War Supplied from 0 to 100

[Anolytic]

6 minutes ago, Archaos said:

As I understand it the Danish fleet had logged out, out of sight of land waiting for a perfect wind to enter port. Not many real invasion fleets can do that!!!!

Please stop with the bullshitting.

[Archaos]

1 minute ago, Anolytic said:

Please stop with the bullshitting.

I am only going on what was heard from a Danish player.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Keep the focus on the subject. Tavern talk of "heard something" or "someone told that" is nothing but noise.

[Anolytic]

2 minutes ago, Archaos said:

I am only going on what was heard from a Danish player.

That's the worst example of hearsay I've heard in a long time. 

You do realise that to wait for good wind out of sight of land there's no need to log off? Nobody is going to spot you out there anyway.

[Archaos]

10 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

That's the worst example of hearsay I've heard in a long time. 

You do realise that to wait for good wind out of sight of land there's no need to log off? Nobody is going to spot you out there anyway.

But in saying that you help make my point about how the war supplies mechanic is broken. If no one is going to spot you out there then there is no risk of being intercepted and by the time you are in sight of the port it is too late for people to stop you due to the sheer BR numbers.

I wish people would just admit that the Hostility Bomb tactic is just like the flag system but worse because there is no warning. With the flag system you got warning and then had time to try and gather a force and intercept. The attacker either tried to come with brute force in numbers so the flag could not be dragged into battle due to BR difference or they tried to sneak it in on a fast ship. At least then you stood some chance on intercepting, now without warning you would have to be lucky to see them coming and then even luckier to have enough BR to take them into battle. 24 Indiamen without fleets have a BR of 4800 so at a ratio of 5:1 you would need a BR of 960 to take them into battle and even then the odds would be in favour on the Indiamen.

[Llewellyn Jones RN]

10 hours ago, Kloothommel said:

 

Just to make sure you get to see this: We did actually sail in with a huge merchant fleet filled with war supplies.

Couple this with the fact that you had a clear route straight from your home port to target without passing any possiblity of being spotted and reported until destination reached

[Powderhorn]

So, everyone is beating around the bush, wailing, rending their clothes, and so on and so on.

The real question here is this:

Was 1 faction able to hostility bomb two regions through war supplies inside of a week?  If that is the case, then obviously, war supplies are not prohibitively expensive.  If it wasn't done that way, then, let us move along.

[North]

1 hour ago, Archaos said:

I am only going on what was heard from a Danish player.

If you want to know how we did it, just ask me as i'm the Hostility bomb's Robert Oppenheimer

I also plan how to deliver them and can tell you with 100% honesty that we did not log out to enter with perfect wind, we also had a disconnect within view range of the port and set their with the whole fleet for 3-5min to wait until he could relog..

[DreamMaker]

1 hour ago, Archaos said:

But in saying that you help make my point about how the war supplies mechanic is broken. If no one is going to spot you out there then there is no risk of being intercepted and by the time you are in sight of the port it is too late for people to stop you due to the sheer BR numbers.

I wish people would just admit that the Hostility Bomb tactic is just like the flag system but worse because there is no warning. With the flag system you got warning and then had time to try and gather a force and intercept. The attacker either tried to come with brute force in numbers so the flag could not be dragged into battle due to BR difference or they tried to sneak it in on a fast ship. At least then you stood some chance on intercepting, now without warning you would have to be lucky to see them coming and then even luckier to have enough BR to take them into battle. 24 Indiamen without fleets have a BR of 4800 so at a ratio of 5:1 you would need a BR of 960 to take them into battle and even then the odds would be in favour on the Indiamen.

Not rly, we was writing about it, created WarSupplies not easy, it dont need change. Need change other mechanics: 70-80% only can be UP with WarSupplies, other 20-30% PVP/PVE. Why you dont want check it???? I cant understund... you have one point of view, and you do not wish to listen to others. 

P.S. about what you have not noticed, our fleet: during delivers, we have discovered the British and pirate, why you have not received this information, remains a mystery.

Edited November 10, 2016 by DreamMaker
addition

[Archaos]

5 minutes ago, Powderhorn said:

So, everyone is beating around the bush, wailing, rending their clothes, and so on and so on.

The real question here is this:

Was 1 faction able to hostility bomb two regions through war supplies inside of a week?  If that is the case, then obviously, war supplies are not prohibitively expensive.  If it wasn't done that way, then, let us move along.

I think you are missing the point, it is not the expense that is the issue although I do agree that it takes a lot of effort to make War Supplies and all props to the Danes for the effort. But the fact that you can take a region from 0 to 100% in a matter of few minutes or less. As long as that remains possible then people will still do in no matter how expensive the supplies cost.

All it will mean is people spend more time trading and gathering resources to make war supplies rather than playing other parts of the game.

If war supplies are to be left in the game then there must be some mechanic added to counter their use.

[Powderhorn]

1 minute ago, Archaos said:

I think you are missing the point, it is not the expense that is the issue although I do agree that it takes a lot of effort to make War Supplies and all props to the Danes for the effort. But the fact that you can take a region from 0 to 100% in a matter of few minutes or less. As long as that remains possible then people will still do in no matter how expensive the supplies cost.

All it will mean is people spend more time trading and gathering resources to make war supplies rather than playing other parts of the game.

If war supplies are to be left in the game then there must be some mechanic added to counter their use.

 

I agree.  Either something to counterbalance (Allied war supplies to absorb the war supplies of another faction?) or a limit to their effectiveness (50% max hostility?)

[DreamMaker]

2 minutes ago, Archaos said:

 But the fact that you can take a region from 0 to 100% in a matter of few minutes or less.

You can see a few minutes - In fact, it takes weeks and millions of gold.

[Archaos]

2 minutes ago, DreamMaker said:

Not rly, we was writing about it, created WarSupplies not easy, it dont need change. Need change other mechanics: 70-80% only can be UP with WarSupplies, other 20-30% PVP/PVE. Why you dont want check it???? I cant understund... you have one point of view, and you do not wish to listen to others. 

So you do agree that it should not be possible to raise hostility to 100% with just the use of war supplies. If this is the case then why did people do it?

Similar to alts being used to generate hostility, it is possible to do but people do not do it because of the threat of being banned. Just because something is possible does not mean it should be done. We are testing the game and finding the flaws, point out flaws you find rather than use them to gain advantage.

[DreamMaker]

2 minutes ago, Powderhorn said:

 

(50% max hostility?)

It'll be unplayable, in a situation with the Britis it is ok. But if we whant deliver war supplies in georgia(for example) - we cant up the remaining 50%, becouse not 1 US boy dont  take with us into battle. 50% PVE = 2-3 hours drudgery for dozens of people. 

[DreamMaker]

2 minutes ago, Archaos said:

So you do agree that it should not be possible to raise hostility to 100% with just the use of war supplies. If this is the case then why did people do it?

Similar to alts being used to generate hostility, it is possible to do but people do not do it because of the threat of being banned. Just because something is possible does not mean it should be done. We are testing the game and finding the flaws, point out flaws you find rather than use them to gain advantage.

We expressed our opinion a long time ago. Why we still whant fair battle 25x25??? Because we not a *censorship*(associated with female organs)

[Snoopy]

20 minutes ago, North said:

If you want to know how we did it, just ask me as i'm the Hostility bomb's Robert Oppenheimer

I also plan how to deliver them and can tell you with 100% honesty that we did not log out to enter with perfect wind, we also had a disconnect within view range of the port and set their with the whole fleet for 3-5min to wait until he could relog..

Oppenheimer showed contrition and worked on banning the bomb.

Your turn.

 

Bad analogy putting you in a bind

How about you use your dedication to the game to get Trafalgar nights going again. That's PvP without the grind and it is fun for all.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Snoopy

[Archaos]

5 minutes ago, Powderhorn said:

 

I agree.  Either something to counterbalance (Allied war supplies to absorb the war supplies of another faction?) or a limit to their effectiveness (50% max hostility?)

Yes something along those lines. I know for a fact that my clan was stockpiling war supplies in Bermuda to counter hostility, but there was no time to use them. Even if we had seen the fleet arriving the timing of the use would have to be too precise.

I personally would favor a limit to their effectiveness but not allowed to be stockpiled or used to generate the last 10% or so of hostility. For example if the limit was 50% then it should not be allowed for the hostility to be raised to 50% by other means and then war supplies stored at the port used to generate remaining. In such a case maybe war supplies could be used to top it up to maximum 90%.

[DreamMaker]

Contrition for the fact that we are much better explored this game moment than anyone else???

[DreamMaker]

3 minutes ago, Archaos said:

Yes something along those lines. I know for a fact that my clan was stockpiling war supplies in Bermuda to counter hostility, but there was no time to use them. Even if we had seen the fleet arriving the timing of the use would have to be too precise.

And we could, and that all the difference, your ppl does not want to give the game enough time.

[Archaos]

5 minutes ago, DreamMaker said:

We expressed our opinion a long time ago. Why we still whant fair battle 25x25??? Because we not a *censorship*(associated with female organs)

I keep hearing about how people want a fair battle of 25 vs 25 and how port battles are the best part of the game and there should be more, yet the same people who want this did not opt for a fair 25v25 port battle for Santo Domingo or Ponce (although as I understand it that battle did not happen due to a mix up with politics).

[DreamMaker]

3 minutes ago, Custard said:

 

One player a friend of mine is sat on a large number of 'War Supplies' he intends to bring this to the attention of the British Council at some point and offer them to be used at their convenience  however the chances of him providing them to be a one shot PB are probably nil because he believes in fair play.

Does it 5 hours PVE grind for PB = fairplay??? 

 

You just blame, empty words and insult, no more. I feel sry for you

Edited November 10, 2016 by DreamMaker

[Snoopy]

10 minutes ago, DreamMaker said:

Contrition for the fact that we are much better explored this game moment than anyone else???

You really need to take those blinders off. Grinding is no accomplishment. I can/will and did congratulate the Danish PB fleet for their skill, but you must see that a PvE grind arms race is the worst possible direction for the game.

[DreamMaker]

1 minute ago, Snoopy said:

 but you must see that a PvE grind arms race is the worst possible direction for the game.

YES! I am very glad that you understand our position

[Archaos]

14 minutes ago, DreamMaker said:

It'll be unplayable, in a situation with the Britis it is ok. But if we whant deliver war supplies in georgia(for example) - we cant up the remaining 50%, becouse not 1 US boy dont  take with us into battle. 50% PVE = 2-3 hours drudgery for dozens of people. 

How have the French managed to get the hostility as high as 80% + at times in the Windward Islands? From what I hear it has been close and actually there have been a couple of port battles for that region.

I agree there are still issues with generating hostility but a lot of that I think is due to many players not wanting to engage in PvP and they would rather grind out missions. I hear lots of people stating that they want PvP but then run away when faced with it unless they are guaranteed of a win.

You want PvP then take your fleets to a region and start generating hostility and I bet you will see players coming out either to face you or do missions to reduce hostility that you can jump in on.

You say in your next post that we dont want to give the game enough time, but how much hostility generation has been tried by the Danes without war supplies? There was the initial attack on Bermuda where they used the high hostility generation of PvE to create a port battle and since then very little (unlike the Spanish and French). It seems you always want to take the shortest route to get your port battles.

As I have said before just having port battles leads to a very boring game with days of grinding supplies to make war supplies followed by a port battle that limited people can participate in.

[DreamMaker]

3 minutes ago, Archaos said:

 

You want PvP then take your fleets to a region and start generating hostility and I bet you will see players coming out either to face you or do missions to reduce hostility that you can jump in on.

You say in your next post that we dont want to give the game enough time, but how much hostility generation has been tried by the Danes without war supplies? There was the initial attack on Bermuda where they used the high hostility generation of PvE to create a port battle and since then very little (unlike the Spanish and French). It seems you always want to take the shortest route to get your port battles.

You do not understand me... We was PVE grind  in Gerogia for 2 weeks, not 1 Fleet dont go pvp vs us.....
About shortest route - Read posts before, PVE is rly boring. Your fleet dont go pvp vs us any way, we have already check it