Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Karvala

  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.
  16. Thanks Felix. Unfortunately, I think the acceleration values with different woods in the ship compare are incorrect now (they're certainly different to how they were, and acceleration is now close to zero with some of the heavier woods, which doesn't seem likely). Perhaps worth a quick look?
  17. Excellent, we now have magic and radar in the game. We just need aircraft carriers and flying carpets and the game will be complete.
  18. You obviously didn't bother to read the quote from the dev, who mentioned PvP as a reason for the changes and whose point I was directly addressing. If you think PvP is irrelevant here, I suggest you go and tell them, since they raised it, not me. Why shouldn't the AI be more aggressive? You also obviously didn't bother to read the four or five reasons I gave above either then. Maybe you should spend a bit more time reading and thinking about the substantive arguments and a bit less time just attacking people for daring to voice an opinion different to yours. How is it going to affect only AFK sailors? They sail in the same water as everyone else and I'm quite sure the AI will make no such distinction. More to the point, while I've never done any AFK sailing myself, if other people want to do that and it doesn't harm anyone, why shouldn't they? What is that offends you so much about people playing the game differently to you that you want to celebrate any attempt to stop them? The player base is low enough as it is, I'd have thought we should be trying to cater for as many different types of players as possible at this time, not deciding that it's now time to purge AFKers and reduce the numbers even more. Yes, definitely attack the individuals rather than address their actual points, that will really convince people.
  19. Peace server players complaining of lack of peace. 😉 I'll remind you of that when you need to logout but you can't because you were just tagged by the AI. Or you want to do that trade run, but you can't because the AI will sink you. Or you've just bought a new ship and need to take it to the port with your Forge to fit decent guns, but were sunk by the AI on the way. Or you were out hunting in your Wasa looking for a nice 3rd rate to fight and were ganked by a Bellona + 10. Honestly, the number of scenarios in which this is a potential disaster are countless. At the moment, we have PvE, but at a time of *our* choosing to fit in with real life schedules etc.. If this comes to the PvE server, the only difference is that now the AI will choose when and what you fight, and that choice is taken away from the player. I'm amazed at the number of people who seem to think that reducing player choice is a good thing. If you want to fight, great. Go and do it now. You don't need to wait for the AI to attack you.
  20. Fantastic, thanks Felix; all working great again.
  21. Sure, but people on the peace server (PvE) are not PvP players by definition, so presumably they will not be subjected to this? It would completely change the nature of the PvE server if they were.
  22. Yes, another vote here.
  23. What this actually accomplishes is:- 1. Everyone, including non-clan players, will now put their first shipyard at the Nation Capital. 2. Because everyone can now build ships with all PB3 bonuses, you have effectively changed the PB differential to one level, so drastically reduced the effective presence of PBs in the game. In a competitive PvP game, there are as many losers as there are winners, by definition. Do you enhance the winners or do you assist the losers? Do you seek to reward success or do you seek to strengthen opposition? These are genuine design questions that clearly have not been answered in this game, and as a result it just lurches from one half-thought-out mechanism to another depending on which group is the most vocal at the time.
  24. Great work, Felix, but is it just me or is the ship configuration tool no longer working properly? It doesn't seem to update the stats based on different woods, trims etc.., which worked fine in the previous version.
  • Create New...