Macjimm

I tried out a free weekend of SC in Early 2016. Nice stuff but it was difficult to get into the game because all you could do was walk around, operate vessels and shoot stuff. I like Elite Dangerous because you don't have fight anything, or anyone, and there is plenty of content to enjoy. I have spent most of my time trading and there are still hundreds or thousands of hours left to learn mining, taxi service and exploring. All that and no requirement to fight anything. I even tried a wee bit of bounty hunting and it seemed realistic. The game is very configurable. ED allows players a way to turn off all of the hud info so it feels like you are in a ship. I would love to have a similar level of immersion in an age of sail game. Also NA allows players to mix single player, closed community and open sandbox and use the same personal assets in each environment . ED would allow players to use the same character within the PvE server and PvP server, and carry XP gold and assets with them. I'm excited about playing Star Citizen when it is is ready. It looks great. But I've heard it is not ready. Perhaps in 2020 ... or so.

Merry Christmas and happy new year to everyone at Game Labs and all of you fine people browsing the forums this holiday season.

Yes. I've searched and can't find the thread: I too remember that the Devs said that the mechanics can't allow storms in instances. Wish I could find that post. Seems to me that we can't have land and storms in the same instance, the system will have too much to process. The good news is; players who hate storms, and those who like them just a little bit, can rest easy.

I like the accuracy of Prater's map (it allows for the variable wind direction). Versatile & customized for each ship's top speed. I find the timings to be very close and it's nice to be able to include multiple legs of a journey. Domox's Burning Sail is easy fast access when a distance and time is needed quickly. Good for short distances with one leg. The most important feature for navigation is to be able to input the ship's speed. The map you have created contains lots if information and works very quickly for me. Both loading and access times are almost instant. I would like it more if the refresh did not recenter the view: perhaps add a clear button that holds the screen position but removes the co-ordinates that are displayed with double left mouse clicks.

I think there were lots of people that didn't like storms at all. And there were others that liked them just a wee bit. Some people prefer when the weather is almost always sunny. Everyone is different. I like to allow everyone their own preference. I had imagined some areas where storms were predominant and the rest of the world completely storm free: Players who liked sunny weather could stay away from the storm zones. Most of the Caribbean would be blue skies, starry nights, and fair winds. But sometimes it might be worth the risk, for a shorter trip, to cut through a zone notorious for wrecking ships. Would depend on your skill at sailing in heavy seas; and perhaps who was chasing you. It's okay to enjoy a game packed with the excitement of; the mighty ocean, the hazards of huge waves and the threat of a rocky shore. To some it would be more thrilling than combat. The optional danger of big weather would enhance this game. Sea monsters and wizards would trivialize it. But a storm zone is merely the stuff of imagination, as the Devs have said ... storms are not possible.

A great many of us would love to have storms and the potential damage that an angry sea can throw at helpless ships. Great sailing ships are synonymous with storms at sea. I imagine that sailors were far more afraid of the sea that they were were of the enemy's cannon. But other players are here only to fight. Nasty weather interferes with combat. Aiming is more difficult and any damage from powerful waves can meddle with the balance of competitive fairness of PvP. When we had damage free storms previously some players hated them. I had hoped that we might restrict the risk of storms to specific areas, where foul weather might pull us into an instance. Fighting against the elements would be a huge enhancement to those of us that enjoy sailing and immersion. Other areas could be free of storms to allow players to avoid the high winds. But I understand that storms with damage are too difficult for the NA engine and they will never be implemented.

A separate no-consequence training instance. I would appreciate an explanation how creating a testing (or training) instance or a casual duel instance would effect anyone else. I imagine that the training instances would be accessed from any port; not linked to OW and when the players leave the instance they are back in the port. Perhaps even allow option to join a friend, even if he/she was located in a different port and from a different nation. Also there would be no ship, XP, or gold loss/gain/damage so it would have no impact on the economy. NAL is completely different than a training instance because NAL is has E-sport structure, it encourages competition and there is a potential for loss and gain. What harm would a segregated training environment have on NA? How could it be abused? Those who don't like it don't have to use it.

Optional is key.

I'm not sure how you could prevent scamming. I've had players give me resources for free and then explain to me how to craft items. Sometimes I've sold the crafted items back to the person who gave me the resources, sometimes I've kept them, sometimes I given the crafted items to someone else. It is all part of the trade and interaction of the game. So far I've been pleased with my interactions and had trading partners gift me hundreds of thousands in gold and ships. There are some steadfast personalities in the NA community and I enjoy the gameplay. The trust and risk associated with the freedom to decide makes for interesting gameplay. There is always a chance that someone may be a scammer. I can offer payment before I get the goods and services as sign of good faith. Or I can play it safe and refuse to pay till I have received the product. I think it is more important to have the option. If the game mechanics removed all chance of getting ripped off the experience would be much less satisfying and too restrictive. Think of trading or combat like gambling, never put out what you can not afford to loose. And remember some people are prepared to lose everything and then quietly start over, without breathing a word about their loss.

Couldn't agree more. I've heard lots of players asking for more content. Perhaps if we had some improvements to economy and crafting the players would develop the story. I would love it if I could search find an area rich in resources out the in open world and extract and transport them back to port. It would create PvP in so many ways. I would be a target when I was roaming around exploring and prospecting for new sources of minerals, timber and other botanicals. I would be a target as I sat in a cove extracting the resource and again as I transported it to port. The escorts that watched over me would be particpants for PvP. The process of selling resources to crafters would add interest and levels of detail and open opportunities for foundries, wineries, breweries, mills. A colorful story could evolve from the business relationships that would be integral to successful exploration, harvest and crafting. Interdependancies could generate layers of complex interaction. It could give us a reason to travel around the OW with enthusiasm. Attention to economy might go a long way. Some may argue that economy is only PvE because it isn't fighting. PvE can create PvP and a rich, rich story. Plus it makes the game interesting. NA legends could be a solution for those who hate PvE. But I imagine that logging on and fighting back to back battles, day after day, will get boring for many people.

didn't completely understand the explanations here on the forums, so I asked in chat in game. Are the following statements true? If you get attacked in a friendly reinforcement zone you can call reinforcements. You may not call reinforcements if there is an attack of a friendly NPC fleet next to you and you get pulled into the combat. Smuggler flag allows you to enter enemy ports (in trader ships only) but will not allow friendlies to attack you. and thanks Duke, You can call reinforcement by - releasing mouse pointer with pressing the CTRL key and then clicking the Call reinforcement button.

Can someone explain how a current smuggler flag works? Within reinforcement zones and outside them?

I like Hodo's idea, but I'm not sure if we could allow traders to give in to a superior hunter without creating an abuse portal. I was sailing a trader Lynx recently and was jumped by a Prince. I didn't have a chance. I did not surrender. It was over very quick and the hunter teleported away to the other side of the Caribbean (At least that's what he said). I lost my ship and my cargo. It's okay. It's a PvP server. Stuff happens like that. But imagine if Hodo's idea could be implemented. I could have negotiated with the hunter, (he seemed to be a bright reasonable chap, polite and sensible.) We could have savored the battle a wee bit longer, enjoyed a chance to agree on terms. Perhaps if the game mechanics allowed him some of these combat marks or if I could trade with him inside the Battle Instance I could have paid him gold (how much does it cost to buy C. Marks?). The way the battle works right now it was a blind rush to sink or capture me then exit out of the instance. Very little PvP. I like the idea of surreder options that provide an incentive to the hunter to trade my ship back to me for - gold, goods or my word for future services . Sinking or capping me in my T. Lynx from a Prince does take much skill. I would like to have an option to the current mechanic of surrending just to spite my attacker.

I hear you Landsman and think I sort of understand you. You would like to find more PvP. You may find it a little frustrating that some players are on the PvP server and not putting themselves in a position to engage you in PvP. You also may not agree that players should be able to obtain ships and grow their finances without being forced into fighting with other players. I like to play on the PvPEuro server because there are more players and I have more chance to interact with other players. More trading opportunities with other players. More chance to put my crew to work selling their labor. More access to buy more kinds of ships. The element of risk on either PvP server makes travelling more exciting and I've had some interesting close calls as I escaped from ambushes or chases when I am on a trade run. I also like PvPGlobal because I have a different character and unique acquaintances there. I am playing less on the PvE server but still find that the community is very helpful and arguably has the most dependable players in the game. I'm very glad we have an option of a PvE server, the community there is stellar. Recently I seem to enjoy the PvP servers the most but I do not look for fights (with players or NPCs), I avoid them. It goes without saying that we all have different styles of play. While I can appreciate that you favor fighting players, it is a wee bit offensive that are suggesting my preference is retarded and I should stay off the PvP server because I value a different type of game play. My method of gameplay has no impact on you whether I am on or off of the PvP server ... except on those occasions when I am traveling outside of my reinforcement zone and I provide you with a potential target for you to kill or capture. The total player count does not have to equal the total people ready to PvP with you. It is just fine if there are a couple hundred players on the server that are crafting, trading, fishing or just interacting and choose not to PvP with you. They don't need to leave and play on another server. You need to accept that not everyone has the same interests. We have as much right be here as you do.

So thats why everyone left? When I look at the numbers it appears that the population is pretty steady. With the exception of a honeymoon of a few thousand initially with the steam intro ... for a short time. If I play during primetime there are many hundreds. During the slow times a couple hundred. And when it is really slow less than a hundred. But it has been that way for a long time. More or less.

Have you tried Naval Action Legends? I understand that there is lots of PvP there. Not sure if there is a server active all the time or if there really is PvP without too much waiting but I think that was what it was for. Player vs Player combat. Check it out if you haven't yet.

Thanks for the info. So all of OW except for a tiny area around each capital has no reinforcements. 15 km is not very far considering the size of the Caribbean. If I wanted PvP I would look for it in all of the area not close to the capitals. Seems like a big area.

Just throwing this out there. I don't know alot about MMOs. (learned everything here in NA). But perhaps players can create their own content. Players who like PvP can work with other players using the forums, chat, TS3, discord to get an idea of where the conflict density is highest and at what time. Having variety with part of the OW rather quiet and other areas like the battle front is appealing. It allows for different tones in the game. Perhaps the Devs could build an ingame indicator that provides a magic radar showing where PvP is happening but it is better without it. Without a PvP indicator players have to work together to find battles. It can be fun to gather intel and co-ordinate actions. Trust becomes important and the chance of using information for an ambush becomes possible. The idea of information and location reports is interesting and somewhat appealing. I'd be careful of how much detail we put in the reports. If we make a workaround that makes sharing intel between players redundant we may make the shallower and isolate ourselves. On a different note. I think that finding conflict areas may be very difficult because of the high speed in OW and ability to teleport. It will never be practical to get a snapshot of the theater and where fleets are because the situation is dynamic. Players can move quickly and instantly with and without ships across huge distances. Players can hide ships in port and teleport to another one in a heartbeat.

Can someone explain how the reinforcement zones work? Where are they located? When were they added to the game? Perhaps a link to the post when they were last added.

I read the title to this thread and was tantalized at the thought of salvage. Thoughts of gaining rights to stranded or sunk ships. This would be a fantastic addition to the game. Having access to cargo and ship material, perhaps the remains of a stranded ship. The possibility of refloating her and towing or sailing her to port. Added content. But the elation sobered as I quickly remembered that our ships are invulnerable to weather, all shorelines are harmless and collisions with other ships are impossible in open world. There is simply no opportunity for salvage. Only plunder. So we must be content with what we can get from the holds of defeated victims. The chance that a ship may not have valuable content or material for repairs is an enhancement as it contributes to the interest by adding an element of chance. Makes it more realistic too.

Can't hurt anything if it is optional.

I missed lots. If you don't see why for now we cant sub divide the map a little to suit pve'ers or why would PvE'ers quit when they don't have to worry about going into the pvp zone? you may want to read the following threads: In March the admin announced that the PvE server would be closed. Later that month the admin guaranteed that the PvE server would not be closed for at least a year and a half after the game release. Within the threads above are detailed explanations about the reasons that players do not want the PvE server to be merged with PvP.

Actually what I read seems just the opposite. Some players are saying they are not willing to play a game that they do not enjoy. They are offering their opinion that the game sucks or about extreme changes to the game would change it so completely it would not be worth playing. It seems very kindergarten to expect mature adults to continue investing their time playing a game that they have no interest in. Perhaps the merge would work best if we had a teacher who could force everyone to stay and make us play together ... regardless of what the game is. The game seems good to me right now. I used to play on all 3 servers. Since the last wipe I've spent almost all my time on one. It is still reassuring to have a choice. Perhaps we should leave the set up as it is. Merging the servers will not make a big difference to the population. And we will lose some players who are happy with the status quo. For players who are threatening to quit if the servers are not merged .... let them. They are not happy and their absence will not make much difference to the population. A better option than a merge may be to allow a one time opportunity for players to transfer assets from Global to Euro. And the PvE players are not hurting anyone in PvP. It is not feasible to expect that they will stay if they are forced into a PvP server. There seems to be no benefit to killing the PvE server. If the reason for a merge is that Game-labs can not afford to maintain 3 servers then none of the discussion has merit. The discussion should be focused on possibilities for alternate funding.

What is the proposed capacity of the "one big server? Would you reinstate multiple servers if the population increases into the thousands? Or would the "one big server" be limited to a couple thousand players?

The name of this thread and vote options could be tweaked. POLL: Remove the PvP Global server? VOTE: 1) No, allow players a choice of two servers 2) Yes and wipe out all of the PvP Player assets on both servers. 3) Yes but allow Global Players to transfer their assets and XP to PvP Euro. seriously though be carfull what you wish for ....