Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'balance'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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)
  • Age of Sail Historical Discussions
    • History
    • Shipyard
  • Ultimate General
    • Ultimate General: Civil War
    • Ultimate General: Gettysburg
    • Ultimate Admiral: Age of Sail
    • Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts
    • Forum troubleshooting
  • Sea Legends
    • General Discussions
  • This land is my land
    • General discussions
  • Game-Labs Forum
  • 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


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


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

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 40 results

  1. To illustrate some of the exploits possible with the current version of the game (in regards to torpedoes and other issues impacting them), I decided to build a ship that would demonstrate and test my observations using the Destroyer. Let’s start with the design (1930 tech, custom battle). Two principles govern it, speed and vast numbers of torpedoes. At $28M, this one is not cheap. I am really looking at this one as overkill and the design could certainly be optimized. But comparing it to a Yamato class I built in a previous build of the game at almost $150M, still a bargain as you will see when it comes to effectiveness and firepower. Probably the biggest cost savings would come from lowering the ridiculous speed to 38-40kts (and a realistic speed at that). She carries 6x4 torpedo mounts with fast 21” torpedoes.That’s a hell of a lot of fish to dump in the water at once, but the real kicker is the storage. 130 (need to check the exact) torpedoes total. Around 5 reloads per tube. For reference, HMS Maidstone, a submarine tender in WW2 carried around 100 torpedoes and was quite a bit bigger than my large 3500 DD. Now let’s get to combat. I chose a fight with 4 of these DDs vs a BB and BC. I chose this match to prove how utterly useless a BB or BC is to a fast DD with plenty of torpedoes. I could have easily used just two DDs instead. It just would have taken longer as I waited on reloads. The AI builds were the notorious designs everyone has encountered. A monstrous fortress of a super BB, and a speedboat BC. Let’s take a look at my first salvo (from 1 DD) on the BB. Couple of points here, I was able to approach with ease to about 5KM from the BB/BC without a single hit on my DD. This is due to the accuracy speed penalty to firing ships because of my speed (46kts). I did not even use smoke until after I had fired and turned away. Two, at this range my 63kts torpedoes are unavoidable to even agile ships because of the speed and size of the spread. With better controls on how our ships launch torpedoes, the effectiveness would be even greater. Currently it's more like a shotgun loaded with buckshot. In this case, torpedoes that will sink most ships outright if they don’t have real protection. But not this 100K ton monster. Here you can see the results after that salvo. 12 torpedo hits on it. You can see I have the equipment readout showing. Anti-torp V, Reinforced Bulkheads, Aux 3, a literal fortress at sea. It doesn’t show, but he did only have Standard bulkheads for a shocker. The end result is scratched paint (827 HP lost) and speed loss. Clearly I need to take this guy seriously and show him what torpedo spam really is. So here I have added another 28 torpedoes to the hit counter, and I assume with his Float number dropping fast to single digits he’s doomed. You guys know what happens next. It actually drops all the way to 0.2 or 0.4, then magic...4% and still going. Ok fine, one more salvo of 24 torpedoes, I mean really. Continued to next post:
  2. I decided to do a test on how Armour weights effects ships by class. This is to test if say I could Armour up a BC more the same as a BB. (German 1930's tech)Hulls used Include: Modern Battleship Modern Battle Cruiser All ships towers are the most advanced available. But all these factors will remain the same Krupp 4, Barb 4, Anti Torp 3, Reinforced Bulkhead 2, Citadel 5, White Powder, Electro-hydro turrets with auto loading as well, and finally Stereoscopic 5 with Radar 2. The ships will all have a 30kt speed, medium range with standard bulkheads. Again the purpose of this test is to just show Armour disparities I'm just trying to limit as many factors as I can, but I decided to include these in the calculations because I might actually use a ship with these upgrades only as a minimum. Obliviously we could make slight changes but they are meant to serve as a baseline in say campaign or mission viability. All Values in Imperial Inches The BBs armaments included 4x2 14 inch guns 6x2 8 inch guns 8x2 4 inch guns The BB with a total of 52,493 out of 52,500 displacement 20 belt 10 Belt Ex 12 deck 5 Deck Ex 19 conning tower 20 turret 9.5 turret top 6 secondaries The BC with a total of 46,745 out of 49,000 Displacement could fit the same amour and armament as the BB. But I could add more. 20 belt 10 Belt Ex 12 deck 5 Deck Ex 19 conning tower 20 turret 9.5 turret top 6 secondaries This could be because the BB has more displacement (couldn't make the battleship any smaller than 52,500 displacement or the BC bigger than 49,000). But we also have more tonnage to play around with so I could actually add more amour to the BC if I wanted. But with a displacement difference of only 3,500 we have an pretty significant weight difference. I know the displacement difference still counts towards the weight because more is being armored but the weight difference doesn't seem right yet. Some problems that could arise with this include BB hulls being less competitive in certain missions and eventually campaign if not addressed. AI maybe abusing the BC hull in games say by squeezing things onto hulls they shouldn't be able too (Robots can be weird as we have all seen). Having BC's just be to much like BB's no difference in the actual ship classes and people treating them as essentially BB's were we would not see them used for there historical purpose. 2nd Test with America Did this one in a hurry so I used all the same factors as above! Only thing different was armament. (America 1930's tech)Hulls used Modern BB 1 Modern Battle Cruiser Armament used was 3x3 16 inch guns 5x2 4 inch guns All Armour values set to 8 inches for quickness and accuracy The BB had a displacement of 47,814 out of 50,000 tons the total weight of the BB superstructure and funnels was 10,664 tons. The weight without the superstructure would be 37,150. The BC had a displacement of 47,591 out of 50,000 tons the total weight of the BC superstructure and funnels was 7,524 tons. The weight without the superstructure would be 38,767. In this test seems like the BB fared better. While the ship had more total weight less of that weight was allocated by the algorithm to Armour and more was due to the superstructure just weighing more. Also because you can increase the displacement of the BB we don't have to worry about this BC hull having ridiculous amounts of Armour because it couldn't support the weight like with the German hulls. Please comment your thoughts! If you have a question or comment I usually try to respond! I just wanna see what other people think about my little test.
  3. So I have a question/observation. I was recently doing a custom battle British vs. Japan. Just to warm up 1940's tech was gonna build the biggest battleship I could, But then I noticed that the biggest battleship The Brits could get are the Dreadnought IV and the N3/G3 hulls which top out at 62k displacement. That got me thinking does Britain actually have the smallest size battleship displacement in the game? All Displacements are max French 93k Germany 130k Japan 125k USA 109k Spain 69k Russia 69k Italy 65k Austro 90.5k China 87k British 62k Spain and Russia share the same hull but it begs the question of balance late game. Obviously not all of these nations designed ships with high displacements but the problem is that how are the devs going to balance these hulls out? Britain tops out at 62k but Germany for example has 4 battleship hulls that hit a max of 62k and up. Some hulls will inevitably be shared across nations like how I noticed in Spain and Russia with the modern battleship 69k hull but I thought I'd post this here for the community to brainstorm ideas for the devs or maybe share historical designs for nations they can find of specifically capital ships. One Idea I had was for if this game has an espionage system (I haven't seen anything confirmed yet) is that your spies could actually steal hull types that you could then build in your own faction. This would stop specific nations having a hull advantage. But ideally I'd hope us the community could find some examples the devs could look at and see if they want to eventually include into the game!
  4. Too me it seems that the armor upgrades in game are a bit drastic. Getting any of the Krupp tier armor makes putting a ton of armor on too easy and it also makes the ships absolutely impenetrable, throwing 500mm of armor with Krupp IV makes the ship only vulnerable to torpedoes and the absolute largest guns. Does anyone else feel the same way? It just feels like smaller weapons even on battle ships, and I dont mean 5 inch guns, i mean the 13-14 inch weapons are just not viable for very long.
  5. Attached is an overview of reload times for all the naval guns I have manged to get my hands on in finished British and United States campaigns. Often times the reload times spike for at least one gun in the series, but these spikes are also not consistent with a single poundage. Something similar is going on with the prices, but since my campaigns are on varying difficulty levels I can't fully compare them yet. Since I am by no means an expert on naval guns I must ask, are these reload discrepancies intended or are they errors?
  6. So I tried my hand at re designing an battle cruiser class. The original Indefatigable class was sunk during the battle of Jutland. I decided to remake the class in 1933 setting seeing if i could make the best BC I could that hopefully wasn't out of the scope of what the campaign of the game would allow in terms of effectiveness. And I think I did pretty good just looking for any feedback if any. The class costs around 77.4 mil to lay down kinda expensive but only an maintenance of 7,800 a month which I thought was pretty nice because an battle ships maintenance for the same year just to lay down some of the hulls starts at 50k a month without any guns or superstructure attached. Its probably known to the devs and will be balanced before campaign but I thought it was funny I could have essentially 7 of these battle cruisers for the monthly cost of an unarmed giant barge. And finally the overview if you didn't see the picture 45kn top speed 5-16 inchs of armour with 16in belt and 14in deck 2x3 14in guns 2x2 14in guns 1x2 8in guns 8x2 5in guns 14x1 3in guns total displacement is 49,996/50,000 T Yes I essentially made the fastest BC I could with about the same armour as an USS Iowa. Well I'd love to hear what you guys think of my creation and some thoughts on what they could do to change balance in the game economy wise when the game comes out. Im curious to see what the devs do to actually combat monetary discrepancies between classes because if they don't we could get an extremely up armored BC race instead of a dreadnought race if the AI or more cheeky players notice. Just a note yes I know the games in alpha. Im not bashing the devs for not noticing something related to economy balance in a game that hasn't even released campaign for us to test things. Im just bringing it up in the off chance they didn't notice and my observation can help. Please see this gallery link for all updates to the design. Thank you all again
  7. Like the title suggests, I'm new to the game and certainly not an expert on naval combat, but I've been having a lot of trouble with mission 10 in defeating the 3 heavy cruisers. I've found battleships to be extremely underpowered, and get picked off easily by the cruisers. I remember someone on the forums saying they used a mix of 13-inch guns, heavy armour and 19-knot speed, so I tried that and got picked apart. That led me to sacrificing almost everything but armour, and resulted in the screenshot posted here. I still got picked off and sunk before one of my guns even got a hit. I could be wrong, but is one of the benefits of a battleship its longer range accuracy? Should it be the case that cruisers can pick off a battleship from long distance without take any damage itself? I can post a video of my attempt in battle if that helps. I've tried several approaches, including handing over the control to the AI, but nothing has worked. I figured I'd post this because this makes battleships almost useless with their near-zero accuracy. Either that, or I'm doing something wrong that makes them useless instead.
  8. So I've noticed that Cruisers, destroyers, and etc. are faaaaar too weak. Their guns dont nearly deal the damage or have the accuracy they should. I feel Cruisers and Destoyers need a massive buff, because a battleship of practically any kind is worth almost a fleet of smaller vessels, where in reality it wasn't this severe. Advanced battleships also are a bit too extreme compared to dreadnoughts. It makes sense for Dreadnought vs Pre-dreadnaught but I feel it's a little bit extreme with Dreadnought vs WW2 era Battleship.
  9. Warships in the age of sail are nothing more than gun platforms. ( let's exclude trader vessels for the moment being ). They were designed with usage of certain guns in mind. So the framing, planking and woods to be used all were focused on being able to transport into battle a certain set of guns. My proposal is this: - tie the structural strength of the ship - mainly the woods used can reflect this - with the size of the guns than can be equipped. For example, a USS Constitution built of Live Oak and Oak would be able to carry the heaviest guns for her - the 24's and the 42's. But a Fir and a Teak construct wouldn't be able to carry that heavy armament. Just an idea of how variety in regards of wood choices may also balance the broadside weight. Ships were weapon platforms and built as such. That's why some models that tried heavier armaments didn't go too well and had to downgrade them, IRL. ( carronade introduction is a good example of trying to upgun ships that weren't built to carry heavy broadside guns ) And is all about woods chosen in the construction. So the effect would be: - we can still choose whatever woods we want with the limitation of the gun sizes the final ship may carry with success.
  10. This method is fully built into the in-game rules. If you do not like it, the rules should change: Step 1: Find a Patrol Zone in an area where First Rates are common - La Mona Patrol is probably the best Step 2: Take a Frigate or Light-Frigate into the Patrol Circle, and attack a L'Ocean or Santisima (900 BR Each), make sure to be Downwind (!) Step 3: Sail Downwind until you reach the circle edge, while putting some shots into the Enemy (get Sail Damage to mark it as your kill). Step 4: Right before the Enemy is likely to turn, sail outside of the Patrol Circle, but keeping yourself tangent to the circle so you can return in time. Step 5: When the Enemy ship follows you clearly outside the circle, turn so it can intercept you and commit to a turn + fire broadside behavior. Step 6: Survive the barrage and re-enter the Patrol Circle enough to Reset the clock. Step 7: Exit the Patrol Circle again and wait for the Enemy's 5 minute clock to run down to 0. This ensures the Enemy ship stays outside the circle, and since you reset your own timer, the other ship gets sunk first and you win. Your timer stops after winning. Congratulations, you just Killed a First Rate. You can now loot the corpse. Repeat Steps 1-7 until you reach 8100 points. To get the most Dubs, perform the last battle in the last few hours before Reset, since the tie-breaker is the last person (!?) to reach 9000 points. PvE Server Testing: 6th Rate Test: ~2700 points, won the ladder (didn't bother to max). Mercury with no skill unlocks and no mods. Lost one ship - mistake, took a broadside from too close a distance. 5th Rate Test: ~4500 points, won the ladder. Surprise Sab/Sab got the most kills, no skills or upgrades required. Lost a Surprise to timer mistake, Lost a Trinc - unable to return upwind. 4th Rate Test: Killed a L'Ocean with an Aggie on accident, discovering this method. There are paths that are quire possible with heavier ships. but 3rd rate and above is trivial to just win by Boarding/Fighting. Boarding Help Method - alternative method that is also likely used: 1. Make a L'Ocean with Boarding Spec and take Barricades and other defensive skills, Marines, etc. 2. Fight a Lone Santi/L'Ocean and start the fight by softening the rear armor by 25%, then immediately boarding. 3. During the boarding, do not use any attacks, and Defend whenever your crew goes low enough for the AI to Counter-Attack. Slow down the killing of enemy crew. 4. The smaller ship gets behind the Enemy and starts raking from optimal distance and position, starting with hull damage, and then switching to Grape for crew. 5. If the smaller ship does more Crew and Hull damage than the Helper, it will get the kill even if the larger ship wins the boarding. Can be enhanced by allowing the smaller ship to work down the sails with Chain initially, scoring extra sail damage which adds up for to secure kill. This can be done in 30-40 minute fights or less. This is simple enough to do with an Alt-Account / Dual-Box. Suggestions: 1.Make Weekly Ladder Fights 1v1 only, do not score kills in fights with friend or fleet ship help. No help, 1v1 only. (This disables the Boarding Help method) 2. Make the AI Ships Immune to the Patrol Circle timer.
  11. “Make a quick write-up”, I thought. Yeah, well… TL;DR at the bottom. We’ll get to play with new-old acceleration soon that some of you whippersnappers might not have tried. The idea is to (hopefully) drastically reduce acceleration globally. I hope we also get acceleration based on hull size and shape. There have been differences in acceleration all along, but now with speed-Bellonas, Aggies and Rättvisans having much more firepower than the superfrigates, the game could use some help with viability between those “classes” in particular: The old school fat-bodies and the Napoleonic box ships. Here’s a reference of how much acceleration has increased since it was originally balanced. To my knowledge the increase hasn’t been deliberate and intentional but rather a by-product of various other changes and increased fidelity of the sailing simulation. We now have Endys that that can broad reach from 0 to 10 knots in 10 seconds or Connies that can do the same at beam reach in 22 seconds where it took about 80 seconds before. Even with the partly accelerated instance dynamic, it is clearly way, WAY too much to represent these ships in the best possible manner. “What’s it to me, jodgi?” Two things mainly. You may experience a loss of comfort when your ship accelerates slower than what you’ve grown used to. Feel free to use your cognitive abilities to keep the inevitable emotions in check when it hits you. Slower acceleration will also tax your planning and ship handling abilities. I suppose some of you have experience with driving large vehicles and can attest to the added mindfulness and planning that is required for the safe operation of humongous kinetic energy vehicles. I’ve had to read up to get learnt about ships, speed and acceleration. I currently know enough to make a complete fool of myself by boldly speaking of things I now should know I know too little about [breathing and contemplation pause]. “Principles of Naval Architecture, Vol II” has a section concerning the resistance a body is subjected to when moving through a fluid. Since you’re all a bunch of monkeys I’ll just point out some highlights. The total resistance is broken up in parts. A ship has to push away water according to its displacement (The old guy in the bathtub, remember?) waves and eddies form and that makes up 15-20% of the resistance. 80-85% of the resistance is friction. Some old English dude (duh) called Froude did some pretty nifty studies on planks he towed around in water. (Oh, look! another old guy in a bathtub!). Up until then shipbuilders relied on true and tested ideas with some rough rule-of-thumb math like “hull speed” (Vhull = 1.34 ∙ √Waterline length). Froude found that short planks had higher friction per unit area than long planks, he attributed this to water being accelerated along the length of the plank thus lowering relative speed which in turn result in less friction. The takeaway is this: Canoes suffer less friction moving through water than stunted prams. There is, of course, more to this story but if I drone on this particular subject I’m afraid you’ll start eating your crayons. Let’s look at our ships. Let’s assume the surface areas exposed to water on Constitution and Rättvisan are the same, they prolly aren’t but play along, please. The ship with the highest length/girth ratio would have the lower resistance and thus the highest potential for both top speed and acceleration. Yes, simplified, specifically for you, dear. Wouldn’t that be neat as a balance parameter? The simplest way is to make acceleration a function of speed. But we can mix it up with our ships that sometimes have very similar speeds but clearly different length/width ratios. If we use the simplest ratio almost ignoring the area of the wetted surface a Connie could accelerate 12% better than a Bellona, I suspect this would make negligible difference in the game so we could bump it to 25% and balance shit from there. Froude even towed a whole ship around and measured total resistance. It catches my interest because then we can clearly make out how much force (component vector along the line of travel) the sails would have to produce to propel the ship to a given speed. Just look! That's eight and a half metric tonnes of wind thrust to maintain almost 12 knots for the Greyhound! You can see that the increase in resistance with speed pretty much matches our in-game acceleration curves. Neato. I wonder if our deceleration curves also reflect this? I should do a test… Buckle up, Busters! NA is about to get more real! TL;DR Hell, no! If you can’t read it all and frikkin’ enjoy yourself in the process you have no business playing this game!
  12. The state of cannons right now is a little unusual, and while it has been ok for the game to this point, the upcoming Wreker and Téméraire class ships currently in development are likely to change this and we are soon likely to see a risk of the game balance being rocked in the future, with both Téméraire and Wreker able to equip 36s and with Wreker somewhat more notably likely able to equip 32s on her second deck. Under the game mechanics as they are this means that both these ships would be able to also equip the heaviest standard armament in the game, the 42lb cannon, which a potentially creats some weird looking situations where we have people running around in 3rd rates with 42lb guns or we end up rating Téméraire as a 2nd rate, neither are desirable outcomes in my opinion. I would like to propose breaking up 36s and 42s. As I understand it the cannons in question are based off the British 42lb and the French 36lb, who's shot weights are as follows: British 42lb: Shot weight 19.026kg, Gun Weight 3957kg (short cut 42 from Victory, standard would be heavier) French 36lb: Shot weight 17.064kg, Gun Weight 3643kg (standard long 36 from Boudroit's figures) With the accessibility of cannon classes currently set up like this: 42lb, 36lb 32lb 24lb 18lb, Edinorog 12lb 9lb N/A 6lb 4lb 4lb Basic 2lb This is somewhat of a bizarre set up in two areas, 1st and 7th class. 1st class is bizarre as the only class to contain two distinctly different gun weightings, while 7th class is even more illusive due to the fact it contains no cannons at all, only the 18lb carronade. What would make infinitely more sense to the game would be to rerate everything slightly so as to have cannon classes set up as follows. 42lb 36lb 32lb 24lb 18lb, Edinorog 12lb 9lb 6lb 4lb 4lb Basic 2lb The other benefits of this is you could reassess which ships could potentially equip each class of cannon more precisely, potentially leaving the most powerful 42lb for Pavel, Victory and leaving Ocean, Santissima, Téméraire, Bucentaure and Wreker equipped with the slightly smaller calibre of 36lb gun, this would not only give a slightly more realistic historic armament flavour but also create a nice little way to look at balance more seriously, with the 36lb gun being a little worse on the DPS, which allows both Pavel and Victory to be more competitive amongst their similarly rated ships, hopefully promoting more variety in combat. As a little side note I'm uncertain whether Ocean would be able to carry 42s or not, the 300kg difference between the French 36 and the British shortest variant of the 42 isn't hugely significant to a ship the size of Ocean although it would be a nice balance point, meanwhile I severely doubt Santissima would be able to mount the British 42 safely, had she not been wrecked in the storm and then enlisted into the British fleet following Trafalgar I can't see her being armed with anything heavier than the British 32s. To summarise, please could we consider splitting the 42 and 36lb guns up into separate classes to avoid potential balance issues with the current ships in development but also add more flavour and realistic armaments to the various ships we already have in game for the pursuit of balance and accuracy. Thanks for reading.
  13. The sizes are ludicrous. If I'm sailing somewhere and can't see land during the day, with clear skies, I should not be in a reinforcement zone. Additionally, because of the proximity of certain capturable ports to non-capturable ones, and the lack of an exclusion zone that cancels out reinforcement zones too close to an enemy port, we get ridiculous situations like this: Please explain to me why US players need to be protected within cannon shot of St Mary's, and explain how this doesn't harm the gameplay experience of Pirates. This isn't restricted to St Mary's, either. A similar situation exists at Little River, right now, and presumably any place where a captured port sits close to an uncapturable one. I can understand when it's close to land, and when it's coast between two friendly ports, but this is simply ridiculous, especially with the new buffed reinforcement mechanics. I shouldn't be staring at Bellona's parked right in front of my ports, sitting safely and smugly within their noob zone. Could you imagine if the Pirates had a reinforcement zone that starts right outside Charleston harbor? It would be a killing field.
  14. Idea: Dynamic NPC Nation Overlays... Short version at the bottom... @admin You’ll need a drink for this, try to bear with me... Summary To build out Multi Nation storyline campaign arcs that intersect. This out of game backstory pushes the in-game content taking a few weeks to complete. Background and some views... Basic idea was seeded from a post by @Cetric de Cornusiac. Please read his post. http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/26636-create-national-councils-for-regulating-the-big-picture-of-each-nations-stance/ I didn’t agree with many of his assessments or solutions, but he makes a really good point that the Nations need to have a purpose. His view was to open up the Lite Sandbox but have the Nations players control this at the expense of clans. @Christendom and @Wraith have wanted Clan restrictions lifted to the point of doing away with the different Nation overlays allowing Civil Wars and self-rule opening up the Lite Sandbox still further... A while back we had a Nation alliance vote function within the game. The idea was good and added richness but it just didn’t quite deliver. Further back [PvP EU] had an EAST v WEST problematic alliance added with night flip issues. On my [PvP Global] we had the ironclad Care Bear alliance GB/US/Dutch which developed into a slow stranglehold on the entire server when it couldn’t be broken. Another view concerns this Open Sandbox PvP world push is/will crush RvR, trading, crafting, exploring and all the other parts that are NA-OW. Leading to fears of just a NA-Legends carcass left behind. I may be wrong in this view, but the more power the PC wields they’ll usually migrate down to the path of least resistance. Any PC Nation driven alliances will struggle to be dynamic even if adding more mechanic restrictions to stop the walk down the slippery slope... Name dropping... First let’s drop the word “Clan”. This is just cosmetic but is an irritation. So, [ELITE] will be a “Division” of GB Nations Royal Navy within the Caribbean. Divisions can Own their own PORTs as normal. Divisional conflicts did occur in REAL LIFE. Sub-division leaders were often in conflict with their peers and Senior Ranking officers within the same Navy during the same theater points. Nelson’s account of Cape St Vincent was challenged by a jealous Rear Admiral Parker. At Copenhagen our beloved Nelson completely disobeyed a direct order from his Commanding Officer in front of his own flag Captain. A Controlled Civil War... Via a Purchased Note from the Admiralty. When triggered will offer a limited time window to engage in a civil war against a same Nation Clan/Division. On the time expiry, there will be double the time cool down before you may trigger another Civil War against the same clan. No same Nation clans can get involved. The Pirate Clans unique feature allows them to be hired by either side for defense or attack. This automatically would put two hired Pirate clans at war with each other for the duration. PORT Battles as well will be acceptable. With this we have some form of retribution for those who don’t treat other same Nation clans with respect. If you’ve solo player ideas let me know. Now we need to bring all the full Divisions together to fight for the King, Emperor or Blackbeard as God intended. How Nation Guidance should work... Back Story... What NA-OW will have is an out of game back story of each Nation with traits, traditional alliances and map areas. Below, look at the four EvE Online [EvE] races with sub titles. You can get a visible image of differences within each race and temperament. https://community.eveonline.com/backstory/races/ NPC Nation Templated Mission Arcs... Imagine... In-Game you and all other same Nation PCs are sent a letter. In it a brief story outline... Example... GB Nation [ELITE] Division, Your king as requested all Englishmen to rise to the challenge to push the French from the Caribbean. This will be a long campaign and not just one or two battles. Accept the first scenario to start the campaign. Plain Co-Op 5th Rate cap epic mission dropped around K/PR. Teams of six of same Nation. Bonus multipliers apply if team members include different divisions or solo players. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=50&v=vKSR4l11oio http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Campaigns Missions can be replayed multiple times but only rewarded once. After a few days the second letter arrives. The Map above shows French and British demarcation lines. Any French AI or PC within British waters must be sunk or taken a prize. Here the French ships deliver more rewards than other ships inside GB waters. Again, this last two three days. The next mission in groups with multi clan or solo multipliers is to raid French shipping lanes. Again, this builds into Hostility and Port Battle triggers. And so, the campaign rolls on... The rewards must multiple with French targets and with solo or different Division members in same group. So, the Campaign as moved from a PvE/Co-Op thread into a PvP one. Storylines could include craft or exploration. The French... While all this is rolling out at the same time the French receive similar posts and Campaign objects. This time if the nation is smaller in size... The Dev’s here can tweak the templates. The French maybe way too small in PvP numbers against GB. So, allied bonus may involve a local Nation like Prussia. This is the big bonus multipliers that enforce the alliances. GB players may find it odd or strange getting ganked by Prussians in GB waters... Nation Templates and Story Arcs... The templates are just that, Dev’s manage them like they would a weekend tournament. Its flexible. http://lorebook.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1:cosmos-epicarc-guides&catid=1:cosmos-epicarc-guides&Itemid=2 This is the [EvE] lore or story arc for all EPICs, have a look through all the structured storylines. PvE Co-Op Solo and PvP all included. It seems mammoth in size and detail. However, look closer and the missions for the four races all play the same way. Copy, Balance and Multiply... That’s the key, five core story arc templates just change names and ports or boost with allies. No new coding. We have eleven Nations; a new story line template (GB) would have a counter balance arc (the French) that then can be copied 11 times. This out of game content can be as deep or light as you like. The hook is the BLING on offer as a reward at the right stages. This with multipliers help Divisions to come together... Sorry for the length, let me know if you think its rubbish etc... Norfolk nChance [ELITE] Division GB RN Short version NPC Nation Campaign story threads. Built from several missions taking maybe a couple of weeks to complete. Encourages Multi-clan and solo participation with PvE to Co-OP then PvP conclusions against other nations. This out of game campaign drives in game content and builds player retention.
  15. Suggestion: Introduce taxes for stockpiling in the warehouses. Details: all player warehouses and clan warehouses will have to pay taxes on each used slot every maintenance cycle. If player cant effort to pay the taxes local goverment will size the goods till missed fee + additional charge is payed sized good penatly payment increases each day up to a maximum of xx. A clanwarehouse at a port that the clan owned has no tax cost. Pros: Money drains reduces stockpiling by players "meaningful eco?" + pressure rvr Cons: Can be bypassed by using ship cargo slots to reduce taxes players have to pay taxes (oh no)
  16. Why does the LGV refit still have only 3 skill slots ( and other traders too ) ? It used to be underwhelming enough when it was 3/3 compared to 3/5 frigates but now that you can built 5/5 ships, it just became even more useless. YES, I know it can enter enemy ports and has a decent amount of cargo hold BUT for that it pays with a puny broadside weight that is surpassed even by cerberus, that is actually on par with the Niagara 6th rate ( Niagara actually has a lot more firepower when mounting carronades - I know right.... what the F...lipper ) while being the target size and having the maneuverability of a medium frigate. Also the main bonus of swivels are the visuals.... they are more of a gimmick in actual combat. Why would I want to use this ship? Please make it a bit more viable, even if it is only 3/5 and not possibly 5/5... we all know 3/3 is garbage in the mod stacking meta. Even for only hunting traders I wouldn't use this... I love the looks and concept of this ship but as it stands right now, it is rather useless. The price of 25 PvP marks also is more than unjustified... That's 2.5 Navy hulls for ships that can actually get the job done. @admin Please consider making LGV refit more viable. It is a real shame nobody uses this beautiful ship...
  17. The super heavy frigate Constitution is at the moment plain broken. Turn rate is 2.37 (almost on par with a Bucetaure - 2nd rate! - being at 2.33) and inferior to all 3rd rates (Wasa Bellona and 3rd being at 3.06 2.79 and 2.79)... not talking about 4th rates (Wappen Agamennon and Inger being at 3.60 and 3.04). So, having a far lower broadside there is not reason using her in place of 3-4 rates turnrate wise. Speed wise she sits at 11.69 with all frigates (5th rates) being between 12.66/7 - Cerberus/Renomee and 12.01 of Indefetigable). So again: no sense using her in place of a standard frigate speed wise. I'd propose to: Move her speed to 12.00-12.10 (making her on par with slowest frigate - Indefetigable); Move her turn rate to 3.00 (making her superior or on par with 3rd rates and slightly inferior to 4th rates). This way she could try to keep a brawl battle on 3rd rates, get outturned by 4th and 5th rates, be faster than 4th rates, slower and less nimble than 5th, still being well more tough. Making a scheme = Speed: 5th rates > Constitution > 4th/3rd rates => she cant outrun frigates but can outrun bigger ships Turn: 5th rates > 4th rates > Constitution > 3rd rates => she cant outturn same rate or smaller ships, still she can outturn full SoLs Toughness: 3rd rates > Constitution > 4th rates > 5th rates => she can outlast 4th rates but not 3rd rates Broadside: 3rd rates > 4th rates > Constitution > 5th rates => she hits harder than other frigs but not 3rd/4th rates I challenge anyone saying such a ship would be OP. I'd say she'll be a nice mid range (not shining nor crappy) in all categories. I'd like Devs opinion on this rebalacing of a nerfed to death ship. Regads.
  18. Today I lost my snow, so I need to collect gold for another. I took combat mission (7th rate-the easiest one) and went here with a basic cutter. But bot there have brig (6th rate) and I CAN'T kill him. Can't buy something to deliever too. Help me pls.
  19. Contrary to the tags on this thread (clickbait ftw) I have a nice solution (and easy to do!) for the ganking issues that plague PVp at the moment. here it comes... Make PVP rewards scale to BR difference. mind blown yet? Please follow my thinking: Target BR : attacker BR x100%= % of rewards. And I do not mean rewards per player, but total potential rewards across all players for the attacking group. Group of players x attacks player y. The BR difference is X: 500, Y: 100. So the maximum rewards for the players in group x can be AT MAXIMUM 20% of what it would have been in an equal br situation. Same goes the other way around. Guy in small ship (e.g. @The Red Duke/Hethwill in a privateer) br 40, attacks an LGV br 110. This gives Hethwill a potential (110:40)x100= 275% for possible pvp rewards! Relatively simple solution to a relativly complex problem. PVP rewards will force down large groups of attackers leading to less ganking. Because face it: Outnumbering an enemy BR wise is NOT a show of skill. This way it would be high risk, high gain, no risk, no gain.
  20. What we got now - We can add a clan in our friend list. We don't know if this clan add us in return on his own frienlist. The ones i put on friendlist can enter the portbattle the clan lead in defense or offense Why it's a problem - We don't see if the clan we add add us on friendlist leading to strange situation where you are ready to help a clan that forget to add you. - We are unable to add clan from different nations in the friendlist. Sometimes, as the map is huge, all the clan from a nation are not playing on the same area. A geographic alliances would be far more interesting than a nation alliances. Why adding different nation's clan in friendlist - It will allow all the nations to field PB with 25 player if necessary - It will be alliance lead between people who like eachothers. It may change with the population of the clan chaning leading more flexibility that the alliances we got before - It can be just for a few times to help this or this nation to capture this or this port. It will create anew kind of gameplay that we can named "Mercenary". 1) Port battle The map is huge, player are not so many. Most are cluster on different port. If your nation is tiny, everyone is on the same place. More your territory is big, more you get a risk to cluster the nation and not be able to field PB with 25 players. allowing the clans on border on the frontier to make friends with others nation on border of their frontier will help the population to reach the golden number of 25 to be able to play the game entirely. 2) Flexibility The alliances we got with the vote were really heavy and almost impossible to change once forged. Into this clan friendlist, you just have to add a different clan in the list or to remove him. It may be great for owner on the clan and diplomat to recieven an email to warn them but it's really easy to do and undo giving flexibility into the pact. Your clan is on the center on his own alliance. If you are in clan A and you put clan B in frien list, you are not allie with clan C. You have to add clan C in friend list and clan C has to accept. It will not be a domino alliances like before freezing everything. My alliance is MY alliances, not the ones my allies or my nations but the one my clan personnaly want to build. It will not be 1 2 or 3 alliances but as many allainces as there is clan. 3)Mercenary With mercenary, any clan can play RvR whichone is their number. Atm, if you are in a wrong nation, your clan of 5 veteran is useless. llow them to be hired for their services and they will have fun every day PvPing and rvring with thoses who pay them. Paying them will belance the things allowings the ones who need them more to hire them to capture ports or territory How it works, the nation, the pirate? A) Port Battle 1) Problem that may occure Clan A from nation 1 is friend with clan B from nation 2. B attack port a from nation 1 owned by C Clan. If clan A join, what is happening? Clan A from nation 1 is attacking clan C from nation 1? 2) Solutions The nation is upper the clan on port battle. It's the main difference with pirates. A clan whatever his alliance has to be unable to join a PB against his own nation. In the other hand, the clan has tu be unable to defend his allies against an attack from his own nation. In not any case, a player from Nation A can attack port of Nation A. If not any case a player of nation A is able to defend a port from nation B attack by nation A. Pirates are not limited in this gameplay. Pirates can help nationals forces to attack pirates ports or they can defend against pirates. B ) Open sea To make it simple, the easier thing would be to reserve battle group to people of your clan friend list whatever are their nation. The player keep their own flag but as mark as : "in command from Nation A". A player like that can be attack by nation A (to not let alt group alt and make them invincible) but all the frist battle group may be oppose to second battle group meaning in Open sea, Clan alliance is upper nation C) Changing nation, pirates gameplay and forged paper The pirates as said as to get this opportunity to seel themself to join PB whoever is in whoever is group in front of them, national or pirates. It's the perfect nation to join for small group of hardcoreplayer wanted to pvp every day or for group of player that are tired of their nation. As said in PB your nation is stronger than your alliances so you can't play against your nation in RvR. Pirates can. When aplayer want to change nation, he switch to pirates. On the pirate admiralty, Forged paper can be bought (1000CM each?). It's a playerlink article that can't be sold or moved. It will allow player to change nation if they want it by switching to pirates first and then second nation. it's far more RP than what we got now with player switching from nation to nation. They will have to prepare it before or to play as pirates for a times allowing them to meet new people and maybe finnaly change their mind or their gameplay. Everyone will be able to play pirates and to leave pirates nation with this forged paper byable in pirate admiralty. No clan will be able to switch withouth thiking about it. Player will have to decide for themself about the opportunity or not to switch and they will have to farm a bit for that. Example: You are french, you sunk a french ship making you a pirate. You then have to show your future nation you are ready to become a loyal national so you sunk ships (and french onesà to collect CM allowing you to buy a "letre de marques" making you a true national. This system of forged paper is more RP, will lead maybe less player to change nation when a nation is falling, will make everyone able to switch if they want it and give pirate something special, the ability to be the key for the balance. You may buy them for your nation for a certain time if you pay them in CM to cover the cost of CM and they may return back to piracy after their mission. Their choice, your wallet.
  21. It seems that with the new speed limit Endymion is worse than ever. Its sailing profile couldn't be much worse and the high base speed that is supposed to make up for it is somewhat useless when i can just stack speed mods on the constitution. Is there still anything that makes Endymion worth sailing? I have really been meaning to build myself one lately for its awesome looks alone but i feel like i should get the constitution instead...
  22. English version below. Вкратце: - Формулы риска и вознаграждения в игре все поломаны. Вознаграждение за бои почти не существует, а Боевые Капитаны в огромном невыгодном положении по сравнению с Трейдерами - Запускать Экономику без начальных вливаний это не-реалистично и глупо - ГДЕ ИСТОРИЧЕСКИЕ СТАРТАП ИНВЕСТИЦИИ? - Торговое меню смехотворно плохо разработано с игрой, не играемой без сетевых инструментов. Нет способа сортировки как по производству и по расстояниям (simultaneously). - Экономика, движимая игроками, чрезвычайно раздроблена в зависимости от кланов и регионов, а некоторые регионы имеют огромное преимущество перед другими - Опыт нового игрока ужасен, а "бесплатные корабли" оскорбительно бесполезны без экипировки. Опыт нового игрока, простая арифметика: Загнивание в Базовой Лодке - скучной одиночнои мачте. Первые 12 до 9001 миссий не имеют риска, потому что вы получаете все оборудование бесплатно, а награда - 6000 + 1500 золота за миссию. Ремонтные работы также бесплатны, поэтому вы можете выполнять 3 миссии за один выход ~22К без каких-либо дополнительных затрат. Тогда вы должны получить достаточно денег на 6-й Реит, который обойдется вам в 23К корабля и ~ 70К пушек и ~10К+ за ремонты корпуса. Ваш доход за миссию увеличивается всего до ~ 9000 + 2500 (minus repairs!), а ваш РИСК поднимается до ВСЕГО ПРОГРЕССА, который вы делали раньше. Если вы попали на абордаж или в миссии против двух кораблей, или вы проиграли битву, все ваше ~ ~90K+ золота, корабль и снаряжения потеряно, и вам нужно снова начать с нуля. Зачем рисковать всем когда можно гнобит себя в Базовой Лодке еще 9001 сражений? Вы не можете захватить корабли NPC - весь корабль, мачты которого вы тщательно отстреляли, тщательно взяли на абордаж, часто дает ноль дополнительной прибыли, так как все ее супер дорогие пушки волшебным образом исчезают, а весь корабль оказывается мнимым. Я понимаю причины - чтобы не надувать экономику миссиями. Почему не давать захватывать корабли NPC Fleet в открытом мире, по крайней мере, 6-го уровня или ниже? Почему награда за боевые успехи настолько низкая по сравнению с риском? По сравнению с AFK торговлей? Кто придумал что заставить всех Боевиков подчиниться донату клана или Базовой Лодке - хорошая идея для роста населения открытого мира? English - In brief: - The Risk versus Reward formulas in the game are all messed up. The reward for doing well in battle is near non-existant, with Fighting captains at a huge disadvantage compared to Traders - Starting up a player driven economy without startup capital is ridiculous. Where is the HISTORICAL VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT? - The trading menu is ridiculously poorly designed with game unplayable without offline tools. There is no way to sort by both Production and Lowest-Distance, for example. There is no easy comparison of prices or profit potential. - The player driven economy is extremely broken depending on clans and regions, with some regions at a huge early advantage compared to others - The New Player or Returning Player experience is Horrible and the Redeemable Ships are insultingly useless without cannons Returning player experience: You start out stuck rotting in the Basic Cutter. The first 10-12 missions have No Risk because you get all the equipment for free, and the reward is ~ 6000 + 1500 gold per mission. Repairs are also free, so you can do 3 missions per trip with no extra cost. Then you should get enough money for a 6th rate which costs you ~23K for the ship and ~70K for Cannons and 10K in hull repairs. Your income per mission rises to ONLY ~9000+2500 per mission (minus repairs!), and your RISK rises to the ENTIRE PROGRESS you made before. If you get boarded or unluckily raked in a mission against two ships, or you lose a close fight, your entire ~90K of ship and equipment are lost and you need to start in the Basic Cutter again. You cannot capture NPC ships - the entire ship you carefully de-masted, carefully raked and boarded, can easily provide 0 extra profit, since all her super expensive cannons magically disappear, and the entire ship proves imaginary. I understand the reasons - to avoid inflating the economy - but whey aren't the Open World NPC's capturable, at least the ones of 6th rate or below? Why are the rewards for Combat so low in comparison to the risk? Who thought that forcing all Fighting Captains into Clan donations or Basic Cutter servitude is a good idea to grow the Open World population? This type of "Hunger Game" will lead to the bottom percentile of players constantly burning out and leaving until there is no foundation and no prey for the top percentile to hunt. The result will be starvation for everyone, and a gradual decline. The game needs a growth in player base, not a starvation diet. Learn from EVE and figure this out fast.
  23. I know the snow has a fair amount of guns but how are the low hitpoints justified? Even build from Sabicu wood it just melts like butter vs other 6th rates... 1900 side structure while the others have 2200 - 2500 and its sail hp are abysmal too. Is this really justified by the few more guns and good sailing profile?
  24. This game is getting better and better with every patch but i do find a few things really annoying. The first being the time limit and the required 20 minutes holding of an objective to have it captured. I just rage quited the battle of Cold Harbour when i playing as the Confedarates lost the entire battle because i didn't cap the objetive in time i.e. the timer ended LITERALLY A SINGLE MINUTE before i "captured" the little forest on the top of the map during the left flank phase, and this was caused by a 2800 strong Union brigade that charged my ranks and i was unable to rout them before they managed to occupy the point again (i did have 2 brigades defending it but i was outnumbered). There should always be a option to prolong a battle for an extra 30 minutes because i don't think that in real life there was a single instance where generals would retreat their forces at exactly 14:00 or 15:00 if there was a chance for a huge breakthrough or victory. Reputation is a feature i really do like, it rewards you for winning battles by increasing your troops morale and giving you extra manpower or guns if they are urgently needed but i don't see why it is caped at all. The "logic" behind this implies that you can win every single minor and major engagment of the Civil War killing hundreds of thousand of enemies and destroying hundreds of guns but if you loose 2 battles like Chicamauga and Cold Harbour you lost the entire war. There shouldn't be a reputation cap but the morale bonus can stay at +15 so that it doesn't get overpowered. Double standards i also find really annoying, but i dont know how prominent they are because i only noticed it once. Because i play two campaings the main one being with the Confederates and my "side" one with the Union, i play the battle of Chicamauga as the Confedarates first and managed to control all objective 1h before the timer ran out, and the game normally proceded to the next phase. So when i replayed the battle with the Union i didn't want to waste my elite 1 Division of the First Corps defending the two river passages on the left of the first phase. Resulting in the Confederates capturing them and i instantly lost that battle. There shouldn't be any double standards because it gives the AI an unfair advantage.
  25. Have anyone else seen the A.I. have 1863 Springfield's while it's still 1861? (Hard Difficultly/Legendary)
  • Create New...