Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Macjimm

Naval Action Arena Game

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, karacho said:

So... is it true? Is it really true that the sea trials will be back?

Will the dream come true again?

 

yes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2017 at 4:22 PM, Simon Cadete said:
 

It was because of player input that fine woods were introduced and all this input of ideas from players has put us in the situation we're on. I think they should just do what they think works. We've basically have gone full circle from when open world first came out. Everything in between, even though it was a learning experience, just slowed down the whole process.

I totally get that, thats why I called out fine wood. However for the OW game to work, you need people in the OW. Do to get people in the OW, you need content that they WANT to play. To do that you need ideas, and well a small team of guys who have to focus on coding may not have the team to come up with the ideas. That's the main reason behind a Creative Director. 

So allow users to submit content that is then reviewed for validity and viability. Then allow the community to vote on what the devs have already agreed are possible ideas.   Admin him self said he didn't like the "Fine Wood" but did it due to demand, this allows them to veto any thing they feel is to hard to implement or just won't work. Additionally it allows development to focus on content that players want and not wast man hours on things that may not be as appealing. 

It also helps the community feel like they are helping develop the game and may help with some of the salt that is going around. 

lastly, more players in OW means more PVP and is that not what we all want? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2017 at 10:39 PM, Simon Cadete said:

Well from everything I've read so far, open world will pretty much die in a short period of time. Most people have limited time to play ( no more than 4 hours a day) and they want to have some nice fights when they do play. Not everybody is either, retired, disabled or unemployed to play 15 hours a day to get all the resources and ships moved to where they have to be.

I actually think the opposite is true.

Small Battles and Large Battles have always been available and at one time they were popular enough but that part of the game died while open world population was still relatively high. I think the truth is that without an overarching game to give meaning to the battles, this style of arena play will only entertain people for 2-3 months and then you'll be logging in to an empty game.

Personally I think he's wasting his time to support it at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Slamz said:

I actually think the opposite is true.

Small Battles and Large Battles have always been available and at one time they were popular enough but that part of the game died while open world population was still relatively high. I think the truth is that without an overarching game to give meaning to the battles, this style of arena play will only entertain people for 2-3 months and then you'll be logging in to an empty game.

Personally I think he's wasting his time to support it at all.

People will join whatever game has the most players online. With all the changes being made to open world, only people that have a lot of patience and/or time will stay with it. The majority of players, bought this game for the combat aspect of it. In the trailers, they always show big ships fighting other big ships (I'm talking 4th rates and above). they don't show people sailing in an empty ocean because that is not appealing. Think of call of duty, battlefield, gta and other heavily populated games with a focus of player vs player interaction. It's the same thing over and over again but people keep doing it because its fun. The only big fights you get nowadays (up until a month ago since nobody is really playing right now) are port battles or ganks. I gave up on open world and I'm just waiting for the arena type of game but if we get nobody in the area game and over 1000 people playing in a server, then I'll go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is great that Game Labs looks to the opportunity to give a chance for all to enjoy the best age of sail.

To some it is the arena packed action immediate action and rewards for everything and no risk of loss. For others it is the other game, that one with a map and whatever players want to do.

Well played GL :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is hoping that the "Naval ACTION Arena Game"  can fulfill the desire of the warriors to engage with each other.  I've heard so many complaints of how boring the game is so perhaps this option will allow those who want to fight, the ability to do so ... quickly ... and very often.

But not everyone wants to be in one continuous steam of end less back to back battles.  I must have seen different trailers because every one I've seen has shown at least some ships on the open ocean.  But they are trailers with just glimpses and snippets.  They are designed to let your mind fill in the blanks. 

I was hoping that  the "Naval ACTION Arena Game"  would allow the development of a parallel game ("Open World") that has a focus on " Long Journeys and Age of Sail Experience (chasing and running)."   There seems to be relentless championing for fighting and it is possible that both games will be focused on e-sport and competitive brawls.  "Naval ACTION Arena Game" will be continuous none stop combat but there may be ample mechanisms in "Open World" that are designed to force all players into PvP all of the time.

I think that players will choose to play a game based on the content and quality of play ... NOT on the numbers of other players online.

 

Edited by Macjimm
Spellingk and grammar
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that some of the players who currently take a break from Naval Action and play World of Warships or similar, might instead be taking breaks to hone their skills in "Naval Action: Sea Trials".

Edited by Anolytic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Slamz said:

I actually think the opposite is true.

Small Battles and Large Battles have always been available and at one time they were popular enough but that part of the game died while open world population was still relatively high. I think the truth is that without an overarching game to give meaning to the battles, this style of arena play will only entertain people for 2-3 months and then you'll be logging in to an empty game.

Personally I think he's wasting his time to support it at all.

Do you really believe that he makes this arena game out of pity and charity and pure altruism? I think it is quite clear that after 1,5 years of trying to find and put some meaning into open world they seem to have realized the limitations of a small team and go the route of less resistance and where the actual money is, focus on their strongest point (hint:combat system) and just cut the loss and weakness and take the experience they got out of it and move on to something that is much easier to manage and lucrative. I do not want to shatter dreams but I think that the writing is on the wall regarding focus shift.

A game like Blackwake which in my opinion is a complete superficial abomination and made by a mere 2 developers (correct me if I am wrong) has already sold more than twice the numbers within just 2 months already (and you do not need alts in that game I believe).
Meanwhile Naval Action is limping along trying to find it's meaning already for a year and half at this point while actually sitting on a much better and deeper combat system that will not be able to shine in open world game just because of the sandboxes gank or get ganked nature and it doesn't help that majority of current customers are used to carebear handhold safe pve OW with 5 durabilities without deeper economy/loss/rvr so these changes will hurt many who plan to return quite a bit and nothing is set in stone yet.

Don't get me wrong, I really like where they are trying to go with the new changes in OW and I wish they actually implemented these when I was still playing. Back then when suggesting these ideas it was considered too radical and only possible to test in a separated hardcore server so I figure it is better climate to try it now when numbers are lower and most casuals gone so I am cautiously supportive. However I do not see a sustainable market demand for such a niche of niches project that is sufficient to keep this kind of 'hardcore' war sandbox alive and replayable for majority of customers who can lose a lot of their playtime investment because of one mistake. If people cannot see a way to win and solo players are ousted by making it too difficult to stay afloat then they will not herd up to put up resistance or join forces, they just log off and find better use for their time. Same potential problem with arena, people hate to play against skilled opponents so they would rather not get repeatedly stomped during their free time but I think there are easier ways to set up noobs against noobs there than in sandbox.

Also these makeshift small-large battle rooms were as superficial as port battles, imaginary RvR and trading when the game was released in EA, they were actually afraid to develop these battles further because they knew it would take people off the open world if done properly and that would distract from ow testing. Tournament was quite lively from what I noticed on forums even when it was organized shortly after addition of perks that were still fresh and unbalanced that limited certain tactics.

Giving a crystal clear product with easily defined intention that is potentially only entertaining for 2-3 months while at least being for like-minded people with no false expectations/illusions would be a tad bit better problem to have after receiving money than discovering that you are sitting on an empty mmo with a pile of playerbase that is so divided in their interests (everybody joined sandbox for their own personal reasons, there is no sign that says ''pvp warriors only'' and I specially feel sorry for those who joined for promised exploration) that herding cats would be a walk in the park in comparison.

Keep in mind that pvpers are minority in this game and only a tiny percentage took part of any rvr/pb testing as has been announced so good luck trying to tell majority of population that we are hardcore-unicorn-rvr now, they will laugh while writing negative reviews, scaring away future potential buyers that are very needed to keep the wars alive and going even if their only purpose would be to fill the role of a simple cannonfodder target for someone else. And the discontent grows while devs are trying to fight the fires by disappointed customers who demand content in a sandbox game without realizing that people themselves are supposed to make the so demanded content and they do not have to babysit people by creating more pve hoops for them that is distracting them even more from player interaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kaos said:

Do you really believe that he makes this arena game out of pity and charity and pure altruism?

I think he makes it because the community demands it, but the community has a long history of bad ideas.

Look at Blackwake's concurrent users: click CCU daily. Over 200k owners and only 600-900 online at a time.

I predict Blackwake will go the way of Guns of Icarus Online: 1.5 million owners, less than 200 concurrent players now. Historically the game didn't last long in terms of getting concurrent users to stick around: http://steamcharts.com/app/209080#All

And yet the Steam rating is "very positive". What went wrong? Well, there's no overarching gameplay. There's nothing to do other than log in, pewpew and log out and repeat the same thing tomorrow with no consequence. Fun for a while but gets thin quick.

Naval Action went for a long time with > 1k users online at the same time and I think that's owed to the open world. People like to hunt and not just pewpew in pointless arenas.

Whether you are playing Naval Action in 2018 or not is going to depend on the success of open world. If it flops, the game dies. Arena will go just like Blackwake and Guns of Icarus: lots of copies sold translating into nobody online because with no overarching gameplay, it wears thin too quickly.

 

Still, not a bad deal for the developers. Guns of Icarus sold 1.5 million copies and since nobody plays it anymore, I guess that saves a lot on maintenance fees! Maybe you ARE on to something, but not something that's any good for us players.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Slamz said:

Look at Blackwake's concurrent users: click CCU daily. Over 200k owners and only 600-900 online at a time.

I predict Blackwake will go the way of Guns of Icarus Online: 1.5 million owners, less than 200 concurrent players now. Historically the game didn't last long in terms of getting concurrent users to stick around: http://steamcharts.com/app/209080#All

And yet the Steam rating is "very positive". What went wrong? Well, there's no overarching gameplay. There's nothing to do other than log in, pewpew and log out and repeat the same thing tomorrow with no consequence. Fun for a while but gets thin quick.

Blackwake is an arcade game, with very little content (2 ships, 1 map on release) and no depth gameplaywise. You cant even aim your guns and every activity (like reloading) is just point and click. Its a good game and was fun for 15 hours, but after that its just not interesting anymore.

Quote

Naval Action went for a long time with > 1k users online at the same time and I think that's owed to the open world. People like to hunt and not just pewpew in pointless arenas.

So I guess CSGO will die soon?

Edited by Jon Snow lets go
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

So I guess CSGO will die soon?

There is certainly a question as to what makes CSGO endure while games like Blackwake and Icarus die out quickly. For that matter, hordes of AAA MMORPG titles have come and gone while Counterstrike lives on, with only minor updates to its original format.

Although there's probably something inherent in FPS games that makes them more timeless. Really there's not a great incentive to switch away from CSGO when every other shooter is pretty much the exact same game with a slightly different theme/skin -- especially if what you really care about is the FPS shooter combat and not vehicles and other things other games add on.

Is Naval Action the "CSGO" of big ship combat arenas?

I suppose it's possible.

I will be very surprised.

My suspicion is that FPS games deliver a sense of tension and immersion through adrenaline -- it's the twitch and the immediacy of combat that makes people come back for more. A slow paced game like this will never have that. I believe the lasting sense of tension and immersion in a game like this comes from having something on the line -- real risk, real meaning, longer term consequences. And that requires a wider open world to give meaning to the battles.

I think that's the only way you keep ship battles fun for a year: by making it consequential.

EVE is probably the perfect example of this. EVE has probably the most boring combat ever invented. The actual mechanics of it are dead simple, requiring very little user input. There's good strategy on a group vs group level but as an individual player in a typical warship, your input and tactics are almost zero. But EVE has thrived for ages based on the combat always being consequential. There's always a bigger picture and more at stake. "EVE: Arena" involving canned battles with just ships and no context is not something I can envision being popular for more than a few months. I'm sure a lot of people would check it out and play with it but I'd expect interest to drop like a stone after about 2 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slamz said:

Is Naval Action the "CSGO" of big ship combat arenas?

Most likely not but it could end up like what Aces High is for flightsims. Hitech made Warbirds back in the mid nineties and that went strong until the end of the nineties. Then there was some corporate buy-off and they went on making Aces High in 1999 that mostly killed the competition. They had a large (7-800 concurrent) playerbase until the advent of free-to-play games, though it is still an operational and profitable online sim today, it does not have those numbers and, sadly for me, most players are now americans with the time-zone troubles that presents for a poor european.

NA has the same fun-factor combined with detailed fighting mechanics that made Aces High a lasting success. Big old fighting ships could hold the same general appeal as planes, wowarships or tanks for that matter, though it is the russian tremendous love for tanks that has carried WoT on it's back for so long.

You might  get bored with senseless fun, but that is the most common denominator among people who play games. NA OW killed or at least obfuscated the skill aspect that this game has such a high potential for. I suppose the competitive skill aspect is what keeps games like Aces High and WoT going year after year. Baddies don't like that, just look at the XVM hate in the wot camp. Anyway... the journey to get better and gradually win more and more is the "the meaning", "the consequence" and the fear of losing a fight is "the risk". Nothing motivates me more than these things, this is why I still play games at all.

I don't think that EVE's success has anything to do with their pitiful combat. People came to EVE for all that eco and PVE stuff, then there's all those stories of people getting scammed. That is PvP, actually, I gotta give them that.

NA PvP on demand has a lot going for it:

  • World class fighting mechanics.
  • The first game of it's kind, really.
  • competitive gameplay
  • accessible arena gameplay
  • low downtime
  • Jack Sparrow general appeal (sorry, not sorry)

Many will try it, many will move on but I'm certain enough will stay to make it a fantastic thing to waste time doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jodgi said:

Many will try it, many will move on but I'm certain enough will stay to make it a fantastic thing to waste time doing.

That's probably a good argument for having it, really. I suspect a lot of people will try it, like it, find it unfulfilling and will move on, but hopefully what they will move on to will be the real open world gameplay. Maybe the Arena can be sort of a no-risk introduction and really the standing advice would just become "Go play Arena for like a month, then try open world."

Now that they know how to fight, they may be tempted to back their fighting skills up with an economy and real danger.

And open world people may still use it from time to time because you don't necessarily want your first experience fighting 1st rate vs 1st rate to be your brand new 10 million gold ship you finally got built and are too scared to take out and learn with!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Slamz said:

"Go play Arena for like a month, then try open world."

Of all the players we've had we have retained most (notice I didn't say all) of the OW/sandbox lovers. People who enjoy drawn out things because "it must matter" don't grow on trees, you must see this? It's neither astrology nor rocket science to conclude that the PvP-on-demand concept will have higher player retention.

I'll make sure to tell anyone who's looking for deeper meaning to run into your arms. I loved the idea of OW at first (In my head I pictured the Aces High concept of massive map, three team perpetual RvR PvP) but when I saw that eco/loss stuff introduces unbelievable PvP timidness and lavish amounts of downtime and boredom I was heartbroken. My aggressiveness and abrasiveness stems from this. "How can this top tier fantastic game become so boring?", mind blown and it hurt.

I'll drop into the OW every now and then to say hi. Maybe I'll click out some resources for the poor crafters as long as that only takes me a few seconds. But the PvP aversion by design and the long battle timers that kills all hope of skill based gameplay is devastating to my enjoyment of the OW.  I wish you all the best because I truly believe you like this stuff, I don't want to shit on anyone's parade ;) but I'm not dragging my balls through broken glass for no skill based PvP anyway.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jodgi said:

People who enjoy drawn out things because "it must matter" don't grow on trees, you must see this?

I guess we'll see! In EVE, there are players who guard gates, apparently for hours. They just sit there. Bear in mind there are also games out there that are literally nothing but driving farm equipment all day so it just goes to show, not every gamer is looking for the next League of Legends.

Really the fear I have for Naval Action as an open world game is that it might not have enough moving parts. EVE does very well partially because the mechanics allow for a lot of emergent gameplay. A lot of that emergent gameplay stems from actions you'd call "really boring", but you can't have pirates attacking you when you warp into a system without gatecamping (which is, frequently, really boring). You can't have pirates jumping into your PvE mission to kill you unless one of them spent probably an hour or two poking around systems with probes until he finally found you and honed in on your position (and both the probing and the PvE were boring). The boring stuff sets the stage for the exciting PvP.

Basically I don't think it's boring gameplay that drives people off. I think it's lack of variety. You either need NONSTOP ACTION EXCITEMENT -- fps or moba style gameplay -- or you need depth and variety.

I hope Arena at least gets the ability to select map locations from the global map, and maybe the ability to do port battle matches and not just deathmatches. If lack of variety kills open world in a year, it'll kill Arena in a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Slamz said:

I think he makes it because the community demands it, but the community has a long history of bad ideas.

Community demanded OW too and it has completely stalled after 1 year of prototype testing + 1,5 years of EA testing, while this silly clicker game that is probably made in less than half the time and half the manpower is outselling NA that has best age of sail skill based combat system and better arena potential. I am sure devs made their conclusions from it and won't step into the same hole again by chasing some crowd demands instead of market opportunity.

9 hours ago, Slamz said:

Look at Blackwake's concurrent users: click CCU daily. Over 200k owners and only 600-900 online at a time.

What do I look at these numbers for when this game is just a temporary arena without any hints of skill based combat? It's mainly for 15 minutes of lulz and doesn't aim to be a sustainable nor subscription-based game. Requires only 54 players to fill one server so everybody can have full content that the game has to offer unlike current ow that has map size designed for probably not less than 1000 players and has to be filled with bots to not feel completely empty?

You can still log into project reality (mod of battlefield 2) and find a server that is running on max cap 100 players and enjoy all the game has to offer while it's being more than 10 years old now so I would say decent arena games are doing pretty fine these days compared to sandboxes that don't seem to age well and where population is more needed to keep things going, isn't Eve on a rapid decline as well lately?

9 hours ago, Slamz said:

Naval Action went for a long time with > 1k users online at the same time and I think that's owed to the open world. People like to hunt and not just pewpew in pointless arenas.

Are you really implying that most of those 1k hunted eachother instead of singleplaying in some pve instance while occasionally delayed by few hunters? I think you can agree that OW was glorified lobby for pve arena with economy that would fit more into singleplayer title and pewpew rvr that had quite low participation rate because I don't know anyone who knows anyone who actually suffered some deeply consequential asset losses. but there was a lot of trashtalking in forums that spilled over to development topics where armchair nelsons and nec... blackbeards pretended that they influence some deeper strategic outcomes and run this pixel shit.
Here you go: '' PVE to PVP ratios are better than eve online where for every pvp kill there are almost 700 pve kills'' and '' There is no need to pretend - eve online and naval action are mostly pve games.'' I suppose admin has better statistical overlook on these things based on those quotes.
 

9 hours ago, Slamz said:

Whether you are playing Naval Action in 2018 or not is going to depend on the success of open world. If it flops, the game dies. Arena will go just like Blackwake and Guns of Icarus: lots of copies sold translating into nobody online because with no overarching gameplay, it wears thin too quickly.

My humble bet is that arena (if done right) will probably pull the last remaining pvpers from ow leaving it as purely pve experience unless ow reduces pve or on other hand it actually drives those who can't cut it in arena back to chasing traders so time will tell, no hate : )

Edited by Kaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kaos said:

Are you really implying that most of those 1k hunted eachother instead of singleplaying in some pve instance while occasionally delayed by few hunters?

A lot of that PvE was done by me and other hunters, too, mainly so we could then afford to PvP (and level up). Give us all infinite free ships and we won't PvE at all any more but then the PvP won't mean anything either.

And at least you'd better hope people are mostly PvEing so that they can PvP later. If they're PvEing for levels, they will eventually max out and quit the game. If they're PvEing for fun, well, not sure what to say to that other than Admin could have saved a lot of time by releasing a single player game that consists of nothing but endless mission running! So I don't really think that's what people are doing.

I think they are PvEing with the intention of gaining rank and money with which to PvP later. That's certainly why my guild did it so much. We don't mind, though, because it makes the PvP that much more impactful. Now you have a reason to not want to die! (This is also how it works in EVE. People do PvE more than they PvP on average, out of necessity, but it's that time consuming PvE that makes the PvP have meaning.)

 

Edited by Slamz
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Slamz said:

The boring stuff sets the stage for the exciting PvP.

This is what I fundamentally don't understand. Or I only understand it schematically but as far as my own motivation goes it is an alien concept.

7 hours ago, Slamz said:

You either need NONSTOP ACTION EXCITEMENT -- fps or moba style gameplay -- or you need depth and variety.

It doesn't need to be that polarized. The long and sometimes fruitless hunts sure aren't optimal but I'm able to deal with it because someone else is getting his rocks off running or wishing to be left alone bullying bots, good for him, right? In a large OW with depth and variety every individual needs to make some concessions.

Rakers are self-proclaimed PvP hardliners but even we have made compromises and participated in other people's "fun"; Kaos and me were alt-scumbagging virgin ports in Mexico of iron ore back in the day when that was the most scarce resource (before production and EA?). I'm level 50 crafter and so is Turpos and MG. You could argue I've done more of what I don't like than what I enjoy for my own part. My point is simply that we're not completely low attention spanned "gib me LoL gampley NAOW!".

So, we paid the boredom tax and were ready to cash in the tiny portion of skill based OW hunting fun. Then victims started to cry about being ganked and their friends cried about not being able to help them whenever or wherever, perversely under the guise of "wanting PvP". The only thing we ask is skill based OW hunting and instance fighting, as you know long timers obliterates skillbased hunting and recharging HP repairs is questionable in instances. Even massive PVE grinds to get the best fitted ship is a significant issue for healthy skill-based PvP. The OW was always a thing slightly at odds with our idea of fun, but we could deal with that. Now it is specifically geared to keep us away.

Maybe the EVE extreme ratio of PVE/PVP is perfect to keep a sustained "depth and variety" game going? Maybe if you truly enable PvP hardliners you give the sheep the content they most hate: To be robbed or interrupted? There will always be that tiny bit of PvP as even sheep will nibble as something smaller than themselves from time to time. But if you introduce raging carnivores into the world the outcry from the herd reaches intolerable levels with demands to build walls to keep the wolves at bay.

I'm no longer sure I'd be doing the OW game a favour by asking to be let back in...

4 hours ago, Slamz said:

Give us all infinite free ships and we won't PvE at all any more but then the PvP won't mean anything either.

Just like Hitech's online game has offered these last eighteen years. Terrible, I know. They have EVE beat by four years and it's still profitable, imagine doing that "without any meaning to PVP", as you would put it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jodgi said:

This is what I fundamentally don't understand. Or I only understand it schematically but as far as my own motivation goes it is an alien concept.

Maybe in a nutshell it's the desire for "player stories".

I do not believe you will ever, ever get the kind of player stories out of Arena combat that we got last year out of the French and Pirate War on PvP2. That's a story I think I'll still remember 10 years from now. For all the hours I have put into FPS gaming and MOBAs, there are very few stories of general interest I could tell you about, but I have tons of stories from Everquest, WOW and so forth. I have over 1000 hours played in Planetside and it's mostly just a blur. Fun but pointless and I doubt I'll look back on it in 5 years and really have much to talk about. But I can still tell you funny stories from Ultima Online and that was 20 years ago.

The good stories developed out of deeper gameplay that was more than just combat. The combat itself is all forgettable but the circumstances of the combat is where the story shines and what I will remember for decades.

And I think it's these stories that keep people coming back for more. Counterstrike lives by its combat but EVE lives by its depth and the stories it generates. Counterstrike was fun but I can't think of any good stories I could tell you that last more than a few sentences.

(One time there were these guys and I shot them.)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Slamz said:

A lot of that PvE was done by me and other hunters, too, mainly so we could then afford to PvP (and level up). Give us all infinite free ships and we won't PvE at all any more but then the PvP won't mean anything either.

''Kill 500 boars in isolated instances off the map to unlock your pvp ticket to reach the actual game'' is not very good first impression on a pvp server I think, while technically you could go pvp straight away but who does that (besides me and some other crazies who tried it) when xp accumulation is so much faster and efficient compared to pve progression and everybody is already in frigs from pve while you are scanning around still in fore-and-aft? Here's only 2 explanations, most players either sabotage themselves out of a lot of fun and potential stories just because they don't know what they don't know and are missing out or they just don't like pvp outside of their own terms and prefer more chill and risk free pve experience and ganking.

I suspect it's the latter. I know some people have misconception that if you give players infinite durablities and no loss that they would pvp more but that was proven wrong long time ago before wipes, people just avoided pvp as usual.

11 hours ago, Slamz said:

And at least you'd better hope people are mostly PvEing so that they can PvP later. If they're PvEing for levels, they will eventually max out and quit the game. If they're PvEing for fun, well, not sure what to say to that other than Admin could have saved a lot of time by releasing a single player game that consists of nothing but endless mission running! So I don't really think that's what people are doing.

I think they are PvEing with the intention of gaining rank and money with which to PvP later. That's certainly why my guild did it so much. We don't mind, though, because it makes the PvP that much more impactful. Now you have a reason to not want to die! (This is also how it works in EVE. People do PvE more than they PvP on average, out of necessity, but it's that time consuming PvE that makes the PvP have meaning.)

 

I don't hope because I know most won't pve to pvp later on, they actually start pressuring devs to implement more and better pve and they are not very amused when admin tells them to go pvp because the pve tone was set in the beginning stages. PvP is something alien for majority that few will look into after they have grinded out their maximum everything to feel secure trying it and I think devs realized it and now the million dollar question is how to un-f-u-c-k this pvp server and actually drag people off the pve progression and into interacting with each other like it should have been from the start?

That means that trading should be also pvp and not pve. Someone will buy because they need or speculate that the demand will go up in some other port and someone sells because they think the other way around not because they know some magical euro trader fills all their contracts or admin floods the market with resources in shortage to calm the crowds.

11 hours ago, Slamz said:

I think they are PvEing with the intention of gaining rank and money with which to PvP later. That's certainly why my guild did it so much. We don't mind, though, because it makes the PvP that much more impactful. Now you have a reason to not want to die! (This is also how it works in EVE. People do PvE more than they PvP on average, out of necessity, but it's that time consuming PvE that makes the PvP have meaning.)

 

Maybe I just lost the sense of danger and challenge in the end because I was intentionally gimping myself by modding up 1 dura capped 3-5 ships from players when I wanted to try out some other fit and still felt pretty safe when roaming around with my main guys (we were small group) because all we could find is pve people en-route to mission to slam and that get's old fast personally, once in a blue moon we met some group that was roaming like we did and it was a blast but these encounters happened rarely but they were fun indeed. Worth the dead time between farming farmers and hoping to getting lucky to find some similar group? Not for me at least. See, the point of arena is to bring these 2 groups together faster skipping the dead time so they can see who outplays who on terms that are winnable for both (given that they find a way to put skilled players against skilled and noobs against noobs) because on OW any seasoned pvper already knows how to avoid getting into situations where the odds are not in their favor anymore and not take foolish baits.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slamz said:

Maybe in a nutshell it's the desire for "player stories".

I do not believe you will ever, ever get the kind of player stories out of Arena combat that we got last year out of the French and Pirate War on PvP2. That's a story I think I'll still remember 10 years from now. For all the hours I have put into FPS gaming and MOBAs, there are very few stories of general interest I could tell you about, but I have tons of stories from Everquest, WOW and so forth. I have over 1000 hours played in Planetside and it's mostly just a blur. Fun but pointless and I doubt I'll look back on it in 5 years and really have much to talk about. But I can still tell you funny stories from Ultima Online and that was 20 years ago.

The good stories developed out of deeper gameplay that was more than just combat. The combat itself is all forgettable but the circumstances of the combat is where the story shines and what I will remember for decades.

And I think it's these stories that keep people coming back for more. Counterstrike lives by its combat but EVE lives by its depth and the stories it generates. Counterstrike was fun but I can't think of any good stories I could tell you that last more than a few sentences.

(One time there were these guys and I shot them.)

 

I have a lot of stories from naval action and I really liked my time playing it but most of these stories were surrounding the combat because I knew if I tricked someone out of their durability, they would have 4 more respawns and plenty of bots to farm the recovery in no time so meh.

Regarding these other arenas depends on what level you are playing. If you are just a pubstomper then sure but when you are in a game that has $10.000 on stake instead of some pixel resource and it's documented on youtube and goes into hall of fame then that's a bit more story and streamabe than farming some randoms around jamaica - the story that just stays within your group of friends.

Then again I doubt competitive naval action would be streamable anyway because last time I showed it to some outsider she said she would rather watch 2 snails play soccer. :DD

These games that have a large following and don't die throughout the years is because they are easy to watch and understandable for outsiders who don't play, doubt anyone from the outside would understand the maneuvers that go on in naval engagement and half the energy would go to explaining it in some shoutcast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kaos said:

''Kill 500 boars in isolated instances off the map to unlock your pvp ticket to reach the actual game'' is not very good first impression on a pvp server I think

I definitely agree and this is why I have occasionally campaigned to re-examine how this game handles XP, rank and progression.

Pure PvE players don't like this game because of the lack of unique PvE content, which is costly and time consuming to develop (evidence: empty PvE server -- it's always been pretty empty that I've seen, even in this game's heyday).

Pure PvP players don't like this game because they don't like being forced to level up and grind out low ranks before they can realistically engage in big league PvP.

So the target audience ends up being "PvP players who enjoy large doses of PvE". I actually enjoy a bit of PvE myself now and then but I don't think it should be a mandatory gateway to things like port battles (or at least it should not take so long to get through).

I would rather see XP gating of ship upgrades or something, so that a new player can (assuming someone gives him one) immediately sail a full crew 1st rate and join all the port battles, etc, but he has to earn XP in that ship to unlock its upgrades and doing so does nothing to improve any other ship he may want to try later. In this way, a veteran is gaining breadth rather than depth. A 2 week old player can have full upgrades unlocked in like one 5th rate while a 1 year old player may have full upgrades for all or most ships.

But at least for now, it is what it is: WOW-like. At max rank, PvE simply funds PvP which I think is fine but at lower ranks, PvP is actually gated by PvE which I frown upon.

1 hour ago, Kaos said:

That means that trading should be also pvp and not pve. Someone will buy because they need or speculate that the demand will go up in some other port and someone sells because they think the other way around not because they know some magical euro trader fills all their contracts or admin floods the market with resources in shortage to calm the crowds.

Very much agree. Magical Euro Trader fills were okay for testing but really have no place in the game. Player economy needs more emphasis and needs to be part of PvP.

1 hour ago, Kaos said:

Maybe I just lost the sense of danger and challenge in the end

That is definitely a problem in this game. The French and Pirate War of PvP2 was fantastic. Some of the best gaming I've ever had. We spent the rest of the time trying to recapture that and failing. Population dropoff and just the way port flip mechanics worked made it impossible to get into that same situation again. I do think a lot of improvements made in the last year will lead to better and more frequent (and more predictable) wars but we won't really know til after the reset and hopefully people come back to try it.

To me, Arena just feels like giving up, though. "Welp, wars like that will never happen again, might as well give up and do Arena!"

I still feel that if we get the mechanics right, Arena will be empty just because there is plenty of real PvP in the regular open world game.

"Gentleman's Duelists" will still use Arena -- these are the people who just hate unfair fights -- but I like to think they're the minority.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Pure PvE players don't like this game because of the lack of unique PvE content, which is costly and time consuming to develop (evidence: empty PvE server -- it's always been pretty empty that I've seen, even in this game's heyday).

Pure PvP players don't like this game because they don't like being forced to level up and grind out low ranks before they can realistically engage in big league PvP.

So the target audience ends up being "PvP players who enjoy large doses of PvE". 

And of course the answer has been starting us in the face the whole time:

Pirates who aren't a nation and are exempt from XP grinding and crafting headaches, but just sail around PvPing everything. But the people with plush Johnny Depp body pillows won that argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Slamz said:

Arena will be empty just because there is plenty of real PvP in the regular open world game.

If that happens I'll get back to bitching and moaning about join timers becoming sensible again and play the hell out of OW, happily. I can take almost any packaging, I just want skill based PvP.

16 minutes ago, Slamz said:

these are the people who just hate unfair fights

I'll let that one pass... ;)

16 minutes ago, Slamz said:

"Gentleman's Duelists" ... I like to think they're the minority.

You're right about that.

 

15 minutes ago, maturin said:

Pirates who aren't a nation and are exempt from XP grinding and crafting headaches, but just sail around PvPing everything.

We dreamt of this and it would be perfect. We want optimal ships so some crafting headaches might exist, though. Forget about eternally open battles for rats, no self respecting PvP player would go near that.

  • Like 1

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

×