Teutonic
-
Posts
3,127 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Teutonic
-
-
17 minutes ago, Liq said:
it's supposed to tell us inflation will be crazy again
The fact that you will always make more money then 1 player doing trading versus your very own "fleet," shouldn't be the reason to nerf prices.
You will make more money than anyone in any environment.
But the 1 player will suffer more with less profit.
Eve has the same "issue," everything that would help tye small groups or solo folks, will always help the large groups more. That's just how it goes.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, admin said:
Captains. We got reports that trading is broken (too much money. Is it true? How is it broken? Is it really really broken?
15 hours ago, JG14_Cuzn said:It’s not broken. It’s working.
Kudos for not allowing contracts to be placed on tradable goods.
As for the price of upgrades/books/ships: it’s basic economics. Yes prices are inflated, and if you’re not making bank with the current Econ system you’re doing it all wrong.
The economy is NOT broken.I agree it is working.
The entire argument I originally had was that a casual (2 hours or less daily) was not able to make enough money during their play session, while ships, materials, and goods were sold at such a high price.
Now with the trade good change I have seen more folks enjoying the game, more folks able to get what they want without too much trouble, and frankly we aren't scrapping by like we used to.
The hardcore players that had the alts and time to play didn't think it was a problem which is untrue.
The broken aspect was that trade goods were worse than cargo delivery missions and we only ever did those missions. Now? Everyone is enjoying making cash, port owners are happy because they are making money, pvpers are happy because there are more targets in the OW.
Heck even RvR players are happy because they see a reaspn to continue to expand their empire.
If there is anything to complain about, it is that passenger and cargo missions seem redundent to trade goods. I would suggest that they become primarily doubloon rewards.
Now everyone is trading nonstop to make money to.....never use it?
Majority of players are doing 1 to 2 trade routes a week to supply their enjoyment of the game for the rest of that week.
-
1
-
-
Felt this needed a separate thread.
It's one thing to have a defender's advantage, it's another thing for ports to be nigh impossible to take because of a defensive structure.
To even think of attacking a regional shallow capital when it has 2 forts is out of the question. Nassau and Morgan's Bluff being 2 shallow ports that with any competent defending force will *never* be taken by the attacker. the attacker literally has to pray that the enemy won't show up to achieve victory.
There is no attacking force in a shallow water port battle that can come close to destroying a fort unless the defenders decide not to show up. unless a nation can prove us wrong and kill a Fort while the battle is being defended.
Forts MUST be replaced from shallow ports in exchange for normal Martello Towers.
-
8
-
-
7 minutes ago, Liq said:
Account is deleted
5 minutes ago, Despe said:Seems that not only is a pvp farming... Spinacia delete his account now, and he have put the hostility level of Gasparilla at 90%. Im not sure but i remember that player playing in spanish faction, so is probably that this could be an abusive use of an alter to break the RvR rules.
So i guess that check the hostility mission in which he participated is needed.
account deleted? sounds like we don't even need a trial. guilty.
-
1 hour ago, Earl of Grey said:
And what If the "dick" comes Out of your own Nation? Its quite common that the slow big ship attempt to board after the small ships chained and damaged the enemy enough. See it at least one times per week that the boarding ship just take the enemys ship and give a f**** to the ships that did 90% of the Work.
But i dont know how to solve this ...
This would cause more Problems than it would solve and would make the RoEs more un-intuitive and less logic than they are now
I would 100% have everyone's Nation "Flag" in battle stay as their Own Nation.
if a Pirate joined the side of GB, they would still have the Pirate Flag. Green on Green is changed to ONLY apply to players in your own nation. if GB wanted to, they should be allowed to shoot the pirate player without tribunal issues, it isn't their nation after all.
-
7
-
-
40 minutes ago, z4ys said:
In the one hand I do agree that BR of ships is strange atm. L'Hermoine 220 while an Endy has only a handful of BR more.
A bigger BR would make it possible to assign proper BR for ship capabilities. Furthermore BR for upgrades is needed as well.
On the other hand the feeling of the all mighty first-rate like after the introduction of shot weight is all gone. It feels like we are back to a diameter sized (old system). So such a huge BR for lineships isnt really justified anymore.
and I don't disagree with you.
But I feel a larger "BR Spread" would really help to solve some minor BR irritations, such as your Hermione and Endy example. Although I absolutely would advocate that DLC ships are not "BR Efficient." meaning that they have a higher BR than other ships of similar weight.the current 900 is "max" BR spread seems too limiting.
I believe the goal that Redii had in mind was to make 3rd/4th rates the most "BR Efficient" wise, but 1st and 2nd rates would be the most "Stat Efficient" per player. Trying to find that exact balance may be difficult, but at least adjusting the balance to get closer to that ideal seems more enjoyable for more people.
*EDITED*
-
6
-
-
13 hours ago, admin said:
what do you disagree with?
QuoteOn skills and progression and rules for new content (promised in 2h of 2019)
-
We have cancelled work on changes in progression, current skill book rework, and perks for the following reason
- Changing anything players already have causes immense negativity as it is taking something away from them.
- Features made for new players can feel that they are done at the expense of old players, who feel they are unfair to the existing community (people who supported the game before), So even if the new progression is amazing it could feel like a robbery for old players even if it is better.
- Thus...
-
We will only add new content if it fulfills the following rules
- It must solve a specific problem of the majority or reduce negative outcome for the majority.
- It must be beneficial for both new and old players
- It must not take anything away that players worked hard to get.
-
One example for a skill tree that fulfills the above mentioned rules could be a Bravery Skill Tree
- Bravery skill tree gives benefits and bonuses to crew when fighting outnumbered
- Bravery skill tree levels up when fighting outnumbered
- These two things reduce negativity for the majority as everyone is ganked from time to time and everyone would love to get higher chance to sink someone in those situation
Mainly this part and honestly I feel your reasoning for discontinuing some content or adjustment is flawed. I don't mean to be rude here.
I can attest that players will accept changes or stuff being nerfed/taken away, if the difference makes the game more enjoyable for everyone as a whole. Let me give an example to what I mean and based on your proposals, also try and suggest a solution to them.
1. Many players that participate in RvR believe (rightly or wrongly) that some ships are essentially useless compared to others. That there is an imbalance that we believe could be solved with simple changes. @rediii is one of those players who made a suggestion that "we" believe is an easy change for you and a change that many people accept as reasonable. That is:
BR changes on lineshipsthe proposal is to increase BR on 1st and 2nd rates by quite a large margin (Rediii goes further into adjusting 3rd and 4ths rate BRs too). I am aware that some players think of it as a negative change, but a sizable group also believe it was help add some diversity to Port Battles, and even Open World Battles to a degree. The main goal in mind was to allow all players the ability to choose and decide on Fleet Setups that could all "work." Whether someone decided to have a 3rd rate heavy 25 man fleet, or another team decided on a 10 man 1st rate fleet.
What I am getting at here is that I really do believe what has been proposed in increasing BR of lineships will be a net-positive for the community as a whole.
You already adjusted BR on ports and reduced them and I thank you for that. It has allowed my friends, clanmates, and nation to participate in more battles than before. I also hope you can see based on the data you gather that there has also been an increase in port battles fought since the change. The only major Gripe we have left is that BR on ships could be looked at. We believe that you DO NOT have to change any stats on ships, but instead just tweak some numbers (and you already changed the Pavel BR so we know you can do it 😘).BENEFITS
A. New Players start off with small ships, By adjusting BR of ships for both shallow and deep water we could come to encourage newer players or those who have low rank to participate even in just a privateer or niagara because the "BR" of the ship better reflects the use within both OW and Port Battles.
B. Old Players will enjoy this more as a way to both adjust their tactics as well as encompass a wider range of ship choices. Currently many of us dislike that fact that 1st rates are the only choice when it comes to fighting in port battles (even greater now is the Christian because stats and BR are WAY too efficient). Old Vets will accept the change because it makes us go back to the drawing board and find new secrets to "unlock."C. This DOES NOT take anything away from players. No ships are taken away, no one player has less of an experience than others. This instead increase the chance for all types of players to be in all types of ships (if we continue to balance BR).
To sum this up.
Increase BR of lineships (ex. 1,200 BR for ocean) will allow all players/nations a greater choice in ship decisions for both OW and PB PvP. Further adjustments of BR will also allow for continued changes for all players to experiment and be engaged in the game for time to come. by CHANGING BR it will allow both New and Old players to actively participate in a wide arrange of PvP conflict that we all like (on the War Server).
If I had to think of a Downside, I guess it would be that BR changes would affect the NPC Raids. I know that @admin just changed BR on ports to compensate NPC Raid fleet setups.... but I really do think just BR balancing for ships and continuing to balance over time is something everyone can agree on to be something we would like to see happen.-
3
-
We have cancelled work on changes in progression, current skill book rework, and perks for the following reason
-
Just One point I would heavily encourage some discussion on:
Shallow Water ports really should Not have Forts as defense, and all Forts should instead be Towers.
so any Shallow regional capital would have 4 Towers instead of 2 Towers and 2 forts.
Regional shallow ports would have 3 Towers instead of 2 towers and 1 Fort.
It's honestly the last sticking point for many players that I talk to in regards to why shallow water port battles "don't" happen. because the defender has such a huge advantage, it's not worth someone's time to attack.-
11
-
-
I don't agree with everything in the post.
BUT
I commend, encourage, and congratulate @admin for a well worded and detailed post on what's to come, why it's coming, and why some things have changed.
We would have a LOT less troll/toxic posting if topic of patch notes and coming content were like this (including myself).
-
18
-
-
4 hours ago, rediii said:
Well it is super effective at 100m
It is also enemy 1sts that are exploding not the friendly ones. Or can I throw buckets of water on enemy ships?
these are the questions worth asking.
feedback is asking for the fireship damage to be turned down but the answer we got was to just "put water buckets on your ships to stop your ship from exploding."
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Malcolm3 said:
I see - at least Bridgetown, Caracas and Cartagena are now 55 points ports
good.
just in time to be taken by Russia
-
4
-
-
no lie, because silly decisions for patches.
BORK will officially end open recruitment, a number of clanmates have decided enough is enough and now with the fine "seasoned" woods. We are taking and official step back from the game.
BORK will still be a clan in NA, but I will no longer actively participate and nor will many others.
Thank you to everyone for the battles, the community, and for sinking me all these few years.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Redman29 said:
Think it will be a while before we see the new 1st rates in large numbers. 3600 tools takes a while to buy and move and that's just for one 1st rate. Not to mention the cost, 7 Mil in reals for tools and an additional 10k doubloons in seasoned woods. (Speaking from the RVR point of view)
Smaller ships yes, but again only the richest players/many alts will be able to push out seasoned wood ships in decent numbers
But this is almost a slightly better copy of the fine woods, and we all know how well that went
if you saw some screenshots of some players warehouses/money you'd realize that these same players can literally supply a nation with multiple port battle fleets - all they need are the privateer chests, and those hardcore players that want to win badly will absolutely go deep into the grind.
will it happen immediately? no, but the moment you find out your opponents whole fleet is these pent up seasoned wood suckers. that's the end there
this is fine woods all over again as you point out, and it'll end the same way it did before.
-
5
-
-
I don't think I can personally continue to be cordial on the forums :P.
we had some actual suggestion discussion about this, about BR for ports. like quite literally word for word on what should be done.
instead it's almost the opposite.
then this magical new building is another crazy grind on what is basically fine woods again to which was probably the single most important factor that had the largest amount of players leave....but HEY, lets do it again boys.
and now on top of that it seems we have some new hard caps.
This. Is. Hilarious.
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, admin said:
feel extreme pride with my design, when the Elementary course on Ordnance and Gunnery from 1845 accurately describes what happened with shallow waters meta in Naval Action.
Naval Action is a replication of historical METAs - and we are not balancing gameplay for making basic cutters useful (we did some time ago but *** that time - we were idiots)
Sail 32 pdr carronade ships. Do not like it? Good luck(we should allow use of 24 and 32 lb carrons on all light ships)
hol' up.
you aren't going to balance the game to make things useful because historically the 32pd carro was just always better?
in order to save precious game space I guess we should start deleting item files out of the game because they were in general disuse!
-
3
-
-
On 11/23/2019 at 2:24 AM, Bryan Von Gyldenloeve said:
Must be a photo shopper ss. Bork allways sails in Big groups🙂
it's definitely a photo shop, I mean look at these ones. prime fake news right here.
-
30 minutes ago, Potemkin said:
This game is 9.89/10, the players are rubbish though. Would be 10/10 if they brought back small battles and did weekly trafalgar events but perfection is an elusive animal.
meh.
I'd give the game a 7/10. it's got good parts, but still needs improvements. if small battles/trafalgar was brought back, I'd bump it to a 7.5 or 8.
and 7/10 is really not a bad score. I've had real enjoyment with the game, but also real headaches and so the score changes. but 7/10 is the current decision.
-
3
-
-
i mean, to be fair, a skilled player can do it solo.
but that's not what I'm looking for....if the perceived value of doing 1 raid chest mission is not worth doing when you have "6" people for a max group. then in my opinion, the goal for making a small 6 man group mission successful has failed.
I'm not saying raids are bad, I'm saying that the reward is still not worth the risk for a 6 man group and that should seriously be looked into.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, admin said:
Do you know you can do it 6 times? If you have 6 people you can take 6 raid missions and do all of them in one sitting.
that seems like quite the time commitment... 🤔
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Mascarino said:
France, Spain, US, Prussia can have 25 players online at the same time...maybe. But not all of them can or want to take part, you must see all sides of this problem not only your side.
if I recall correctly, the US does want to take part in RvR, but no one apparently wants to do shallow water RvR....?
-
lol
there are more Danes on the forums than in the game playing it seems.
-
4
-
-
12 hours ago, Potemkin said:
Review bombs from salty armchair developers pissed that they got ignored
has already done far more damage..... but i agree for the most part with what you're trying to say @Teutonic. Just remember, shit like the hostility "exploit" and most other so called exploits can work both ways for any given faction, and are often used by everyone, not just the nation everyone likes to bitch about.
I own one account, my account. if i even wanted to, i would never review bomb :).
so while it is a different thread, the fact that we are able to stack battles on top of each other to hide "other" battles, is just not "good." if we don't call it an exploit, we should at least be unified in agreeing it's shit for gameplay, shit for good experience, and yet another reason why players get frustrated and end up quitting for a while.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, huliotkd said:
3rd rate were intended to use as we use 1st rates in naval action. important Naval action of the period were fought on 3rd rate max, with a lot of lower rate ships. 1st rates were used in 3-4 real battle...nothing more.
and I think a majority of us currently playing would love incentives to create this "ratio."
currently there is little reason to sail anything below a 1st rate besides the cost, and even then the cost can be mitigated to a degree through coordination with others.
suggestions that @rediii has stated with BR balance and BR adjustment on ports is, in my opinion, just 1 step towards achieving a better goal in lowering the "need" for 1st rates.
1st rates are great right now, most guns, HPs, best BR ratio. They have everything and very little downsides.
I don't want to nerf the 1st rate stats for the ship, what I want is someone to have to make the conscious decision if they decide to use a 1st rate in a battle, that they should expect another group to be able to take 3 - 3rd rates to match the BR value, and that those 3rd rates, if they coordinate are superior in firepower, HPs, and maneuverability.
if the BR of a port was 10k, I'd like to see it where if you decided to only bring 1st rates, you could only bring 8-9 of them, but when it came to 2nds or 3rds, you could bring 15-25 ships. if you have the numbers, the 2nd or 3rds would win based on stats, but depending on who is more battle-hardened would determine the overall outcome.
Alternatively we as players will always find a "meta" in RvR, if that is the case, I'd rather have a 3rd rate meta that also supports 2nds and 4ths to a degree instead of the insanely bland Ocean/Santi Meta we have now. it's legit cancer.
-
4
-
-
8 hours ago, Wraith said:
IMO they aren't even worth sailing at that cost.
lower the cost and would they still be worth sailing the pavel?
helllllllllllllllllll no.
the cost is not the problem.
I have a counter proposal for all lineships that cost permits. Allow the Permits to be purchased with victory marks.
-
2
-
Trading Explained - Feedback welcome
in News Announcements & Important discussions
Posted · Edited by Teutonic
1-2 weeks before the trade change, repairs were anywhere between 250-500 at la tortue, rum got down "almost" to 150 per.
last night they were:
Hull: 750 (ranging from 500-800 over the day)
Rig: 450 (ranging from 300-700 over the day)
Rum: 500 (ranging from 250-500 over the day)
when I look back even further, repairs were around that price a month after release. now this is clearly not a vast amount of data to make an argument. but I tend to base the "open economy" by La Tortue pricing, and at least based on that to me, prices didn't change all that much, and now i actually have cash to afford to price of the good.
in Sweden, we have multiple clans that are quite competitive with pricing their goods for selling and so almost all our primary crafting/outpost ports have repairs around 150-200 and rum about 100.
from a Swedish perspective goods are getting cheaper to buy, not more expensive.