Abram Svensson Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Jan van Santen said: Yes, but being the best of the 5th doesnt make it a 4th. Neither does being the best of the 4th make Agamemnon a 3rd. (Connie is no 3rd anyways.) By your reasoning the now best of the 5th is than to be promoted in next hotfix ? I guess it is an adjustment for the Solo Patrol Zone sice Indef was too strong for that in my opinion. 2
Neads O'Tune Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 35 minutes ago, admin said: The partial fix was applied - it will be easier to get in. Full fix this or next week. Any more details on this? You've made them more difficult, reduced the reward, and taken away the only 5th rate ship that stands a chance sinking multiple first rates or even getting out of there alive in there WHEN your group doesnt get pulled in. What is a PARTIAL fix. What does "easier to get in" mean? Will it work or not? Can you tell us what the issue is so that we can maybe give ourselves the best chance of avoiding the issue (example: dont be too close to the marker or the player with the mission) While it appeared to be random whether or not you'd pull everyone but there was clearly a reason that it works sometimes and sometimes doesn't Would it not have made sense to make these particular changes once you have the FULL fix ready? 1
Neads O'Tune Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Abram Svensson said: I guess it is an adjustment for the Solo Patrol Zone sice Indef was too strong for that in my opinion. Then ban it from the solos. The problem here is the human element. Of course they are going to choose that one because it out classes all other 5th rates in term of firepower and HP. The simple solution (without disrupting the rest of the game) is to just not allow them into the solo zone battles Edited March 5, 2019 by Neads O'Tune
Abram Svensson Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Neads O'Tune said: Then ban it from the solos They just did. 1
Neads O'Tune Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Abram Svensson said: They just did. Love a smartarse answer in the morning! 3
Jan van Santen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 Solo Patrol zone doesnt even matter on PvE..... Plus they could have done that w/o disrupting the rest of the game (not to mention history) like Neads already posted. 2
admin Posted March 5, 2019 Author Posted March 5, 2019 18 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said: The increase in difficulty for group missions has me scratching my head. They are already impossibly difficult for 90% of the players in this game. Only an elite player can take on SOLs with 5th rates. And before the members of this forum tell me how easy they are..keep in mind that 90% of players are not participating in these forums. we have no confirmation to your statement. In fact more than half of group missions were completed solo. Group missions must provide challenge and require group coordination, which they will. 1
jodgi Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said: Also, by putting Connie as 3rd rate it got nerfed even more, being more useless ship than before. Admin has stated plans to buff connie (unspecified). 4 minutes ago, Jan van Santen said: Solo Patrol zone doesnt even matter on PvE..... Plus they could have done that w/o disrupting the rest of the game (not to mention history) like Neads already posted. A fair point. A line will be drawn, it could be drawn almost anywhere, people will find issues with any and all lines. This particular line suits my taste, though, so I'm biased. I really like the fact that endy and trinco top the 5th line-up, zone or no zone.
Tom Farseer Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 Just now, admin said: we have no confirmation to your statement. In fact more than half of group missions were completed solo. I suggest a counter-test. If you can, please check how many failed group missions had a full group in them. Skill gap is extreme in this game and it might well be that while enough people are able to solo some of the group missions, those that need to go in a group might already fail. Which would keep groups from showing up in the list successfull missions. 1
Jan van Santen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said: How about Cerberus vs Endymion? Dude, there will be always low tier ships and high tier ships. Some ships fill the gaps between the rates, like Cerberus is a bridge between 5-6, Wasa is a bridge between 3-4 etc. Also, by putting Connie as 3rd rate it got nerfed even more, being more useless ship than before. The books for the Connie will be worse now. Not to mention LReq vs other 6th rates And if Indefat was a problem on PvP servers 5th rate SP, howabout LReq in 6th rate SP ?? Recently in Nassau patrol SP eg ? Edited March 5, 2019 by Jan van Santen 1
Neads O'Tune Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 5 minutes ago, admin said: we have no confirmation to your statement. In fact more than half of group missions were completed solo. Group missions must provide challenge and require group coordination, which they will. Which 5th rate ones were completed solo? The ones with 1st rates in? 2
van Veen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 On 2/28/2019 at 11:50 AM, admin said: United States and Constitution has been moved to 3rd rates Indefatigable has been moved to 4th rates 3rd rate? I hope this is a typo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution Quote Constitution was rated as a 44-gun frigate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frigate Quote In 1797, three of the United States Navy's first six major ships were rated as 44-gun frigates (or "super-frigates"), which operationally carried fifty-six to sixty 24-pounder long guns and 32-pounder or 42-pounder carronades on two decks; by all regards they were exceptionally powerful and tough. These ships were so well-armed that they were often regarded as equal to ships of the line, and after a series of losses at the outbreak of the War of 1812, Royal Navy fighting instructions ordered British frigates (usually of 38 guns or less) to never engage American frigates at any less than a 2:1 advantage. So, yeah why not 4th rate. But frigates as 3rd rates? No way. Same topic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Agamemnon_(1781) Quote HMS Agamemnon was a 64-gun third-rate ship of the line of the British Royal Navy. Put all frigates into 4th rate, but not 3rds. Come on! 1
AeRoTR Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 5 minutes ago, admin said: we have no confirmation to your statement. In fact more than half of group missions were completed solo. Group missions must provide challenge and require group coordination, which they will. I do confirm that all the group mission we have done is our 3x1st rate against 3x3rd rate + 7x4th rate. As it is the easiest of them. Which was sometimes close call, if players are mediorce. Close call means losing a 1st rate which is a big thing with your latest additions to the game which is imho good additions. I was thinking to try 3x5th rate against 1x1st rate plus 5th rates, which was a more difficult mission. I have built lo/wo indefs, but indef is 4th rate now. That mission became really difficult now. You should be adjusting group kill missions not increasing overall difficulty. With the new damage model, 2 npc against 1 player is good balance if same class ships. Sols+many npc same level ships are very difficult for player 5th rate groups. 1
Jan van Santen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Indefatigable_(1784) Indefatigable was thereafter rated as a 44-gun fifth-rate frigate, along with Magnanime and Anson, which were converted at about the same time
Malachi Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 Posting wiki entries won´t get you anywhere. The question is whether the in-game rating does make sense or not. 2
Jan van Santen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Malachi said: Posting wiki entries won´t get you anywhere. The question is whether the in-game rating does make sense or not. Makes no sense both ways, neither history nor ingame wise. If LReq vs Niagara in 6th rate SP is fair, so why is Indefat vs other 5th rates unfair ??
Angus MacDuff Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 20 minutes ago, admin said: we have no confirmation to your statement. In fact more than half of group missions were completed solo. Group missions must provide challenge and require group coordination, which they will. Completed solo by who? I agree with you that there are players who can do this, but I suspect that they are top tier players. Which means that the best players are picking up the best rewards. Of course high skill and effort should be rewarded, but the effect is that as always, the best players now have the best stuff. It's a dilemma for you that I don't envy. I wish you could find a way to get the really good stuff to the average player so that they feel part of the game (and will stay to be hunted).
Zlatkowar Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 5 minutes ago, Malachi said: Posting wiki entries won´t get you anywhere. The question is whether the in-game rating does make sense or not. I thought the aim was realism? 🤣 I honestly don't understand some of the changes so I'll just sit there, wait and see what happens.
Angus MacDuff Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jan van Santen said: Makes no sense both ways, neither history nor ingame wise. If LReq vs Niagara in 6th rate SP is fair, so why is Indefat vs other 5th rates unfair ?? I always thought that Indef should be a 4th rate. The RN did. But I also believe that Connie class is 4th rate. Agga also.
admin Posted March 5, 2019 Author Posted March 5, 2019 4 minutes ago, Jan van Santen said: Makes no sense both ways, neither history nor ingame wise. US Super frigates were built so tough so they could be considered third rates - we finally came to peace to this (US players will remember heated discussions about it). Superfrigates = third rates Indefatigable has such high DPM and HP so it does not make ANY sense to be called a 5th rate. It's not a 5th rate. 1
Jan van Santen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Angus MacDuff said: I always thought that Indef should be a 4th rate. The RN did. But I also believe that Connie class is 4th rate. Agga also. If you mean Royal Navy by RN: it rated Indefat a 5th, as quoted in my post above.
admin Posted March 5, 2019 Author Posted March 5, 2019 Just now, Captain Woodpecker said: The idea of 'moving forests' - it has not been implemented yet but it gives me the creeps already. They just grow. They are growing NOW, and will be discovered in some time in the future. You can grow things too You can try it yourself Woodpecker. You can grow tomatoes in your yard, and someone can discover them, given time 3
Jan van Santen Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, admin said: US Super frigates were built so tough so they could be considered third rates - we finally came to peace to this (US players will remember heated discussions about it). Superfrigates = third rates Indefatigable has such high DPM and HP so it does not make ANY sense to be called a 5th rate. It's not a 5th rate. Hmmm, and what about that 6th rated Xebec frigate ? At least mine has enough power to deal with any 280 crew frigate easily.... I gues it's unfair than to use it in 6th rated SP or the weekly 6th rate contest ? Edited March 5, 2019 by Jan van Santen 1
Archaos Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 4 hours ago, admin said: In this case the you (not owning the resource) will be less compelled to capture them. If they change every week you just sit and wait instead of going for them. If resources change every week, you also will feel less compelled to defend them - because what's he point to defend if they are going to disappear and maybe be found in your other port. What about the situation where a clan can almost empty the resource (making the port unattractive to be captured) and then sitting on a low stock just to prevent the respawn of the resource elsewhere? This is why I feel there should be some form of time limit on the resource, 1 week is too short but maybe something like 4 weeks. This would give enough time for a clan to acquire what they need and also enough time for enemies to discover the resource and organize a port battle to take the resource. The thing is after a certain amount of time the resource will be getting low anyway, so it will lose its attractiveness to be captured (who is going to risk 1st rates in a PB when there is only 50k stock remaining). I also think that the location of the clan resources should not be visible in the API data and should have to be discovered by exploration. I have spent a lot of time while trading, going round the map locating these resources and it gives some sense of achievement finding the resource in some not often visited port, but with the data available in API all the resource spawns are instantly known.
Malachi Posted March 5, 2019 Posted March 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Jan van Santen said: Makes no sense both ways, neither history nor ingame wise Oh, really? The 300.000 dollars Connie cost would have bought you 1 1/2 74-gun ships built in a royal dockyard in GB at the time. And the historical rating is nonsense anyway. How can you compare a 5th Rate built in 1750 with one built in 1800? 2
Recommended Posts