Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

120 Excellent

About Barbarosa

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There is no high BR, there is less vodka. With enough vodka you can go with 5-8 guys on your prime time against full fleet of Russians. No worries BR will change as soon as Russians take over the ports they want.
  2. Well done by increasing BR to ridiculous numbers 👏. Now we can enjoy the supremacy of single nation who can master three 1st rate fleets if needed. It was stated many times by RvR players who are doing it for ages that slow 1st rate big combats are among the most boring battles in the game. Seems like we are moving back to "everyone sails 1st rates" days. Besides, RvR is among the first reasons the game loose active players. Most of the players stop playing because they have no options to participate in it. Either it is certain for them to loose or they get burned out if they lack numbers to defend themselves. RvR has one or two winners, the content become blocked for the rest. In current situation no one can master 20 1st rates against Russians continuously. Many clans are looking for allies at the moment to able to have competent RvR fleet. Nations will become desolated like today's Dutch nation. You are squeezing your player base by pressing them from 2 sides, Skill, numbers and organization required to RvR Repeating physiological pressure to succeed Frontiers are good move to slow down RvR. Increasing BR only blocks content for many. RvR should be even slower and more accessible for all kind of players. Raiding, resource hauling, capturing prize ships/flags can be added as mini games which might contribute to final conquest. You can define BR depending on outcome of these mini games + port upgrades/importance ect.
  3. Sinking enemy ship, capturing their ship, looting their cargo should be the only economic reward you get by PvP. All the rest should be aesthetic rewards or titles boosting your fame.
  4. It is almost the same as the rarity of intelligence and wisdom. The only difference is you are well aware if you have that rare ship or not. MMO's are not a good place for seeking instant gratification since it has to consider the whole player base. In single games, it is more easily attainable but still, some fun is hidden behind certain achievements for a reason. Having DLC ships doesn't justify the opposite logic. They are simply wrong to have.
  5. We have rare ships now, I think it is very good addition. Immensely expensive and just slightly better. Nothing wrong having rare woods in same manner. Nothing wrong to return oak/oak builds. We are just too much used to sail everything best and bigger. The only problem is the winner/owner of the certain ports gain very easy access to strategic woods, creating snowballing effect. They can replace their ships from best woods easily and very cheaply comparing others. The spawn amount is huge compared to population. You can stock strategic woods in no time to have enough for the rest of the year :). I believe stat differences of wood types should not be that big, to reduce the effectiveness of bonus stacking. The winner/owner of the port should only have direct access to the resource, they should pay same with all others, in this case 50k doubloons for 5k woods to avoid snowballing effect. Moreover, all spawned strategic resources should have spawn rates based on active population, lower population less resources.
  6. I am backing the idea of special ships, hard to acquire this way or another. Instead of trying to balance ships combat wise, balancing their economic values is much more interesting and immersive. However, DLC ships in their current form don't fin anywhere in any economic scenario. I am advocating from very beginning that PvP should not be rewarded. If you win you are already rewarded by weakening, demoralizing your enemy, may be capturing the cargo or ship. The award can be titles, cosmetic items and such. Gaining everything you can imagine from single activity kills the purpose of other activities like trading, shipbuilding, exploration, pve hunting ect. which should have important part in game content. PvP targets limited audience and there is no need to push everyone there. PvP'ers will find them anyway I believe that nonconvertible currencies only exist to balance non existent economic balance. As soon as we have "economy" one currency to rule them all is optimal solution.
  7. Briefly defenders start with 2 circles and attackers with one. Attackers had free points coming from useless towers and forts (which was a lot). Attackers, most of the time, have a luxury to have wind gauge, which is amazing advantage. I would say attackers had more advantages than defenders.
  8. That is great step! Can we attack almost EVERYWHERE (half the map) from Aves? 😂 Can you elaborate how "2 nearest" will work using Aves as an example please?
  9. You are not among additional source of players. You are different type of player. Besides, as I stated before you have different tools for lobby play since very beginning. Port battles being one of them. 1v1 zone can be easily put out of normal patrol zone. The problem of this lobby tools are as soon as you start loosing you have your excuses to not participate anymore. The population is very small to make it enjoyably for different tier of skills. You play it for a while till "winner, ganker, cheater" is decided. I am pretty confident that lobby players are nor after having lobby. They just want to cease the fun of others because is unreachable by them. If we have on demand lobbies one day, those players will only play till get dominated by some. OW leaves the options open to balance things. DLC ships are to serve your saying "no loss on demand PVP" in certain extent. You are asking for "on demand" part now since you already have "no loss" part. You were very very successful to direct game development to this point. The day you get on demand thing we should remove OW or keep it for authenticity only. The reason was explained many times.
  10. We had it before. It was developers decision to remove it. They can implement it in a week if they want it since it is already coded. No, I am telling that forum users can be manipulative with their lobbying, sometimes in very childish way. Having NA and NA Legends both is not dividing the community. It will serve both games better in long run. The day lobby players leave NA forums for NA Legend forums I will consider it as a win for both games.
  11. Exactly my point, 2 different games that can not exist inside another. It is not genuine and wise trying to implement OW features to League of Legends or adding features to EVE for no loss on demand PvP. May be it is time to start talking about NA Legends again for better focused discussions in their respective places.
  12. You have this features now, with patrol zones and mid 1v1 zones, in sailing distance of 5 min from a port. Port battles are also instanced for equal battles and they exist since beginning for group play. You have small BR PB's and big BR PB's. However, my aim was not to discuss with you about your gaming style. I respect it and would like if you find your enjoyment. My point was to prove that there are many posts here proposing things that actually don't belong to open world sand box genre, misdirecting development. Thank you for this.
  13. What about proposing this under proper forum topic for another go with NA Legends? It is perfect time to grab your mythical ardent pvp arena players and enjoy it as you like.
  14. If you love lobby based game so much why you didn't supported Legends when it was tested? The game test was shot down in 1 week for obvious reasons. There was no campaign to not play it, many were excited, nobody jumped with ideas about how bad it would be. Your NA Legend failed, designed for players exactly like you and for casuals who have 1 hour per day. Why you are so keen to push this game to another failure? I wholeheartedly believe that you are not here to improve this game by advocating lobby style gaming. You are here to kill the fun others have. None of you were part of RvR glories/failures, none of you enjoy PvP as you claim here (pvp players know each other, cause they encounter each other, you are not among them), none of you enjoy nation drama, conquests and losses, none of you love trading, none of you enjoy sailing in OW, in which you have no idea what will happen next. I bet you spend more time in forums than in game. However, I admit that you have won the forum war. RvR/OW players either banned or very few remained posting in forums. Some enjoying playing the game in their limited spare time and many disappointed just waiting for release to see how it will be. People bought the game as open world sandbox game. Server population is proof that their expectations were not met. Dear developers, you can not design this game by surrounding yourself and listening minority of players who never represented the NA community. I can assure you that their understanding of the game is very limited. It was very sad to see some moderators seeking to join a RvR clan to experience it properly after 4 years of development.
  • Create New...