Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Karvala

Members
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

56 Excellent

About Karvala

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. So once again, the devs have come against the problem of saturation: "oh dear, too many players are become rich and experienced, with decent ships and equipment. We need do something about it or soon everyone will be a veteran." And once again, the devs solution is to cut rewards and make grind times longer in the delusional belief that this means people will play for longer. It's like trying to make someone double their work hours by halving their wages. Sure, some desperately poor will indeed work longer, but quite a few people will simply quit the job, and that's what we will see with the game. This punitive approach to game design is flawed, but there's almost no point in saying it because I think the devs already know it but choose to carry on with that approach anyway.
  2. Great work, guys; this is very helpful.
  3. An even playing field where the Captain's skill is the difference would be great. But please don't do it at the expense of the gear. Rather, make the gear part of the decision-making, somewhat as it is now, but even more so, so that the Captain may develop skill at sailing particular styles of boats can customise his boat to fit his particular style as much as possible. The different boats are why many people play and the fantastic boat models, and remarkably good balance across boats that you've achieved, are the key reasons many people want to play and it would be a shame to lose that. Things like removing speed and wind indicators can easily be made optional with a checkbox in the first place if you're afraid of the likely mutiny. See how many people choose to use them and what their experience is, before taking them out entirely. Sometimes these things add to the realism, sometimes they just add to the chore.
  4. But:- (A) If you are fighting a fleet and busy with other ships, OR (B) If you are in a close fight and don't want to put yourself in danger by sailing towards the dying ship while it is still firing OR (C) If the stealing ship has entered battle supposedly on the side of the ship being looted (as in the example in this thread), which will prevent it from being boarded OR (D) If the stealing ship is larger than the sinking ship, but still substantially faster/smaller than your ship then there remains a problem. More to the point, players shouldn't have to find ways to workaround a violation of the rules anyway. Either we allow loot stealing or we don't. If we don't - and the current rules say we don't - then it should be blocked by game mechanics. If we do, then it should be openly stated and we can all engage in a free for all with the endless controversy and green on green tribunal cases that will undoubtedly result. For what it's worth, I think loot stealing is absolutely wrong, there is no good historical argument for it, it's an abuse of the game mechanics and designed mainly to stop other players enjoying the game and having a level playing field. It will lead to players leaving if not properly addressed.
  5. Yes, I agree; that would be a substantial improvement and make a lot of sense.
  6. On the contrary, I think you need to catch up with recent developments and the rules update as a result of them. You *can* fire upon anyone in the battle, including someone who has joined on your side, after issuing warnings and recording with screenshots, if that person is (a) trying to steal your loot (that was clarified some time ago); or (b) is trying to sink you (that was clarified a week ago). See the following:-
  7. Well, the devs have stated explicitly that the loot belongs to the person who initiated battle (regardless of kill credit; I don't like that part of the rule myself, but that's the rule). By implication, therefore, if someone other than the battle initiator steals the loot, they're violating that rule. The green-on-green permission was given not as part of the game per se, but as a way of players enforcing that rule themselves rather than clogging up Tribunal or F11. Similarly for the green-on-green permission if someone enters your side of a battle and then attacks you; it's explicitly against the rules and you have permission to sink the offender after due warning.
  8. No, the OP is asking the devs to protect the current RoE, which prohibit loot stealing (with good reason). The problem is the prohibition is not enforced by game mechanisms, and it needs to be.
  9. Exactly. When I proposed the invite mechanism/permission mechanism, it was particularly the PvE server I had in mind. The PvP server is slightly more complicated due to the clan and national conflict aspects, but some variant should work there. On the PvE server, as you say, there is absolutely no reason for someone to be allowed to join someone else's battle on their side but against their wishes. That person can only have malicious intent. I really wish the devs would actually implement this; it would save a whole load of griefing at a stroke and wouldn't really interfere with any type of normal play.
  10. it's certainly not true on the PvE server, categorically. You make practically nothing killing Elites for the reasons given above.
  11. The only special guns from those five, plus another one this morning (so now six in a row) were Obusiers or Congreves, and neither of those sell for anything on the PvE server because players recognise that they're actually weaker in combat than standard guns. Obusiers are useful for capping, but not many people are doing that, not least because the Elite AI cheats to the extent that you need at least a 4-to-1 crew ratio to stand any chance even with perfect action selection. Obusiers and Congreves don't sell for more than 5k a piece if you can sell them at all. I don't mind cargo or passenger missions existing and I appreciate their role in helping new or poor captains; what I object to is them being essentially the *only* way to earn any significant money (reals or dubs), so players are forced to do them rather than what you might say are the core actions of the game, i.e. combat. Standard trade also earns relatively little on the PvE server; you only have to look at Felix's map to see that the most profitable trade routes - assuming that the goods are still there when you get there - can take an hour or more of sailing for a single trip and still earn less than one cargo mission in reals, and of course no dubs. So if you want dubs for ship crafting, you HAVE to do cargo missions. You simply can't get them any other way in sufficient quantity. That's a major flaw in my view. There seems to be a deliberate design to force players into cargo missions, but it's not clear why or who benefits, at least on PvE.
  12. Given that the game is called Naval Action, not Naval Fedex, how about increasing reals and doubloons rewards for sinking AI ships instead of further encouraging the boring Fedex stuff? I sank five Elite AIs of 1st-3rd rank yesterday, and didn't receive a single doubloon, a single ship note or any worthwhile upgrade and a total of around 70,000 reals for all that work. A single Fedex mission with no risk on PvE and less risk on PvP would have netted me more than that. There should be an increase in doubloons especially, but for combat, not for Fedex.
  13. Yes, definitely; gankers need a bit of assistance, as I understand there are one or two new players still afloat somewhere. Why don't you also propose that any player with less than 6 months longevity or sailing a ship below 5th rate should not be allowed to purchase any guns and should receive constant damage while in the Capital Zone?
  14. I agree; I think this is the most likely explanation. Hitting a magazine a second time is a cheap exploit that you can easily use against the AI; literally the majority of AI fires I cause these days spread and end in fire shock, and in every case it's just because I keep targeting the fire area with cannonballs. The AI doesn't intentionally do it against players to the best of my knowledge, but it can happen by misfortune.
  15. Fantastic, thanks Felix; all seems to be working again now.
×
×
  • Create New...