Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Russia so bored they try to kill off smaller nations?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What do you care Intrepido ? Those AI are not going to farm themselves, so you better get on with it.

more than 3 ROVERS in big ships might have broke the server anyway

L O L If you repeat it enough time you might end up believing it is true.   Also to people complaining, you get content and you complain? me not understand.

Posted Images

I trough myself into this conversation. I am playing as Poland. Since Russian why the hell ever decided to take basse Terre we have no port to build ships. OK you can buy some. But how much u need to play to buy "decent" ships. Than you think. Time to hunt better ships. You kill a guy and instantly (my luck) a veteran shows up in a faster ship. For me it's hard to fight if you are just the victim against an predator. I do fighting. And I don't mind losing ships. But in the moment I am trying to get my money for my trash ships back. The balance between winning something and losing something is very much on an minus pool. Atleast for me.  Only hope are these mission and gold chest.      So well it's OK when a nation is strong. But for what did Russia take our port? Poland not even able to have 25 1st rates.  Now we can argue its your choice. We'll that's true. But it's also russians choice to attack it or not. 

I would like to see a alliance system that works.  But here is the question. If we choose this. How will a nation agree on that? And who has the power to vote it?. Every member? Per clan 1 vote?  Many questions.     I apologize my bad English and wish everyone an good weekend 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rediii said:

I agree a bit. But where is that fear coming from? Most people already know before a fight they will lose. And the one's that don't know it yet will learn after they fought moscalb, dron, reverse, havelock, hachiroku, pellew, mars etc once. (my experience)

Think about getting alliances in again and see what happens then in RvR.

Dude. No one fights me without me teaching them. You are right about the rest. It's the pointless loosing players avoid more than anything. The issue this community has is that seal clubbing is rewarding and competitive gameplay is not. Its a fact. That's why leader boards and k/d ratios are a terrible thing in games too. 

It encourages seal clubbing just like pvp marks or however you call them. There are other ways to get them but a certain Russian "elite" recently turned down a 1v1 against me because there was no rewards for it. What kind of bs is that? 

All mmos suffer from this but I believe the more arcade and less sim the game has become the less competitive it has become too. 1v10 was basically impossible in the old game design but the devs believe that was bad. As long as they have that attitude the discussion is pointless. Simple fact is that ram dinark or even jesus Christ should not be capable of defeating those odds. Take the tools away and he still is a good player. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Gringo69rus said:

Your disputes, gentlemen do not lead to anything. The problem is not in port bonuses or RVR. The problem is that there are no tasks for players who are oriented to Pva and the economy. Players cannot build their trading corporations and pve clans. There is no content for this type of game and this leads to low online. Missions in the style of kill 100 mobs are the same and boring, a sealed bottle leads you to a hold and not to a mission in which it is not clear what will be either extraction or an ambush or a task for a while. Everything connected with the ports for the development of the city would have to have levels - 1 level village; Level 2 - a large village; Level 3 - a small town; Level 4 - city; at level 5, one could choose the specialization of the city - mining / military / trading, and until the city was developed to a certain level or the corresponding buildings were built there was nothing there (goods / ships). In general, what do I need to take the Age of Sails to add more elements with quests / sieges / sabotage / trade wars to attach to it PVP modes everywhere and the possibility of MMMO will be a finished product. Now this is a game on skill and your ability to gather people. well, or to divide the BR cities so that smaller clans have a chance.

P.S. “What will the little clans do when the war comes to their port?”

sorry for  translator

The game is a barren wasteland. Open works games should not require scripted content. The world itself should be the content. I always told players crying for content that there is nothing meaningful to add. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, van Veen said:

Yes. It was tested and did not work. People votes turned out to form two fixed blocks. Nothing changed. Voting did not change the alliance for a very long time. It got a stalemate. Many people complained heavily about it. Then the devs decided to drop alliances altogether and make PVP "all against all", instead of fixing and tweaking it. 

I think alliances could work again if it applied to port battles only and didn't prevent OW battles. Already we can choose to join any weaker side of OW battles. So there's technically an alliance there, IF we choose to join that battle. We just need the ability to help in Port Battles.

The voting system got fekt by alt clans who screwed the votes. And most of these alt clans were just trader alts. If it were somehow tied to other activities like PvE and PvP kills or damage, then perhaps it might work. I would make the kills count too heavy, because ppl are already in a weak ship....but if the weight was on damage, it could help. I don't know. All I do know is that weaker nations need to join forces in PBs to help each other.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, van Veen said:

 

Clans are not good decision makers either. After all, you take away the power from everyone and pass it on to a few hardcore players. So basically nothing changes. 

I'd love to see an AI doing the diplomacy, like in CIV or other games. Player actions should influence the AI decision. But since this requires a lot of coding, I'd be happy to let server admin set alliances every week. 

The thing is, the more you participate in the nation the more you should be able to share your opinion and have a bigger influence on the nations decisions, this would exclude alt voting which was some of the problems 2 years ago. Also if a player dont want his nation to be in an alliance the Pirate faction should be the obvious choice, because the pirate faction SHOULD have Outlaw battles

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rediii said:

lol

Yea these few hardcore players that actually play/use the alliances shouldn't decide on them. They should be forced to work together with someone else! Because they would totally work together with their forced alliance.

Who needs sandbox in this sandbox game anyway

But it's not just your sandbox. 

41 minutes ago, Wyy said:

The thing is, the more you participate in the nation the more you should be able to share your opinion and have a bigger influence on the nations decisions, this would exclude alt voting which was some of the problems 2 years ago. Also if a player dont want his nation to be in an alliance the Pirate faction should be the obvious choice, because the pirate faction SHOULD have Outlaw battles

Voting with unequal voting weights will create endless drama. Forget it. Voting does not work. 

Edited by van Veen
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 час назад ХатиРоку сказал:

Игроки не боятся потерять пиксели, но боятся потерять время. Время - самый ценный ресурс во вселенной, так что они правы, опасны потерять пиксели, которые стоят им часов. 

Только пиксели - худший аргумент за всю историю. Виртуальные предметы могут быть такими же ценными. 

Если у вас 30 кораблей, это не значит, что вы должны их потопить. Они имеют ценность. 

 

Then why keep 30 ships, but try to make and keep the best copy of the ship. 5/5 gold ship. For what purpose? 
So the game does not need this kind of upgrades for the ships? Shipyards should create "just" ships. Without options 3/5, 4/5, 5/5. No options, "simple", "magenta", "pink", "gold". Without additional additions to the characteristics so that they are not afraid to lose in battle.
The biggest loss of time when you come to the capital of the nation to fight and no one goes to battle. You are waiting, and the enemy does not come out. Or it will come out in five-fold advantage in the lineup. When you are going to leave this region.
I remember the times when the ships had 5 strength. The upgrades were not lost after the battle. And all the ports were filled with ships with 5 durability. They were also afraid of losing their pixel ship. Although there was a completely different game mechanics. It was a completely different game.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, van Veen said:

Voting with unequal voting weights will create endless drama. Forget it. Voting does not work. 

This is on the same level as no voters in republic systems we have in our real life countries. Complaining on what should / shouldnt be done, yet the person choose not to vote.

The weights on the vote you have ingame could be classified out from pve rank, PvP rank, average playtime pr. Week etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Wyy said:

This is on the same level as no voters in republic systems we have in our real life countries. Complaining on what should / shouldnt be done, yet the person choose not to vote.

The weights on the vote you have ingame could be classified out from pve rank, PvP rank, average playtime pr. Week etc. 

Words can't describe how bad an idea that is.  That would mean the no-life, 24/7 players would own the game and the population would drop to them and their alts.  Players shouldn't vote on anything...ever.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Medniy Sandal said:

Then why keep 30 ships, but try to make and keep the best copy of the ship. 5/5 gold ship. For what purpose? 
So the game does not need this kind of upgrades for the ships? Shipyards should create "just" ships. Without options 3/5, 4/5, 5/5. No options, "simple", "magenta", "pink", "gold". Without additional additions to the characteristics so that they are not afraid to lose in battle.
The biggest loss of time when you come to the capital of the nation to fight and no one goes to battle. You are waiting, and the enemy does not come out. Or it will come out in five-fold advantage in the lineup. When you are going to leave this region.
I remember the times when the ships had 5 strength. The upgrades were not lost after the battle. And all the ports were filled with ships with 5 durability. They were also afraid of losing their pixel ship. Although there was a completely different game mechanics. It was a completely different game.

why own a ferrari enzo and never drive it? Its nice to look at and has value. 

The game doesn't need upgrades for ships but upgrades and mods are a nice thing to have because they add overall stratergy to the game. Besides that customization is always good. The problem with upgrades are there are to many and even more so are extremely overpowered by the fact that they have far higher bonuses because you can repair multiple times. 50% of the mods should be removed. In the old days lightweight ropes and blocks was one of the best mods ingame. Compared to the mods we have now its useless. The funny part is that Art of ship handling and gunnery encyclopedia are the hardest mods to get ingame yet not even that op. Its all the other hull bonuses, repair bonuses and armour bonuses stacked. The gap between the noob and pro is to much. Those ships are made even better by the fact that they have lots of repairs.  

I can tell you one thing I am 100% certain that multiple repairs are the single biggest problem in this game. Ever since we have had this bullshit the devs have not ONCE had any kind of "balance" in the game. That one addition has made combat design impossible. If they were removed things would improve a bit but there are other issues. I have had the argument with admin many times and so far he has no argument in favor of it other that "it makes the game more tactical" You can add a Nuclear bomb kill streak after 10 kills just like call of duty and also make the claim it is tactical. You can add a Turbo boost to the game and claim it is more tactical and it actually would be. That does not mean its a good thing. It means its stupid

Players do not like loosing ships because it is humiliating to be sank 10 times without success. I already said that making AI first rates capture is a good step BUT that it will not solve the fundamental problem of players not fighting. Expensive ships are bad but making them super cheap is also no a solution. 

The biggest problem in the game is that Good players SHOULD NOT be looking for PVP from some noobs outside KPR or other capitals. The game mechanic reward this behavior and human beings will always choose the easier fast way to gain what they want. How to change that is a problem in many games and I honestly do not know myself. I do know that removing the tools that gives good players such a major advantage is a step in the right direction. It doesn't matter however because I think that train has sailed. There is no chance this game can be saved anymore because its too old. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lars Kjær said:

Mechanics need to support content creation.. When contest becomes "I-win" scenarios, demands rigorous grinding and locks equipment behind permits, port bonus etc. the opposite side won't create content (i.e. PvP and PBs) and in its furthest extent deny the opponent content by simply not showing up for PBs or surrender in PvP matches..

why the new account were you banned? I was banned for 7 full days. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree that any modifications of the ships should be removed. No mods, no port bonus, no books. But a very sophisticated damage model installed with single spars to be shot away, ships only sinking when hit below the waterline, more focus on the crew  ( a trained crew, that survived several battles should work faster than a new crew. So keep your crew alive). Maybe even choosing single sails to be set...

That would be my game...

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, van Veen said:

Yes. It was tested and did not work. People votes turned out to form two fixed blocks. Nothing changed. Voting did not change the alliance for a very long time. It got a stalemate. Many people complained heavily about it. Then the devs decided to drop alliances altogether and make PVP "all against all", instead of fixing and tweaking it. 

Yes and that decision was a complete failure. 1 or 2 more development iterations could have fixed the problem. Instead they've chosen the easy way: just drop it. The result is a superpower nation and the rest leaves the game (like i did).

Edited by Sven Silberbart
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Words can't describe how bad an idea that is.  That would mean the no-life, 24/7 players would own the game and the population would drop to them and their alts.  Players shouldn't vote on anything...ever.

Join pirates then if you dont want an alliance. 

Yes that would exactly mean that the players investing most of their time would deserve to have more of a say. If a player has an alt and plays for 2 peoples then so be it he deserves a bigger piece of the cake. 

What you're saying is that one guy that plays 2 hours pr month should have as much equal vote as one that spends maybe 20 hours in the game. What would it matter anyway for that one guy that wouldnt play as much. This kind of game needs player driven alliances, its historical and would do better for the game in the long therm. As its now nothing does good for the game, which is proven by the player base in decline which is more then halfed since release

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tom Farseer said:

Erm... I think the math on that one does not quite check out...
10% being 7k damage means in total he would have to have had 70k HP all repairs included. Trincomalee's HP cap at just over 11.6k. And that is white Oak frame and planking, so definitely not a hunting build. Assuming you went the full 90 minutes and he repaired whenever possible that is 8 or 9 cycles. Since you cannot even reach close to 100% HP repaired per cycle, there is absolutely no way that evens out to 70k HP worth of damage received.

In general the game still is and always has been much more dependent on skill than on gear.
Just look at the actual numbers of the port boni: For example the difference between Hull 4 and no bonus at all on a White Oak Ocean is 1400 HP on each side. That is the equivalent of 8.3 hits with a 42pd long gun (168 dmg). Are you seriously telling me that is the deciding factor? Same goes for all the other boni, especially when comparing 45 point ports to 55 point ports.
The only part where gear can really make a difference is indeed repair stacking. But that only works when the captain has the skill to time his repairs, chose what to repair and when to disengage to repair. And it also needs an opponent who let's his enemy disengage to repair. So even here skill and decision making plays a huge part.

For those who cannot believe anything without seeing it. I never said that skill isn´t important. The widened gap caused by frankenships is what I focus on. And yes for your 8.3 hits with a damage of 168 each mutliplied with focused fire and maybe some extra-charge of 5 ships on a target without caratagena and whatsoever matters... but of course, like rediii the allknowing wiseguy here knows: everybody, literally everybody has these frankenships in the port-battles. wonder on what planet some people live. It isn´t of any use to point out  that tactics, decision-making is of importance too. That´s just common sense and not the philosopher´s stone. Best wishes, Gene

Screenshot_17-09-2019_20-23-01.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm  all I know is back when we didn't have PVP Marks, Repair Metas, Port Bonuses and 11 nations this game had 10x the amount of filled RVR battles on average every week tha nwe currently have now.  We also had an alliance system that was instrumental in filling those 25v25 battles.  What we have now is a game that was designed to accommodate 2000 players that does not function with 700.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if instead of alliances (or until alliances) small countries should all jump to a single no-longer small nation.  One which still has a decent ship-building capability.  Then if the zergs roll over that you can stick a fork in the game, its done.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wyy said:

Yes that would exactly mean that the players investing most of their time would deserve to have more of a say.

It's a terribly bad idea to make a handful of hardcore players the rulers of the server, unless you are planning to get rid of all non-hardcore players anyway. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2019 at 10:04 AM, Carl von Lichtenfels said:

So Russia decided its time to kill the rest of Prussian Pop? No better Enemies around then one of the smallest Nations? 

All this will achieve the Game dying faster, have a good day.

How bizarre....Playing a "hardcore" faction, complaining that another hardcore faction is attacking you..

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lars Kjær said:

Why give the zerg any content? Why shouldn't the zerg split into the many factions so we can get more evenly distributed players?

Why did we get the poorly designed frontline system? Forced to fight for the capital first, that should've been the end chapter of a story of regional conquest. Why the large BRs effectively removing the ability of smaller clans to actually engage in RvR?

The problem isn't the russian playerbase, it's shitty designed mechanics... What's even worse - we knew from EA that there's a clear powercreep in this game that could and did render nations uncompetitive.. We knew the effects of this was: players left the game. How on earth someone thought that port bonus' would be a grand idea then is beyond me. It doesn't take a genious to know that the powercreep would ensure that the 55p ports ended up in more or less the same hands. Especially since 3 of the 5 russian ports is in the mexican guld with only two free ports located more than an hours sail from NO or VC respectively. The other 55p port was placed in Nassau, of all places.. Basically an uncapturable port due to the buff on forts! How on earth could this not have been foreseen??! And the effect? - Players left. Will they come back now that ppl can't say "it's EA it might be improved in a later patch"?

Then comes the RoE, that basically ensures that hunting the larger factions is impossible since they either A gets a BR advantage in every match or B has 20 mins to get a BR advantage, and since they have the majority playerbase they will always be able to get the BR advantage. How could this not have been foreseen? Not to mention the shitrakings the new players got when they inadvertently joined a battle they shouldn't have, some even to the point of being tribunaled because "they're prob alts".. How can it be any wonder that the player retention rate is so low in a game so poorly designed?

I could go on, but honestly any1 saying that port bonus' doesn't matter are just not adept at simple calculus and any1 saying the RoE is functioning fine is just delusional or atleast so narcissistic that they can't see the newbie problem. Any1 saying the powercreep isn't an issue, well then answer me this:

Why do ppl  pay fx. 600k for carta refits? That's 6 boxes of shitlong sails in todays NA econ. If it doesn't matter why would ppl sail afk for hours to get it? If port bonus' doesn't matter, why don't Russia drop fx. Nassau and give it to a smaller faction then? If the powercreep doesn't matter why then do Russia get more and more players by the day? I'd reheeeally like to see the most recent playerdistribution if it's possible @qw569?

Answer me this:

Why is players leaving if the mechanics are great?

Oh, you are so right. This is the "complete edition of biggest game design fails in NA". I cant agree more, but I lost hope that the devs ever understand that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lars Kjær said:

Answer me this:

Why is players leaving if the mechanics are great?

 

 For me at least I am having much more fun/time in other games, latest one is Battletech which i got with 2 expansion packs from humble bundle monthly which was $9 (12 normally but had $3 discount) and i get a selection of games on 4th Oct also which most probably will be no interest but still.

I log into NA look at what i need/want to do...

Kill missions PvE - 5th rates i need to sail an hour set up outpost, ship repairs, tow/sail ship over..

Kill missions PvP - Sail 1-3 hours looking for a fight only to find mostly teams of 3-4 players on gank fests (what ever happened to lone hunters?)

Cargo missions - Sail hours while watching netflix or playing another game alt/tabbing out to see if am near destination.

 

So what tends to happen is i will fight couple 6th rates outside capital to open slots, then go play something i can get some fun out of.  I know is a sailing game so travel is expected but the whole realism guys obsession with huge time sinks, making lineships rare, etc  has made NA feel like going to work.

Somewhere along the testing fun seems to have been forgotten, balance has always been an issue throughout testing and seems like nothing has been learned.

So we are left with a population mostly consisting of the ones that stuck through testing who mostly joined the same powerbases, and game design with port bonuses/ship permits created initial huge demand for combat marks..... which of course meant new guys were raped constantly around capital waters...

 

 Combat mechanics are great, although forts are insane (again balancing issue) and have made motar brigs useless and may as well be removed from game if stay same as is current situation. 

 Port bonuses would be ok if say craft level influenced how many of the bonus points could be used perhaps 1 per craft level and crafter chooses which ones from levels available (no more mass produced frankenships) but ofc would need a wipe as game flooded with them which would be a disaster. 

 Open world is sterile, AI at moment are just comedy zombie things in open world so perhaps if done right AI reacting would be a good thing for game.  Finally i think removing the protected zones/rienforcements was a really bad idea, but gotta keep the spawn campers happy... genius move.

 I really hope NA is fun again and that the playerbase grows, but currently i don't see it happening. If devs think adding a wind button people can press to travel quicker will make people sit watching empty sea for an age instead of alt/tab netflix or whatever there really is little hope i think.

  I have had fun in NA and many hours so can't complain personally, but I really hope devs have a master plan that will succeed.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Severus Snape said:

Hm  all I know is back when we didn't have PVP Marks, Repair Metas, Port Bonuses and 11 nations this game had 10x the amount of filled RVR battles on average every week tha nwe currently have now.  We also had an alliance system that was instrumental in filling those 25v25 battles.  What we have now is a game that was designed to accommodate 2000 players that does not function with 700.  

May be, port battle limits (BR), should be daily adjusted during server maintenance, taking into account the max/average game populations during the last 7 days. A new routine to write for developpers, but this could be an exit way from this RVR max BR concern. Self adapting to the future population. We could reach again 25v25 when the population will rise-up again (saying optimistic).

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...