Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Capitalism

Members
  • Content Count

    173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Capitalism


  1. I think for non-Elite NPCs we should make them as smart and player-like as possible, but when they lose substantial crew or are below half health they surrender... We should increase the speed at which grinding AI takes place in other words and, while not only being more historical, it would reduce the worst and cheesiest part of AI battles, boarding...


  2. But what you all (other than Wraith) are not considering, unlike the last time we ground to max rank, the biggest ship always wins under the new damage model, and absurd AI cheating currently implemented exacerbates that. And without easily accessible and approachable AI missions that grant meaningful amounts of XP (kill missions are not acceptable for new/less experienced players) the grind is going to be horrific.

    Layer on top of this the fact that player numbers absolutely will not support grinding meaningful amounts of XP via PvP and you’re in for a miserable ride to becoming PvP- and RvR-effective. And like it or not, getting to the largest broadside weight per rate the fastest is really the only content we have in the game, as this core principle underscores “winning” the PvP and RvR endgame. And without much else that’s the content we have.

    The largest irony all you pro-wipers ignore here is that new players will be the ones that suffer the most, and will likely never even bother sticking with the game long enough to become competitive because it will take a 1000+ hours before they can catch up in broadside weight (not to mention a vast skill gap) to vets who’ll be out in front of them only hours after release. So no, PvP will suffer as will PvE, and the grind will be anything but fun for all involved. New purchasers will be shocked at how progression has handcuffed them, and vets likely will be turned off enough that even they won’t be willing to do it all over again.

    Of course, xp and rewards could be tweaked to speed this progression along, so my opinions here might be invalidated. Let’s hope they are, because AFK fishing and mindless cargo delivery runs doesn’t exactly keep the Twitch viewers tuned in...

    • Like 1

  3. 1 hour ago, Intrepido said:

    Dont spam the forums and ask for help in the game.

    My hell, and one wonders why the new player reviews on Steam say we have a toxic community... 

    To the OP, you can always buy a Basic Cutter in any port for free. Crew is free and repairs are always free (you don’t need to carry/buy any for a Basic Cutter) as well.

    • Like 5

  4. 11 hours ago, Crimson Sunrise said:

    promises can change darling  we were promised alot of things and many didnt happen...

    Don’t call me “darling” grandpa, women these days don’t have to put up with that patronizing shit anymore.

    The fact that people don’t get what they were promised when they buy into an Early Access game is exactly why developers get a poor reputation. This is just bad business.

    People aren’t buying a “game” in Early Access, they are buying an opportunity to influence a game’s development and participate in its progress along the way. When testers are treated badly then that trust is broken.

     I’d probably agree that we are unlikely to see a huge influx of new buyers on release. I know that with reviews as bad as they are on Steam I’d wait until a half-off sale at least to buy into a game that I’d wishlisted but hadn’t purchased yet like this.. so I suspect the major player bump on release will be returnees.

    I can guarantee that those returnees would rather not start from square one.

    • Like 1

  5. We should keep it because people bought and played the game specifically for the reason that the developers promised we’d keep it. You can quibble over whether it matters on release or not, I personally think it doesn’t matter a bit since we’ll all have passed the tutorial in a few hours post-release, and be light years in front of a new player anyway by that point. 

    But at its core, giving us earned xp back is the only ethical decision to make.

    Otherwise, it would be like submitting a down payment and signing the contract on a new house that was supposed to have 4 bedrooms, and then the builder parks a trailer on your land and walks away from it and says they’re done. 

    In the real world that contract would protect you, but on Steam it doesn’t. Only the reputation of the developer for keeping promises is your protection.

    • Like 2

  6. 3 minutes ago, Thonys said:

    after a week of preparation, today we made a special operation to damage the economy of a certain nation

    under heavy gunfire and incoming damage, the crew of our vessels participating in the ops did very well

    after a long gunfight where our vessels where hit many times,  we accomplished to destroy one of the forts 

    the fort was brought out of action and raised the white flag.

    D091AA249DED5D3EC0B59B67C2C367271AB84978

     

    we believe this fort needs to be  build up again

    also, the fort was still standing in OW (?)

    will it disappear after maintenance?

    If this was in a PvE battle then it definitely won’t. We think it will only need to be rebuilt after being destroyed in a port battle? Clarification would be nice.

    • Like 1

  7. 3 hours ago, Huang Po Tsai (Retired) said:

    Players have brought this up before, but I will too. If want AI to remain somewhat challenging give them repairs instead of the super aim/angling etc. It just looks redicolous and unrealistic.

     

    AI ship giving me a perfect broadside when I almost positioned on his stern is just wrong.

    100% agree

    With “elite” AI coming to the game the normal AI should be dialed back to something that is doable in an average vet’s sleep, which is still incredibly challenging to your average new player.

    Right now the AI are so unfailingly stupid in their sailing, and ridiculous in their firing and boarding mods that new players must be be just rolling in the aisles.

    • Like 2

  8. 2 hours ago, Raekur said:

    As in that day the maintenance was going to occur. The rest of us were told it would happen between these 5 days. 

    Sorry I was not more precise on the statement. Guess when people don't want to  answer a question it is easier to attack the question instead.

    Careful, that tinfoil hat is showing. 

    Everyone knew the wipe was occurring and the day it was likely to drop. Letting the port go Neutral and pulling the missions didn’t take a whole lot of foresight. I mean, I guess a bit more foresight than the average US player or your famed War Council is capable of but, meh. 

    Accusing the developers of favoritism and dealing in insider knowledge is definitely not a road you likely want to pursue. Asking for some in-game welfare to get your coastline back instead of pulling missions and flipping the port yourself to fight for it really is telling. Sad.


  9. 6 minutes ago, Hawkwood said:

    Agree that trading should bring more money, BUT combat has to be lucrative too.

    Agreed, there definitely needs to be balance there.. and both should encourage active participation.  I think combat should be the "gathering" activity equivalent of other MMOs, while trading should result from that combat.  I'd argue that captured ships should be broken down for legitimate amounts of crafting goods, making collection of rare and useful crafting resources and tools a byproduct of that activity and making trading/hauling these goods to satisfy contracts in the primary, buffed-up ship-building ports more lucrative that the largely passive, AFK sailing of delivery missions.

    • Like 1

  10. 1 minute ago, van der Decken said:

    No to forced alliances. We are trying to influence history...trying to change history in this game. We want to see which nation can rule the Caribbean by their own accord/alliances, not be forced to create a history based on dev's plan. 

    I agree with this to a large degree, but am also swayed by arguments for a dynamic alliance system where thoughtful developers might have the tools to change balance based on changing population trends over time. Because of the influence of forged papers the current distribution of players, and most importantly RvR-active players, will not be the same forever.

    So something dynamic is key, and that's why I'd favor something like Wraith's proposal above which doesn't lose the historical context but leaves dynamic the large majority of the map (much of which is unused) to the clans, their alliances, and their warfare both between and within the backdrop of the nation states.

    • Like 1

  11. 15 minutes ago, van der Decken said:

    No one is denied anything. Freeports are open to everyone and all of them even have PvP Zones right next to them. Plus, these FPs are spread out everywhere...except we lost Coqui and La Orchilla. One of these should come back. :(

     

    5 minutes ago, Msk said:

    I agree one of them should come back, and so should St. Mary's and Navasse.

    Hostility missions have never been easier.  Time to flip a port no?

×
×
  • Create New...