Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Capt Aerobane

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Capt Aerobane

  1. I think the OW should have anonymous comms between hostiles. IE you can message them but it doesn't say their name or anything just a chat room with "anonymous" and you. That way you can still communicate without being identified if you want.
  2. Well if nobody wants to defend then yes. I mean if nobody contested port battles they would be PVE too after all.
  3. Imagine logging in on saturday to discover that a PB was set on wednesday and the port was lost on thursday? I get that this is on a smaller timescale so it would be easier to surprise people, but at the same time the consequences are not as great. Raids could also easily have windows set by the port owner to prevent night raids. Losing something like a few days of port productivity and a tower or two isn't going to be nice but its not the end of the world. Rewards and penalties could be adjusted to make both attacking and defending worthwhile but not catastrophic.
  4. Richer port = better rewards but also tougher defenses. Weak ports are easier to raid but don't give much of any rewards. Pirates generally didn't raid well defended ports. Blackbeard blockaded charleston sure, but that was an exception. Pirates would generally attack weaker ports. Well protected ports would require a very well coordinated and swift attack with little to no warning, and with limited rates for pirates they would have to get most of the raid done before the defenders even react. For such a feat, the rewards would be spectacular, as would be the damage to the port. A small little port they can just stroll up to with a couple guys and blow up one tower before leaving would not give remotely as good rewards and wouldn't suffer much from it.
  5. How can PVP work? Attacking pirates show up to port. If they have enough players, they can launch the raid. The battle instance starts with the port in the middle and the attackers can start doing their objectives (blowing up stationary merchant ships, blowing up towers, dropping off raiding parties, bombarding the town, whatever) Defenders can join at any time and drive them off. If the attackers successfully complete enough of their objectives, they get rewarded, possibly by stealing resources from the port or just regular rewards. The raided port on the other hand would lose supplies and/or temporarily be unable to produce them. If the attackers are driven off the defenders get good rewards for each attacker sank and maybe a slight boost in port productivity. Attackers who die in a raid or leave one without achieving a required % of objectives can't launch another one for a set cooldown to prevent spamming. I don't think it has to be complicated. *Edit limit pirate ship sizes though. Honestly just completely rework pirates. Has admin commented on pirate plans at all? I'd like to know if they even plan to add pirate mechanics into the game, so I can make my suggestions about them. Interesting, hardcore, outlaw-style pirates are the only thing that would make me start playing this game again. Its what I wanted to do from day 1 when I joined in 2014, and I still haven't been able to do the one thing I always looked forwards to in this game. I hope they pay attention to this area in future.
  6. I said nothing of the game, only the community. I log on once in a while to see if its worth coming back to and every single time, without fail, there is ALWAYS some stupid hello kittying drama bullshit happening in the tribunal that I don't even understand the source of.
  7. Shit like this why I don't play this game anymore. Everybody just trying to be as big of an asshole as possible and threatening to ban each other for anything and everything. So called "testers" exploit the shit out of a game soon to be wiped anyway because they are quite literally addicted to 'winning' even if its by cheating or exploiting. People using alts to get what they want, then reporting their enemy's alts from their own alt forum accounts to stop them doing exactly what they were doing a year ago or what even ever... Everybody bitches and moans about the developers supposedly 'killing the game,' like this game has any chance to survive with this community, when the first thing a new players sees is this kind of crap?
  8. Topic is H. Darby - let's do H. Darby. - Naval Action Memes
  9. I'm not going to accept the idea of spending weeks setting up the facilities and resources to craft decent 4th rates and then having some guy cash out 30 bucks and get infinite redeemable ones with any wood type he wants. I'm not going to accept the game's entire economy being destroyed by what I cannot describe as anything but a cash grab. I'm not going to accept that, I'm just going to stop playing this game. I've never wrote an angry review for this game or tried to sabotage it, but I'm not going to lie to myself about what it is or try to ignore blatant game breaking problems because I don't want to see it fail.
  10. These premium ships are so bad for the game because they are 100% meaningless to sink. Sinking a player on one of these is like sinking an AI. Infinitely more to be respawned. Whats the point then? We might as well be playing a lobby game, then at least everyone has the same amount of skin in the game, instead of players without DLC working to get resources and crafting ships over time while the people with DLC can snap their fingers and get a ship that is just as good in any wood type they want and keep spamming the redeems every day till they get a nice one at 0 ingame cost. Just my 2 cents
  11. I'm saddened to see it has gotten to this, I miss the times when the most controversial thing happening was Mr.Doran's chatban for spamming trinco duel requests. I do have a question though, will the developers still read/see suggestions made on the forums? I've been wanting to write up a huge suggestion for a while now about how to make pirates a realistic and unique class for solo players, I hope my delaying won't make it impossible to get that suggestion through.
  12. A dedicated fishing boat would be cool, it would be nice to see AI fishermen sailing around ports. Even better if pirates could attack them to reduce prosperity of hostile ports.
  13. I think people are so invested in the gank wars mindset they've forgotten that people fighting because they both want a fight is actually possible (and for me at least, a lot more fun). The PVP server isn't what PVP can and should be to me. Its not realistic either. The PVP server isn't like the golden age of sail, its like warhammer 40k in wooden vessels. What @Slim McSauce said basically. The PVE server, with consensual or limited PVP opportunities only for people who want them, could be far closer to what many including myself hoped NA would be than the PVP server currently is.
  14. I wasn't too active anyway, but I'm out of here because of the premium 4th rate/new DLC stuff in general. I'm not going to argue about it, that horse has been beaten already. I'll just acknowledge that I definitely don't like it.I think I might like the PVE server actually. Cooperative sailing and having fun fighting with friends sounds more fun than raging and searching fruitlessly for pvp for 2 hours only to get surprise ganked and sank in 10 minutes. I think the PVE server fits my enjoyment of lighter vessels more than PVP anyway. I don't care about the wipe whatsoever though, I mostly sail brigs and corvettes anyway and I don't usually bother with expensive ships or hoarding resources.
  15. plsnoban, I'm here for the memes not the politics behind them!
  16. I need more! MORE I TELL YOU! If I can't sail against the wind by shooting backwards, I don't have enough cannons!
  17. Purely fictional ships aren't a good idea in my opinion, but the idea of having what is essentially a large indiaman with as many 4 to 9 pounder cannons as you want/can support while still being able to move definitely appeals to my pirate side. I'd love to see a pirate ship similar to what Queen Anne's revenge is thought to have been, even if its not called that.
  18. I think timers could work for this just like normal PBs, at least until a different system is devised. Eco warfare at night might not be very fair to a clan, so I think allowing clans to limit the general spawn times for their port's AI would be fair.
  19. Might I draw your attention (and that of all those discussing hostility) to my proposal for reworking the way PBs are set/Hostility? I made the thread to hopefully change the boring nature of grinding hostility and replace or enhance it with a bit more spicy pvp and pve.
  20. Most people don’t really like hostility missions, and I have found them incredibly repetitive on the few times I did do them. With the recent changes to ports and the addition of port management, customization, and a real reason to own them (awesome changes btw!) it opens the door for much more interesting port battle setting mechanics. I propose getting rid of the hostility mission system and replacing it with any one or combination of the following ways to set a port battle. Blockades. The premise simple, the details more complex, a large group of players sail to the port they want to blockade and when a sufficiently large battle group is near the port, they can trigger a “blockade” event. To successfully blockade a port and either set a PB or complete one step in setting a PB, the attacking team would have to prevent the defending team from bringing more than a certain amount of “relief supplies” –food supplies and gunpowder for instance— into the port. Lineships and frigates would not be able to carry relief supplies, only merchant ships and smaller vessels; the defenders must protect a big merchant (Indiaman) or create a distraction allowing several light ships to sneak through. The blockade would have to be kept up for a standard amount of time, probably somewhere between 1 and 2 hours, but if the defenders do not show up and get at least one ship within a certain range of the port within 30 minutes, the blockade is counted a success so that people don’t have to sit in the blockade for hours waiting for nobody to show up. “But aero you noob, it’s impossible to blockade a port in NA because you will just get screened out and people can sneak by once ur in an instance, also tagging mechanics make blockades so hard!” Here is the big trick: the blockade is an instance of its own. If you trigger a blockade, a battle instance is created in and around the port. The open world continues somewhat normally, with players who aren’t involved coming and going like normal. The catch is that if you want your supplies to count towards breaking the blockade, you must drop them off into the port from the combat instance, having sailed into the port through or around the blockade while they can chase or block you. When the blockade is triggered, all ships in the attacking clan/attacking alliance of clans are pulled into the instance based on their relative position to the port in the open world. When the defenders join the instance, they join also based on their relative position but at least 10 minutes sail (in the battle instance mind you) away from the supply drop off point, which would be right in the center of the port. The wind in these blockade instances will always be set to a neutral position so that nobody spawns in down wind with 0 chance to make it to the port.*a small caveat is that the blockading ships might need unlimited chain or sail repair mechanics may need to be nerfed in these particular instances, to stop spamming and sail repping as a cheesy break-through tactic. In this type of engagement, port defensive batteries and towers will actually be extremely important because the closer you can bring your blockade to the port, the easier it is to cover all the gaps and stop a small ship sneaking through. Enormous and expensive shore batteries can destroy warships at long range, creating a “safe zone” for blockade runners that will be very difficult to prevent them from reaching, as opposed to a port with no defenses where the blockaders can keep shooting the supply ships even as they are slowly unloading their supplies into the port. If team composition and size is unrestricted, it will be extremely easy to break a blockade because the defenders have the advantage of being able to use any one of multiple strategies ranging from a powerful fleet to smash the blockade, to a swarm of blockade running lighter ships to shotgun the defense and hopefully make it through. Because of this teams would have BR limits, with the blockaders getting more BR so they can bring a combination of powerful warships and interceptors. Also remember that depending on the layout of the port and any spits of land with defenses, the attackers may be required to bring a mortar brig to neutralize particularly problematic shore batteries. Ideally, the BR limits are shaped for each port so that a fully exposed port with no defenses is easy to blockade, and a heavily protected port that the clan has invested in is very difficult to blockade without some way of destroying the defenses first... This would require fine tuning on the BR limits for each side. Raids and Assaults. Been suggested a million times before, and other people have put a lot more thought into it so take what I write here as a general idea. The premise is simple, but here the details are pretty simple too. You show up with a bunch of ships and you start blowing shit up right way, mainly those defensive fortifications. Defenders trying to break up the raid spawn in at any time from the moment it starts and with any ships they want. They would spawn rather close to the attackers. Towers destroyed in these attacks would not be available in blockades and PBs for the next week or so. So yeah. Show up and start blowing shit up, guaranteed action, high chance of PVP. You don’t even have to do it because you want to launch a port battle, you can just do it because you want a fight, or just because you don’t like the clan that owns the port and you want to give them a head ache. Economic Warfare. As the developers alluded to in their post about port mechanics upgrades, economic sabotage in more indirect ways could play an important role in RVR and with port battles. The possibilities are endless, so I’ll only list a few ideas I’ve had. Sinking shipping to weaken port defenses Sinking shipping to increase PB/RVR timer window. (Sink AI merchants near an enemy port to create a window for a raid or blockade or to increase the length of the existing one.) Sinking shipping to decrease the prosperity of a port and reduce its output of materials. Hiring “privateer” players to go attack merchant shipping around an enemy port or to suppress piracy around your port waters. (pls I just wanna be a pirate come on). Rewards for escorting AI merchants and for intercepting them (if on a contract to do so by a clan.) Etc, etc. Lots of possibilities that give people meaningful reasons to go out and look for trouble, and giving them central focus points around which to focus their activity, increasing the likelihood of encounters that turn into fighting. Escort and intercept rewards would also give rewards to players even if they can’t find PVP, leading to less of those frustrating instances where you spend an hour searching the OW but find little of interest and log off with nothing. Those are my three big ideas for how to change mechanics around port battles and ports to improve the conquest aspect of RVR and introduce a more “sustained” aspect, with spontaneous raids and constant economic warfare being important to weaken an enemy clan before the decisive confrontations. Couple this with the “front lines” that admin confirmed: https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28606-manage-ports-and-save-time-coming-soon/?do=findComment&comment=627960 and you will (hopefully) end up with more RVR action, and a lot more different types of RVR action. My favorite part of this idea is the privateering and merchant raiding, because it’s a way to get solo players involved in RVR, and it offers a smooth transition from PVE to PVP. I don’t think that requiring a clan to tick all the RVR boxes to have a PB is necessary either, as these mechanics could flow together. Raids and eco warfare make it easier to blockade, blockades trigger PBs. If the impact of coastal defenses on blockades are well balanced, then players will have to perform raids and destroy them before trying to perform the blockade and set the PB. Some sort of screening nerf may be needed, however, because I think if players must sustain economic warfare, conduct raids, and blockade ports to set a PB with no guarantee that they won’t be stopped by an impossibly big screening fleet or just really cheesy delaying tactics, then people may not go through the trouble of trying to set PBs. Alternatively, blockades, raids, and merchant sinking could all work together to build hostility, so after either several blockades, several raids, or a combination of the above, a port battle could be set. I might not have the specifics down pat, or there might be a glaringly obvious weakness in this idea that I was blind to in my excitement, but please look at this as a suggestion for a type of mechanic change, not a hypothetical set of patch notes. I fleshed this out quite a bit because its an exciting prospect to me and because I wanted to propose solutions to a lot of the problems pre emptively, not to try to tell the developers how to do their job. Thanks for reading this and kudos to you if you actually did read most or all of it, I hope it wasn't a waste of your time. I'll check to see how people have responded in the morning. o7.
  • Create New...