Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sir_Wiener_Von_Snitzel

Crew prices are TOO DAMN HIGH !

Recommended Posts

Sella22    638

I feel like a random % percentage(not too low or too high) would be more appropriate than a fixed one, based on the things you've mentioned.

 

Edit: For the surgeon only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cmdr RideZ    647

I believe the crew is an issue for new players, and probably for some other players as well.  Probably it is not an issue for end game players, but casual gamers are a big group, and I think this crew thing is punishing them more than it should.  I believe it is decreasing the fun factor, and even radically for some.

 

You sink, you lose the crew and a "dura" from your officer + a dura from your ship.  Death penalty is probably too high.  Just losing a dura from your ship, I think that is already enough as a death penalty.

 

This punishment system, I think there is a high change that it is not benefiting the game, just harming.

 

edit.

 

Decrease the crew cost radically, so that the mechanism is in the game, but it should not be a big thing.  Crew just come and go, and all can buy it.  They can craft the med kits to make it even cheaper.

 

Officers like upgrades you select in the officer slots.

If officer like atm. -> No dura loss, but -3 levels if you reset.

Edited by Cmdr RideZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akd    2,622

If it is a problem for new players, then you need a sliding scale of some sort.  An across the board cut in cost just makes it meaningless button pressing for clans / higher-level players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cmdr RideZ    647

It is better that the crew is meaningless for all, than the current state where it is just an additional penalty for new players.  I have enough money to craft my med kits, and lvl50 crafter so dont really need the hours.  I think I have used medkit once or twice, but really did not need those, kinda just wasted those.  So it is 100% meaningless to me.

 

New guy gets his first Bucentaure, 2x frigates go and sink him.  He lost already lot of money with the ship dura, and then on top of that crew + officer dura.  This kind of punishment is not needed.

 

PvE players, well a new player will end up sooner than later to buy more men.  The state when he most needs money, does need his crafting hours, and crew is not cheap for them.

 

So indeed..  Remove the crew or make it mostly meaningless.  Or rethink the crew mechanism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akd    2,622

"New guy" + "Bucentaure" doesn't really make sense (and, sorry, but no sympathy for the midshipmen sailing their redeemable Bucentaure).

IMO, everyone should get first 40 crew free (consistent with free basic cutter dynamic). Next 140 crew should be available at a deep discount from port (at or below production costs of medkits). Everything above 180 crew is full price from port (or going rate for player-crafted medkits, which should be less than port price). Then ships up to Cerb can manned with much less concern for crew cost, and this coincides nicely with the actual step up from true newbie to fully participating player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who plays solo and mostly mission running / pve, and for whom 100k is generally a lot of money. I don't have a lot of time to play either, what with work and family commitments. Prices as they stand at the moment are pretty high for me.

 

I'm a Master and Commander running in a Frigate, so slightly under crewed but nothing major. Just wanted to chip in and give this perspective.

 

I haven't as of yet gotten around to making any of the healing kit things, will see how things play out once I can get the mats together for some medium ones.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrdoomed    1,531

As someone who plays solo and mostly mission running / pve, and for whom 100k is generally a lot of money. I don't have a lot of time to play either, what with work and family commitments. Prices as they stand at the moment are pretty high for me.

I'm a Master and Commander running in a Frigate, so slightly under crewed but nothing major. Just wanted to chip in and give this perspective.

I haven't as of yet gotten around to making any of the healing kit things, will see how things play out once I can get the mats together for some medium ones.

Cheers

Running undercrewed ship , therefore not being 100% efficient causing extra crewbloses and damage. Most likely running missions above your level too ( but we'll never know ) also causing extra time and losses . All this means youre doing it wrong and paying the price.

Play appropriate ships, fight appropriate missions and problem solved. Ive done it myself so i know it works fine. Hope that helps.

Edited by Mrdoomed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running undercrewed ship , therefore not being 100% efficient causing extra crewbloses and damage. Most likely running missions above your level too ( but we'll never know ) also causing extra time and losses . All this means youre doing it wrong and paying the price.

Play appropriate ships, fight appropriate missions and problem solved. Ive done it myself so i know it works fine. Hope that helps.

 

Sorry I don't buy that. The under crew penalties I'm suffering aren't that severe, we are only talking about the difference in one rank after all and the offset in extra armour and cannons should even things out ( pretty much ), especially as I tend to run missions at my level or one below never above. Anyhow at the time there weren't any Suprise's around I could afford, so this is what I have. Like I said I don't have much money.

 

Let me add some stats from a mission I just ran. I can't see the result of this being any different if I had been in a Surprise or Renomee either, in fact it could have been worse as they have less armour.  This was a  Lt Commander mission which pitted me against 1 snow and 1 mercury.

 

Decided I needed to chain them a bit initially so I could separate them or at least stop them from running rings around me. Id say those very initial broad sides from the pair of them cost me 10 crew, that's half the mission money gone within 30 seconds. Skip forward a bit and I'm ahead of them with them at about 70% sails turning back and blasting them. Problem is ( and entirely possible this entire plan was stupid ) all my stern armour is gone cos they shoot with laser sights, This is costing me more crew, I pop a repair kit to try and mitigate this ( more £££ - ironically I very very rarely repair in battles it was only the need to try and protect the crew that made me do this now ).

 

Anyway skip forward more. Gets a bit more close in and blastey as I'm trying to protect the stern more, they both get sunk. Id say apart from the stern I take about 10-15% armour damage on the rest of the ship. However I have lost 35 crew all told. Not sure how much of that was from the stern stuff and how much was just from general. As I did try to protect it as much as possible and then changed tactics when I could see long range running wasn't going to work.  But here are the break down of post battle costs:

 

Profit:

5000   Mission Complete

16806 Damage Done

 

Loss:

1572   In Battle Repair Kit

1455   Post Battle Repairs

17500 Post Battle Crew Replace

 

Overall Gain:

1279

 

Last double mission I did I'm pretty sure it was a similar scenario as well. Things would be different against one opponent obviously, I didn't run a mission against just one today yet as its early. That opponent would be individually stronger though so perhaps the crew loses would be still costly. But for someone with Average gear, with Average skills at an Average level 500g per crew seems excessive. Just one last thing, the entirety of my rubbish battle plan was based around not loosing crew not what was the best way to defeat these two opponents, and that was just because of cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Intrepido    2,182

The system is absurd when you forced players to do missions of one or two levels of difference to make profit. Example, going in a first rate and taking Flag captain Orders because the thickness of your ship avoid the killing of hundreds of your crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akd    2,622

Balancing entire game to PvE missions will ruin the combat model. PvE mission conditions are very artificial, and players tend to play very "sloppy" due to incompetence and predictability of AI, and AI repair assymetry. This allows them to take on AI in unrealistic ratios, but also means they receive many times more hits (often from vulnerable angles since players tend to just "wade into" AI clusters) than they would in a typical PvP battle. It is the same problem seen before of "OMG, cannon loss is too high! Nerf, nerf, nerf!" (but strangely problem was confined to PvE).

Anyways, should PvE missions be the primary way to generate wealth in game? It seems to me that they have failed to design a good open world game if this is the case. I'd prefer PvE missions to just be a secondary means of XP generation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skully    1,019

Working all roles at all angles makes your life easier. Or dividing up the roles with friends.

Working one role at one angle by yourself is the most hardest you can put yourself into.

If you manage to pull it off, kudos to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrdoomed    1,531

Balancing entire game to PvE missions will ruin the combat model. PvE mission conditions are very artificial, and players tend to play very "sloppy" due to incompetence and predictability of AI, and AI repair assymetry. This allows them to take on AI in unrealistic ratios, but also means they receive many times more hits (often from vulnerable angles since players tend to just "wade into" AI clusters) than they would in a typical PvP battle. It is the same problem seen before of "OMG, cannon loss is too high! Nerf, nerf, nerf!" (but strangely problem was confined to PvE).

Anyways, should PvE missions be the primary way to generate wealth in game? It seems to me that they have failed to design a good open world game if this is the case. I'd prefer PvE missions to just be a secondary means of XP generation.

To many pvp server players consider the only pvp to be port battles. This is why we get forum complaints such as " we dont have time to sail we need teleports " " we dont have time to sail to missions ww need missions closer to safe zones" " we dont have time to do missions our levels we need to be able to pick fleet missions so our entire clan can grind xp for me" " we cant afford to mindlessly grind pve missions and pay for crew "

I could go on forever.

I guess this is the result of pve carebears playing on a pvp server so they can fight emtpy port battles and the devs listening to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fastidius    303

To many pvp server players consider the only pvp to be port battles. This is why we get forum complaints such as " we dont have time to sail we need teleports " " we dont have time to sail to missions ww need missions closer to safe zones" " we dont have time to do missions our levels we need to be able to pick fleet missions so our entire clan can grind xp for me" " we cant afford to mindlessly grind pve missions and pay for crew "

I could go on forever.

I guess this is the result of pve carebears playing on a pvp server so they can fight emtpy port battles and the devs listening to them.

not necessarily,

 

Say you go PVPing and sail for 20 minutes to jamaca from illevatch.  you get 2 or 3 goes at attacking before the revenge fleet the area and then your escaping.....once you escape you want to go find new targets somewhere else .....thats where teleporting comes in.    Teleporting ships is merely a requirement for having multiple fronts without making it annoying.

 

the way you play is about time investment for fun.  If i cannot have fun in the first 30 minutes of playing a game then im wasting my time.  My definition of fun is competition with other players not sailing ships around the map.

 

we hunt for ships that are solo to equal numbers...slight more against is fine but if it is one sided we look for new grounds.

Edited by Fastidius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skully    1,019

Teleporting ships is merely a requirement for having multiple fronts without making it annoying.

Hehe, you mean hard, not annoying. ;)

"Send to outpost" needs to go, at least for warships. It undermines the strategic aspects of Open World.

Picture two conflict zones next to one-another.

F-P-P-R-P-F-P-R-P-F

F = Free port

P = Deep or shallow

R = Regional

In the free ports (and independent ports) you can only build ships yards up to level 2. National ports can contain ship yards level 3, hence most likely they put the level 3 in the Regionals.

You would then need to continously supply the yards from the local region. Smuggling and intercepting away, generating hostility in the process. Hopefully lots of traders needing regional escorts. :D

Now should you be able to TP in warships, the whole regional balance would be upset. It would be a different story, if you had another region on the side, which would be producing 1st rates though.

But such a region would be pickings for Pirates.

Edited by Skully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was actually thinking of this the other day, but I don't think the answer is reducing crew price. In naval combat of the period a sailor was about twice as likely to suffer an incapacitating injury than actually be killed (Source: casualty figures from historical sources). Perhaps after combat you should get a random number of crew back, much like with the doctor perk. Sailors who were only injured in the fight and can recover to be fit for duty. I agree, boarding seems too costly to really spec for when it would be fun to see it as a more viable option.

 

I also think one thing important to helping the more boarding inclined among us, would be to give gold/xp credit for crew damage. I find it intensely annoying that boarding and grapeshotting ships is infinitely less financially viable than sinking them, when historically it was always favorable to take a ship a prize over sinking her. Naval Action at present seems to encourage the opposite by the risk versus reward ratio of each option.

 

Another important note of realism for a historically accurate game is that pirates gained most of their crew from the crews of prize ships. I know the press gang perk exists, but mechanically it gives you very little crew when the historical context is considered. I think the problem with the perk versus the perk's intention is that morale takes too little damage. Crews almost universally fight to the last man rather than surrendering against impossible odds.

Edited by saltiestraccoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jodgi    2,310

To many pvp server players consider the only pvp to be port battles. This is why we get forum complaints such as " we dont have time to sail we need teleports "

Well, I prefer the comfort of teleports and the focus of my gameplay isn't PB's at all.

Is it really so bad that solo hunters, group hunters, crafters and PB participants wish for easier access to the fun part of the gameplay?

Maybe I'm overly selfish, but I wish to spend as little time as possible hauling, port-clicking or worrying about crew.

Whatever the underlying reasons, players react very negatively on what may be perceived as a tax on fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×