Tsesarevitch

People grinding on low-levels (tbrigs) and being rewarded massive quantities of upgrades and marks/doubloons for pvp missions. Clubbing the seals should be heavily discouraged, not rewarded.

You would do far better to ask this question in the in-game chats.

I fundamentally disagree with the lack of protections for new players. I utterly abhor the artificially increased grind presented to new players. I wish to start my dissertation with some qualifying statistics; this will hopefully absolve me of any allegations of "salty n00b". I bought Naval Action on January 27th of 2016, and have since then racked up roughly 3,425 hours of gameplay. Consistently. I have played on both servers, in every nation, using a plethora of names. I saw this game go from multiple full servers with a wait queue for log-in to merged servers due to low population. My greatest complaint is in regards to the prior removal of mechanics that were seen by predatory players as being "unfair" to them; those being rookie and capital reinforcement zones. So too do I completely loathe the removal of on-demand instant action missions that were on-par with players rather than absurdly disproportionate or near impossible. ( The assertion that a new player is able to sink 1x Fourth Rate and 3x Fifth Rate using only their own Fifth Rate is absurd. I saw these numbers myself, and through the screenshot of a friend. ) How can we reasonably expect players to stick around and learn when all staff have to contribute to the discussion is the following: "If new players are being killed near your capital, it's your fault. Go out there and guard your coasts! Go attack! Don't fear losing your pixel ship!" What trite. The behavior of these predatory players should be heavily discouraged, rather than blaming the small nations for being unable to defend themselves. I am not of the opinion that people shouting "Play on PVE then!" have the best interest of the game at heart. Many people want balanced PVP and not to make progress on the PVE server and lose it all when they move to PVP. What does a casual or softcore player have to impel them towards activity? The threat of losing everything they gained at a low rank because they either lack skill or equipment? The developers made a terrible mistake by listening only to the hardcore nolifers that play the game from maintenance end to maintenance start, seven days a week, fifty-two weeks per year. On average, if somebody gains 6,000 Reals per combat and 250 xp from sinking, say, a Cerberus, it will take them 48 battles to go from 380 crew to 500. They will have no choice but to run large amounts of delivery missions over countless hours to replace any damaged or lost equipment/ships/crew. The vast majority of our now ex-player community simply doesn't have the time to invest in this. The trading economy is broken. Battle is un-affordable. New players are fleeing from the game, and overwhelmingly negative reviews often seem to reflect that fact. Urgent action must be taken if Naval Action is going to become more than a cult classic. We must woo back the former players with more than a "use it and lose it" attitude.

This seems related to the Great Firewall.

I believe the issue at hand is most likely in relation to whether or not clans really do have the right to work against their own nation in general. Obviously something shady was done here to deprive VCO of a port, whether or not it was against the rules will, when determined, set a precedent for the future.

I think you didn't check the quoted portion. The green-on-green is the concern. The "trash attitude" is not.

This isn't relevant to the actual tribunal affair; INK will tell you to use the "Report" button in the right-click menu.

I did what I could, It's loose but I hope it's accurate enough to help anyone visiting the thread.

To put it quite simply, the apps are by nature harmless. Discord is only an instance of a web browser and you're not in any danger whatsoever provided you do not click untrusted links or download strange files. TS3 is the same in that is has no danger unless you click unknown links or download unknown files. You are completely safe on either to the extent that you act responsibly.

They need to be blueprints again.

Would this not lose all Rank XP, etc.? Or is that only on PVP Server. If it does constitute losing all Rank XP, I feel that should be included in your response. -I.LM

Unfortunately this would quickly become an unbalanced mechanic when it comes to PVP. To be clear, this is not possible since the entire game is calculated and handled server-side; but in the hypothetical situation that it was possible, we'd have to account for the fact that A.) Not all players will be hindered by the storm if their preference is not to see it; and B.) Those who have chosen to disable inclement weather will have an advantage in every area when there is a weather effect.

To be frank, and now having read this abhorrent comment for yet another time on the review of this thread: How absolutely self absorbed one must be to equate playability with realism, and concern over population distribution to egocentrism. The argument for too many nations has never been just about "hurr duhrr they weren't here historically!" because it was very clear when they were added that there was a reasonably elaborate backstory as to why they were being added. The fact of the matter is that this being a player-stimulated economy, absolutely nothing is possible in a small nation that can't even muster the activity to flip a port. This must certainly be easy for a nation like Great Britain which boasts 28% of the server population, or even Pirates at 14%, but makes no case whatsoever for the Polish-Lithuanian 1% population share. It is simply not feasible in any period of time for a nation that cannot actively participate in the game to retain any amount of players. Joining a desolate wasteland of a nation chat for new players must quickly turn into "this game is surely dead" and a rapid uninstall and refund for those affected. By removing the superfluous nations such as Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Prussia, and Poland, we are left then with Great Britain, France, Spain, Netherlands, USA, and Pirates which is far more of a long-term solution to the low playerbase that we've suffered from in early access. The argument could be made for "but what if the game really truly takes off post-release and there are thousands of players!" to which the response will be: at which point you can consider adding some such nations back into the game.

DLCs to spawn ships will kill the economy in other places. More ship-faucet DLC is not the solution.

The wipe had been advertised well in advance, and was talked about constantly in every chat channel in-game. If you were on a vacation and didn't know beforehand, you can take solace in the fact that all players are in the same situation.

Ignoring the issues does not make the issues go away.

New players aren't leaving because of money, new players are leaving because they are attacked constantly and have no protection. From my point of view, this is something that should have been in the game since the beginning. If the issue is "new players", the obvious solutions will be to: Get them protected zones in the way that Eve Online does it. Encourage them to stay by putting the help channel on their box instead of global. Curb toxicity in chats. Make the tutorial easier. If the issue is "old players" giving up, then there's nothing to be done because there are no old players left already. 160 players peak at US timezones, 500 players at EU peak. Down from the thousands and thousands that got this game when it first came out on steam. The only reason that you have supplied for not wanting this, other than the ones I have argued against, is the inconvenience of it, to which I can only reply "that's rough" due to the inconvenience of the game in general.

Losing all of our pixels in this game is something that happens. You are in a clan, your clan would bail you out. It would not be the first time I have lost everything in Naval Action and had to start over financially.

An excellent argument for bringing enough reals to repair and recrew, which further ensures that ships are carrying physical currency at most times. In your own words, Furthermore, if you have your combat ships at La Mona, you would need to either import your repairs to La Mona, or move an amount of money there to afford repairs locally. In the same breath as you clearly do not want to lose any reals to other players, you forget about your ability to also interdict players carrying money.

Why would you want to bring reals when you have a full cargo hold? The cargo is still loot in itself. I cannot see a downside to physical currency.

It becomes a matter of bringing only what's necessary. Bringing repairs to the battle is quite easy. If someone is foolish enough to put their entire savings on a pvp ship, they deserve to lose their entire savings when they are inevitably sunk. There'd be effectively no reason for someone not to leave excess currency at their outpost. Luckily we don't have to simulate crew upkeep beyond replacing the casualties. 😋

I see no reason to bring your currency with you when PVPing. Just leave it at your outpost warehouse.

I agree with the idea that players should not be able to use a magical wallet with no limit, that follows them around everywhere. It is an excellent idea to include money as an item, and it would further serve to add content when clans have to move their money around.

I run an NVidea GTX 1070 and can happily say I've never had any issues with this game. No graphical issues or gpu related crashes, etc. Runs like a dream.

Even assuming that it is banter, the content still remains toxic, and without context players who aren't in on the joke, especially new players, may think that's acceptable behavior in general.