO exactly? No one has any money
-
5 hours ago, --Privateer-- said:
Ship notes staying or going with the first wipe? sorry if it has been answered already, I only got through reading the first 10ish pages before giving up.
NOTES staying, permits going. Looking at the "original" post
-
54 minutes ago, Michael of Saxe Coberg said:
Firstly I've played this game for thousands of hours and the developers owe me nothing in terms of financial loss if they now change the game, so be it. There is a great game in here, but I'm concerned about its future.😒
However what worries me is that they are breaking the promise that they guaranteed that rank and crafting xp would be safe; changing that undermines trust in the developers. Suggestions as to how to avoid breaking that trust have been suggested; I hope they listen and respond.
I'm also worried that the game's economy is so broken that they feel the need to reduce our reals to 50,000. Why is this being done? Is it to allow us to "test" another economic model? If so there must be the possibility that this one will also be broken. Indeed it likely is, and any testing here will fail to show up the problems when they have thousands of players in game.
First of all, shut up about broken promises and trust. It's getting old now. The only thing missing from your post is a quote of the original statement.
When they said it, it made sense. They've since realised it was not the right thing to do and have adjusted accordingly. They have also been upfront about it even they knew the backlash they would get from it. They could have easily just done it on the day without any warning and said "Screw you, it's done so get on with it" and to be perfectly honest that's what I think they should have done. Yes people would have been pissed for a couple of days but they would have gotten over it carried on. The problem now is that they have given the whiners 2-3 months to think and worry about it.
Secondly, Yes you are exactly right, that's why they have done it, to enable us to better TEST something. They wont know if it works unless it can be tested and unfortunately without an asset wipe, it will be pointless. This way everyone is on a roughly even footing and has the same opportunity to test the new goods and mechanics. let's face it, there are people that have tens if not hundreds of millions reals and would completely empty a region of a trading resource and sit on it for weeks while they slowly start moving and trading. This would hinder testing.
They are also adjusting the "rare woods" and other crafting resources, SO once again it would not be very helpful if on day one someone came along and bought up everything would it?
So to summarise:
- Point one: Get over it, if it has to be explained why they did it, then you will probably never get it
- Point DOS: They have a system that most people agree is crap and they think they have come up with a better system for us to test and have come up with the most efficient way to test it so they can see any issues and address them quickly
-
3
-
9 hours ago, Kartaugh said:
Another item I'd like to have a confirmation for is paints.
I got a couple of paints off some Deadman's Chests, and I'd like to know if the paints will survive this wipe.
Paints go on ships, ships are sea worthy. Therefor Paints are safe.
ANYTHING you use on ships will not be touched
Forthcoming patch info
in News Announcements & Important discussions
Posted
@admin You NEED to make the new DLC ship available to everyone in game for at least a couple of weeks before releasing for proper testing and balancing. Mistakes were made with the original two DLC ships that must not be repeated again.
I'm sure you can ease people's concerns by telling us you've learnt the lessons from those two ships.
The "Ratatatatatatainavan" needs to be a easy to obtain ALTERNATIVE to crafting the current best ship in the class, NOT the only logical ship to take into battle