Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Powderhorn

Moderators
  • Posts

    1,982
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Powderhorn

  1. Since that's the current meta for the beefiest ships while still pushing the speed cap, I think that rather sharply goes against the intent of the OP.
  2. I don't think that @Ink is about at this hour, but, just to do some of the prep-work: What sort of graphics card do you have, are your drivers up to date, and what graphics settings are you using in game?
  3. When someone accuses Hethwill of moderator bias...
  4. Hethwill is not the only moderator. The accusations of bias against him are unfounded. Rather than looking to cast blame, look inside yourselves to wonder why posts get hidden, and see if there is a common theme.
  5. I have a few humorous anecdotes about this, as someone who fails every color perception test going on the red/green axis. However, it's not a question of not seeing red, it's that the red kinda blends in with other colors. For example: Traffic lights? Total non-issue. They are three distinct colors. Red on green? Awwwww no. When I was going through Field Med, we did a training called "The Kill House." Basically, imagine a bunch of strobes, smoke, bodies, fake blood, and the soundtrack to the landing scene of Saving Private Ryan. As it was winter, we were in woodland cammies, and got covered in fake blood. When the day was over, I went ahead and washed my cammies, and then threw the same set on before evening formation, not thinking anything of it except, "Warm cammies, F- yeah!" While standing in a formation of about 400 people, I get called out with a large "wtf?" from the instructors. This was unusual. Apparently, the cammies still appeared stained with fake blood to everyone else, but I could not pick it out. Also, apparently, my hair had turned a faint pink which I was also unaware of, which required, ultimately, me to shave it all off. So, in a nutshell: High contrast? No worries (for me at least, YMMV). Low contrast? Gonna look a fool in front of a few hundred people. (For those alarmed that a medical type might not be able to pick out blood on clothes, don't worry. Nobody sees red in dark, confined spaces, which is what most trauma ends up being. You just check your gloves for wetness after poking around a bit.)
  6. 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.
  7. 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?
  8. 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.
  9. I don't understand. Every other faction is flagged as "Enemy Player." Is that not the case? Is that inaccurate?
  10. We had a diplomacy system before. It led to less fights.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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. A ton of Haitian Independence flags would be appropriate: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Haitian_flags
  15. The original flag of Venezuela: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Venezuela#/media/File%3ABatallaCarabobo01.JPG
  16. The flag of the United Irishmen would work here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_United_Irishmen
  17. This is just an off the cuff thought: Why not make Poland a true privateer faction? Everything is already done, it would just need a more inclusive name (simply "The Commonwealth" would suffice), and every cool flag that is historically accurate, but not sizable enough to warrant a faction could be added in, making use of a wider variety of flags, and adding for a distinct "hardcore" faction.
  18. I just want to point out that this is yet another day in the unending cycle of factions rising to a peak then falling into a trough. Anyone who's been here for a couple years can think of multiple times GB has been the biggest, baddest faction, and multiple times they're looking for alms for the poor - as with every faction.
  19. There should be a perk for breaking up ships giving substantially more materials.
  20. Yes - that's something to take up with Steam. We of course advise that players should operate within Steam's Terms of Service. As I think we've gotten to the root of this issue, I'm going to lock the thread lest anyone say something to be regretted.
  21. This is really beyond my comfort zone on advice to give, but from a volunteer standpoint, all I can advise is that you should set your steam country to the country you reside in / pay taxes in. If you need more funding to purchase the game, hopefully you are able to do so, as I am certain we would love to have you on the seas
×
×
  • Create New...