Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Percival Merewether

Members
  • Content Count

    474
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Percival Merewether

  1. 2 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

    Make captain names only visible on the ship card when the ship is taken or sunk.

    If not happen, you'll never know.

    Similar to "unknown quality of enemy ship".

    Complete opposite of yours, just to add seasoning to the soup.

    And has inherent benefits and cons as well.

    This was my initial idea, but figured the following stated by @Je maintiendrai was going to be a problem.

    1 minute ago, Je maintiendrai said:

    I have alliances with individuals in other nations so pls no xD

    It's important to consider that this is a game for a wide audience, not just the elite few 🙂

    What other solutions do we have? I really feel like it's becoming an issue.

  2. Hey guys!

    For a while now, it has been a problem that people leave when they see who you are in battle. Sometimes people prefer an easy fight, other times they tag someone they realise is a friend. Other times they have heard rumours of the person that they have attacked and prefers to stay away from whoever this person may be.

    This problem first started back when names were removed from Open World. This was not too bad initially, although I personally wanted the names to be displayed.

    With the latest changes to tagging I see some new problems arising in battle. People now spawn much closer than they did before, and it takes a lot longer to leave battle. While I am personally in favour of this new mechanic, I do see some of the old things being somewhat out of date.

    If people join and decide to leave because they will not fight the person they have tagged, it will now take 8 minutes to get out of battle and for both sides to continue playing the game.

    I do not wish to discuss the mechanics already implemented, I am sure that the developers have had their reasons and I am fine with that. What I want to focus on is what is now outdated.

    I suggest the following two solutions to the problem:

    1. Make names visible in Open World again
    2. Make names invisible when the battle starts and only reveal them after 5-10 minutes
      1. For this feature I would also suggest disabling battle chat until the end of the ‘reveal timer’ or until one person has died from the opposite team.

    With option no. 1, we will satisfy a lot of people who are worried about tagging players in Open World, but it is likely to introduce a reluctance to PvP against some people thus reducing PvP combat.

    Option no. 2 is the one I personally consider to be the most interesting, this means that during the initial phase of the battle you will not know who you are up against. This could keep some people in battle who would otherwise leave very early.

    Feel free discuss; maybe the third option is to simply leave the mechanics as they are. 🙂

    • Like 1
  3. I think it'd be a sound idea to create a sub-forum for general discussions in 'other language' - but giving special treatment to a language as small and insignificant (For the NA community) as Catalan seems over the top.

    Given that there's a fairly large chinese player-base I'd say they should have a much higher priority.. The same is the case for the Scandinavian community who are often treated as having just one language and in this case is without a subforum (Denmark-Norway and Sweden are even in-game as seperate nations..). Furthermore, I bet the vast majority of Catan speakers are perfectly capable of communicating in either Spanish or English and a sub-forum would only serve to alienate and distance the minor Catalan group from the rest of the NA community.

    36 minutes ago, Pablo Frias said:

    I believe it´s slightly more nationalist blaming someone because he wants to speak his langague which is recognized in Spain at the same level as spanish

    In that case I'd like to request the creation of a Faroese sub-forum as that is officially recognised in the Kingdom of Denmark at the same level as danish. Hardly an argument for the creation of a sub-forum here though ;) 

  4. 2 hours ago, Da Hool said:

    Have got the E-Mail too but haven't looked into it further.

    What are the Prices for pre-order? @Beserko

    https://www.aos.ultimateadmiral.com/

    Scroll to the buttom

    I downloaded and played it yesterday for around 15 min. So far it seems good, but with limited gameplay available at this stage (Alpha/Beta), don't expect anything big just yet.

    Will there be seperate sub-forums for those of us who wants to provide feedback?

  5. 10 hours ago, Wolfram Harms said:

    Another thought, about the woods:
    To avoid unrealistic speedy SHIPS, it would be great if the SHIPS of RANK 5 and higher could only be built of woods, which would have really been used in real life: OAK, TEAK, MAHOGANY, WHITE OAK and LIVE OAK.
    Bigger ships could not be built of FIR or BERMUDA CEDAR - those woods were to light and would have warped, if their decks had carried 18pounders or even bigger cannons. 

    I’m sorry to break it to you but that’s just not true.. though it was not the preferred material, frigates were routinely built of fir by multiple nations and carried 18lb cannons and bigger, you need not look further than the Endymion-class ships.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endymion-class_frigate

    What would be interesting to see though is a simulation of real life maintenance costs. Since there is no maintenance on ships ingame, this could be done by greatly increasing repair costs on light ships and making repairs cheaper on oak based ships. This could potentially simulate the increased maintenance that comes at the cost of building vessels on the cheap.

    This will also greatly decrease the speed bonuses achieved with light woods since they’d have to carry 2x more repairs.

    I can agree to limit 3rd to 1st rates to non fir/cedar type woods, but there is no historical basis for not allowing the use of fir on frigates.

    • Like 3
  6. 23 hours ago, ManuelSpain said:

    before introducing mods it is necessary to introduce to Spain and France playable I think

    That makes no sense

    If modding is possible in this game then the developers already know. It will have absolutely no impact on whether France and/or Spain will be playable. I'm not requesting a feature so don't worry about me blocking your spanish dreams :D, with modding available you may even be able to add Spain to the game yourself.

    A game such as Naval Action is moddable, but your options are limited due to most of the data being stored on the server.. seeing as this is a Single Player game, there is no reason not to open the files to the public.

    It's basically a yes/no question. :)

  7. The developers have decided to make a much needed wipe, this has left every player with only 50k, future wipes are very likely to happen so try not to get too attatched to your items.

    Good luck out there! Safe sailing :) 

  8. 4 minutes ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:

    This solo class patrol should also enable what we on PvE Peace Server often discuss affirmatively as "consensual duels". Our admiralties now ask combat medals for ship notes just like on PvP War Server but the means to earn them are not yet provided (I think). Make it so people can meet in solo patrol zone (and only there) for duels, with option if it will be without damage/loss of ships (like in the old tournaments) or "bloody-real" with damage and possible loss/capturing of ships. In the latter case the winner earns combat medals, the first tournament-like duel is just for fun, without rewards.

    This little opportunity for PvP on PvE Peace Server may trigger some people to discover they like PvP and also venture over on War Server. In case you need a motive for introducing this feature. All the rest of us have a lot of fun, combat medals and can settle personal issues with each other :). People who just cross the zone and deny agreement for a duel are not getting harmed = PvE Peace Server fundamental rule of tranquility is kept intact.

    I certainly see your point, but I'd fear that the opportunity for a little PvP on the PvE server could make some players make the jump from the PvP to PvE server.

    • Like 1
  9. 30 minutes ago, admin said:

    Examples:
    New ROE: used by many - we see battles escalating over and over - giving exciting and even pvp opportunities for players
    New trading: used by many right from the start
    New group missions: used by many right from the start
    Delivery missions: used by many right from the start

    I really think you've done a great work with the recent patch, but there are things that I'd definately like tweaked. I have to say though that it's hardly fair to compare the suggestion put forward by @Vile Executioner to features you have already implemented that has no real alternative for players.

    Please do not take this the wrong way, however:

    Claiming the new ROE it is a great feature because it's used by every player is a bit far fetched when that is the only way you have left us to play the game we love :) personally given the choice between the old ROE and new ROE, I'd certainly chose the old one because that provides more safety for me as the attacking party.

    It's all a work in progress though, we'll see how things develop.

  10. If you ask me you should keep Global and Nation Chat free of "banter", not all of us is interested in reading it, nor do we find it funny. It has been seen on several occasions that "banter" spirals out of control and turns into very hateful arguments.

    Keep "banter" in Clan Chat and PMs where only friends can read it. There are lots of ways of joking in public chat rooms that does not involve having to resort to death threats.

    • Like 3
  11. 3 hours ago, Legioneod said:

    Ships should have historical stats when built from historical materials. Currently when building a ship with historical woods the stats may be different than what it would have been irl.

    My Suggestion is that when a ship is using it's historical woods then it should have it's real stats, instead of it being altered.

    One example of this is the Constitution. Currently when using it's historical material (Live Oak/White Oak) it's slower than what it would be irl. It's should be around 12-13 kts when using LO/WO but instead it's slower even though that's the material it used irl.

    I'm ok with different woods altering the stats but if the wood was used on the actual ship then it should have it's stats reflect this.

    I hope you realise that your suggestion means that an Oak/Oak Endymion should go 14.4kts and an Oak/Oak Bellona should go around 12-13kts.

    9 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

    The current system is flawed imo. The strengths of the constitution was it's hull strength and a decent speed of 12-13 kts. The way the game models it screws it's historical strengths. In game you are forced to choose either strength or speed but not both, when in reality it was a decently fast ship. 

    Bear in mind that non of the ships in-game are directly comparable to their real-world historical counterpart. A lot of people tend to think that the Connie was some kind of an unstoppable super-weapon, completely overlooking how a 13 kts Live Oak/White Oak ship would affect the rest of the game.

    The most accuate Connie build in-game would be a 'Very Fast - Teak/White with Cartagena Caulking'. It already has the highest thickness of any frigate in the game and is therefore placed exactly where it was historically. You also have to remember that the ship you see in-game represents the class of ships that she was in and not just the Constitution herself. You must look at the performance of her sister ships and take that into account when you evaluate her performance.

    If you are unsure about the Constitution's stats in relation to the other ships in game, I'd suggest that you compare the base stats to see if anything can be improved there.

    • Like 1
  12. 18 minutes ago, jodgi said:

    I'll never not complain about ganking ;). "Playing it smart" is such a hindrance to fun; It's other people's fun, not mine. Sorry.

    I think one of the major problems in the game today is that every involuntary fight is considered a gank - even a Surprise vs Victory.

    Unfair tactics such as waiting on top of a battle is certainly a hindrance to fun, but so is tagging an AI fleet to escape, sitting under the forts or calling for a revenge fleet. In the end the game allows it, so I'd always direct my critism at the game rather than the individuals playing it. :)

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...