Let's see how 400 players look in NA world

[Christendom]

How to get people to leave the capitals - - 

1 crafting in player owned ports produces purple / gold ships.  Ships produced in capital regions should be blue and ONLY 3/5

2 labor hour reductions built into the ports

3 regional trims.  This was the biggest success of the fine woods patch I think.  

4 lower the cost of the shipyard levels so people can have multiples in various ports.  In particular lower the amount of stone and fittings.

5 incentivize leaving safe zones by placing missions outside them.  Missions taken in player owned ports net more cash AND better rewards.

6 increase the production/consumption of various player owned ports to promote trading.  Quite frankly trading needs to be buffed and mission gold reduced to increase that style of play

7 Player owned ports need to matter again.  

[Busterbloodvessel]

Yes let's tax all the players that don't want to do PvP to buggery. That'll make them love the game and sail more to get attacked and sunk by PvP green zone sneekers won't it 

Lets put a tax on ship building so that people that don't want to do PvP but craft instead are taxed so that they are restricted from building ships, making ships so expensive the carebears don't want to buy or sail them or do RvR.

Let's make the missions more and more difficult to obtain in safe zones and discourage people from playing. 

I am so positive about these wonderful notions.

Buster (wht could possibly go wrong)

 

[Slim McSauce]

38 minutes ago, Molder169 said:

The game lacks content in general. Your 4 choices are pvp, pvp or pvp with the option to trade.

Clearly by the numbers of last nights patch the content delivered in way of training was legitimately eaten up. Content is content regardless of it's category.

ow pvp has no supporting mechanics to it. You're expected to fill in all the gaps which shows signs of lack of development. PVE with it's basic mission system is still many times more complex than PVP mission system. (hint: pvp has no missions system, we have old pvp zones disguised as missions)

Edited April 20, 2018 by Slim McSauce

[victor]

24 minutes ago, Fletch67 said:

Why are  PVPers so obsessed with the safe zone? Does it hurt you that you cant ruin some noobs day? You have your pvp mission zones after all your crying about them why not use them? Oh that's right because the other people there are organised and not easy to kill. Lets ignore the pvp zones, too many good pvprs , lets just whine about the safe zones instead

they are not obsessed, they simply try to maximize the PVP marks income.

A lot of people here on the forums talks boldly about old times when there were no PVP zones, but forget to add that in those times there were also

- no PVP marks as reward for killing players;

- ships had multiple duras

- no knowledge books with magic powers

So the good old time PVPers were interested in actual fights against other players (or in taking ships or cargoes), not in trying to get the more kills they could in the shortest time to sell the marks to get the gold to buy the upgrades for they one dura (then very precious) uberfitted ships.

There was a balance in the thing: a balance that did make safe zones unnecessary.

A lot of things have changed, and each of this changes has shifted the PVP towards the gank side.

For this reason green zones have been created.

With the last patch safe zones have been nerfed big time, but all the previous system (PVP marks and so on) was not touched. So the absence of green zones NOW it would not be the same thing as the absence of green zones that we had before.

 

Edited April 20, 2018 by victor

[Slim McSauce]

1 minute ago, victor said:

they are not obsessed, they simply try to maximize the PVP marks income.

A lot of people here on the forums talks boldly about old times when there were no PVP zones, but forget to add that in those times there were also

- no PVP marks as reward for killing players;

- ships had multiple duras

- no knowledge books with magic powers

So the good old time PVPers were interested in actual fights against other players (or in taking ships or cargoes), not in trying to get the more kills they could in the shortest time to sell the marks to get the gold to buy the upgrades for they one dura (then very precious) uberfitted ships.

There was a balance in the thing: a balance that did make safe zones unnecessary.

A lot of things have changed, and each of this changes has shited the PVP towards the gank side.

For this reason green zones have been created.

With the last patch safe zones have been nerfed big time, but all the previous system (PVP marks and so on) was not touched. So the absence of green zones NOW is not comparable to absence of green zones that we had before.

 

The insistence for "free market pvp" where the game doesn't support the flow of pvp is why the game is so gank v ganker.

What reason do I have to pvp in the gulf? There's no reason to go there. No mechanic incentivizes traveling to take areas of the map as an ow pvper.

So guess what, you get everyone going to capitals because at least you'll find pvp there.

that's what happens when you don't take control.

 

[Project Pluto]

37 minutes ago, Suricato Rojo said:

Im a solo hunter with 5500+ hours and I can say both maps are wrong. Second one a bit less wrong than the first but wrong as well.
Right now... there is only activity in capitals, in the free town near the patrol zone, and in a bunch of sanctuaries were some clans think is safe to do some missions and fleets and trading.

For instance: If patrol zone is near aves... Tumbado is empty.

Free Towns used to be trading hubs. Right now traders try to avoid Free town as much as posiible.

 

You don't get the point. Map Accuracy has nothing to do here. I just represent the general idea of what is happening now. 

Edited April 20, 2018 by Project Pluto

[OjK]

Honestly, from my point of view PvP Marks are biggest stupidity of this game.
I can kinda understand what was the idea behind them, but it missed the goal. Missed it wide.

If they are a reward for some PvP actions, why they are actually best awarded for everything which is NOT REALLY a PvP? 

You call hunting the traders a PvP?
You call 6v1 gank a PvP?


If only the PvP marks were somehow adjusted based on the strength difference between the fleets...

Your fleet is more then 50% weaker? Double the PvP marks.
Your fleet is weaker by less then 50%? Extra bonus for PvP marks.

Your fleet is twice as big as the enemy? Reduce the amount of PvP marks to 25% only
Your fleet is more than twice as big then Your enemy? Reduce the amount of given PvP marks to 10%

If the 4v1 gank would give 10 times less PvP marks, then a 4v4, or traders wouldn't be giving PvP marks, multiple problems would disappear straight away.
No one would bother about such stupid ganking, if there would be no benefits from it.

No risk? No reward.
No effort? No reward.


EDIT: And most of all - the system when winner gets 100% while looser gets 0, is also bad. The loosing side should always get some rewards.

Edited April 20, 2018 by O. J. Kosznicki

[Vernon Merrill]

48 minutes ago, O. J. Kosznicki said:

Honestly, from my point of view PvP Marks are biggest stupidity of this game.
I can kinda understand what was the idea behind them, but it missed the goal. Missed it wide.

If they are a reward for some PvP actions, why they are actually best awarded for everything which is NOT REALLY a PvP? 

You call hunting the traders a PvP?
You call 6v1 gank a PvP?


If only the PvP marks were somehow adjusted based on the strength difference between the fleets...

Your fleet is more then 50% weaker? Double the PvP marks.
Your fleet is weaker by less then 50%? Extra bonus for PvP marks.

Your fleet is twice as big as the enemy? Reduce the amount of PvP marks to 25% only
Your fleet is more than twice as big then Your enemy? Reduce the amount of given PvP marks to 10%

If the 4v1 gank would give 10 times less PvP marks, then a 4v4, or traders wouldn't be giving PvP marks, multiple problems would disappear straight away.
No one would bother about such stupid ganking, if there would be no benefits from it.

No risk? No reward.
No effort? No reward.


EDIT: And most of all - the system when winner gets 100% while looser gets 0, is also bad. The loosing side should always get some rewards.

You say there should be "no risk/no reward"...  But that is exactly what you are saying when you say that hunting traders  isnt "a PvP"....   Why should traders have no risk?  They are certainly reaping the rewards.

I'll let you in on a little secret as to why myself and most others hunt traders from time to time...  Its so that we DONT HAVE TO DO TRADE RUNS OURSELVES....

Why should I spend time and money tracking down stuff when I can just take it...

And despite everyone bitching about it, its actually the MOST AUTHENTIC feature in this game...

Look up the term "Privateer"

[Christendom]

9 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

You say there should be "no risk/no reward"...  But that is exactly what you are saying when you say that hunting traders  isnt "a PvP"....   Why should traders have no risk?  They are certainly reaping the rewards.

I'll let you in on a little secret as to why myself and most others hunt traders from time to time...  Its so that we DONT HAVE TO DO TRADE RUNS OURSELVES....

Why should I spend time and money tracking down stuff when I can just take it...

And despite everyone bitching about it, its actually the MOST AUTHENTIC feature in this game...

Look up the term "Privateer"

Except that this game forces you to either sink those traders and take a fraction of what they carry for PVP marks OR keep them and get nothing but the loot.  An asinine decision to have to make honestly.  You NEED pvp marks to get certain ships, books and upgrades.  But you also want to make privateering feel satisfying.  

Just one of the reasons I absolutely cannot stand the PVP mark system.  I hate having to sink perfectly good ships for marks and/or to split them with a group.  The reward should always be the prize itself.

[victor]

8 minutes ago, Wraith said:

This is exactly the kind of incentive to get people out of safe zones we need. If you make it impossible or reduce the production capacity (or increase production cost/labor hours) for buildings inside the safe zone that would be useful as well.  People should be able to make due in safe zones, especially when starting out, but with increasing risk should come increasing rewards.

I keep saying: if you have to deal with a tired horse - which is the naval action average non PVP focused player - bait him with a carrot and do not beat it once more with stick.

So it's ok to make crafting outside safe zones more rewarding, but nerfing the crafting in safe zones RIGHT AFTER nerfing safe zones and making missions more dangerous would not be a smart move. 

Edited April 20, 2018 by victor

[Vernon Merrill]

14 minutes ago, Christendom said:

Except that this game forces you to either sink those traders and take a fraction of what they carry for PVP marks OR keep them and get nothing but the loot.  An asinine decision to have to make honestly.  You NEED pvp marks to get certain ships, books and upgrades.  But you also want to make privateering feel satisfying.  

Just one of the reasons I absolutely cannot stand the PVP mark system.  I hate having to sink perfectly good ships for marks and/or to split them with a group.  The reward should always be the prize itself.

I do not disagree with any of that...  The fact of the matter is that we all realize that this game is a HUGE time commitment.  It definitely takes quite a while to get to the point where you can choose which playstyle you want to do that day/game session.

The bigger question is:  Is that good or bad?

I guess it depends on the player.  Some are driven by the goal and some are driven away by the hassle.

[victor]

6 minutes ago, Wraith said:

But honestly, I think the safe zones should be tiered. 

Well seems to me like an old topic, since safe zones - as a matter of facts - are now nolonger really that safe.

Edited April 20, 2018 by victor

[Liq]

Just now, victor said:

Well seems to me like an old topic, since safe zones - as a matter of facts - are now no longer really that safe.

devs never called them "safe zone" - just reinforcment zone

safe zone was players invention.

they are still reinforcment zones, as battles are still open for the whole time, and you get ai support.

[victor]

1 minute ago, Liq said:

devs never called them "safe zone" - just reinforcment zone

safe zone was players invention.

they are still reinforcment zones, as battles are still open for the whole time, and you get ai support.

We needed so much this semantic precisation mate. So please note also BTW that there is also no PVP server. 

Edited April 20, 2018 by victor

[Christendom]

I don't really get the safe zones hate.  The only reason players are currently trying to hunt in them is because the game population is so small that capitals are the only place to find players these days.  They're aren't really out there trading because it's not all that lucrative.  They're aren't out there hauling around shipbuilding supplies because the game allows players to do just about everything in the zones.  They aren't crafting out of player owned ports because they cost so much these days and not many of them are worth setting up shop in.  

We keep trying to adjust the game to work for the current situation in game, a VERY small player base....rather than tackling the reasons why we have such a small player base to begin.  

So the solution is simple:

Get more players back into the game
- more casual level content.  stuff that doesn't require 3 hours to do.  Missions.  Randomized events.  Player created escort runs.
- more variety
- more involved and detailed crafting and economy (aka something I can't do with just 1 alt)

Incentivize those players to leave the capital areas
- promote crafting outside of the capitals through taxes, increased chances of getting purp/gold ships....or dare I say  CRAFTING REGIONS?
- enhance the safe zones around the capitals.  1 ring protects everyone and another protects only traders (or something like that)
- increase pay out of missions taken outside of capitals
- increase trading pay output
- Remove PVP marks as a currency.

Fix these 2 things and PVP will magically fix itself.

 

[Kloothommel]

I think many would rather stop playing than be "forced" to risk pvp when they don't feel like doing pvp.

[RedNeckMilkMan]

5 minutes ago, Cornelius Trash said:

I think many would rather stop playing than be "forced" to risk pvp when they don't feel like doing pvp.

If you dont want risk then PVE awaits you

 

[Njord]

3 hours ago, Suricato Rojo said:

Right now traders try to avoid Free town as much as posiible.

Why shouldn't they, when there is no reason for them to be there other than selling repairs for small profit? They are better off trading somewhere quiet and safer. 

[victor]

1 hour ago, Banished Privateer said:

Wait, so what is it? We have PvE server and.... _______???

When you open the game, you read "PVE only" and "Caribbean" (first clue)

In caribbean you have PVP .... and .... missions ... and .... crafting ... and trading ... (second clue)

Naval Action legends was a full PVP game (third clue).

But basically, know what?

You always talk shit about carebears but the truth is you are just a first class whiner! Period.

You are always complaining about something. ALWAYS!

The proof is that you got just yesterday a full PVP patch and today you opened a thread whinig about vera cruz and new orleans being in a too wide safe (not so much safe anymore) zone.

Because your actual aim in the game is not to have fun your way, but just to avoid that other can have fun their way. You bascially would like that every player should play to please your needs and desires and whine if the game does not oblige them to do so.

It's people like you that are sinking this game. 

PS: do not waste your time in aswering me. I wouldn't be able to read.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2018 by victor

[Galt]

From reading this feels just like ganking noobs but with extra steps. People keep trying to find ways of getting players out of the safe zones when it's usually the only thing keeping these people alive. I never had any issues hunting at KPR because player battles stay open for a while, there are a lot of players running around fighting AI, I can almost always find a mission or something to jump in. 

If people want to PvP with you, believe me they will be easy to find. But people who work mostly in the safe zone (in my case) do so to provide ships that are needed for PvP and RvR. Ships are expensive and I can't afford to always ONLY PvP every second of game to provide the rest of the community with content. I venture out to fight on my terms and when I do I usually don't have an issue finding one (win or lose.) 

I know most have you have played enough to know where to look for players to fight. If you just can't possibly wait another second without shooting at another person then feel free to set up in Nav and sail on down. Jump in some missions, get a group together and brits might just organize and come try to sink you. Or hell, just tell me where your shipyards are and I will make a point to come say hey. 

[Fenris]

4 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Why should traders have no risk?  They are certainly reaping the rewards.

Because full loaded trader is no sport. Thats why.

I was suggesting on several occasions to give traders non combatant status. Traders from enemy countries can be attacked. Pirates can attack traders. But that should be it.

Historically, attacking a trader without being in  a state of war, was a serious incident, which could lead into a war between nations.

On the other hand, IF a trader can not be attacked, only by a hostile fraction, there must be alliance between 2 nations...To make these work, game needs proper mechanics, and NOT the simple minded button clicking we had in the past.

Edited April 20, 2018 by Fenris

[James Cornelius]

7 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

Players creating the whole of content is a great sign that the game lacks mechanics 

 

This.

 

The PVP reward zones that used to exist got people in a certain area.

 

Treasure fleets that briefly appeared got players in a certain area (briefly).

 

There NEEDS to be more content than just sail and fight for the hell of it. There should be CONTINUOUS DAILY events that draw people to certain areas and they should not be some mysterious thing that magically appears at the whim of the developers/programmers/administrators of the game without warning or explanation of any unique mechanics.

 

Here are some suggestions:

• AI trade Fleet that needs to be escorted from one port to another. IT LEAVES AT A SPECIFIC TIME! No more "it might be in this area sometime during the day". The defending nation gets rewards for the trade ships making it safely to destination. Attacking nation(s) get rewards for capturing the traders - meaning that they need players to both fight the defenders and capture the merchants. Those attackers who only fight off the escorts would need suitable rewards at all for participating so as not to only reward those who capture.
• AI blockade fleet that surrounds a national port. As long as it is in place, defending nation suffers a malus to various incomes. It must be broken to restore proper income levels. Other nations might receive various prize monies from blockade if they assist in maintaining it against the defenders' attempt to dislodge it.
• Overall leaderboard of PVP with massive rewards for sinking those who are high on it. This helps alleviate seal clubbing and directs PVP to those who want it the most. Historically accurate too, as famed captains were desirable targets of enemies for both national prestige and to stop their reign of terror against friendly shipping.
• The ability for players to send out AI trade ships. It would put a lot of possibly BIG rewards out there on the seas if a player in for example South Carolina can "send" his trade ship to the coast of South America with a load of cargo and have it return. The player directs which cargo it is to return with for maximum profit. This allows him to make money trading without devoting 16 hours to sailing there and back. The catch is that this ship is perfectly visible in the OW and under AI control and therefore completely vulnerable. However, allow the player to set (in advance) the course the ship is to take. He will get a message when one of two things happens: the ship returns safely to its original port with lots of cargo and money...or a message that it has been sunk or captured. If it is captured by another player, then the capturing player receives everything that was on the ship (cargo, money, etc = payday!)

These are all ways to get players out on the seas exploring and being drawn to certain areas.

 

Finally it's worth noting that there has never been a successful MMO of any kind (which ultimately is what Naval Action really is) that doesn't have continuous content provided in many areas simultaneously to engage and occupy player base.

[SKurj]

On 4/20/2018 at 9:55 AM, Powderhorn said:

There are no such things as "trash woods."  Only woods that are not fully appreciated for their various characteristics.

Fair enough, but anyone building 1st rates to sell or even use is not building them from oak or fir, unless they are preying on new players who don't know better.  All of the 'preferred' woods come from outside the safezones.  

I spent most of my ingame time running materials like white oak and live oak to KPR, with over 95% of my in game time spent outside the safezones.  Alotta the people wanting to prey on traders don't realize we are out there but if you want easy player traders to prey on, you better be prepared to put in the time to find us.  Sorry but login for 30 minutes in the hope of catching one ain't gonna cut it. 

 

[vazco]

On 4/20/2018 at 4:30 PM, Fenris said:

No trash woods? I suggest you try a Fir/Fir 1st rate, or any other ship in a brawl.

After that try this ship in a battle against 2 heavy 1sts, 5 4th and 5 5th. We did this and with a support of two Ingers we sank ships worth 110 pvp marks. Each ship has its purpose and each wood can work great in particular situations. 

[Fenris]

16 hours ago, vazco said:

After that try this ship in a battle against 2 heavy 1sts, 5 4th and 5 5th. We did this and with a support of two Ingers we sank ships worth 110 pvp marks. Each ship has its purpose and each wood can work great in particular situations. 

Aha...Miracles and wonders.