Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Powderhorn

Moderators
  • Content Count

    1,899
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Powderhorn last won the day on December 23 2018

Powderhorn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,462 Excellent

3 Followers

About Powderhorn

  • Rank
    Admiralty Herald
  • Birthday 10/30/1988

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    History, Emergency Medicine, and Computers.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,261 profile views
  1. Powderhorn

    Re-imagining Old Mechanics for New Port Battles

    I think getting hung up on the hours is a mistake. If a 4 hour minimum is too much, make it 25% every half hour, at most. It's really one of the smallest aspects of the whole idea.
  2. Powderhorn

    Alternative methods to flip ports/Bring back war supplies

    Humorous on the timing. I actually call for this exact thing right here: Would you mind if I simply merged this into the other thread?
  3. We have had a number of mechanics to manage port battles in the past, all of them with various positives and negatives. The current iteration moves away from a realist base, and instead favors abstraction: If you control a majority of the circles around a port, you control the sea lanes, and therefore, the port. This is not bad, per se, but it is so abstracted from the subject matter that it feels disconnected. Setting up the port battle is an exercise in mass AI farming, taken from the idea that "people need to do something in order to create the port battle." And so, I present a series of ideas that hopefully are easy to implement (I will point out the sticking points as I go), remove a layer of abstraction, and hopefully make the battles more dynamic by introducing more options. 1. Return of the old flag system to initiate hostility. Instead of simply taking a mission, launching a flag could once again be done in isolation, or with a whole fleet escorting. It should be physically carried, and announced as it was in the past. This brings the first aspect of the port battle back: Fleet actions at sea, heading off the port battle in its inception. I would encourage these flags to cost doubloons, in order to have big-ticket items that are consistently purchased, keeping them moving within the economy. 2. Generate Hostility via economy. Instead of grinding bots with a massive fleet, I would encourage basic supplies moved into the port. This can be abstracted from siege equipment, bribing locals, what have you, but I would encourage the goods brought not be trade goods, but instead, actual crafting goods. Hemp, Oak Logs, Iron Ore, etc. Things everyone needs, and everyone uses, which in turn would encourage privateers to hunt the waters (and in turn encourage escorted merchant vessels, which in turn leads to larger, task-force sized engagements). Further, I would cap the rate of hostility generation at 25%/hr., in order to prevent simple spiking of hostility - this would allow for time for people to gather and fight. The lower end, I would recommend at 10%/hr., forcing a faction to commit to at least 4 hours of setting up a port battle, at most 10 hours. 3. Add a craftable "Shore Party" item weighing 100 tons. This will come into play later, but simply adding the item should be easy. The reason for 100 tons is to limit them in quantity, while having a palpable effect upon ship handling in battle. Further, merchant ships should be allowed into the fight in order to carry more shore parties. (This will be important.) 4. Reduce the three circles to one circle in front of the port. This is abstracted to represent storming the town itself. This is partially where the shore parties come in. Each shore party is one "unit." Much like the game of Diplomacy, you need one more "Shore Party" than the defending side to take the town. Shore parties, ideally, would only be active when the ship is going less than 3.5 knots. This would take programming, but could loan from the "boarding initiate" parameters. I am not certain how easy this would be to code in. 5. Add circles near to shore batteries. Exactly as above, one more "shore party" than the defenders, and you can seize the tower for your own side. This adds to dynamism of battle, increasing options from "destroy fortifications" to "destroy fortifications" or "seize fortifications" for each fortification the port has. (This mechanic was present in Naval Action: Legends, but simply used the ships as abstraction for shore parties, without an item representing those shore parties.) 6. Destruction of the Enemy Fleet, or Total Absence from the Port Circle would result in the town's capitulation. This mechanic would remain from current mechanics, that way even if no shore parties are left, the defenders cannot simply kite away and leave the town. In a nutshell, this brings the focus of RvR back to economics, which is of course the whole purpose of naval presence in the Caribbean. It re-diversifies both the lead-up and execution of the port battle, creating a more dynamic event - largely re-using old mechanics in new permutations.
  4. You're comparing stand-alone buttons and systems on one end, and a system that would interact with another dynamic system. How is weather implemented in game? We know it moves, we know it varies in intensity, but we do not know how the lines of code work. Maybe it really is as simple as "if weather, then X." But I don't know. I'm not a developer. Even if it was, is the benefit worth the cost? There is intrinsic value to people getting lost at sea. It's the one small amount of exploration you get, and the only time you get it is as a newbie. There is intrinsic value to people learning how to navigate. Why would you take that skill away from people, and make it meaningless?
  5. Powderhorn

    Nation Policy System

    I don't understand. Every other faction is flagged as "Enemy Player." Is that not the case? Is that inaccurate?
  6. How do you come to that assertion?
  7. Powderhorn

    Nation Policy System

    We had a diplomacy system before. It led to less fights.
  8. "Just do these things!" - Every time I hear a line that approximates this, I cannot help but to think of the anecdote (true or not, it's irrelevant) of the Computer Vision Project of 1966. In a nutshell, a task seemingly simple was given to some undergrads to figure out over a summer, yet is still trying to be solved today (having computers identify objects in pictures/film). We don't know what code goes into the game, how easily things are changed or tied together, or how simple or difficult something is. Further, the cost/benefit analysis of a limited staff is something that NA players seem to never incorporate into their ideas.
  9. Every "why isn't this standard" question comes down to "there needs to be solid, meaningful choices." Getting lost at sea was a real issue, even with contemporary navigational aids. You can navigate on your own, without the perk, without issue. The tools are there to ensure you should never get lost at sea via dead reckoning. The sextant perk merely takes the navigational skill and experience and puts it into an expert NPC Navigator's hands to take care of for you.
  10. Powderhorn

    A Suggestion to Reduce the Number of Factions

    I'd actually be interested in reducing the number of factions, but I'd encourage 7 total (like the game Diplomacy). I wouldn't recommend any special features or functions for any faction. As to which ones to keep? I'd just recommend merging or removing those least populated.
  11. Powderhorn

    Open Poland to All Privateers

    There is no reason to make this any more than what it is. All I'm suggesting is renaming the Commonwealth of Poland and adding those flags that are not appropriate for other factions, to make it more appealing for more people. Everything else, including re-hashing ideas already tested and new mechanics, should be taken to their own threads.
  12. Powderhorn

    Open Poland to All Privateers

    Please read before responding.
  13. Powderhorn

    Open Poland to All Privateers

    V Because in this game, outlaws did not fight outlaws, they used the mechanic to deny fights to other players. Further derailing will be removed.
  14. Powderhorn

    Open Poland to All Privateers

    A ton of Haitian Independence flags would be appropriate: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Haitian_flags
  15. Powderhorn

    Open Poland to All Privateers

    The original flag of Venezuela: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Venezuela#/media/File%3ABatallaCarabobo01.JPG
×