Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'pve peace server'.
Found 6 results
-
I know devs are dealing with NPC behavior and intend to teach them "new tricks". I applaud to anything on that field, if even present NPC act very convincingly at times. We are used to call AI "dumb" in the tradition of three decades full of examples given by game industry history, but the NPC in Naval Action are quite an exception which makes hope for the future. Still, we can shape their behavior for more human likeliness. Fleeing is a reasonable human reaction when things go wrong and the opponent is stronger. We have traders fleeing per definition, which seems right. But wh-
- 2
-
-
- npc
- pve peace server
- (and 1 more)
-
Purpose of this suggestion: No restrictions on side of clan who organizes hostility mission or port battle, regarding who is participating in their conquest activities. After all, players of different nations are not seen as enemies here. That should reflect in the choices we have in teaming up. We should find agreements with them and enter them in our list of allowed participants of hostility missions and port battles (right now it is still possible to join into hostility missions but we have a thread in support section which talks about ending this by decision of admin, due to exploits
- 8 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- pve peace server
- hostility mission
- (and 2 more)
-
OK I get it. Devs don't want international cooperation in Port Battles on Peace Server. Either it is a holy cow that PB should only allow nationals and their befriended clans, or it's the standard argument "but the alts" which ruin the idea. We have stressed often enough the fate of small nations or small clans, or the combination of both (sic!) namely Poland, Russia, Prussia, when they cannot defend against 21 neutral ships attacking their ports, if... IF THEY EVER WERE ABLE TO CONQUER ONE AT ALL, in the first place. So we are reduced to small numbers in PB. But what about the attac
- 5 replies
-
- 5
-
-
- port battles
- screen
- (and 3 more)
-
After the success of our "Impossible Gunboat Mission" contest in may 2019, of which a second will be planned for sometime later this year, French clan 'MDRA' is proud to present a new type of contest for players on PvE Peace Server. This time it is: "Light my Fire!" (Painting "Fireships on the Hudson River" by Geoff Hunt. A scene from the American War of Independence, 1776.) As you can guess or read in the headline, this is for fireships. This first time 4-5th rate fireships, to be precise. Players can take part with a 4-5th rate ship of their choice, if equipped with fires
- 5 replies
-
- 5
-
-
- player-made content
- contest
- (and 2 more)
-
It has been stated before: the Idea of "consensual duel" is very popular on PvE Peace Server, given the precondition players still stay safe all the time in open world. Or else it would not be PvE Peace Server, the place to enjoy "calm, tranquility, relaxation", any more. Some players resent the idea of consensual duel or NPC being entitled to become aggressive and attack them when AI smells a chance of success. I was looking forward to the latter, but as this part of admin's announcement has been crossed out, it seems it will not get implemented. Or maybe it could, while everybody is kep
- 78 replies
-
- 11
-
-
- pvp option
- pve peace server
- (and 3 more)
-
So I read yesterday here "PvE (peace server) is boring/stupid". Which it isn't, when you are inside and know by own experience. One of the factors assuring this has ceased to exist with the big patch. Fleets are no longer 1+24 size (large or medium ships), now maximum we observe is 1+10. Fun as seen in attached images. The French Faction on PvE hereby asks devs to bring back the superlarge fleets (all others are fine) as they served so well for clans going out on the hunt together. They were inviting independents like me to participate. Now no more, as 11 is just enough to serve
- 37 replies
-
- 13
-
-
- pve peace server
- pve content
- (and 2 more)
