tarkin1980
-
Posts
105 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by tarkin1980
-
-
I have decided to fully endorse this proposition. #MakeNavalActionGreatAgain
-
Pirate scum fighting rebel traitors... BAH!
Long live the King!
-
Very well. I guess I will just have to wait and see then. In the future, it may be a good idea to implement some way to appeal, since moderators obviously make mistakes too. Racism goes against every fibre of my being and I know that I would never and could never have said anything like that in chat. I report, confront and oppose, on a daily basis, people who express such views in various games and social media.
-
1
-
-
No one can contest that all these examples are more than enough to warrant a ban. I know that I have definitely never said anything even remotely similar in chat. If you are not going to let us know what we were banned for, at least tell us the length of the ban.
-
That thread is great. Except that it doesn't tell you why you were banned, which is what everyone wants to know. We already know that we were banned for something that someone deemed inappropriate. Making a thread to state the obvious doesn't answer any questions whatsoever.
-
Learn to use depower sails (T key) to make your ship heel less so that you can depress your guns enough. Just remember to power them again when you want to turn or tack.
-
I have had my Niagara flipped twice after a trader's brig disengaged from combat and nudged me slightly with it's stern while turning away from me. I was also flipped once when a cutter from my own fleet rammed me. Yay, 3 durability lost from my reward ship just from sheer nonsense!
-
I like the game as it is right now, and would probably get bored if you couldn't lose your ship. But at the same time I think the OP's analysis is spot on and I have been convinced since day 1 that this game will be very short lived indeed for the very reasons you give, so I intend to enjoy it as much as possible while it lasts. There is a reason why we don't have these 90s style games anymore.
-
1
-
-
You haven't the faintest idea what I want with the game, as I have only voiced what I don't want with it. Do not try to patronize me, it will only make you look bad. I don't see how you can disagree with things I have never said.
-
First of all, I do know how market economics work. That is the whole point. I do not want the game to work like the real world does. Your reasoning is flawed, and I will try to explain why.
Imagine, if you will, that all the poor in the world had the choice to just leave and switch to a different dimension where their lives would be better. Businesses would lose their customers and go bust. The reason it works, is that people do not have that choice. They have to, in the vast majority of cases, accept their fate. In our dimension, which we call Naval Action, however, we do have that option. If people don't like it here, they will move to a different game, and your business, your resources and your gold will quickly become worthless. I'm sure you can see the difference, and if you can, you must realize that it is in your own interest that others feel content with how the game works.
Your example with XP is also flawed, because there is an unlimited amount of potential XP in the game. Me being higher level than you in no way prevents you from catching up. That is not how the economy works, though. Your lead is just going to get bigger and bigger because you have the buying power to keep me out of business.
-
Again, I am sorry if I outbid your contract. This does not indicate a problem with contracts, but points instead to your ineffective trading strategy.
If you don't want to be outbid, you should not raise your bid by a single gold unit. If you aren't getting any oak at 101, it does not mean that contracts are the problem - it simply means that oak is worth more than 101. If your bid more closely resembled oak's actual value, you would not need to worry about being outbid. In other words, don't bid 101 on oak; bid 200.
I am concerned by the pestilent demands by some on this forum for plentiful and cheap goods. The oak is out there, you just aren't willing to pay what it is worth.
Prices are gradually settling into their natural values. Just because you saw oak for sale last week at 80 gold does not necessarily mean that it is worth 80 gold this week. You will need to become comfortable with the fact that oak is worth much more - which is totally fine in the context of gameplay.
Spare us the theory. I think we are all aware of how economy works irl. This is, however, a game and we play it to have fun. Those of us who chose to explore other aspects of the game than trading during the first few days after release, simply don't have the funds to compete, and now it is too late to make those easy quick big bucks. I'm sure this is great fun for you, but for the majority it's not. There is a limit to how much "reality" you want to put into a game, because when the reality factor reaches 100%, we might just as well go to our real jobs and then your in game gold will be useless. You should realize that it is in your own interest that others than yourself enjoy the game.
-
1
-
-
I had high hopes for the community in this game because it was great during alpha, but now I don't know...
The british chat on PvP one is horrible at times. There seem to be no moderators at all. People are free to adopt whatever abusive behaviour they like, without repercussions. There is, for instance, this individual called Nathaniel LaBelle (I think?) who jumps at every opportunity to share his views on how "niggers" and "muslims" are taking over the world and abuses everyone who opposes him, calling them all sorts of things.
Seriously? We need moderators and we need them NOW. And don't tell me to just ignore them. I do ignore some of them, but I also don't think that these people should be left to continue their abuse. Simply ignoring them is, in a way, accepting their behaviour.
-
2
-
-
Being swedish irl, I now kinda wish that I had gone with Sweden in game, but when I started out it seemed to much of a chore to play a nation with only one port so I rolled with the brits. I really wish there was a way to switch sides, as I simply cannot bear the thought of grinding all the XP again. Allowing a switch of sides once every 2-3 months should be fine, imho.
On a different note, is it possible to have more than one character? If so, I might roll a swede and see how it goes.
-
Minority? There are only a few people on the forums who DONT want open world. You sir, are in the minority. "Unlike them"? Since when am I afraid to express myself? You think we all think like you? And are afraid to express ourselves and prefer arena games? No way. TDA has over 100 members, and 90%+ would prefer open world over arena.
Well, to be fair, the people who don't want the open world probably left the forums at about the same time they left the game.
-
1
-
-
Not sure in which way arguing about the form or language used in posts is useful input, really. It should be clear to all but the blind that the OP contains input. Especially since the author specifically clarified just that in a second post. One wonders how many months of development testers could save the devs by laying off the brown nosing and just saying what needs to be said. The devs want testing and input, not praise and "omg i love this so much xD pls friend me on skype/whatever". I'm sure the devs and moderators are fully capable of locking what they deem to be non productive threads without the fanboy brigade coming to their rescue.
-
I, too, really believed in a hardcore OW game for a long time, but the more I think about it, the more sceptical I become. Since the first time I heard about this game, I've thought that it would be a gamble and extremely hard to pull off as a commercial success. I see this more as a project by some people who want to create the game THEY would like to play, as opposed to what would be commercially viable. Just like game creators did back in the good old days. I would never dream of asking the developers to abandon their dream/vision.
That being said, I don't think anything would be lost by providing an arena style game mode parallel to the OW game. I think the fear that the arena mode would "steal" or drain away players from the OW is unfounded. People not interested in OW are not going to play it just because there is no arena mode available. They'll play something else instead. It's more likely that the arena game mode would help funding the OW project.
I also don't like the condescending attitude of some posters towards arena games. The notion that they are shallow games for the dirty plebs of the gaming world is not only arrogant and self centered, it is also just plain wrong. Being a fan of a genre that attracts a minority does not make you some sort of elite or better kind of gamer. World of Tanks gameplay is some of the deepest I've seen in my 30 years of computer gaming and continues to fascinate me after 5 years of playing. I realize how shallow it must appear to most players since it is nearly impossible to get into it without dozens of hours of research on 3rd party forums. The fact that WG stubbornly refuses to tell their players how their game work does not make it shallow.
That an arena game would be lacking in content is also incorrect. World of Tanks has around 40 maps and hundreds of tanks and once you have every tank in the game, there are missions and marks of excellence and other things to work for.
I really hope this game succeeds. The PC gaming scene needs it. I also hope they add an arena game mode.
-
2
-
-
Thanks everyone
Belle Poule looks awesome
-
Mmm.. so much frigate porn... thanks
-
Hi
I havent been able to find time for Naval Action for the last few months but I am still curious about the new ships that have been added. Does anyone have some screenshots to show? I think last time I played was in May so anything that has been added since then is what I'd like to see. Feel free to post them in this thread
-
1
-
-
This is my own translation of a facebook post made by the swedish national archive:
In 1784, the small island of St. Barthélemy in the West Indies became a swedish colony. King Gustav III's desire for a colony had been satisfied.
After capturing St. Barthélemy from the french, the swedes founded and erected the town of Gustavia by the port of Le Carénage. Living quarters, administrative buildings, taverns and businesses were constructed in a massive scale. The swedish church Sophia Magdalena was completed in 1785. The town grew rapidly and by the early 19th century, Gustavia was one of Sweden's largest towns with over 5000 citizens.
The island was made a free port and a west indian trading company was founded. Slavery was wide spread on the island but was banned in 1840. St. Barthélemy did not turn out to be the success Sweden had hoped for, and in 1878 it was returned to France.
Among the first swedes to arrive to the island was the young physician Samuel Fahlberg. He made several drawings of St. Barthélemy, and laid the foundation of a city plan for Gustavia. For his services, he was admitted into the Royal Academy of Science in 1791. Samuel's life did, however, take a disastrous turn for the worse in 1810 when he, after an uprising, was forces to leave the island. He was later to be convicted for treason.-
4
-
-
Hey, I thought I'd share with you this map of Gustavia, the swedish colony on St. Barthelemy, that is currently in the game. I found this in the swedish national archive. The map is from 1799 and is drawn by Samuel Fahlberg.
-
4
-
-
If you play Total War for the battles in single player, you are indeed easy to please. Watching the AI run around in circles while you bombard them with catapults gets old pretty fast.
Back to NA. I for one am completely uninterested in clan warfare and organized battles. I want to explore, gather personal wealth, collect rare items, customize my ship/crew and play encounter battles as they happen. If I wanted one-off fleet actions between teams, the open world would just be an obstacle. All I need would be a big red BATTLE button.-
1
-
-
Sounds good. I'm not sure I could afford another "free" to play game. I've spent over 1000 euros on WoT. It was worth every single euro, though.
-
What most people seem to fail to realize is that money is time and time is money. Some people are able to put massive amounts of time into a game, and are held in great esteem as honorable players. But if you should decide to put money into the game, which you've put time into making, you're suddenly a cheat. Most people just don't have the choice. If you have a full time job, you have a full time job. You can't choose to convert part of your salary into free time at will. Similarily, an unemployed person can not convert their abundance of spare time into money. No one is going to accuse the person with a lot of time on their hands of cheating, though. You have to decide if you want to keep certain people out of the game or not, and whether it is going to be time or money that is going to be the deciding factor. This should be obvious to all.
That being said, one also has to consider what makes a better game. My personal opinion is that the F2P model has utterly crippled the MMO market quality-wise. I think most developers are aware of this but they simply have no choice. Customers just aren't willing to pay a monthly subscription these days. Without micro transactions, this game just isn't going to happen.This game, like WoT but to a lesser degree, is pretty skill based. People who start WoT by purchasing a tier 8 premium tank, and bypass the learning stages of the game, are effectively paying to lose since they will just be completely roflstomped by people who actually know how to play. That Löwe player with 200 games just isn't going to be able to do anything useful whatsoever. I suspect the same will be true in Naval Action.
-
3
-
Sea Trials as a Game Mode
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted
OW was also pretty empty before EA. I guess the devs should just have dropped the whole game? Stronk logic.