Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Improvements'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Naval Action
    • Naval Action Community and Support
    • Naval Action - National Wars and Piracy
    • Naval Action Gameplay Discussions
    • Naval Action - Other languages
    • Naval Action (Русский язык)
  • Ultimate General
    • Ultimate General: Civil War
    • Ultimate General: Gettysburg
    • Ultimate Admiral: Age of Sail
    • Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts
    • Forum troubleshooting
  • Age of Sail Historical Discussions
    • Shipyard
    • History
  • Sea Legends
    • General Discussions
  • This land is my land
    • General discussions
  • Game-Labs Forum
    • Jobs
  • SealClubbingClub's Topics
  • Pyrates and rovers's Literature & Media
  • Pyrates and rovers's Gameplay / Roleplay
  • Pyrates and rovers's History - ships, events, personae
  • Clan [GWC] Nederlands talig {Aanmelding}'s Topics
  • Polska Flota Kaperska's Rekrutacja
  • Polska Flota Kaperska's Historia - Polska na morzach
  • Chernomoriya's Topics
  • Unsolved mysteries in plain sight's Mysteries
  • Unsolved mysteries in plain sight's The Book of Rules
  • Congress of Vienna's Global
  • Congress of Vienna's EU
  • Congress of Vienna's Historical
  • The Dutch Empire's The Dutch Empire
  • The Dutch Empire's The Dutch Empire
  • The Dutch Empire's Discord Server
  • ROVER - A treatise on proper raiding in NA developed by real events's The Rulebook
  • ROVER - A treatise on proper raiding in NA developed by real events's Tactics (methods)
  • Ship Auctions's Topics
  • Creative - Captains & Ships Logs's How to...
  • closed's Topics
  • Catalunya's Comença la llibertat !!
  • Port Battle History's Topics

Blogs

  • Game Friv 4 School
  • Mad things going on
  • Duels (1v1)
  • semenax1's Blog
  • Bernhart's Blog
  • John Dundas Cochrane's Blog
  • The adventures of W. Laurence
  • kusumetrade's Blog
  • fastbug blog
  • tai game co tuong mien phi
  • Log Book
  • sellfifa's Blog
  • sellfifa's Blog
  • Captaine Arnaud Arpes' Log
  • Remir's Blog
  • Real Armada Española
  • Core Blackthorn's Blog
  • Saltback's Blog
  • British Privateer
  • Game App Development
  • Game App Development
  • Brogsitter's logbook
  • maturin's Blog
  • Antonio_Pigafetta's Blog
  • Ingemar Ulfgard's Blog
  • News Sports Blog
  • Saffronsofindia
  • Cpt Blackthorne's Blog
  • linksbobet88's Blog
  • Tube Nations Game Givaway
  • English Nation Gunners Blog
  • Commodore Clay
  • From the Conny's Deck
  • About Madden NFL 17
  • Travel between Outposts
  • Blurring reality as artist’s 3D model tricks
  • Download Only file APK for Android
  • Testing stuff
  • Traitors Gallery
  • Tracker of Good Stuff
  • Emoninail
  • TpGS2019~~Nice experience
  • Organifi Gold Juice Review
  • Fitness Programmer
  • Implications of Electricity Deregulation in the United States
  • The Process of Lottery Results
  • htrehtrwqef
  • Best Ways To Overcome Hair Loss Issues
  • Boost Your Testosterone Levels For Building Bigger Muscles
  • Teds Woodworking
  • The 2 Week Diet
  • Five Fat Loss Workout Routine Exercises
  • Captains Log, September 1756
  • Log of Cpt. Nicholas Ramage II. Esq; RN
  • Average Gamer Marcs: A Naval Action Story
  • Thiên hạ Ku
  • From The Logbook of Captain Sir Sebastian Pendragon, KB; RN
  • Rachel Tran
  • Thẻ game W88
  • Thẻ game W88
  • Log of Sir Elio Perlman, KB
  • 바카라카지노
  • The Sea Dogs's Website
  • [CTC] Caribbean Trading Company (Pirates - PvP EU)'s Buy ur Favorite Ships.
  • Creative - Captains & Ships Logs's (Naval Action fiction) Diary of Cdr. Joseph Barss

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • United States Continental Navy's Pearl Harbor Day

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 11 results

  1. G'day folks. Yet more suggestions for yet better gameplay. Enjoy, and let the good times roll. * Duplex rangefinders should be available; options for whether main guns also have rangefinders to minimise the loss of accuracy when main rangefinder(s) are hit. Number and sizes of rangefinders should have rudimentary options- none, one, few, moderate, many, maximum options. Rangefinders could also be a placeable structure, assuming implementation of the structures system indicated earlier, instead of abstracted options, with each rangefinder being individually modeled and it's effect on accuracy individually tracked. Also would be nice to include rangefinder blind spots. * All turrets should be individually searching for targets when set to aggressive fire-mode; including main and secondary turrets, so we can get all our guns blazing when surrounded, as I prefer to be. * Battleship ambush defence should not include merchant ships. If it does, that's a very unfair convoy defence, as even a maxed-out battleship ain't killing that many light ships before they drop torpedoes and ruin your defenceless and ignorant transports. * Save tabs- at the top of the saved designs window, an extra button to switch into your universal saves would be appreciated. This would preserve function and cleanliness of current saves window but permit persistent saving of designs. I'd also like filter controls to filter by type, weight, modernity, etcetera as I plan on creating large libraries of designs. Now, this final part might be controversial, but I would like this tab to allow me to construct other nation's ships, assuming none of their components would be unavailable to me from a technology perspective. Again: if I want to build ships that look the same as my enemy's that's my prerogative as the ultimate fleet admiral. Some nations just get plain screwed with their available designs... * Near miss damage: large-calibre HE should cause some shrapnel/splash damage, and AP that falls short on trajectory to hit the hull below the waterline should be modeled. * We should be able to click the "some guns have poor sectors of fire" warning and be brought to the offending turret and have it blink for us a couple of times. This is so we can actually know what turret is causing the issue. * The new turrets with little gunnery nests on them are quite nice. Now can I please have an option to not use them, so I can use the old generic ones so they'll fit with barbettes? Better yet, a simple option to remove the nest so I can properly put a superfiring turret over it would be ideal. * Please set all armour preset values to balanced figures so I don't spend ten minutes getting the weight balance perfect only to find that the ship has 500% more aft deck armour than fore deck armour, requiring a complete redesign *after* I think I'm nearly done. * In the Fleet tab, the tooltip keeps getting in the way of what statistics you're trying to look at. Redesigning it so that information is displayed in a dedicated window to the side would be ideal. * In the shipyard for ship design, there's a large dead space where the keyboard move buttons and the mouse movements are all ignored. Please increase the bounding box in which these functions work. Suggest making all space that isn't a button or sidebar accept these inputs. On the sidebars up/down buttons should scroll the sidebar we're mouse-overing. * Speaking of the shipyard, it would save me a lot of effort if the engine efficiency and pitch/roll values all displayed the same tooltip as the sidebar provides. Please. * Aim high and aim low settings would be appreciated so we can exploit poor superstructure armour or aim to hole the targeted ship. * When about to initiate a battle, the window that opens causes the countries, warscore and fleet dispositions tab to fade into inscrutability. Respectfully, don't do that. There's no reason for it and in the current build there may be several consecutive battles scheduled for me by the AI between which I cannot check this tab. In fact, stop making those tabs impossible to close; I may want to order new ships or adjust my spending as a result of the battle I just finished and there's no mechanical reason to stop me. * Convoy escort missions are just not acceptable in current build if you want your game enjoyed or sold. It is literally impossible to protect your convoy from long-range torpedoes, even if your whole force is immediately sent out to meet the attackers, along any relative bearing, the AIs super-torpedo ships are going to fire on your escort force with the rapidity of a machinegun and as you evade you'll inevitably attract salvos that can go on to hit your convoy ships. The crux of the matter is detection range and initial force placement. RADAR is supposed to detect things in plenty of time to respond to it, and even if not (or not available)you're going to have a far more satisfying game if these battles are remotely under your control to win- maybe lengthening the distance between the starting would help, as might reducing the range of torpedoes to nearer their indicated maximum range, or PUTTING THOSE CONVOYS UNDER PLAYER CONTROL and ADDING AUDIO AND VISUAL CUES THAT A SHIP IS ON COURSE TO TAKE A TORPEDO, that latter two being highlighted as they alone will fix this issue without making every convoy defence mission a drudgery of waiting to make contact. Also, if the convoy ships are going to be under AI control, whether we set them to it or you force us to use that alone, then they should follow Mr. Piccolo's advice and DODGE! 'Coz trust me, we're begging them to. I reiterate: all ships under AI control should be using AI dodge-hacks, a term which will be replaced with AI evasion when it becomes more accurate than the former. * Related to the former: please stop letting the AI build super-torpedo ships with literally a hundred or more torpedoes on them each, ESPECIALLY in historical build mode. No-one actually did that. Just we armchair admiral wondered about doing it. Even the Japanese didn't go that far with their most outrageous designs... * Make AI dodge-hacks less noticeable. It's immersion-breaking. Reduce all values that they exceed the limits imposed on a player ship by at least 50% of the difference, preferably 100%. This is a priority concern. * Fleet tags in campaign are way too big to function right, both for ports and ships. Interface is messy and unwieldy; I don't feel very in control of my ships... * Fleet tags could use the silhouette from the designer's plan to show us the heaviest ship in a given force, thus communicating considerably more information than they do now. It would also be comparatively simple to do, too. * I'ma repeat myself: light ship spotting mechanics are not sufficient. Being fired at by ghosts also isn't sufficient. Most other games mitigate this by having the ship that fires balloon out it's detection range by up to 50%, but my primary desire is to get RADAR and SONAR mounts to exist and have more realistic ranges regardless of what they're mounted to, except a slight range buff *for free* by being mounted higher- say, on a BB mast. This bonus should not be *that* high, as it isn't in reality. No more than 100%. Again free from a weight perspective- same RADAR module, same weight- but it should be a roll concern as in reality. After all, that weight is very high up on the superstructure and that's how you get roll. * The dispersion of guns in the current patch is so poor as to be offensive to the Youtubers playing the game (though admittedly, I never really paid it much heed, understanding how the math behind this system works and that the displayed rounds are merely a visual representation of that math). Anyhow, relatively easy fix: reduce the maximum dispersion of the shells being animated by say 30-50%, especially at short ranges, just to improve the aesthetic, if not affect the performance which seems adequate for this stage of development. Nice work making the fall of shot from the same turret look realistic, though; even War Thunder couldn't pull that off. * Please have speed stat display to two decimal places, as it already actually accepts inputs down that far and adjusts the ship's weight and stats accordingly but doesn't actually show the difference (except by the altered stats). * I think we need a mini-map. I am having severe trouble tracking all the ships involved in larger encounters... * Would like an "assist ship" order; for when a ship is critically damaged. Allow us to send another vessel to rescue survivors (adding them back to the trained crew pool after battle) and attempt to stabilize the ship in trouble, at the risk of potentially losing the rescue craft. This will add a new dynamic for damaged capital ships and give us an organic objective mid-battle; we may find ourselves trying to fend off attacks while we complete a rescue or salvage operation. Dedicated salvage ships also appreciated as a long-term stretch goal. * Flagships suffer a -15% accuracy malus due to being out of range of the flagship. Hilarious, but better removed. Okay then, as ever feel free to cite both liked and disliked ideas to allow the devs to better understand our wants. Happy hunting, Admirals. o7
  2. Does anyone else find it jarring to see some of the names used in the 1890s? I know now we can rename ships ourselves, but really we just need some better name lists to start with. It's not a difficult fix and shouldn't be too laborious. The Germans have it worse than the British in my opinion, but I'm sure there are examples on both sides. Admiral Scheer made his name at Jutland in WWI, and yet we have 1890s and 1900s ships called that. The worst is transports having battleship names. I'm sure there any many people on here who would be happy to contribute historically accurate or at least ambiguously plausible ones. Why don't we work on some lists and hand them off to the devs for an update? Would anyone be interested? Are there any name list updates planned @Nick Thomadis?
  3. Greetings. I'd like to ask, what is your outlook, on some of my propositions on the imrovement of the game, whether you agree with them, (or maybe not?) and if there are any chances to implement them into the game. 1. portholes - I'm looking forward since a long time, to addition of this little detail to the hulls' textures. To my mind, at least for now, Ships, especially from the period of drednoughts are really lacking "flavour of this time", because of absence of the portholes in the hulls. Some ships are therefore just ugly, or not as preety, as they could be. 2. simultaneous turn to board - inbattle feature. It is really annoying to my mind, that such order is not present for battleformation. In case of enemy torpedo attack, you have to manually, first dissolve the foramtion, and then individually order every single ship in formation to make a turn, and then again reform formation. 3. creation of ships' designs for the enemy 4. multiple classes of the same ship type in the one battle 5. artillery unification in auto-ship-designer for ships of dreadnoughts and post-dreadnoughts era - it was one of the main distinguishing feature of dreadnoughts and post-dreadnoughts ships. Unification of the artillery. Usually 2, sometimes, very rarerly more calibers. But always only one caliber, for the main battery. Auto-ship-designer still does not understand this principle. 6. aiming penalty for multiple ships shooting to single target 7. Setable weather conditions 8. "Library" with ships designs 9. Posibility to place 7th main battery centre turret - casus of HMS Agincourt 10. Addition of british early dreadnoughts and super-dreadnoughts hulls, with casemate guns - current british battleships' hulls are example of WW2 configuration of HMS Queen Elisabeth, and other after WW1 battleships . Virtually, for now, it is de facto impossilbe ot create a british dreadnought (on british hull) 11. All British front towers are too wide. It is impossible to place secondary batteries on the boards 12. Allowance of usage of the currently created ships designs for the AI 13. "jump to ship" by clicking on its name, not only on itself 14. Prefixes - (HMS, SMS etc.) 15. autodesigner shall not add two centerline barbettes on the stern, one just after another for ships before 1920-1930, and moreover it shall not add the second barbette after the first one, if the one behind the first is lower. Higher barbette should be always closer to the rear tower. 16. Honestly, I'm a bit dissapointed with the campaign, since I was hoping, that I will be able to control my fleet, create my own squadrons, task forces etc. and moreover, to move them on the map in real time. I was hoping, that it would be sth like combination of totalwar-style campaign, where I can freely move my ships on the map, and if necessary jump into battle, but in real time, since the maps in custom battles are just huge, and 50km is not a problem for the engine, therefore it looks like engine should be able to withstand this. But for now, it is unfortunately just a boring stream of random missions with random number of ships, sometimes just ridiculous, for example where " Early light cruiser" with 2 main guns, and a few secondary and no torps is intercepting Heavy cruiser.
  4. Let's dive right in: this game could have been great. It could still be great. It would be even better if the development team actively communicated—or at the very least, hired someone to communicate—as they gave out in the past, but that's neither here nor there. We're not here to beat a thoroughly dead horse. Instead, I'm here to present some (relatively) minor quality-of-life improvements that I've compiled from my experiences playing this game: things I wasn't quite satisfied with, or thought could be done better. This is an alpha, after all, and we're here to test and provide feedback. Here's the feedback. Battle Better divisional organization—if we are not allowed to pre-determine the divisions and their heading prior to entry into combat, the game should stop taking four ships of the same type and then making a division of three and then a screen of one. The ideal solution long term would be a 'pre-battle' phase showing a top-down 2-dimensional view of the engaged fleet and any allies: a naval chart aesthetic could be used. Simple slide-and-drop controls could be implemented to quickly separate ships into divisions and organize them efficiently prior to battle, representing the signals that would be naturally given out to separate from cruising groups and order battle formations prior to actually engaging in combat. Turrets ought to have a toggle in battle for 'rapid' and 'salvo' fire: in the former, all guns fire together or with a barely noticeable 'ripple', providing a slight rate-of-fire increase at the cost of a minor amount of accuracy—ideally it should only be toggleable once the enemy has been 'ranged.' The latter would be fire-by-turret, as currently implemented, and would provide no bonuses or maluses. The AI for both enemy and friendly ships should be able to toggle this automatically as required, though you would have the ability to manually countermand the order if so desired. Guns of the same calibre should lock to the slowest loading cycle among them: if you have two quads and a twin turret for 14"/356 mm artillery, the twin should fire at the same rate as the quads. Compensation might be that loading cycle differences are less noticeable. Animations Casemates ought to also elevate and depress with their loading cycle. It looks very strange on pre-dreadnought and dreadnought-era warships for their main battery and turreted secondaries to move for their loading animation, while the casemates remain at a flat 0 degrees. Single-cradle artillery (Italian medium-calibre guns prior to the Luigi Amedeo Giuseppe Maria Ferdinando Francesco di Savoia, primo Duca degli Abruzzi - yes, that is the actual name of the Duca degli Abruzzi - and American 8in guns prior to Wichita) should depress and elevate all together, as they're on the same slide. Models More hulls are, obviously, a must. Since they shouldn't require nearly as much time to implement as a campaign, and the modeling personnel should not be focused on the same work as the programmers associated with that project, smaller bi-monthly or monthly patches might work better- not only will this reduce the pressure on the team in order to deliver on the core patches, since they won't have to cram in as much per update, it would also keep a steady stream of new content in order to keep the existing playerbase interested and to draw in new customers. Potential hulls for consideration include (minimum necessary outlined in bold) Russian Empire / Soviet Russia Rurik. Bogatyr. Svetlana. Pr.26 (Kirov). Pr.26 bis (Maxim Gorky). Pr.68 (Chapaev). Pr. 68 bis (Sverdlov). Izyaslav. Gnevny. Leningrad. Tashkent. Germany / German Empire Moltke / Seydlitz. Derfflinger (can be rescaled to Mackensen & Ersatz Yorck). Emden (1925). Königsberg (K). Nürnberg (N). Type 1934. Type 1936. Type 1936C. Austria-Hungary Much the same as Germany, but including the 'Improved Tegetthoff' (also known as Ersatz Monarch). Italy Conti di Cavour (designed). Conti di Cavour (modernized). Duca d'Aosta. Duca degli Abruzzi. Turbine. Navigatori class. Soldati class. Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro class. France / French Empire Danton. Courbet. Bretagne. Normandie. Duguay-Trouin. Duquesne. Suffren type (all are distinct from one another so different towers are probably necessary). Algérie. La Galissonnière. De Grasse. Mogador. Le Fantasque. Le Hardi. L'Alcyon. Aigle. United Kingdom / British Empire Orion. Iron Duke. Town class subgroups (1900s). Town class subgroups (1930s). County class subgroups (1920s). A class. G class. N class. Tribal class. War Emergency Programme destroyers (Q through Z classes). United States of America USS Texas (1892) - by popular support (and by popular we mean @Cptbarney) Mississippi. Florida. Wyoming. New York. Nevada. "Standard" type (Pennsylvania through Colorado generally only require separate towers). Omaha. Pensacola. "Standard" type (Northampton, Portland, and the Astoria classes all share much in common with one another in regards to the hull- only slight resizing and different superstructures are required). Wichita. Brooklyn. Baltimore. Cleveland. Atlanta. Des Moines. Note: the Brooklyn, Baltimore, Cleveland, and their respective subclasses and refits are all largely based on the Brooklyn type's hull: it would be perfectly easy to only add the base type and then use different towers & tops as required. Clemson. Farragut. Porter / Somers. Gridley. Benson-Gleaves. Fletcher. Japanese Empire Nagato. Tosa. Amagi. Kii. Furutaka. Aoba. Myōkō. Takao. Specific towers: Takao — 1937, as modernized. Atago — 1944, as sunk. Chōkai — 1927-1944, as she never received a refit. Maya — Post-AA-cruiser conversion. Takao Kai — Larger version of the hull available 1930-1940, cancelled as a result of the 1930 LNT. Mogami. Agano. Ōyodo. Ibuki. Sakura. Asashio. Otori. China / Chinese Empire Ning Hai & Ping Hai A bi-monthly or monthly stream or devblog of sorts to show off models in progress would be an excellent way to garner reputation and support. Designer (parts) Blast bags. These are an absolute must. See right: note Richelieu's black blast bags. Every country used them at one point or another, and they figure prominently in many photographs of modern and older warships. A toggle to use them should be available, and they should, of course, be animated to move with the guns. Ideally, turrets of the single, twin, triple, and quadruple variants—with a very few exceptions—should not all be common to a single size. Single-gun turrets should be far slimmer, twin- and triple-gun turrets should provide the best balance of size vs. firepower, and so forth. As it is, many ships can be upgunned without any tradeoffs since 'if you can fit a twin there, you can fit a quadruple there.' Designer (balance) Components ought to have more meaning: ideally, the 'modern' warship should require them as an absolute must, not just as an afterthought that eats up weight without being very helpful. Weapons might do more crippling damage to targets, for example, to offset the better benefits acquired. Heavy cruiser armour belt minimum thickness decreased to 20 mm, to allow for the County class's 25 mm as built and the Duquesne's somehow-less-than-that. Misc. When mousing over an armour thickness in the Ship Designer, the section of the ship it protects should highlight or otherwise be made visible. This will allow players to know which parts of their ship are in need of protection and which parts can be left with less weight. Ships should pitch and heave far less relative to displacement, particularly in calm seas. Destroyers, of course, will still buck like a wild horse—but 125,000-ton battleships should be a little more stable. Shameless Plug. This post might be added to as time goes on, as either I come across new portions or they are brought to my attention.
  5. I have enjoyed NA over 1500 hours, which indicates how highly I rate this game. I am a real-world qualified sailing skipper and have been on board ships of the era such as HMS Victory, so I appreciate much of the authenticity of this game. I come from a professional background in the graphic arts, so the visual side of NA is what I tend to focus on, a lot. I would love it so much more if the following developments could be implemented, after the new port UI is completed. In order of priority, I think these should be: 1) Implementing realistic, active deck crew that are visible both in battle and in OW sailing. For inspiration, I suggest looking at how this was accomplished in 'Tempest: Pirate Action' and 'Empire: Total War'. If it is too difficult to have cannon crew actually hauling and reloading the cannons, I suggest having them just standing near the cannons, but definitely not miming, as they do at present, in NA. 2) While the sea and landscapes are admirably realistic, the climatic conditions don't convey the feel of the Caribbean to me. I think this is due to the dark coloring of the sea and the shortage of clear blue skies, and the uncharacteristically long duration of the rain storms. If these could be addressed, I think the general atmosphere of the game would be more uplifting and convincing. I would also like to see the 'raindrops on glass' effect scrapped, as it seems inappropriate to me, when not using the spyglass. 3) While the sea itself looks very realistic, the wake that the ships create could be better. I think it was done better in 'The Pirate: Caribbean Hunt', even though other aspects of the graphics in that game aren't as good. 4) The colouring of the ships could be improved too. Some ships appear too drab (Indefatigable, Diana, Endymion, Victory, etc) while others look too garish (Santisima and L'Hermione). I would love it if player-configurable paint kits or a paint applet could be introduced. (The latter was done successfully in 'The Pirate: Caribbean Hunt'.) 5) A further development that could be considered eventually, would be the introduction of FPS boarding action. Again, this was implemented very effectively in 'Tempest: Pirate Action'. 6) Regarding the introduction of new ships, what I think is needed most now, is at least one more 1st-rate, such as, perhaps the Royal Sovereign and/or Temeraire.
  6. I have some suggestions for some elements I'd really enjoy in the game. 1. Navigation I love the idea of exploring the open world map, but it's very boring and time consuming, and it can get a bit difficult at times. Having more navigation tools would make it a more immersive and rewarding experience. My suggestions are as follows: - you should be able to plot a course on the map, more than just a straight course with a protractor (if you need to follow a winding course next to land masses) - re-introduce the ship's present coordinates. Back in the day they would perform daily noon observations to work out latitude, and they had chronometers for the longitude... It doesn't have to be super accurate, but for example every day at noon the ship's current position can be obtained (if it's not cloudy or raining) and a cross placed on the map, so you can see where you are. dead reckoning with just orienting by islands is not enough, and it's too tedious. - a wonderful example of navigation tools is the implementation in silent hunter 3. again, it doesn't have to be super accurate, and indeed errors can be introduced, for example proportional to the number of times the ship changes course, turns, etc, and an error can also be associated with the noon observation? 2. Crew I think that for a really immersive age of sail experience, there should be more adequate crew uniforms. A captain pacing the quarterdeck would be really cool, and maybe even marines firing muskets when engaged battle, officers giving orders to the gun crews etc... If officers or the captain are killed, a morale shock can take place. At the moment the crew looks like a bunch of golfers taking their yacht out for a spin...
  7. Really having a tough time with targeting. Often when I right click the unit I wish to attack, the movement order is placed instead. Is there a key command that I am missing to get units to target, and fire upon the closest enemy unit, or a specific enemy unit you wish to target? Getting really frustrated having to click several times before the correct orders are issued.
  8. Great game!!! A few things I would like to see. (1) Some sort of ratings or skill advantages for leaders who specialized in specific areas. When picking leaders, the ones better at cavalry or artillery should reflect that. (2) Sometimes I had leaders injured with no one available to replace them. Couldn't there be an option to appoint a generic leader from the army to fill the slot? Thanks
  9. This is a real simple topic on something I personally would like to see. (If you have any reasons against or for that I haven't thought of please feel free to comment as I'd like to get an understand about this tiny aspect of the game, Thanks! Before I had the chance of seeing the power of hiring a fleet at a port I'd reached a level where I was unable to hire one. Not only did this make a mission that was of the same rank as myself difficult if no friends were online to help, but trading alone without a fleet is a scary thing indeed! My suggestion is to allow, larger ships to be purchased as a fleet when your rank increases and allow higher ranks to also purchase even if its only one! Thanks, BlackestBeard
  10. I do not know if this is the right place for me to give you guys some feedback. But just in case it isnt please informk me. But ill type this anyway. So for this id also like to say that i very much like the game but im only gonna touch on some things i think needs to be improved on. First of all i think that trading should reward you with XP, A lot of time goes in sailing to locations and even in logical and realistic worlds you could learn how to become a good trader. So its only logical that a player would be rewarded by trading trough money and XP. Though i understand that that migth not be alrigth, but then make a different XP and leveling system for trading alone so you can grow in it and make trading more rewarding. Second i think that there NEEDS to be a toturial. I know the game is in really early stages. But no one has any clue what to do and why they need to do what they do. I personally am a smart person and it took me 2 hours to understand everything. But i think a small toturial for new players is really welcome. Third is something i get a little frustrated by. The shallow's or sandbanks. And i know these were reall things back then. And i dont mind them exsisting. But then AT LEAST allow us to sea them. See that the water is not so deep here and respond to it. Beceause most of the time i have the feeling its super deep water and i can just sail here at eas but before i know it im stuck by a shallow that i didnt see at a place that wasnt logic to me. Fourth is the faction system. Beceause its very hard to know who your faction is in war with and what the statuses are. You migth need to create a faction screen of all the wars going and the conquests that are in progres. This would help decide where traders are to go and not to go. And fifth, Well this migth be only for me. But i see a lot of trees in water. Or they are floating. Again this is early in the game, but i think you should try and improve on this since it looks iffy tongue-emoticon. Besides that i love your game and im only writing this to help you guys improve on the game so it will be even better. I hope for a respond and ill sea () you on the waters. smile-emoticon Carloguy
  11. I do not know if this is the right place for me to give you guys some feedback. But just in case it isnt please inform me. But ill type this anyway. So for this id also like to say that i very much like the game but im only gonna touch on some things i think needs to be improved on. First of all i think that trading should reward you with XP, A lot of time goes in sailing to locations and even in logical and realistic worlds you could learn how to become a good trader. So its only logical that a player would be rewarded by trading trough money and XP. Though i understand that that migth not be alrigth, but then make a different XP and leveling system for trading alone so you can grow in it and make trading more rewarding. Second i think that there NEEDS to be a toturial. I know the game is in really early stages. But no one has any clue what to do and why they need to do what they do. I personally am a smart person and it took me 2 hours to understand everything. But i think a small toturial for new players is really welcome. Third is something i get a little frustrated by. The shallow's or sandbanks. And i know these were reall things back then. And i dont mind them exsisting. But then AT LEAST allow us to sea them. See that the water is not so deep here and respond to it. Beceause most of the time i have the feeling its super deep water and i can just sail here at eas but before i know it im stuck by a shallow that i didnt see at a place that wasnt logic to me. Fourth is the faction system. Beceause its very hard to know who your faction is in war with and what the statuses are. You migth need to create a faction screen of all the wars going and the conquests that are in progres. This would help decide where traders are to go and not to go. And fifth, Well this migth be only for me. But i see a lot of trees in water. Or they are floating. Again this is early in the game, but i think you should try and improve on this since it looks iffy . Besides that i love your game and im only writing this to help you guys improve on the game so it will be even better. I hope for a respond and ill sea () you on the waters. Carloguy
×
×
  • Create New...