Jan van Santen Posted April 29, 2019 Posted April 29, 2019 On 4/26/2019 at 12:43 PM, admin said: This feature (port investments) does not make sense for the Peace server until there is some form of economic sabotage or port capture (to provide currency - victory marks - to make those investments into ports) Why would it need port ownership at all ? The problem I see is the existing buildings/upgrades I already have and which I cant loose atm. If the new upgrades are tied to port ownership, how to seperate from the old ones ? Ie: if I loose my homebase due to economic warfare (warfare btw of any kind doesn't fit PvE server) will I still keep my buildings, just stripped from the new bonuses ?? Why not make these new bonuses clan/player based ? I wouldnt mind at all if someone else builds his shipyard in my homebase and upgrades it eg for speed, while I upgrade mine for armor. Investment yes (be that marks, medals dubs, reales ...) but just on top of the existing upgrades and on a per player or per clan bases. Would save you the entire effort of programming smthg like economic warfare/sabotage...which btw could easily turn into economic ganking (the thing most despised by PvE players)
Cornelis Evertsen de Oude Posted April 29, 2019 Posted April 29, 2019 Found out by mistake a way alts or other nation players could (be) use(d) to go around hostility mechanic. Russian player was making hostility at Blanquilla and I was getting my Christian out of Cumana at that moment. Sailing there I noticed a hostility missions from a Russian player and I entered it. As you can't see where he is I entered the fight and found out I was not only on the other side of the map, but I misclicked, cause I had a big blue cross in my 'neutral' flagg. So I joined Russia in this.. However, I was there, Pavel next to me I choose to kill it as I was apparantly not escaping it. Also I was curious if I could make hostility for Sweden or Russia. And indeed it was Sweden I did hostility for, Is this a mechanic or not. Cause now you only need one alt in the nation that owns a region capital to make hostility in a small ship. While another nation can enter in big ships. This changes the game in ways it was not supposed is my guess?? hostility should Always be made by the nation that chose hostility missions in my eyes. I hope this info is of any help. ( happened 29-4-19, 14:52 CET) hostility La Blanquilla, Margaritha region/Pampatar. greetzz, player called Cornelis(repost of earlier post in forthcoming patch info). 3
DaRho Posted April 29, 2019 Posted April 29, 2019 On other note - have the Hard Caps for Speed, Reps etc. changed since introduction of Port Upgrades? Or are they still the same as before?
Vinnie Posted April 29, 2019 Posted April 29, 2019 5 hours ago, Hawkwood said: There is an urgent need for another reason/motivation to do RVR.( and port bonusses aren´t a motivation enough, since any nation can have those) This is another vicious circle that needs to be broken, by having this "another reason to do RVR". Not found yet. (wrote this in another topic) I think this suggestion will go down like a fart in church, but what about regular map wipes to trigger RvR? Many other MMOGs have victory conditions which, once achieved, cause a map reset (NOT player reset). Give something to the players of the victorious nation; either a ship-bonus or something cosmetic like a special crown beside their names. I think a crown in the color of the nation would be prestigious enough to be motivating. Imagine having two white crowns, a blue crown and a orange crown by your name (I helped the Russians win twice, I won with the Swedes and I won with the Spanish. Fear me, bribe me)... Would solve the situation of having a couple dominant super-nations, and the Russians would get the pleasure of repeatedly stomping we poor Dutch instead of it being a one-time satisfaction. 3
Cmdr RideZ Posted April 30, 2019 Posted April 30, 2019 I wrote from "investments" long time ago and it got no support. I am surprised that you took it. In initial idea clans were able to provide services to all, add some rent shipyard feature? Idea was also that there can be carpenters ship to decrease repair costs, etc. These were supposed to be something that clan can offer for others as well. Make hubs outside green zones. Give reasons to PvP outside green zones in the process. Also good reasons for players to leave green zone to these hubs. Maybe buildings can also come with mission givers? This way a big clan port can be very important for whole nation to grind XP. In process players build PvP hot spots as well. Whole nation would be interested to defend it. etc.
Teutonic Posted April 30, 2019 Posted April 30, 2019 So literally everyone and their mother is now using hostility missions from other groups to bypass the frontline system. I hope this gets fixed asap. Even more so I hope that the hostility done this way should absolutely be reversed. 5
Guest Posted April 30, 2019 Posted April 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, Teutonic said: So literally everyone and their mother is now using hostility missions from other groups to bypass the frontline system. I hope this gets fixed asap. Even more so I hope that the hostility done this way should absolutely be reversed. I heard some important players like it. So don't expect any changes.
Angus MacDuff Posted April 30, 2019 Posted April 30, 2019 19 minutes ago, Teutonic said: So literally everyone and their mother is now using hostility missions from other groups to bypass the frontline system. I hope this gets fixed asap. Even more so I hope that the hostility done this way should absolutely be reversed Frontline system is a failure if two things are not fixed. The clan initiating hostility must be the port owner (if they win the PB), and hostility must not drop from Free towns. I won't argue whether the frontline system is something we want, but it certainly does not work currently. However, without a frontline system, the whole port investment scheme is on dangerous ground. Why invest when every other nation can attack you, any time? 11
Teutonic Posted April 30, 2019 Posted April 30, 2019 So ship crafting and port investment points. something needs to change, either: 1. Port investments for crafting ships cost double the investment points OR 2. Ports should never have more than 20-30 investment points maximum
John Sheppard Posted April 30, 2019 Posted April 30, 2019 (edited) Investments look good but could we please get some more information on how it works @admin ? My first concern is with the Fort and tower placement . All i can see is it says Fort 1 and Fort 2 but doesn't give us positional indication of which fort will go where and in some ports this is very important especially if we will put only 1 fort I had a look at API but it says only "fort2" Also how exactly do clans regulate who uses facilities? and how can friendly clans who invest be safe from being kicked off the list later. And how to get more than 15 clans to use facilities? What happens if clan A captures port , buys sail bonus then clan B buys hull bonus and clan C is on friends list of only clan B.. will they be able to use only hull bonus? Edited April 30, 2019 by John Sheppard 1
Cmdr RideZ Posted May 1, 2019 Posted May 1, 2019 Everyone should be able to build buildings in national ports owned by clans. Major benefits like shipyard crafting bonuses should be only for the clan and their allies. Forcing people to bigger clans/groups does not have purpose, simply harming the game. 1
Angus MacDuff Posted May 1, 2019 Posted May 1, 2019 On 4/24/2019 at 7:38 AM, admin said: There is a limited number of ports that can build amazing ships with all the possible bonuses. Nations will have to fight for them. This is looking like it could turn into a disaster. Nations can corner the market and have a permanent advantage. Best to make it go away and have all ports have the same potential. 1
Angus MacDuff Posted May 1, 2019 Posted May 1, 2019 On 4/24/2019 at 7:38 AM, admin said: Combat medals are now only granted for mission and patrol completion This is starting to hurt. We used to get CM's for individual kills and also for completion of the PVP mission. Now it's only for the mission, but the number of CM's awarded does not make up the difference in production. For instance, an individual 4th/5th rate kill was 3-4 CM's. Need 10 for completion of 4th/5th PVP mission which awarded another 10 CM's. That's 40-50 CM's. Now 4th/5th PVP mission awards 26 CM's. 6th/7th rate is the same. Used to be 2CM for each 6th rate kill plus 10 for the mission. 2
--Privateer-- Posted May 1, 2019 Posted May 1, 2019 15 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said: the number of CM's awarded does not make up the difference in production Yeah, I noticed that too. I'm pretty sure the devs originally said the mission rewards would be increased to compensate, but that doesn't seem to have happened yet. 2
HamBlower Posted May 1, 2019 Posted May 1, 2019 Dear Devs You had a good idea as you released Patch 31. The thing with the frontlines, with port invests and so on had in my opinion high potential to get a game with many exciting aspects. Yes, you wrote that there will be bugs and problems, this is normal in complex coding, But it's very sad to see that you only shrug about the abuse of hostility missions. It seems that it doesn't matter if some players abuse the mechanics. Sure, you wrote that you hotfix this as soon as possible, but you accept this abuse of the mechanics. You didn't even wrote a clear statement that "trading" hostility missions is against the rules - but you know that this will destroy your own concept and its a slap in the face of the fair playing guys. 4
Licinio Chiavari Posted May 1, 2019 Posted May 1, 2019 7 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said: This is starting to hurt. We used to get CM's for individual kills and also for completion of the PVP mission. Now it's only for the mission, but the number of CM's awarded does not make up the difference in production. For instance, an individual 4th/5th rate kill was 3-4 CM's. Need 10 for completion of 4th/5th PVP mission which awarded another 10 CM's. That's 40-50 CM's. Now 4th/5th PVP mission awards 26 CM's. 6th/7th rate is the same. Used to be 2CM for each 6th rate kill plus 10 for the mission. And I have at least 5 kills not recorded even in PVP hunt mission. And missions keep giving previous same amount of medals. So double hurting. 1
John Hill Regard Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 Hello Port investment is just one more stupidity from Dev. Once every nation will have develop all their port upgrade (very soon) every player belonging to big clan or friend's will have the same ship (but better than now). So it's a useless draw... Not exactly because another time you throw casual or solo out of the game....Sure you have such a player amount that you can do this (your objective is 50 player's that's right ?). Why not to give this bonus to individual's crafter (as experience reward ) crafter will find by this a way to earn their life in this open world.... Cheer's
John Hill Regard Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 Hello another problem from your investment. The game is not balanced. You have decided to do nothing and today the English have + half of the map. Not that they are good but are numerous. the big nations have access to a maximum of victory marks and can invest in many ports, which is not the case for others. A big nation attacking a small one can destroy it like today but the reconquest for the little one will be done with ridiculous boats so almost impossible. the game is unbalanced and your system squeezes it even more ... Too bad it's a good idea but again realized without thinking ....
Vernon Merrill Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 22 minutes ago, John Hill Regard said: Hello another problem from your investment. The game is not balanced. You have decided to do nothing and today the English have + half of the map. Not that they are good but are numerous. the big nations have access to a maximum of victory marks and can invest in many ports, which is not the case for others. A big nation attacking a small one can destroy it like today but the reconquest for the little one will be done with ridiculous boats so almost impossible. the game is unbalanced and your system squeezes it even more ... Too bad it's a good idea but again realized without thinking .... 2
Tom Farseer Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 34 minutes ago, John Hill Regard said: You have decided to do nothing and today the English have + half of the map. Total number of ports on the map: 378 Total number of capturable ports on the mp: 378 - 48 = 330 Number of British uncapturable ports: 7 Number of ports GB currently owns: 87 Number of capturable ports GB currently owns: 80 80 divided by 330 is no longer 0.24 but now bigger than 0.5. Hear ye, hear ye! Basic arithmetic soon to be obsolete! Numbers shall be arbitrary from this day forth! Sorry, couln't help myself there... Edited May 2, 2019 by Tom Farseer 3
Gregory Rainsborough Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 I for one really like the port investments. Finally gives a bit of character to owning ports. 5
Vibrio Cholerae Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 38 minutes ago, John Hill Regard said: You have decided to do nothing and today the English have + half of the map. Not that they are good but are numerous. They don’t have access to 25’000 Br port so not a real problem
Raekur Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 So what was the update that was pushed this morning, have not seen any updated notes in regards to it. 1
Licinio Chiavari Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Raekur said: So what was the update that was pushed this morning, have not seen any updated notes in regards to it. Good question. 1
Licinio Chiavari Posted May 2, 2019 Posted May 2, 2019 4 minutes ago, Gregory Rainsborough said: I for one really like the port investments. Finally gives a bit of character to owning ports. The problem is the potential gap between those at this point. And the others: IF and WHEN (so after losing how many ships) they will get somewhere close to that level. 1
Recommended Posts