admin

Нет ошибки - просто на основе скрина невозможно принять решение Будет видео будем наказывать и банить Грифинг запрещен правилами игры и даже стима.

Вы также можете стоять и стрелять издалека пытаясь прикрыть уходящего или работая на галсах как часто делали отходя москаль и дрон на стримах. На таком скриншоте может оказаться любой игрок включая вас. Но за постоянный грифинг мы предупреждаем, снижаем ранг и баним - снять видео не сложно и на видео будет все видно

Interesting idea. Hebe and Pomone. The mothers of greatest frigates Trincomalee and Endymion. Diana is in the game. It will remain rare gift ship for special occasions (or screwups)

Birth of a Gun

Well i cannot really measure the thickness of endymion these days. But based on the lines they were not really different. But what we can say that thickness/penentrations will be addressed during final combat and sailing rebalance. Soon

They have different roles Many prefer Indefatigable to Endymion in combat. + Do not forget that Indefatigable is a razeee. It cannot have Endymion sailing profile.

we cant. You cannot balance facts. Why i would even try to look for balance between 500 ton and 1000+ ton frigate? British Endymion and French Pomone; Hebe - Leda - Trincomalee (and of course US Superfrigates like USS constitution) were the wonders of the frigate building and most advanced ships of that time. All three could be buffed. And we wont listen to "I should be able to kill victory in a cutter" claims. Its against the emotional pattern - the image of the age of sail truth Reason for current state of things is the fact that we have stuck ourselves into british rating system. By data endymion is a good fast and strong 4th rate and Trinco is also a light 4th rate. They are not 5th rates at all because 5 rate class is too wide to be considered seriously for future games. By any logic cerberus cannot be in the same class with Endymion.

If you want to get what you want (more people staying). You NOT ONLY should take it back but should start actively countering people who claim the game is dead or dying just like you countered me when you disagreed. Otherwise the cycle will continue. People interested in conflict and RVR will not buy the game or will not stay (reading the reviews forums or chats) People interested in beautiful ships do not care about rvr, or forums or chat, in fact they feel safer in with dead PVP/RVR

This is a myth. There are spikes and then there is stable base. Stable base have not changed since 2016. It has been at 500-600 concurrent online (6000 active daily users) for both servers for like 3 years now. For some reasons you and many others attribute game success or failure to the simultaneous players online. We are not a free to play mmo, we do not have subscriptions, so we do not have to force you to play by artificial means or tie players to game by chains (like energy bars or rested xp). We get 40 dollars once from the average player. We are not compensated for concurrent online, because we only charge you once. (thank you for buying DLC everyone who bought it - it helps funds servers and new content). So when you talk about non-existent decline you scare off some players making it worse for you (lower online). You are not really making it worse for NA because NA markets the best combat model and beautiful ships, and we do have the combat model and beautiful ships, and even haters say we have good combat model and beautiful ships and that's it. An average player tries beautiful ships, gets the christian and ocean and moves on. Why? Because all he hears on forum and game chat is that RVR sucks and Russia is ruining everything. He already heard it all on CNN. Why should he even try RVR? He buys the game because of beautiful ships - he does not care if RVR sucks. It is in your interest too that he stays (and maybe buys DLC to fund new content). For some reason you think its only our responsibility. It is in our common interest (yours and ours) to make players happy and feel they made the right choice. You want him to stay as well as we do. He bought the stable mature game, not a declining game or unfinished alpha. Make him know that.

Screen shows the poster being under fire from the enemy ship. There is no video to give definitive answer on griefing. Case closed for lack of evidence. Topic is open if anyone wants to share opinion From now on griefing cases are not going to be discussed without video. Because if we would use this screen for warnings or punishments then anyone can be banned (any retreating battle or any running battle where you run, turn, shoot, ran would be reported as griefing), each player on war server ran from battle at least once. Нет видео. На скриншоте игрок под огнем противника. Убегать и стрелять не против правил. Проблема не решаема без видео так как если смотреть на скрины тогда и убегающих или ведущих бой галсами на отходе будут называть гриферами

The quality of course is taken into account. We do simulate quality and effective armor. What i meant is that when designing the model you can stop somewhere and achieve realistic numbers without going to the molecular level or without simulating how coal interacts with iron during cementation. You can just say its cemented and give a historical bonus.

post you are quoting was updated with more examples. Having given you the example on the penetration and ballistics i would like to point out that we fully replicate many game elements by using method 1 (full simulation) For example accuracy: All possible parameters influence the end result including even very minor ones, arriving at realistic low hit rate with early tech.

Actually unlike water cloth physics ballistics it is much easier with gunnery. And the main concept to understand here is that there is no difference between Here is the WW2 land example that will demonstrate this concept Lets say we need to satisfy the most detail oriented tank realism enthusiast and need to implement gunnery on the 88mm Using the historical tables we can achieve the 85% armor penetration at 2000m in multiple ways. Method 1: simulate the molecular level, metal composition of the projectile, simulate viscosity of steel before, and during penetration and tweak all that until we arrive to 85% at 2000 m range. Method 2: use historical table and just give the game an absolutely correct historical curve from the proven historical reference. Something in between. From experience we found that for penetration of armor it is much easier for everyone to use method 2 or 3. We both (you as historical enthusiast and us as developers) want to only argue about effective armor, its type, % penetration chances at distance and curve.. Not the armor molecular viscosity or atomic level of simulation. But some parameters must be simulated using method one if they are key for gameplay or ship design. For example we simulate accuracy in detail using method 1. Because this is a historical single player game our hands are untied, we do not have to balance the classes or guns between each other (for example giving small ships a chance) and just show everything as it is making sure a 1939 ships with modern guns, and advanced dumaresqs will just be better, more accurate and deadly compared to earlier variations. Trained crew which will come later will improve it even further (or ruin it) because everyone remembers a curious case of HMS Tiger which missed most the shots with the most advanced directors. If you see something that is balanced abnormally or incorrectly let us know it will be fixed as soon as main priorities are finished or even earlier. (edits: wording, typos, better image replacement)

Can you show us a couple of examples please if you come across ones. Name the topic as - Bugs in shells trajectories.

we will of course review rewards and improve them to make raids an interesting daily quest. High win rate pvp will of course be more profitable, but you do not have access to it all the time.

You just said to @Wraith you are not playing. If you have game uninstalled you cannot really provide relevant feedback. We prefer to improve the game for those who play and make them like it more. We cant help those who hate it. We no longer listen to EVERYONE as it led to Homer's car in the past. NA 2017 was a homer's car. But we learnt. + We know people are trading and making huge profits. Taxes on some ports can show it to you. But you prefer to say that nobody is trading.

This is definitely not the game's fault. You just posted about it, which means you know it and will respec if you want 2 indiamans in your fleet. Or you can just exit with a captured ship (you might want a second indiaman for faking - more chances to escape with chest especially in solo attach - 2 indiamans one chest - harder choice.).

Look. There are multiple activities in Naval Action and if someone is efficiently creating something of value for himself. He should continue doing so and do not try to make ALL activities suit him. We wont do that. Not all activities are for you. Some like parcel services. Clans who do not have ports will enjoy raiding ports. Thanks

Yes. Very cheaply. Just like with the previous poster your perceived value is irrelevant to the average player. + know ports will be lost as Raiders wont let nations sit on their asses any more and marks will go up.

Yes. You can bring your own indiaman or you can capture one in the instance, repair it and use it yourself.

11 successful chests were raided this weekend. If we only take into account combat marks the average payout was 25 marks. (21 worst chest -28 best chest) + doubloons + victory marks. Those who can make more combat marks in a couple of hours should continue what they are doing. Those who cant make 25 combat and 1-3 victory marks in 1-2 hours can just raid the ports and make the same. You probably forgot victory marks are unattainable for a 3-6 men groups and they can get them by raiding. Your perceived value has no serious implications on the average player. We know people who make 3 mln reals per trip according to your logic i should make everyone make 3 mln. reals per trip.

Loki never sends player to missions. Missions are safe encounters allowing you to fight the the carefully chosen strong opponents. That's why missions are star rated and high star missions give better rewards. We also do not allow players to join missions on your enemy because of that. Some time ago missions could be entered by players.

You can if you are smart and skilled. First you do not need full group to complete the raid (i know 3 people can do it). So its at least 2 raids in parallel. I can bet 2 people can do it too (with reps) (so theoretically 3 raids can be done in parallel), but it might be slower due to lack of focus fire. It might be faster with 6 captains focus fire - 15-20 mins? 1.5 hour to pick 6 chests and 1-1.5 hours to travel back. Second you do not need to travel back so many times, as you can take fleet perks and take 2 indiamans into fleet. + You might have escorts with you - lets say 3-4 more people providing support, scouting or/and hauling. The reward (if the raid mission is great) beats almost ANYTHING ELSE you can do in this game even if you lose 3 out of 6 chests on way back, + you can bait enemy with early expiring chests (which are still working and are identified as chests if they click on you). If your nation is organized the turtle beach run is possible greatly increasing the number of chests delivered just because its impossible to intercept all of them - of course it requires some organization work from the nation. Not easy to pull off but even if you pull it off once a week its still better than any other activity. But those who do not like organizing things already work as parcel delivery boys, they wont like this content.

проверим в пон бамп сделай еще раз во вторник если ответа не последует

Do you know you can do it 6 times? If you have 6 people you can take 6 raid missions and do all of them in one sitting.