|
|
-
On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
03. 31. 2018 08:19
fail_member
|
Hello, I'm the current fleet leader of BAMF (This changes weekly) and this will be a decently sized post. Whatever you think of BAMF I think most everyone can agree that many of us play for HA's and we'd love to see this game continue on. Below I have a few thoughts on the current state of HA's and would love to have some civil discussion on them.
1) Fix APA's
2) Fix Borderhumped skytrains
3) Remove the harbor limit.
So first thing I'd like to see is the return of APA's. For the newer players (do ya'll exist?!?) APA's were a method of taking a room while the enemy still had subs/other ships holding the room. You'd take the APA to the other end of the map, if it made it through safely it would win the room for you. In the end it added a bit more strat to the game, and when you have no mas apa the ss delaying the room works as it does now. This was inadvertently removed when retreating off the border was patched out, currently the APA will "beach" on the border.
Second thing is skytrains. My personal opinion is they should be completely removed from the game with the state of desyncs but I can understand why they are here, to help fleets who cant counter a supior BB force. That said, there is been an trend of fleets border humping skytrains on the north border, while this happened occasionly (and used to be bannable), these fleets have figured a way to get them completely off the map, so you can only hear sound. Below are the screenshots I tried to capture, but they are so far off the map they don't show much. Honestly I'd just like to see a fix for this.
https://i.imgur.com/IM8VXNN.jpg In this picture you can see the splash of one plane being shot down, and the shadows way above the health bar, followed by https://i.imgur.com/NOYfsYx.jpg . I think we can all agree this is crappy gameplay.
Now for the third one, and what I'd really love to happen is the removal of the 2 harbor limit. So atm, CHNB and RA both own 2 harbors, BAMF would own 2 but we gave away USN so we can attack. Limiting a fleet to 2 harbors is meant from keeping one fleet from dominating the server, but why? Right now there is a good three way balance of power between RA, BAMF and Omegas. I'm unsure on CHNB's power as they can't attack do to investing in both their harbors. Removing the limit would allow fleets to actually fight over harbors. Now if say, BAMF was to take over all the harbors (which is very unlikely) the game could team up and attack all harbors the same day, forcing us to massively over extend and play Navyfield all day (spoiler, we wont do that). I think this would be an issue that would counter balance itself while at the same time allow many more competitive fights.
I'm very interested in hearing thoughts on this.
And on a final note.
Bring back the trade system <3
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 00:06
Andreyeff
|
1. +1
2.
Originally Posted by osn3179
2. Strange statement of the question. One fleet, several players from which are members of TNF team, regularly use the map border bug, in an impudent skytrains conduct throughout the year in HA Baltiysk, Tokyo, now Hamburg. And for this it is necessary to remove skytrains from the game? Do not punish impudent offenders and scammers, but remove one of the mechanisms of the game ?! )) Are you joking.
A desync occurs daily in GB without the participation of skytrains. The reasons for desync are in the program code, not in one of the units.
+1 to osn: skytrains is one of game features. Unfortunately, after some game changes skytrains may fly outside the map. Of course, ideally it should be fixed: any plane outside the map should be stopped in some way (freeze/die/turn round and return to ship/...), but it is kept exploitable for years and those, who use it, are never punished even though were sent screenshots/videos, where the planes take off the CV, fly to the border, cross it, fly their way outside map and then get out around A1 square.
3. I don't see any reason why harbor amount limit per fleet should ever exist.
Even large fleets may hardly gather their group to attack harbor at non-convenient for them time.
Here was said about harbor time roration:
IMHO, this will only provide some "harbor name" change, since majority of fleets play at about the same time when they have peak activity. It is pretty unlikely to raise up more than a half of the fleet in the middle of the night to play HA.
Do you remember there is no worth of getting HA, except for fun and a bit of glory, right?
btw, about worth of HAs:
I guess the rental ships were introduced when there were BB4 or BB5 max. So rentals had a range close enough to the range of maximum possible ship in the game. And dps was larger than any ship had (with the cost of accuracy and spread of the shells). After that BB6 were introduced, EBB6, EBB6.5, BB7. Will the rental ships be revised due to this fact?
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 00:36
icegriffon
|
Originally Posted by osn3179
Do not punish impudent offenders and scammers, but remove one of the mechanisms of the game ?! )) Are you joking.
Quite real. Admins alreday made such joke (removed trade "because of scammers"). They can make more such jokes, why not... Hopefully not. 3) Removal of the harbor limit. No, no good idea.I've seen this on RU server, witth its general situation analogical to these days. Hope I will never see such thing again.
I don't see why one fleet could not potentially take over all Harbours and keep them here (+1 to Bayes). Nowadays there are fleets that are active in various time zones and make HA\HD-s. If there is no harbor limit, they might potentially merge into A Mega Fleet, no pun intended, and engage in all those HA\HD just like they do now, save for having one flag for them. (Cool, that fleet would have two Admirals! Day-Admiral and Night-Admiral. Maybe more).An empire, over which territory the sun never sets. If the limit is increased up to 3 harbours, then one (or more) of the 4 strongest fleets could hold 2 harbors and attack a 3rd one. That would mean smaller (but not less brave) fleets would have no chance to battle between themselves. And there will be no stimulus whatsoever for a new fleet to emerge, if any such stimulus still exists. Sooner or later they will have to join one of the "majors". Which I don't see as a good thing. 6-10 unique Fleets is better than 2-3 global conglomerates, where members would know and care little of each other. And always have the same 1-2 opponent(s) to battle against.
Originally Posted by fail_member
Now if say, BAMF was to take over all the harbors (which is very unlikely) the game could team up and attack all harbors the same day, forcing us to massively over extend and play Navyfield all day (spoiler, we wont do that).
Spolier, in this case, most likely there will be nobody to team up and attack, because the active majority will have joined BAMF. I hope I will never see such thing again.
More anout different time zones and the fact that some fleets never meet. They will still play in different time zones and never meet, even if HA\HD time changes. They wil rather have to change their Harbour, than kill their health and daily time management.
Fleets can actually meet, if they have members playing at the same time.
Also, the trade system or its in-Fleet analogue must exist.
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 07:45
fail_member
|
The majority of active players would never be accepted into BAMF :D
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 08:15
GrafSpee019
|
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 09:07
fail_member
|
Originally Posted by bamaman
4 HA's the same day get challenging.
Back when HA's were on Wednesday and Saturday, that would be 8 per week. Tough
Yeah this is my thought. If a fleet decided it wants to defend 4 harbors and thinks they can then more power to them. If BAMF did that and then omegas, ra and chnb attacked us, we'd lose all three! I think the other point of "everyone will join the winners" is also invalid. Many fleets will be formed on language basis alone and many fleets play soley for competive Ha's (like BAMF). I think both problems will balance themselves.
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 11:29
GeneralSJG
|
Oy!
I agree
APA's
Multiple harbors
Bring back trade...
Legalize weed, etc... :)
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 01. 2018 17:45
vader333
|
+1
Also as a new idea, rotate ship limits weekly on non harbour tile (e.g. bb2 only for a week), would force ppl to get those ships back out :)
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 02. 2018 00:31
AC16051
|
Originally Posted by vader333
+1 Also as a new idea, rotate ship limits weekly on non harbour tile (e.g. bb2 only for a week), would force ppl to get those ships back out :)
splendid! marvelous!
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 02. 2018 00:51
painlesskiss
|
|
-
Re : On the topic of HA's and Harbor Limit.
04. 02. 2018 00:57
icegriffon
|
Originally Posted by fail_member
The majority of active players would never be accepted into BAMF :D
...
I think the other point of "everyone will join the winners" is also invalid.
If we speak of "think", I also think this is invalid, illogical, unfair, unbelievable and whatever you call it. But I have seen this really happen already, that's the difference. Logic just tells me that in the similar situation (and it was similar) people and groups of people will behave similarly. I also saw such thing happen under different circumstances and in different games. Nobody wanted to join losers. And a large community cannot self-organize so effectively as to create or balance something. Simple example - so many people want more fun battles with smaller ships, or torpedoes onle, etc, but for the year I play I never saw any group trying to initiate a fun battle in Clan Zone, for example, and invite others. The BB-6 tournament currently running being an only example of community self-organization. If people won't even do that, it looks dubious if any good fleet self-balance happens if limits are removed. Maybe yes, but more likely, no. In any way, I will mention again, removing or increasing harbor limits will give more opportunities to stronger fleets, they may increase their activity at HA\HDs (which is good) but the smaller fleets will lose their chance to keep any Harbor and attack\defend it against another comparable fleet, not one of the majors (which is not so good). And a good HA\HD activity is one of the stimuli for Fleets. As for suggestions to implement changes to HA\HD, they still should be somethig that looks likely to be possible in these days. Also, the trade system or its in-Fleet analogue must exist.
|
|
|
