Thundershield
-
Posts
111 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Thundershield
-
-
Shouldnt Denmark be Dano-Nor
Yes, myself and others have pointed this out a few times, but we've yet to hear official word that the devs have acknowledged It.
The proper term for the union of the period Is Denmark-Norway, and the correct term for the navy was The Royal Dano-Norwegian Navy.
And let me ask who is really fighting eachother here ?
dutch and eng vs france spain ??
As I understand it; The game doesn't follow a historic route, where wars are set in specific years, with specific countries. Rather, we're playing in an Open World Sandbox, where we decide who we want to fight, as several different countries.
In other words, It's everyone against everyone.
-
1
-
-
Those are just naval flags that not necesarily relevant to the game eh?
It's the flags the developers intend to put in game, and as such I believe they represent the Nations the devs eventually want to portray in game.
-
Apologies for the size:
-
I'm re-reading this to get a better understanding of your proposed system, and figuring out the map you made.
But I'd like to point out, that a system that can be completely undone by the use Teamspeak, has vital flaws since you cannot, nor should you, forbid people from using it.
-
I would like to see more privateer stuff than actually choosing one nation. But whoever has the faction reward I want, or best perks for my play style for sure.
You can't be a privateer without belonging to a nation mate. That's the whole premise for ever being allowed to become a privateer.
I'm also not sure about nations actually receiving specific benefits over another. As far as I know, all nations have access to the same things, and aren't given perks. I could be wrong, but that's what would make the most sense to me.
-
I really really hope not. As i have stated before this would require the devs making sure the game ws kept dumb enough to port.
I have to say; I find this comment incredibly rude and condescending towards console players. I see absolutely no reason why Naval Action couldn't be ported to any console, as is, without "dumbing" it down.
-
Sony and Microsoft charge a lot of money to devs for patches. if Naval Action comes to consoles it will be after release when they get everything stable so they won't have to have a lot of patches that are expensive.
I can't speak for Sony, but Microsoft doesn't charge developers anything to patch their games: http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/06/28/microsoft-drops-developer-patch-fees-on-xbox-360/
-
The developers answered this last year I believe. I'm paraphrasing here; "If Sony or Microsoft gave us a million dollars to port it, why not?".
If they can get more money out of it, they'll do it. Understandably.
What controlls would be tough on controller actually? I believe aiming could even be easier...
I agree.
-
1
-
-
I'll support the game regardless of payment plans.
But I do hope that the devs will go the Guild Wars 2 route, which in my opinion is the best MMO currently on the market, with a perfect payment plan.
For those don't know, or haven't played it; GW2 Is pay once, play forever. But it gives you the option of buying additional cosmetic, toys and boost items. You cannot buy anything that will give you an advantage towards other players in the slightest.
For NA, I imagine this would mean you could purchase unique decorations for your ship, unique ships and such things, which I'm perfectly fine with.
-
1
-
-
That some of those "Danish" admirals are Norwegians, since the country then were called "Dano-Norway". Norway were a part of an alliance with Denmark for a while then Sweden. Tordenskiold and Iver Huitfeldt is in fact Norwegian
Neither were Admirals however. They were heroes in my opinion though.
I think It's important for us two nations not to get caught up in "who was who" with these matters though. For the entire period in which this game is set, Denmark and Norway were essentially one Kingdom (Denmark-Norway is the correct name when referring to the union).
I've mentioned a few times before, and will continue to remind the developers that the in game representation of Denmark in NA, which is confirmed to be included, should be named Denmark-Norway to reflect the fact that for over 400 years, our two Kingdoms were basically one.
To the best of my knowledge, concerning how many Norwegians were Officers, who were sailors etc. The majority of sailors during the union were in fact Norwegian. But the majority of the Officers were Danish.
The first written language in Norway was Danish, that is correct, but never the less they are considered Norwegians. The most used written language in Norway today is in fact a combination of Norwegian and Danish called Bokmål
I've actually heard that modern Norwegian more closely resembles Old Danish, linguistically. While Icelandic more closely resembles Old Norwegian. Food for thought.
Even the word Viking, means "En person fra Viken", or in english, "a person from the bay", referring to Viken in the Oslo fjord.
I'm sorry, but there's simply no part of word Viking that refers specifically to the Viken. You're right in that vik means bay, however the etymology of the word Viking is disputed, and most theories offer different definitions than that the word refers specifically to a part of Norway.
When it comes to Tordenskiold, the Royal Norwegian Navy has called it training and educational centre after him. KNM Tordenskiold is based at Norways main naval base at Haakonsvern in Bergen.
That's great, and the Royal Danish Navy have had several ships named after him as well. He's considered a shared legacy between our two countries these days. At the Danish Naval Musuem, they're currently running an exhibition about the Dano-Norwegian Navy, Tordenskjold is of course in focus.
-
2
-
-
I'd like to clarify my stance on this suggestion;
I would love to see marine fauna in game, but not necessarily as AI encounters, but purely cosmetic things. To me, It's a lot of unnecessary extra work for the developers to start coding krakens and fishes. But simply animations of animals while out at sea would really help immersion.
A "kraken" (I think we just need clarification on the terminology), or colossal squid would just be a rare sighting among these, I'd find that quite thrilling.
-
That's your assertion.
No, that's the popular assertion.
Konungs skuggsjá.
Which provided the following description of the "Kraken":
"because the times he has shown before men, he has appeared more like land than like a fish."
"It is said to be the nature of these fish that when one shall desire to eat, then it stretches up its neck with a great belching, and following this belching comes forth much food, so that all kinds of fish that are near to hand will come to present location"
"but this great fish lets its mouth stand open the while, and the gap is no less wide than that of a great sound or fjord"
Not exactly scientific observations, and the description here does not give any indication that the Kraken was a cephalopod. These early descriptions of the Kraken, back then called a Hafgufa, bear much more resemblance to a whale than squid or octopus. Furthermore, the author of Konungs skuggsj made no reference that he had actually made any of these observations himself.
The true size was slightly smaller than a sperm whale, which would have been large enough to attack ships.
This estimate would put your Kraken at between 10-18 meters in length, correct? Which coincides with the more liberal theories on cephalopod size, as I explained earlier.
To summarize; The Kraken as described in the Norse Sagas, and other early sources has no evidence to support It's existence. There simply put, has never been any squid or octopus observed, or documented properly, with the size to attack any sailing ship.
But scientific theories suggest that some Colossal Squid could attain sizes between 10-20 meters in length. The Kraken could be real in the sense that sure, there's a chance there exist some big ass squid out there, but even at 20 meters, they wouldn't pose a large threat to most ships.
-
Yeah ok your just another kraken hater. The Kraken is a gigantic squid most likely exist because of evidence, its not "fictional".
In my earlier post I actually said I was for this suggestion.
But the Kraken as depicted in popular culture, is not real. There is no scientific basis for it, at all. You will never find a ships log detailing an attack by one, a carcass washed ashore or indeed any evidence that a cephalopod of the reported legendary sizes ever having existed.
If some variation of the Kraken existed, It could be a Colossal Squid, but even then, even the most extreme scientists put their size estimates far below what could attack, or sink ships.
-
And I am arguing for a Kraken to be in the game not one of these giant squids. The krakens that attacked ships were about the size of a sperm whale.
I doubt that the community would approve of a fictional monster being in game.
-
1
-
-
I like when science is invoked without context. Yes, perhaps "exceeding 20 meters" but 20 meters of what? The tentacles are 75% of its length and rope-sized at best. I've seen one first hand in the museum I work at.
20 meters total length, tentacles and mantle included. Just to clarify further, when was Madoc also saying the largest specimen caught was close to 13 meters, this Is also total length, as are any theoretical estimates.
-
I'll say what I said in this threads other version, and hopefully bring perspective to the people who hate the idea.
There's 2 versions of Krakens, the real version, and the legendary version.
The legendary Kraken; The legend was born of the Norse Sagas, and was described as being so large, It was mistaken for islands. From the Viking Age, to the Age Of Sail, the legend persisted, but morphed somehow into the modern depiction we have of large squid or octopi attacking sailing ships.
There's no scientific basis of any cephalopod reaching the size where It could attack, much less sink ships.
And, the real Kraken; Colossal Squids are estimated, conservatively, to reach a maximum length of 14-15 meters. Though some scientists claim that this species, separate from the Giant Squid, can reach lengths meeting, or exceeding 20 meters. For comparison, the Victory is 70 meters long.
I actually support either in game, for no other reason than It'd be fun to see one. Making it realistic, and merely as a chance sighting wouldn't detract anything from the game, or ruin immersion.
-
I want to say Friday, but that just seems to easy...
-
Looks about right.
Naval Action Is still being developed, and what you have access to now is the Sea Trials, I.E. early access alpha testing, and as such many features are yet to be included, proper UI being one of them.
-
I feel that is partly due to locking my topic and not following your own rules, is this topic for discussion or not?
It isn't that the topic is not for discussion, It's that there is nothing to discuss. You're expressing concerns about an aspect of the game that hasen't even been made yet. Your topic was locked to prevent It from turning into a flame war, as the dev stated earlier.
Members should not be answering other members questions in a topic named "Questions to developers".
If you look back, Balck actually directed you to the developers answer. Your question had bene answered before, by the developer. Balck simply pointed you in the right direction.
I am actually a journalist for a well known gaming blog that was doing a piece on the controversy surrounding early access games
Was being past tense, are you saying you're no longer doing this piece? If so, what's the point of bringing this up?
, spercifically MMO titles and was also going to do a report on Naval Action itself as a game that seems to have potential.
Naval Action doesn't possess MMO traits yet, and doesn't classify itself as an MMO at this time, so why do a piece on MMOs and focus on a game that Is not yet an MMO?
If Game-Labs chooses to not be transparent that's there choice but it won't leave a good impression.
Game-Labs is plenty transparent. The guys are fair, and take the time to intereact with the community. If you were hoping for more transparancy, again, concerning parts of the game yet to be released, you could have contacted them in private, as journalists often do.
For example why would the CEO of the company call his forum account "admin". It all seems rather secretive for a studio who claimed to work on some major Titles like World of Warplanes, World of Tanks, Metro, STALKER et al which you claim on your website.
The Admin account is not solely for the CEO, but as far as I know, It's shared between the developers. "Admin" Is probably just the default username.
Just because answers to some specific questions aren't public, doesn't make It a secret. I'm sure if you ask Game-Labs, they'll tell you who worked on what.
-
@FreshTheFallen So I'm assuming you work for the studio? Then why do you have a Member and not staff forum Title?
Considering we're all trying to answer your question, you're being really rude.
-
Sorry Didn't know you was a Dev.
One doesn't need to be a dev to answer already answered questions.
It also seems to me that "PROTOTYPE" means that its not garunteed to be in the final release.
That's not what prototype means. Prototype means an earlier version of a product, from which the product can be further developed.
Furthermore, immediatly below the sentence "We are continuing development of the open world prototype.", the developer also says: "Naval Action will feature one of the largest sandbox maps in history of age of sail games.". Which is pretty conclusive.
-
As far as I know, all you need to run the game is a DirectX 11 capable graphics card, so you're good to go on that end.
Also, if I purchase the game now, while it is in Alpha, do I get it later for free when it gets finished?
If you purchase the game now, you own it, forever.
You can read the details, and pre order here: http://www.navalaction.com/preorder/
-
If religion/faith/superstition were to be included in game, I think they should affect gameplay somewhat. I like what many others have suggested about buffs to the crew, but I understand peoples reservation about those benefits. My suggestion would be to limit any potential benefits of religion to non PvP related activities, like traveling, trading and exploring. That way religion plays a part in the game, as Is probably historically accurate, but the players won't suffer from any benefits It gives.
Otherwise, I don't think religion should be added If no benefits were to come with it, but as others suggested, simply add appropriate churches to the cityscapes in each nation.
-
You're assuming everyone wants to play the game you want to play. You do not even consider the fact some people may differ in taste, or brush them aside as "greater demographic" and imply their opinions are not worth listening to.
This is exactly what being an asshole is about.
I concur.
I support female avatars in game. I understand that avatars are a low priority, but someone mentioned earlier that portraits could be used, and I think that's a great solution. Portraits to show your character is common in RPGs, and they're only visible to the player, so no ones expirience is ruined (though I fail to comprehend how something this trivial is a game breaker), and the people who wish to play as a woman can do so.
Of course should the developers wish to design fully animated 3D avatars later, I don't think under any circumstances women, or the men for that matter, should be dressed innappropriatly.
And I'm not being an asshole when I am trying to make a game as good as this even better and more accurate to the time period. Don't start changing history to suit the needs of 'the greater demographic'.
Personally I think NA would be better off If it reserved a few fictional, or historically innacurate elements, such as allowing female captains. The portraits idea seems like a fine solution, It's less work for the developers than having to animate full characters, I think, and It won't annoy people of the same line of thought as you, as you won't be able to see it.
Why shouldn't there be a slave commodity? Because it would hurt someone's feelings? Oh, cry me a river, if it happened in real life it should happen in this game as well. Political correctness is killing games.
For me at least, that's not a matter of political correctness, that's just a matter of what makes a game fun. Slaves being a tradable commodity, does not sound fun.
Historically accurate does not always equal a good, or more importantly, a fun game.
-
3
-
Cannon smoke trail.
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
This has actually been brought up lots of times. Last I heard about it, the devs stated that more smoke would take a heavy toll on performance. Too much, and the game could be more or less, unplayable.