Sleepinator2000

Not exactly sure what you are saying, but I thought each wood should offer something unique, and Strongwood and Ironwood both sound like something that is more resistant to damage. If the above rules were in the game, I would be tempted to create two planks for the lower bow out of Strongwood to get an extra boost in hitpoints, even though I would be sacrificing a small percentage of the ship's overall durability.

On a related reddit thread, they seem to be saying that it correlates to the shipyard's durability, and that a good common shipyard can result in higher top level than a bad Journeyman. Anyone have any proof for/against that strange-but-plausible claim?

You could actually shoehorn something like this suggestion into the current system by leveraging the various woods they already have in game. Say that any common deck, plank, gunport, or sail made with only one type of wood would have the following effect on the ship (or component). Generic Wood or mixed wood - No bonus Agedwood +1% more ship gun range Darkwood +1% more ship gun damage Lightwood +1% higher ship weight limit Softwood +1% higher ship speed Strongwood +20% more component hp Wetwood +1% higher ship turning rate Ironwood +1% more ship hp Assuming the above % is for small planks, for balance you could probably tweak those numbers down a bit to apply .5% for medium planks/sails/decks made of a single wood, and .25% for large planks/sails/decks (since galleons have about 80 of the above components, but sloops only have about 20 - a ship made entirely of one would be in the 20% ballpark you suggest) Once you get into blueprints above common, the above bonuses would no longer apply, since presumably good blueprints will offer better specific benefits, and you obviously have to use multiple types of wood anyway. Without adding any new ships, the whole game would be a customize-o-rama, with alot more variety than we see now, at least under the hood.

Acrophobia. Mostly when building up cliffsides. I have lost enough bodies while wearing a glider in those situations that my fear of falling is quite real and compounds the higher I get. Funny thing is that I don't actually have an unnatural fear of heights in real life, although I probably would if I were constantly free-hanging from cliff faces like I do in game. Also - bola taming.

Perhaps by type of monkey? I have trained two using the method you described on the PVE PTR.

If anyone is prematurely euthanizing their crew and tames based on Grapeshot's proclamations, you must be riding a very bumpy rollercoaster indeed. I *might* believe it when everyone is turning to ash.

I just assumed it was a fetish innuendo.

If this happens, just ignore the pillar/platform spam for the short term, and keep demoing their repair structure, if they build one. Only Rainman will be able to keep up with you.

I started noticing this yesterday after reading a reddit post on the subject, it definitely got much worse at some point in the last week. I can't unsee it now, and it looks awful compared to the smoothly lapping waves and whitecaps of the past.

I predict that latecomers will need to practice placing claim query signs, with "We plan to build a small base between here and the other three signs, cool?" If the signs survive the timer they can start spending resources with at least a bit of confidence. If they don't, move on. I would never risk blowing out a full build project if I couldn't at least get a reading on whether the island owner was a patron or jackhole through some means.

While I agree that bigger pieces (at least 3x3) would be greatly appreciated by everyone here, myself included, and most of us will use them tastefully, you have to admit that it would remove a significant difficulty barrier to psychopath builders who will just be making their Death Star bases 3x as big. There needs to be some kind of limit based on vertices, texture memory, attach points, or all 3. I have been to bases that simple math says are using more than a million pieces. If they could blot out the sun, they would. That is mental illness-level of dedication. We need to help ourselves with logical limits.

Hate the system because it is too distracting from the interesting gameplay at the worst times. If they have to keep it, I would at least be tolerable it if your character would auto-eat from foods that would best balance your vitamins from your inventory (like tames). I don't hold a lot of hope they will do this, of course, so I guess if they want to make it even worse, they could force players to manually have to take a dump every few minutes like tames. That would probably push me over the edge to quit.

I have never had a problem with my Galleon resource box pulling gold or resources for crew payment or auto repair, and it is placed as far toward the stern as is possible. Larders and ammunition boxes are another story. I had to place 2 of them. The ammo box is frustratingly close to covering the whole ship. within a couple feet, one set of cannons on the front or back don't get covered.

Another great take on a full ship repair idea. At this point, my Galleon is driving me mad trying to find all the nooks and crannies. Also, never get hit by a whale. They REALLY hate bookshelves.

Love the idea, and would love some larger pieces, but without looking at the game with diagnostic tools, it is pretty hard to tell whether it would make any difference since we don't know the source of the the 'lag'. For a 9x or 16x ceiling piece to remain at the same resolution, it would require a 9x or 16x texture, even if the 3d model has less surfaces overall. Some of the things that could be contributing could be related to the density of attach points or 'bones' within the models. A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you are talking about some serious numbers. I wouldn't be as excited about having larger pieces if I couldn't attach another piece in the middle of them. The biggest hitches I see are while streaming things in. I don't know how good their instancing is, but creative players and psychopaths seriously stress their system out. If they can't solve it in the software, they need to seriously consider limiting the density of objects buildable within a rendering distance, much like they have a limit on ships. I would hate that, but I hate the slideshow coming into some bases worse, especially when I have a tornado at my back, and I am just trying to get an anchor down without plowing into a turbolaser on some player's Death Star. The bottleneck always comes down to how much is loading and unloading in 1/30th of a second. Thank God I have a high end video card and decent motherboard. I can't imagine what this game would look like on a typical laptop.