Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Capitalism

Members
  • Content Count

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Capitalism

  1. Well, the problem we have now is really the hard speed cap itself. We already have differences between ships both within and between classes in sailing profiles. The issue (exacerbated by port bonuses now) is that we can hit that cap at increasing points of sail for all ships. If you better balanced those bumps by hard capping on a percentage +/- as William Death already stated, rather than a fixed number, then balance is more easily attained through ship design. The biggest issue is that we likely won't know the true effect of all of these stacked bonuses until long after release because these haven't yet, and won't truly until many clans have fully updated ports months after release, be tested at large scale.
  2. This is a legitimate question as it pertains to current play and the current gnashing and wailing over colored dots in a digital pastime (which is so silly): What if the collaborator is not an "alt?" For that matter, what is an "alt?" If the player characters involved are max rank, max crafting and have been played for more hours than 90% of players with only one player character, which is more legitimate? What's the difference between a U.S. player being paid in-game currency to start a hostility mission for a foreign nation to flip a port (or doing it out of pure spite/treason) vs. someone using forged papers to swap a 3000 hour player character to a nation to start a hostility mission for their former nation? Where do you draw the line? If a mechanic has been F11'd and it hasn't been changed in over a year, and no "alts" are involved, then you're pointing to rules that have no bearing on the issue, no? My point is that it's the mechanic that might not be working within the context of the intended game play, but it's not the players you should be tribunalling, it's the game mechanic.
  3. Since you only need one timer set on the capital to protect an entire region you must make your serfs (vassal clans who own the rest of the protected ports) pay, otherwise you turn it over to the enemy and threaten their econ. This is the new way.
  4. When did you build it? It doesn't appear until after maintenance I believe?
  5. Sure, give us raids, that's not a new request. But attack lines should be determined by voronoi distances between ports. Any port should be able to attack any neighboring port as determined by a simple half distance algorithm. Not something as ridiculously arbitrary as a hard coded number.
  6. Nope. Only Baracoa and Cap Francais of all places. Try to figure out the logic of that. Two port battle locations for EU timezone pirates... none for US time zone players, is essentially what that amounts to. I'd try to convince folks that the current mechanics are ill conceived, and that rather than being able to capture only the two nearest port capitals that all neighboring regions as defined by voronoi polygons should be attackable. This makes far more sense geographically and doesn't constrain certain nations over others. Furthermore, I'd argue that we shouldn't be able to take hostility missions from free ports at all, except for timed, perhaps once-a-month weekend events. Make nations spread from their historical capital regions more organically. Hamstring hardcore nations as they should be and only let them engage in RvR once the colonial nations have their footholds. Furthermore, the concept of RvR raids as content for smaller groups must be considered as these changes massively shift the end game content towards larger and larger clans, which under current game populations is unsustainable.
  7. I think, even more simply, that you shouldn’t be able to pull hostility missions from free ports. Allow the natural expansion of nations into more contiguous zones. Note that doesn’t solve the non-EU time zone player bias problem upon wipe, as EU clans will have the first crack at expanding out from nation capital areas.. but hopefully that can be dealt with as more ports captured offer up more opportunities for non-EU clans. Make free port hostility once a month, weekend-only events. This would make hardcore nations truly hardcore. No more Russian bias, make them have to establish themselves after the real nations have a foothold.
  8. That's called an alt.
  9. Don't be obtuse. This has to do with finding and participating in PvP for the majority of average players out there. Anything you do to frustrate players who are looking for PvP is bad for the game. I can't believe that you would argue against anything that encourages people to fight more, even if it doesn't fit your "honorable" preference of arranged duels outside of La Tortue?
  10. Agreed. The new damage model has harmed balance in all things more than it has fixed in my opinion. But its impact on RvR and interactions with the forts/timing and balance of point accrual is in severe need of adjustment.
  11. Nah, though I've been quite supportive of many of your essays on mechanics so far, this I'll have to disagree with you on. Three minute join timers were the goldilocks timers. Just enough to hunt in groups but not so much that it was magical-teleport-in-from-anywhere. And I'd add that I'd leave the undocking and leaving battle timer as they are so that you could still be somewhere waiting but not completely called in from out of the blue in order to defend a mate that was tagged right outside of your Outpost/Battle, etc. In any case... We need one, consistent RoE, nothing that varies between zones, etc. This just breeds endless frustration, complacency, and bugginess.
  12. With these little drops of rum is there any chance you could introduce the DLC and permit ships as rare NPCs, make everything below a 2nd rate capturable? This seems like a test worth doing to see how it might affect the balance of ships in the open world, people's willingness to PvP (using captured ships would be viable, random wood/crew space DLC and pemit ships would still be less desirable than custom built, rare wood DLC/permit ships but would even the playing field somewhat) and could fit nicely with the reduced emphasis on crafting? Having more/cheaper ships across the full range of what's available just makes sense if you want to get people out on the water fighting.
  13. Nice post @Anolytic. This is an issue that needs to be addressed prior to release otherwise the game is truly down the rabbit hole.
  14. Even my alts have alts these days. There are times when one of our alt clans has more players online in another nation than all the others.. lol. So ask yourself this: When players have multiple max rank, max crafting rank accounts with all the books at their disposal... which one is the "main?"
  15. I think that rare woods should be tied to PvE players, thus making a link between people who PvP (generating combat marks), those who PvE ("gathering"), and their intersection which are people supporting or participating directly in RvR. If we make the "gathering" of rare woods based on time spent in game rather than labor hours then everyone wins (more targets on the open water, more PvP opportunities, etc.). Basically the "gathering" would go like this: traders drop rare woods quite often, but an even more steady supply available for base crafting materials including fine woods by capping AI ships, sailing them back to your crafting port and breaking them up. By driving up the number of timbers and crafting supplies recovered from broken ships then we get close to traditional "mining" activities of other MMOs (making active time spent in-game matter) rather than just passive labor hour accrual or AFK hauling. You might argue that doubloons are just a go-between for this "gathering" activity, but let's be honest.. getting doubloons is basically best done by AFK sailing these days which I don't think is good game design. I think if you married resource gathering to the ability to cap AI 3rd rates and below (and introducing all DLC ships as open world AI), thus alleviating pinch points on permits and evening the playing field for DLC owners vs. regulars, the game would be a much happier place.
  16. Alternatively, we can just pay a friendly, foreign clan to come out in a fleet of fir Rattvisans and let us sink them a couple times to grind hostility in front of one of the county’s noncapital ports without a timer. But I agree on the fine woods 2.0 problem. I think it needs to be addressed through significant bumps to “gathering” via PvE traders and capping and breaking down AI.
  17. I can certainly add up the kills and captures from my three gold Requins of various builds (two Fast, one Very Fast, all with Elite Pirates) if you like? They seem kinda pay-to-win to me since there's literally not an engagement that I can't pick or leave if it's not advantageous to me? Can anyone compete with those? Not really... I'll run from nearly anything that could sink me, and kill or cap anything that can't. Those are wins in anyone's book. Can you name another ship that's nearly invulnerable that's as combat effective? I don't think my above response fits the definition of "trite," then does it? Especially once you consider the ramifications of putting a stake in ship crafting just so people can save time. And especially now that you have something with as heavy a broadside weight as a Ratt that anyone can click out with zero time invested. It may feel fine for someone like you who would rather have a lobby based game and considers spending time on anything econ a complete waste. But the way DLC ships are implemented is literally at odds with everything that an Open World sandbox is about, and it hugely punishes players that don't have DLC because to get something as combat effective as a T/Wo or Lo/Wo Ratt it literally costs days of grind and even worse, RNG for permits. Even if the player with the Ratt dies at a rate 15:1 compared to the player-crafted 4th rate du jour, it's literally still a win for them in terms of pain and time invested in the game. And I find that sad for those players that can't or don't buy the DLC. I know you don't engage in RvR but a screening fleet of Ratts vs. an outrageously expensive port battle fleet of meta, crafted ships? Who cares if they are sunk 10:1 if they get even one Bellona or Aggie with mods on them through luck or numbers alone? That's a huuuuuge win for the DLC fleet in terms of time invested/lost in the game between those players.
  18. Math is hard and boring, I understand, but you don't have to be patronizing or snide if you don't understand it. But developers set the prices of their products and so it's not very complicated to understand that US and EU players are paying significantly more, relative to the cost of the entire game, for DLC content. Look at my name: I don't care whether the developers try to make a buck or cash out in any way they see fit. But it shouldn't be surprising that non-Russian Steam store users feel a little hard done by, is it, especially when DLC ships are quickly becoming the only way to compete?
  19. I definitely agree about "gathering" via NPCs as opposed to meaningless labor hour extraction or doubloon grindwalls. In addition to traders carrying fine woods I'd hugely bump up the number of logs (I'd rename them timbers to be slightly more accurate) that are recovered from breaking up captured ships making that a viable crafting material acquisition strategy. Make PvE ship capture pay for those players who do it... Making all crafting resources available other than fine woods in any one port seems incredibly short sighted as well... as was the removal of the blueprint system.. In general, 2016-era crafting was so much better, it's just sad.
  20. What part of what I said makes you think I misunderstood what you wrote? I hate to be pedantic, but the tax rate of individual countries on individual stores, or the rake that the store takes for each country is irrelevant to the difference in the ratio between the DLCs and the main game within each country, right? It’s just distributive multiplication at that point. The only thing that would complicate this is if DLC content is taxed at a different rate than the main game, or if Steam’s rake is different between sales types, but I find that extremely unlikely given that in all tax codes I’m familiar with an online sale is an online sale of electronic goods or services...
  21. I believe it’s the ratio of the DLC costs to the main game that people are taking issue with, and that’s set by the developer no?
  22. Are you being serious? Felix’s provides all of the tools that the in game map is missing, so much so that the dev’s basically endorse it over their own tool and quit working on it, lol (they’re removing the trader tool as of the last word).
  23. Funny enough, it also has ten+ thousands of active daily players and an extremely vibrant PvP, PvE, RvR, and social tapestry to satisfy all play styles. Coincidence?
×
×
  • Create New...