Galileus
-
Posts
1,488 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Galileus
-
-
- much more realistic ship behavior while sailing and turning,
- much more variety to the ships, and each ship will have its own characteristics for turning. (Even similar ships with same maximum speed and maximum turn rate, one has higher turning acceleration than other. Even this would make the ship with higher turning acceleration more agile and nimble ==> much more variety)
- a gain/loss factor for all ships, for instance a ship of line would bring more gun power in return of slower turning, whereas, frigates and smaller ships would act more agile and nimble in return of less armor and guns. (Not everyone would rush for biggest and strongest ship, which is Santisima right now. Some could use the maneuvurability of the frigates, some could chose sheer firepower of rated ships => much more variety and less monotony like Santisima spamed PB's)
- Captains would need to plan their turns and moves in advance bringing more strategy and depth to sailing.
- True. No arguing that.
- Disagree. Adding variety on top of variety (turn acceleration on top of max turn speed) suffers from diminishing returns and thus ends up barely noticeable. Ships keep their "nible" or "bricky" status, as is now.
- Disagree again. As above - the change wouldn't be big enough to change the current system. There are already more and less nimble vessels, claiming varying their turn acceleration will somehow completely change meta is ignorant.
- Disagree again. With the speed of gameplay now, the need to plan ahead is already obvious. Again, diminishing returns - adding another layer on top of existing layer will not hugely impact the amount of strategizing required now.
And due to all that I raise a question - are there really any improvements brought by this system that would excuse further slowing down of the gameplay?
I raise another one - how does that "time to reach steady phase" translate into time-warped nature of NA? Would it even be noticeable within sped up time?
-
You would end up with in-game weather changing too slow. Not ideal circumstances if you want to sail somewhere and the wind is against you.
-
2. It fixes "tag and lock" where people can tag you and run to stop you from entering port battles. It also allows you to TP into port and enter PB bypassing any and all enemy ships running a blockade. Will it work like that and would that be intended?
It could be fixed by splitting INV timer between post-battle and port-exit. Pain in the ass, sure, but that could actually come in useful in balancing.
-
Fog of war the Map so ports don't show up until explored the area. Webpages etc will give the locations etc anyway but at least then there is a bit of mystery when you hear about places you havent explored and they open up an webpage to look it up......Travel can take hours and map is mostly empty space and water. People would not feel mystery, people would feel agonizing pain and wouldcheck web-maps for the basic functionality and ability to play. The game is hard for people with limited time as is.
higher rank better pricesIt's a player driven economy. By giving % bonus gold you can create infinity money making loops.
Courier rank would be like traders but set delivery stuff like messages between ports asking for mats etc. If someone captures an Explorer they get a special Flag on a PVP trader moving between those locations the courier was going to which they can engage. this fleet when captured with the person in group and battle get a bonus, say 100K gold if they do it in a set environment...Fleet of 4+ maybe i don't know yet as you could exploit it. Creates a new rank system a focus on capping PVP traders and encourages again exploration.Use conquest flag system to signify CouriersYou have a quest. Now go on with steps 2 through 99 to have a reason of including another ranking grind.
Crafting - ships = lvl no BPs but number of ships created = lvl...subcrafting shouldn't get XP IMO. Craftin 7/6/5 for trade and crafting people essential.I agree... I think. I cannot tell if you're trying to present an opinion or contact alien overlords. If you're trying to present an opinion, please, do take your time.
Build in durability in ships......7ths & 6s. distance sailed.As above. I have no idea what is the message.
get rid of duros - Its bad design IMOThere are dozens of pages of discussions about that. You should not be surprised when I say your "insight" does not outweigh them by the means of reason.
---------------------------- <- Bottom line is this - if you want to make a proposal, take your time.
-
Anything but FXAA or SSAA. MSAA, MLAA, EQAA, that NVidia one... TXAA was it...? But why SSAA? It's not like NA is easy on the rigs as is, pack it tight with extreme SS and you are sure to end up with a slide show.
-
Search for "Battle Timer". You will find at least 27.075 topics on that.
-
1
-
-
'Have fun' Danish Frigate 1789 (With Plans) o_O
I had to double check
-
2
-
-
Let me get one thing straight -
When PvP ruleset changes temporarily and PvP people are told to "sit tight, we're changing everything anyway", you want Devs to change PvE server rules even more, even though this whole stage is temporary?
And most of all, you need a sub-forum for that?
With all due respect, but what the holy hell? Just post a topic like everyone else does, and wait till they implement correct mechanics anyway. Everything is in state of flux, and we all go through it - PvP or PvE. Why in the seventh hell would they change PvE ruleset separately if they are not even at the final stage of the ruleset?
-
How about labor discounts for larger runs?
IRL a big part of labor is setting up tooling to do something.
Give an advantage to the more organized crafter.
That would give another advantage to clans and disadvantage to solo crafter (that has to cycle through multiple jobs). Also an "rich getting richer" mechanic. I see no need for that other than "I want to have more stuff!".
-
2
-
-
There is no way to tell if it is one guy once (because you can just change the name of your alt). Your exaggerated metaphor is not what I am asking for. A simple history check or ip check if it is possible would not be hard to make. I have seen games destroyed my multiaccounting. This is not about this one case. It is about a general problem that could destroy the game, especially if PBs are going to have more impact as it has been advertised.
Simple IP check is not going to cut it. IP is computer bound, not user bound.
My exaggeration is - unfortunately - not an exaggeration. It's not a metaphor either. You want to ID someone over the internet, you need to get a permit.
-
1
-
-
Do you expect them to send a police squad to read this guy's personal e-mails?
No, seriously, WHAT actions do you expect? Because a guy, once, joined the wrong battle - you want him investigated?
Because if anyone were to follow your advice - I would call that a toxic community.
Chill out. You're blowing the case WAY out of proportions.
-
MMM....
and they sell it on the chat ;(
and thats my point its already being done
so why not doing it on the market for secure reasons
on the market you can restrict it as well
Because it's not being done "through the chat". It's being done using chat to coordinate. It still takes a lot of work and cooperation between parties.
The very thing you want to remove is the thing that is supposed to happen - socialization, crafting circles, human aspect, work that needs to be put into the whole process. Your proposal not only breaks the system, it also makes it less engaging, less self-controlling (no need to actually coordinate), less social and all in all lesser.
-
1
-
-
simple solution: Purchased hours can only be used on level 0 BPs
And that helps how exactly?
-
1. The LH system is done precisely to avoid a situation where grinding more would allow you to craft more
2. Problems with buying craft XP
3. The unlimited nature or market. There is a limit to people willing to go through the hoops of community crafting, there is none for market of LH.
4. Devaluation of everything crafting related.
5. People not interested in using their LH get to enjoy steady regenerating money - they don't even need to socialize with others to convert them to gold!
6. Socialization element is lost.
There were some 87-89 more arguments against that, these are the bullet points. Well, most of them.
-
1
-
-
Eternally counter-clockwise turning wind is very much needed. Gameplay is slow as it is, the repetitive and predictable gaming conditions make it possible for many people to swallow the slow pace of travels. Having people waiting for good weather or getting stuck in bad wind with the speed and scale of the game would be a deal breaker.
-
Easily and nicely introduced into officers / upgrades system as well. The better your outfit, the more detail you get.
-
- no logout from the Battle Result Screen. ( not sure if this is even possible )Which would in practice mean you get kicked out of BRS and immediately go into 60s timer outside. Sure, I can see it.
- Logout in the Open Sea not possible during the Invisibility / Invulnerability PeriodAs above.
- Login always in one of these, whichever is better to implemente - Last Visited Port - Nearest Port ( friendly only )This on the other hand is insane (sorry). Just give people straight up unlimited teleport to nearest/last visited port on 60s timer.
And now for something from completely different barrel:
Log in in open see, 2.5min tag-lock (can be attacked, cannot attack). Fixes shady characters, does not affect everyone else - which in this case is almost everyone.
-
2
-
-
Do attackers have the advantage of surrounding the victim or do the attackers have that advantage only when surrounding the victim? Hmmm...?
-
Now: if you want to catch attackers in your water, you spread out, fan and search, trying to use land as a reference and trying to keep distance between friendly ship as to make the net impassable for enemies when they finally show up.
Proposal: sit on top of sign.
IMPROVEMENT!
-
I think it would be helpful to not only display each persons forum name , but also the country or faction they play in game. It would make discussions more understandable knowing from what side of the fence someone is making a comment or suggestion from in any given thread.
From experience - it would rather fuel more meat-throwing competitions where every and any idea is attacked on nation basis.
"Of course you would want more FPS and better optimization, like you Martians don't enjoy enough national FPS advantage! You should be a planet and not a nation!"
-
It should always be the players choice wether or not he will let ship be taken or be destroyed
I will let you think on this for a moment.
"It should always be mine enemy who decides if he allows me to win his ship or if he will deny me".
Great design. If I didn't know better, I would think you're trolling.
I do not say make it impossible to deny your ship. What I'm saying is - it shouldn't be as easy as delicately bumping against other ship. It should be at least as hard to deny as it is to capture - and not super-hard to capture and based on dancing and pratling around the pray like a balerina, so that the prey doesn't as much as breaks a nail... because then it sinks and it's gg.
It should be a possibility to try and deny the capture - not a sure-fire "troll the guy" button.
-
1
-
-
It's not the stack limit that's annoying, it's the lag.
The game can handle 52 cannonballs flying through the air to impact a forest of masts and sails, but somehow the damn Craft button makes the servers agonize over the decision for five seconds.
Even without the lag, crafting 1500 pieces 16 at a time IS ANNOYING.
Sure lag is annoying, it doesn't mean limit isn't.
-
I should still have the choice to surrender my ship or let it sink. as I say in my first post, if you want to make sure you get the prize, take the risk and board the prize sooner. unless you are afraid to loose the boarding
Your advice is useless. If the only way to capture a prize is to make sure it is alone (friendly rams and sink), you never come too close (ram yourself and sink), never shoot round shot at it (random fire -> sink), best never shoot at all, and best of all - somehow board right away without preparing in any way or form...
... well, you just pointed out the problem there. If the boarder needs to mindlessly rush to board while at the same time somehow destroying boardee's friendlies to succeed, and at the same time boardee only needs to sit around and wait to get a chance to sink himself... that's a bad gameplay right there.
Taking risk is one thing, going through idiotic hoops with instant fail-state as soon as one (!!!) leak or spark shows up on the other ship is straight up idiotic.
-
Why should I as a captain not have the choice to decide the fate of my ship??, there are many exsamples in history where captains has destroyed there ship, to stop it for falling into enemy hands. So if you want to stop a captain destroying his ship and denying you your price. then my advice is, dont do as much damage, and board sooner.
You're not a captain from history though... you're a player in a multiplayer game.
open Apology .....
in Tribunal - Трибунал
Posted
*when