Patch 29. Sextant, shallow water changes, improvements in the User interface.

[Hethwill]

6 hours ago, Macjimm said:

 Many PvP players:

1. Hate sailing
2. Want a small map.
3. Hate PvE.
4. Want PvP fights often, without waiting or sailing.
5. Hate grinding.

So give PvP players a little corner of the map where PvP will be concentrated

That's a different game, the way I interpret it. Not Naval Action.

[Grundgemunkey]

 

Quote

 

Perhaps there is another option that will satisfy.  Many PvP players:

1. Hate sailing
2. Want a small map.
3. Hate PvE.
4. Want PvP fights often, without waiting or sailing.
5. Hate grinding. 

 

Then why was Naval action legends a failure .

it had all the attributes you describe

i enjoy pvp ... i enjoy rvr ... and i enjoy pve ..... i do not restrict myself to any  particular player description ,,, and i guess most players are the same ...

there are a few who call themselves pvp players ..who just want pvp and in general these players would not want a small corner of the map, because how they want to play  (they will claim otherwise)   is to sink players of lesser skill and experience ...  they dont want to fight against other pvp players they might lose ..  they want the player in a trader  or in a ship the other player doesnt know how to sail properly yet ..they want to gank ... easy pickings .... the small pvp area with guaranteed pvp wouldnt provide this ... because the players they usually kill wouldnt go to that area ....

there are exceptions  we know which players  they are but there are not many of them .... and no Licinio your not one of the exceptions

[Njord]

1 hour ago, admin said:

estimated release date

Do you have any estimated release date currently? Like a rough guess? Just wondering, because I find it hard to motivate many of my mates when they keep moaning about final wipe and how they plan on putting their time into the game "when it counts", which I can understand but is also really annoying... I think too many players are waiting for the wipe again, instead of simply enjoying the game.

[Hethwill]

16 minutes ago, Grundgemunkey said:

 

Then why was Naval action legends a failure .

it had all the attributes you describe

i enjoy pvp ... i enjoy rvr ... and i enjoy pve ..... i do not restrict myself to any  particular player description ,,, and i guess most players are the same ...

there are a few who call themselves pvp players ..who just want pvp and in general these players would not want a small corner of the map, because how they want to play  (they will claim otherwise)   is to sink players of lesser skill and experience ...  they dont want to fight against other pvp players they might lose ..  they want the player in a trader  or in a ship the other player doesnt know how to sail properly yet ..they want to gank ... easy pickings .... the small pvp area with guaranteed pvp wouldnt provide this ... because the players they usually kill wouldnt go to that area ....

there are exceptions  we know which players  they are but there are not many of them .... and no Licinio your not one of the exceptions

Do not generalise so much.

When many of us login into the Naval Action West Indies we do try to emulate, gamewise, the XVII and XVIII centuries type of character play. Not the XXIst century mindset.

And yes it is a game with a ton of non realistic mechanics, and we all must accept that fact. Game is balanced for all at the moment. But not every game is for every player.

 

 

[Ouwe Knar]

Im going to log in and play,

hows that...

all this blatant one-sided talk is making me want to gank someone.

[Celtiberofrog]

What has been tested (or numerously suggested to be) : any intention to implement it in next patches ?

• Economy dynamism : Deliveries (of goods) from free towns
• RVR incentive : Much higher value for loots during hostility missions and for rewards from PB's
• PVP incentive : Production/sell of repairs in every ports
• Port conquest allowed only if it neighbours national ports or free towns.
• Reduce nation numbers to 5 or 6
• USA needs additional territories in central map. (like Brits, French & Spanish)
• Allow 1/3 portion of map for PVE exclusively (and rookies), as "neutral waters & ports".
• No taxes to own ports : A port become neutral (after a while) if it does not host a minimum national outposts (or infrastructures) number.
• Rather player pay some daily cost per ship owning/maintenance, crafted ships will be mostly sold out in market. (to avoid ship storage)
• National war missions letter, that would give very important rewards (& merit) to the clan that has conqueered a strategical enemy port. These missions will be refreshed & oriented by Dev's.

Additionnal opinion is that Devs should forget about forcing player to long (time) sailing. That is one of strong points that discourages most profiles of player motivation.

 

[LeBoiteux]

1 hour ago, Phaserburn said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_frigate_R%C3%A9publicaine_fran%C3%A7aise_(1794)

5.5m

≠

La Renommée 1744

Also, no better source ?

(edit)

Draft I found for La Renommée : 13 1/2 French feet (in front), 15 French ft (at the rear) (Boudriot)

To be verified and converted. 4-5 m ?

btw, draft may not be the most important factor. Broadside weight is too.

Edited December 13, 2018 by LeBoiteux

[LeBoiteux]

1 minute ago, Phaserburn said:

The one in game is the 44, not the 94? Still I just want the Essex in shallow water patrols. If you won’t give it chasers, buff it with shallow water support.

Seriously ?

Ok to have light frigates (up to the Surprise) in shallows but that's all.

[Hethwill]

19 feet and 10 inches is not below 4 meters, definitely not.

And that's the Essex draught.

[Grundgemunkey]

12 hours ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

Do not generalise so much.

When many of us login into the Naval Action West Indies we do try to emulate, gamewise, the XVII and XVIII centuries type of character play. Not the XXIst century mindset.

And yes it is a game with a ton of non realistic mechanics, and we all must accept that fact. Game is balanced for all at the moment. But not every game is for every player.

 

 

ok you told me  not to generalise then do exactly that yourself ... as a percentage  how many is     " many of us " ???

i dont know anyone with a  17th century or 18th century mindset when playing

. the game is balanced for all .... but is not for every player      that just a contradiction    your just saying its balanced for your gameplay ,,, and if i dont like it then game isnt for  me ..

it Thursday night about 23.15 and there are 200 people in game ,,, about  250 - 300 less than i would have expected before  patch 27 .... tells you all you need to know about how the balance is working out

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

Also I'm sure the cut off is that nothing above 9 pb frigates.  Bell Poule could prob go in theere but it's a 12 pb frigate.  Lets not get all carried away as there needs to be some type of balance.  You just want the exxes cause it would wreck most of all those ships.  Also all the ships being allowed in the shallows are 240 crew and below.  So a new player that did the exam and Master Com could man all those frigates if he wanted.  

[Hethwill]

21 minutes ago, Grundgemunkey said:

ok you told me  not to generalise then do exactly that yourself ... as a percentage  how many is     " many of us " ???

i dont know anyone with a  17th century or 18th century mindset when playing

. the game is balanced for all .... but is not for every player      that just a contradiction    your just saying its balanced for your gameplay ,,, and if i dont like it then game isnt for  me ..

it Thursday night about 23.15 and there are 200 people in game ,,, about  250 - 300 less than i would have expected before  patch 27 .... tells you all you need to know about how the balance is working out

 

I will suggest we can capture all the ships we want, including SOLs, but to balance it, remove ALL safe zones.

Deal ? 

[Hethwill]

12ft 3in is correctly the depth of hold, not the draft.

By the way, xmas coming, buy some sources about american frigates https://www.usni.org/store/books

[Christendom]

yay...my exile is over and I can post!

Not really a fan of the renno and surprise in shallow fights.  Just like what happened when the herc/requin came out, they immediately replaced rattler and niagras as the ships to use in shallow PBs.  This would effectively kill 6th rates in port battles.  

Now if they were restricted from shallow PBs and just allowed to cruise in the OW, I might be ok with that.  Though they would adversely affect screening I think.

[Roadkill]

Really starting like the way this game is heading.  There are plenty of things to do now when logging in and you can finally play the game as you would like.  Is is perfect? no.  But am I more optimistic with each coming patch?  Bet your ass I am.  The conversation amongst clan members is more and more about what is good and improving with new players joining us regularly.  Hell there is even some love now for the new UI.  Keep up the good work guys!

[Hethwill]

USS Essex plans are public access if anything along with a ton of others.

There you have your 12 feet 3 inches, right in the main dimensions annotations. Depth of hold.

http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/86/098610409.jpg

But hey, books are nice.

[Hethwill]

I'm not  a dick.

I buy a book and then acquire their sources. I usually start with osprey and then follow their sources. Because... why not  

Osprey's American Light and Medium Frigates 1794 - 1836

Register of Officer Personnel United States Navy and Marine Corps and Ships’ Data 1801–1807

 

[admin]

7 minutes ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

 Osprey's American Light and Medium Frigates 1794 - 1836

Register of Officer Personnel United States Navy and Marine Corps and Ships’ Data 1801–1807

 

 

• Research finds the blueprints
• Artist picks the best blueprint to get the job done without any confusion
• This blueprint is defined as CANONICAL because if there are multiple blueprints used there could be confusing causing remodeling (increasing time)
• Sometimes artists uses other ships for detailing because the real reference does not exist (Mary rose - surprise - l Unite/ or Wasa- Gustav Adolf)
• The made ship is now CANON and in game parameters determine in game performance. 

So if wiki says the draught was 4.5 meters but the blueprint said it was 3.9 meters the game uses in game draught. 



 

[Hethwill]

Thanks for clarification.

Not that it really matters, Essex being one of my favorites , was more of a lock horns situation. Sorry for the off-topic.

[Magallanes]

On 12/11/2018 at 12:32 PM, admin said:

Hercules and LRQ will be allowed into shallow port battles

great! (irony on). We know which ship will be in de shallow PBs for the next 100 years.

..and a big reason to buy these DLCs, for those who haven't done it yet

Edited December 14, 2018 by Magallanes

[LeBoiteux]

37 minutes ago, admin said:

 

• Research finds the blueprints
• Artist picks the best blueprint to get the job done without any confusion
• This blueprint is defined as CANONICAL because if there are multiple blueprints used there could be confusing causing remodeling (increasing time)
• Sometimes artists uses other ships for detailing because the real reference does not exist (Mary rose - surprise - l Unite/ or Wasa- Gustav Adolf)
• The made ship is now CANON and in game parameters determine in game performance. 

So if wiki says the draught was 4.5 meters but the blueprint said it was 3.9 meters the game uses in game draught. 

At 1'10'' :

-- Would you like to check my figures ?

-- Oh, I'm sure they're perfectly rounded.

 

 

[Grundgemunkey]

11 hours ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

I will suggest we can capture all the ships we want, including SOLs, but to balance it, remove ALL safe zones.

Deal ? 

if you want...... neither suggestion are issues  to me personally ... I dont usually capture ships unless they are traders and I need one .... and the safe zones are  not a concern to me whether they exist or not

Im just sad that the game is no longer the fun it used to be ,,,the proof is the numbers that are online .... if I knew how to attract more players I would tell you  but I dont

but it seems that making statements like the game is balanced seems to be sticking your head in the sand

 

 

[Grundgemunkey]

people arguing over what ships  draughts  ....think the game has more problems than whether  an ingame game ships draught is 0.5 meters less than it  was in the blue prints ,, who cares

ships draught depended on its cargo how the cargo was stored .. etc etc ....

 

make NAVAL ACTION GREAT AGAIN

[staun]

On 12/11/2018 at 12:32 PM, admin said:

 

• Plan leaderboards should now work properly and show statistics for the last 7 days (without weekly reset)

If I read the announcement from page 1 correct, clan Leaderbiard should  work correct?

If you look at the Danish Nations clan leaderboard. It shows lot of inactive clans, ore atleast clans witch seams to have no PvP/PvE kill and never shows any online. But only one of the active clans. Is that the intented goal of the leaderboard. I thought it was partly to maybe show new players witch clans may be worth to join and maybe even some friendly competition among Nation clans.

[Hethwill]

1 hour ago, Grundgemunkey said:

if you want...... neither suggestion are issues  to me personally ... I dont usually capture ships unless they are traders and I need one .... and the safe zones are  not a concern to me whether they exist or not

Im just sad that the game is no longer the fun it used to be ,,,the proof is the numbers that are online .... if I knew how to attract more players I would tell you  but I dont

but it seems that making statements like the game is balanced seems to be sticking your head in the sand

 

 

I am sure you have plenty of ideas, no matter how odd they seem. Only devs decide final design though.