Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

greybuscat

Members
  • Content Count

    230
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

168 Excellent

About greybuscat

  • Rank
    Midshipman

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

567 profile views
  1. I won't miss R-zones. In my experience, they were mostly used to troll nearby enemy ports that somehow existed on the edge of the zone, a la St Mary's. They were never very effective at protecting, say, unescorted traders. As for "new players," everyone I've sailed with tends to let people go if they are low rank, with storebought ships, etc. Failing that, we've offered to give them the ship back. And I'm sure some of those are just alts slipping through the cracks because, honestly, how many "new players" have we really been getting the past few months. "Seal-clubbing" isn't really seal-clubbing if the seal is a Rank 8 in an Indefat who refuses to leave the kiddie pool. "I'm not confident at PvP" and "I don't like being ganked" are not the same as "I just got here and am learning."
  2. I don't disagree in theory. I agree in the sense that books confer the biggest advantages, by far, and the best books are usually held by the best players, who don't need assistance beating up the have-nots. I also agree in the sense that ship XP is a dumb idea that should be removed. The rest of it is going to be wiped already, isn't it? The fact that so many players see books and ship XP wipes as deal breakers is a sign of bad game design. I cannot stress this enough. The problem is, there will always be new players as long as the game is active, and they will face the same problem of being in a caribbean full of DLC ships, well-established clans, and experienced players. DLC ships can always use tuning, so that they aren't perceived as P2W, but you can't protect new players from them in the long-term. I think you have a mix of good ideas and bad ideas for achieving a fair experience at launch. This, in principle, I strongly agree with.
  3. There are lots of things I have spent a lot of time doing in my life that I wouldn't recommend to other people, and I still indulge in some of them to this very day. I don't see why time in-game means anything other than "this person probably knows what they are talking about." Additionally, you have no idea when those hours were played. If someone fell in love with the game in 2016, that game no longer exists. Are they bound to recommend a game new buyers can't actually play? I think this is a lot of presumption and hogwash being presented as a fact. People leave bad reviews for all kinds of reasons. Rather than trying to type everyone into a particular category, so you can ignore them, why not engage with their actual complaints and judge them based on their merit? 'Cause that would take time and effort? See above. This, at least, I can agree with, but I'm not holding my breath that they'll stick around for very long if they do. New Steam review moderation notwithstanding, who should get to decide which reviews are "honest?" That seems like an unproductive way to tackle the problem of negative reviews. As for "poor behavior," I've seen people get forum banned for honest criticism, for meme posts when a certain administrator was having a bad day, etc. The definition of "poor behavior" seems to be relative, but it should be obvious that if you remove a player's ability to give feedback in a place like this, they're going to use whatever other options they have at their disposal, whether it's Steam reviews or a subreddit.
  4. I don't see how this can possibly be working as intended. Seems like something that wasn't fully thought out. "Unfriending" should remove the relationship from both lists. Since someone brought up the ignore feature, I propose that it should be changed to be a sort of blind shadowban that blocks the player from communicating with the person who ignored them, without giving away their name and nationality if they have use forged papers, rather than allowing the player to see a list of people they have chosen to ignore. Removal from the now hidden ignore list can't be too common, so it could be handled at the moderator level. Obviously, it's useful to be able to keep tabs on people if they change their identity, but the question is whether we should be able to do it so easily. The potential for abuse seems high with that one (e.g. an alt account can be used to just ignore anyone and everyone from a given nation). Workarounds shouldn't be needed to "fix" OPs problem, and reporting isn't mutually exclusive to changes on Game-labs side. These are basic quality-of-life/anti-harassment features and they should function properly.
  5. My only problem with this is that, in practice, you often don't get to fight what you see with extremely short timers. If this is the intent, any battle within your horizon (or for any ship within a hypothetical second, much larger circle than the pull circle) should stay open for as long as it is within your horizon, with little to no regard for time-based limitations.
  6. Or our hypothetical player could get bored, not sail at all, and go play something else. Additionally, this only creates more targets for undesirable PvP. If you're looking to make lots of money, you want a hold full of extremely valuable goods, not a few hundred repairs. If you're looking for PvP for the fun of battling other players, a trader's brig isn't going to do much for you. And that's if they don't have the sense to be using a fast trader's lynx. This is a limit on expansion in the same way that a screwdriver is a hammer. Like, sure, it can do that, but it's hardly the best solution and comes with a bunch of other drawbacks, and it can be certain that the people who designed this tool didn't have that purpose in mind.
  7. This is what they call an "is-ought problem." You're describing things how they are and jumping to the conclusion that it is how they should be without doing the work of making an argument for why it's the most optimal state off affairs. I picked an unusually high but recent figure for effect. And thanks for not calling me a liar, I guess? It's only fair that I not call you a moron in return. Regardless, from a gameplay perspective, the "right area" is wherever I'm operating out of at the moment. Repairs being available in places where I am not, at best, creates work that defers the thing I'm actually trying to do (e.g. hunt players, farm for skillbooks/doubloons, RvR, etc). I am totally willing to accept that the player-driven economy would function better if we actually had players driving it, but no amount of player-driven solutions can solve the repair problem because payouts for PvE and PvP do not cover the resource and labor costs of repairs, particularly hull repairs. You can artificially lower the cost of repairs, or obtain them from your teammates, but the resources to make them have to come from somewhere. Further, someone has to ship them around the world, or you're largely limited to your clan or nation's base of operations. What's wrong with trying to minimize mindless work? Have resource costs significantly changed since the real-doubloon conversion patch, particularly for iron? Have they changed by an order of magnitude? A temporary solution to a sustainability problem. I would be much worse off if I hadn't already done the tutorial months ago, then did it on my alt and shifted the repairs to my main. And with this, we come back to my biggest problem with this community. Person A: I have an issue with X or Y game mechanic detracting from the overall enjoyability off the game. I think this will be even worse for new players. This wasn't really a problem when we, as veterans, started playing. Naval Action community: L2P scrub trolololol Like, Jesus Christ, feel free to disagree and contest the premises of my argument, but once you start telling me how to find repairs, you make it obvious that you aren't actually listening to anything I'm saying. I have plentiful repairs because I have been playing for a very long time and am a member of an active clan. My immunity to some of the game's flaws, and experience in accounting for the shortcomings in its design, are irrelevant. But thanks for the unsolicited advice.
  8. Oh boy, so we can enjoy them for a couple of months before they go poof.
  9. I'm seeing some proposed solutions that don't actually address the global problem that repairs tend to be scarce all across the Caribbean, unless you have the right connections or are part of an active clan. "Start a small business" is not a global solution, even with 2.5x labor hour generation, and "find a trader buddy" misses the point by an equal amount. OP didn't ask for help finding reps, they brought up the topic of general shortages. Additionally, repairs are hardly a "viable" business for anyone but the vendor, thanks to resource extraction costs. The market rate for repairs in a busy port (i.e. the only ports that even have them for sale) tend to be so high that any given battle is a net loss in reals if even a single repair is used. Just today, I saw hull in one port going for 500 per rep, and that's not the highest I've seen in the past couple of months. This has been exacerbated by the most recent patch which increased how many repairs are consumed by a single repair order (one player needed over 90 per order in a 1st rate. 60 was among the lowest out of our group.). This means that the people buying repairs are mostly those who need them in a pinch, regardless of the cost (e.g. port battle is imminent, or a player has a huge surplus of reals already and is going into the PvP zone, etc). Since the next wipe is going to turn us all into paupers, everyone is going to be having to spend more time farming resources, more time earning reals, and/or they are just not going to have access to repairs unless they can get someone to do the work for them. Considering how many of our current active players are PvP only, and wouldn't spend a second doing econ if their life depended on it, it seems like a looming problem to me.
  10. You basically broke repairs. Increasing hold sizes would help, but repairs are so expensive already, you should just have repairs give more HP per repair, relative to the recent HP increases.
  11. Not sure this is really the case, considering that they are stackable to a degree. As far as a return on your time investment, PvP and combat PvE for doubloons are mostly a sucker's bet, and this meets or outpaces hunting AI traders for them, which easily beats out the dedicated PvP zones. It also carries less risk than all other methods and is probably more consistent. It might be boring to the "advanced" players, but it's at least as or more efficient. If your goal is having enough doubloons to subsidize RvR or PvP, efficient is a good thing.
  12. Map still marks it as deep water, too. I might be wrong, but I don't believe there are any other ports on the map that are deepwater but have shallow PB restriction. On the off chance that this is an intended change, it should be reflected somewhere in-game.
  13. On that note, I wonder if there any good deals going on for 1440p monitors at the moment. That's not bad, at all. Though if I understand the mission descriptions correctly, if enough people start doing those, you'll run into the issue where someone with a head start already took the same mission and you get nothing? Or does "if someone else delivers it" refer to getting captured, your "cargo" looted, and an enemy player delivering it instead?
  14. About how long do you think that took you, roughly? Just wondering if it would be any faster than killing ~20 AI traders, for the same amount.
×
×
  • Create New...