Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Fellvred

Tester
  • Content Count

    316
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

352 Excellent

About Fellvred

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,282 profile views
  1. Why not just make guns a lot lighter when they're in the hold rather than being used on a ship - as well as showing the contents of a port on the map/trade screen. Quality of life for everyone would make more sense rather than advantages only for players who are willing to pay more?
  2. I do like the idea of regular resets but it could also see large numbers of players leaving at the same time. Perhaps post launch there could be an area (parts of the gulf/pacific coast?) which resets every few weeks, with the nations holding the most ports there gaining rewards not related to the regular RvR wars etc
  3. Bit sad to see the reply against a legitimate concern that a number of players have (spread across the player base). Personally making PvP more difficult for only newer players doesn't make it 'hardcore'. Not exactly related to the thread but for me PvP needs to have real consequences for mistakes and failures to be hardcore. I'm all for new players having their world kicked in when they do something stupid but there needs to be that sort of risk for everyone in the food chain, unfortunately there doesn't seem to be that kind of danger for many of the big fish atm.
  4. couldn't agree more The big danger with adding more rewards for players doing well is that the gear gap will continue to grow - also increasing the gear fear for players who aren't one of the top x% The difficulty curve would probably also continue to get worse, there needs to be some sort of mechanic to make it harder for those doing well (in PvP) and easing newer players into PvP without them being target number one every single time. - It's been suggested a few times by other people but how about a PvP 'score/infamy/level' system which would then affect how many PvP marks ar
  5. Probably, but op didn't mention anything about retagging etc. The tagged player can also put a call out for help to gank the other guy. The way the open world is designed atm is player A can choose to keep player B in a battle for 90 mins, just like it's player B's choice to surrender and leave if he doesn't want to stay there. I'm not a fan of the design (way too much wasted/down time etc) but I can't see it changing any time soon.
  6. I don't really consider it griefing, it's just how open world is designed atm. Is it griefing if a fir/fir Prince keeps a slow heavy rattle at range because he'd be creamed at close range? Is it griefing if a cannon frigate keeps a carro frigate at long range and spends an hour taking out sails and using up your stack of sail repairs?
  7. Personally I don't have an issue with the tactic - he tagged me yesterday, we had a nice little tactical battle at range and then both left with a gg. Either use the next battle as practice for hiding your sails, don't sail a slow ship solo or just surrender next time - you always have an option to leave the battle.
  8. Sorry I really don't agree that solo PvP can only work if the Quality of Life (QoL) improvements are removed. Forcing players to do something hardly ever works - we saw that before the QoL stuff was implemented, we didn't have loads of solo players sailing around long distance and solo pvp, people just didn't want to travel. How about a carrot approach rather than the stick? Patrol areas are a good start but a couple ideas: 'Solo' friendly areas with 1.5BR limits etc - creating the atmosphere of a public event similar to other mmos. New hauling missions (similar to EvE) where
  9. With NAL being put on hold I'd love to see more chances for consistently 'even' fights in NA. Most new players coming in are going to be solo initially and it doesn't really help the population if the first pvp they encounter is being ganked a couple of times for 3 pvp marks , perhaps players should only be able to join on the smaller BR side? Should battlegroups even be allowed in patrol zones?
  10. I'm not a fan of current repair system but I'm not sure if complicating it with even more consumables and mechanics would be the way to go (although I would prefer the much slower repairs via crew). Would 'hard' dmg be done to a certain percentage or would shots cause differing amounts of hard and soft dmg? Surely the players with consumables would still win most of the time. After playing Legends for a bit I really like the lack of armour repairs - you still have cooldown repairs for sails/pump/rudder etc but mistakes really matter now rather than running away for a few mins to repair an
  11. Check through the rest of the Early Access titles and see how many regularly have less than 1% of their owners on at peak times, might be surprised. For a game available for two years 1% is near the top A lot of top released games are also well below 1% (Rocket League/GTA5 etc) If the game was released now there would obviously be a surge in players but it's not ready and most of the people playing an alpha know that.
  12. Not really: NA and Legends are being developed by two teams. NA was originally going to be a fully hardcore MMO but was redesigned somewhat to be more appealing to a wider (casual) audience. You would rather have microtransactions brought into the open world? GL have released three(ish) games so far: NA has sold well in Early Access and personally the Ultimate General games have been more interesting than the last couple Total War versions. Obviously it's your own personal opinion but I can't see why think they don't have confidence in what they are putting out.
  13. A rather strange thing to say when you have no idea of their finances ^^ GL has several games (5+?) in different stages of development so I wouldn't say funding is a massive problem for them at the moment.
  14. The number of reviews is tiny compared to the number of sales, especially recently. As usual it's a vocal minority which didn't get their way and is happy to write a negative review despite more than getting their money's worth. It shouldn't be up to the developers to beg for positive reviews - if you feel the game is good go and write a review, ask clan mates to write reviews, ask nation members, ask alliance members. Frankly the review score is out of the hands of the developer at this point, it's up to the community if the score is 50% and lots of players overlook it, or the recent score i
  15. Ultimate General: Civil War is 33% off as well. If people want to support the devs but don't want another alt it's a really great game.
×
×
  • Create New...