Tenet

Suggestion: Make Battle Join Timers Dynamic - the Higher the starting BR, the longer the Timer. Optional: The closer to a Regional Capital, the higher the battle timer. Optional: There should be a "larger" circle that counts all the BR in the Area, and that BR should also affect the Battle Timer. If you "bite off" a piece of a larger fleet already in the area, that fleet will have the option to join the fight. BR and Tagging mechanics should be Dynamic and Scale-Up to match the size of the Fleets involved. Explanation: Make Gankers actually work for their kills - sail out into Open World, intercept people away from help. When people try to fight actual OW PvP with larger fleets, they get blocked by this timer nonsense. This is the scenario we experienced yesterday: There's an Enemy Ship following right inside a Group Fleet, scouting and relaying every minute movement. The caller decided to tag that ship and sink it. One of the people in the Fleet gets left behind the tag circle, and gets tagged by the Enemy Fleet into a second battle. The enemy scout ship gets obliterated using Preparation, everyone leaves that battle immediately. The Second battle, right in the same location, is already closed. The game literally STOPS PVP from happening despite being right on top of the same area, same fleet, same group, and on the scale of this game, same time. ________________________________ How is that good for the gameplay? Where are all the "realism" and "intuitive rules" defenders? Why does fighting in enemy waters feel like Lawyer Procedural instead of NAVAL ACTION?! Yes, I understand that in the above situation, our group and the "straggler" ship made mistakes, and according to the Rules of the game we were properly punished. I am not contesting that at all. The Rules are the problem. They enable lazy gankers to hold the rest of the population hostage and ruin group PvP. The Small Group PvPer is fast and mobile, can adapt and hunt farther from populated areas. The Fleet Group has no choice but to sail deep into enemy territory to raise hostility. The Fleet Groups should have the priority in Game Balance.

I would be happy if Yoda's Indiaman was bagged - catching a Victory off-guard is incredible. Lady luck smiles upon the brave. I also commend the Surprise that tagged some of the screeners and kept us busy in pursuit. Much rust being shaken off from both sides.

Congratulations on capturing that Victory! Some exciting chases in the storm yesterday as the screening fleets engaged.

Joining the Dutch is never biased. We are the tightest knit community on the server.

Problem: Due to the drop in Durability the Reload time to return to a war zone is too long. Effectively our dock size was reduced by x5 because now we have to store 5 ships for the same effect as before - the result is that people will end up fighting less often in the open world because the recovery time is too great. Solution: I suggest allowing low tier ships, 5th rates and below, to be transferred between Capital and designated Frontline Town, with the following restrictions: 1. Ship Must be a Warship 2. Cargo Must be Empty 3. Travel Time roughly matches required In-Game time, with X hours displayed in prompt. 4. A Town can only be designated Frontline if it belongs to your Nation and has no PB pending at time of designation. Addendum: Frontline towns should have National Docks that can store 5 extra 5th rate War Ships or below. Optional: Some voting method to move Frontline Town, with a cooldown, between limited options based on distance from Enemy towns. All the ships in National Docks move with the selection and the move requires X hours to complete (same as travel time). Each nation should have one such Town at any time (expand later?).

I like this suggestion better than the "send to admiralty" button that I wanted to resurrect. It actually makes more sense to require the open world interaction of sailing back to port.

Someone suggested this before and it's a great idea: Addendum: The same logic should apply to Nations on the list when choosing: The nations should be sorted by population, with underpopulated nations appearing first.

The orange comes out of the barrels and spreads to sails and decks.

The real Spanish are the Dutch, Verenigde Provincien (United Provinces). We take your weak Yellow and add some passionate Red to make the spicy and aggressive Orange. The real Americans are also the Dutch, with much better USA/North American based clans, working together. The Dutch are also have the real Tri-Color flag, properly oriented in Fighting position instead of Sinking position like some other "Nations". If you want to have a good time, you should join the Dutch. We have the best memes and the best clogs. This message has been brought to you by KM, the Royal Marines.

I'm NOT fine with that, and I've been saying from the start all the NPC ships (non mission) in the open world should produce massive rewards upon capture via the "Send to Admiralty" mechanic - so they don't ruin the ship crafter market. Historically a captain received 3/8 of the total cost of a ship, the guns and stores, and any money seized. We're getting barely 1/20th right now. P.S. I love how the Trade Hub suggestion conveniently places one right next to Denmark, Sweden and French territories while being a long trip away from the Dutch. If you want to add trader hubs, you need to create some imaginary islands in more balanced locations.

One method I recommend from previous experiences: Right after a big patch that changes everything or a wipe, do the following: 1. Rename and Archive popular forums related to previous patch. 2. Create new forums with the Old Names, place the link to Archive near the top. 3. Move specific highly popular threads if they are still relevant. 4. Optional: Make a "Popular Posts" Archive where the most popular but outdated posts can go.

Several questions on this topic: Why can't my captain buy a Watch item at port, that has different quality levels and could be looted or crafted? The watch would give GMT time equivalent and could be inaccurate. Then my captain can take a Measurement each Noon and Midnight with various tools to get an approximation of longitude or latitude, giving me the rough grid where my ship is located. This grid can be based on the quality of instruments. Perhaps the entire set of instruments can be the Item, and it can be lost if the ship sinks - so you would have to go back to the basic innacurate version, or obtain a quality more accurate version of the tools at some expense.

That's not the problem indicated in this thread. We don't mind the game being "Hardcore" or with slow progression. The problem is that the progression at the start feels much slower and boring than late game progression. Progression in the grindiest of games always starts faster then slows down. In this game it seems to be opposite. That's the issue and that needs to be solved so we have more players to fight with and more competition. To Admin: I responded to your request in a separate post earlier. I'm available for further debate or clarification here or via PM.

Yes, Thank you for asking. There are two main LH costs - the materials and the recipe itself. I will show two cases, one where the Snow or Mercury is going to be sold on the market, and one where the buyer contacts a Shipyard crafter and supplies all the materials. For comparison, I will use the Constitution, average priced 4th rate possible to use in mid-level Port Battle. The LH is not "free" from a Crafter perspective, because for a long time the Demand for ships will outstrip Supply of Crafters, so LH are a zero-sum game where new players are directly opposed by rich veterans competing for the same resource. http://www.navalactioncraft.com/craft-ship/snow (I know this website isn't accurate right now, but it should be close enough for this discussion) Snow: 835 Labor Hours (396 from ship) = 396 recipe + 439 materials Mercury: 1,012 Labor Hours (468 from ship) = 468 recipe + 544 materials Constitution: 2,568 Labor Hours (1,222 from ship) = 1222 recipe + 1346 materials Consider a typical crafter with L2-3 Shipyard - he has three primary customers: 1. PVP clan members that need replacement and backup ships - they will likely spend their LH making components and come to you with Materials and Money to cover the LH. Some may bring a Labor Contracts but that adds 50K to their expense for every 500 LH, raising the price by 100K to 150K, as much or more as the Material costs, a very high markup they would want to avoid. Still, this is also the population that is best at game and makes the most money. 2. Clan Junior Members that need a Snow or Mercury replacement who can gather their own materials and need only the recipe covered. They cannot bring Labor Contracts because that 50K markup will double the price of the ship, so they want the Crafter to cover all the Recipe costs. 3. Open Market Buyers - crafter supplying all materials and LH and placing the ship on-sale (with mild profit margin). This requires all LH to be by Crafter. Which one of these paths offers the least resistance and most profit for the Crafter? Which one is more lucrative? 1200-1300 LH gets the nation a 4th rate, a PB capable ship that can defend the realm. 400-450 LH gets the nation a 6th rate, useful only to the player leveling (except shallow port battles) That is already an unfavorable ratio for the 6th rates because they are much less useful on most of the map, and are much more likely to sink in both PvP and PvE. Why bother crafting 6th rates when all your LH will be dedicated to pushing the majority PB on the map for your nation, with grave ruin awaiting any nation that loses the war of attrition? They already focus on the immediate danger, and they will continue churning out 4ths and 3rd and eventually 1st rates and their replacements (exception, Pirates). 3x 6th Rates don't counter 1x 4th Rate in most Port Battles. The 6th rate crafting cost could easily be 200 LH and still remain substantial in comparison. Worst Case Scenario: Placing a 6th Rate on the Market: The total cost in LH is competing against partial costs of higher tier ships sold to clans who bring mats. Constitution for 1222 LH to join the PvP for the Nation, or 1012 LH for a Mercury or 835 LH Snow to help someone level up? Constitution and its loss-replacements clearly prevail. So the absolute majority of Shipyards will focus on producing 4th rates and above for PB, and then their replacements as the PvP happens and ships sink. This is why the markets are mostly empty right now, and are likely to remain so unless PB wars are avoided for multiple weeks, unlikely on a PvP server. You could argue that Training Crafters will want to produce 6th rates, but this is not true on the server right now - their highest paying customers are Richer Clan Members who need to replace Trading Ships where the prices can include much more profit markup and still sell. Many Crafters also carried their Crafting XP from before wipe, so many no longer want to produce low tier ships at all. There is also no intuitive system in place to ensure Crafters don't try to steal mats provided for crafting - except if they have all of them ready and conduct trade for a finished ship, another un-intuitive step. Finding a reliable Crafter is therefore a tricky and patient task, not one that is fun. The problem is with the LH and up-front costs at the most fragile and vulnerable levels in the game, during the first dozen hours of someone's Naval Action beginnings, while directly competing with Veteran players and their demand for ships. They should begin their game with easy access to Brig-type ships, being able to easily get a new one whenever the old one sinks, instead of being pushed to a Basic Cutter that doesn't teach them the critical sailing skills, and that misrepresents the fun and interesting parts of the fighting.

This is what many people currently in-game don't seem to see or understand: we are a tiny minority of survivors compared to a huge majority of new players that get very quickly burned out from the mindless Basic Cutter grind. Out of the 10000's (100000's?) that bought the game on Steam and during alpha, only about 1500 remain active. We could easily have DOUBLE the population if the developers adjusted the beginner experience to actually reflect what the game provides - the amazing fun of sailing a Mercury or a Surprise or one of the many other iconic ships. Can they not comprehend that so many people quit the game without ever trying those ships out? If they are intentionally causing this attrition to keep populations and server costs low, they are making a huge mistake, because people won't just leave, they will be disappointed at the lost potential and will complain on STEAM REVIEWS, causing them to slide, causing FUTURE SALES to disappear. I remember last year how developers discussed the Ratio between Money Earned and Ship Cost. They said "You die 5 times but during those battles you earn enough to buy a new ship of the same level, so you can eventually come back and fight again." Where did that logic disappear with this patch? Are we intentionally lied to? Why are the rewards not 5x larger on smaller ships? Why are the smaller ships not 5x less expensive? You killed durability while at the same time increasing the actual cost of an equipped ship. Why is this increase in difficulty not reserve to 5th rates and above? Why is the existing community not up in arms over the deliberate killing of the newbie population, the lifeblood of community growth and future competition?!

This is the structure of the game's player base: Players that Consider buying Naval Action on Steam > Owners of a Naval Action Account > Players that Stopped Playing the Game (much bigger than) >>> Players Still Playing the Game > Players that actually like the long travel times. You do understand that you are in the minority of the minority, and the problem is with other people not liking the semi-afk activity of long distance travel? Particularly people coming into this game from other open-world titles? The other point of disagreement, the real one, is that you claim this is a "sailing game". I'm sorry, but it isn't, and that's partly the problem. This is a Naval (happening on the Seas) Action (Conflict, Fighting) game. There are no Sailing features in the Open World. You do not control your sails. You do not get forced to adjust them or deal with the typical sailing hazards described in all the Captain logs and Book series many of us read. The Sailing is boring and tedious. It's the Action - the successful Trade, the close tough Fight, that most people crave. Yes, we don't want a WoT/CoD clone arcade, we want the open world experience, but we could damn well do with a bit less of the travel time and a bit more of the chasing, running and shooting.

The Labor Hours required to craft a Brig or a Mercury are too high compared to PB grade ships, resulting in a market where Crafters don't benefit from wasting LH on such ships and they don't actually show up sufficiently in stores. Now that we can no longer capture 6th rate ships for new players, and now that prices were increased on all shops, everyone is absolutely reliant on crafters. In bigger clans, these crafters are typically focused on pushing out Port Battleships. In smaller clans, these people suffer from low resources. New People without a clan are totally ruined unless they are great talented players, which always a SMALL minority. Bad Players also need to survive for the game to have a healthy population. PREDATORS WILL NOT SURVIVE WITHOUT A STEADY SUPPLY OF PREY. Having a Brig or Snow or a Mercury sink becomes a disaster case because the win to loss ratio to recoup losses is so high. The player has to survive ~5 to 10 missions to recoup their costs. If they make one mistake, they are ruined, pushed back into a Basic Cutter. Veterans and Clan Members don't understand that this is EVISCERATING THE LIFEBLOOD OF THE GAME. This is CRITICAL levels of damage. Many of us are doing everything we can to help but it's not enough. Players are forced to be dependent on Clans and Help and it's going to be discouraging even for the few that get help. No one wants to be a beggar. No one wants to be reliant on gifts. THIS NEEDS TO BE FIXED NOW NOT IN SIX MONTHS. There are many options for a solution. Pick one and make it happen! ~ title edited. more clear now ~ the moderation team

If you were smart you would hire an Escort, bring the Fighters in your Clan that benefit from the increased trade. Right now Escorting a trader is a huge waste of time because it's often an hour of time investment with no guarantee of any action or necessity. It's only ever done near Capitals by people who already patrol for PvP, but never extends out too far. If my idea reduced the time commitment by a significant amount, and increased the probability of action, it would actually attract PvP / Fighting captains to support their Nation's traders as the game designers clearly intended. I doubt the probability of attack would be 100% as you claim, but if it were, that would be good for those looking for a Fight to defend their Nation. If you lack Escort, you can choose to avoid the faster but more risky travel and stick to a slower but less popular route. It's a win-win for everyone.

This also makes them a honeypot for gankers, targeted by escorts and anti-gank parties. Looks like you are saying the idea will promote PvP in the open world map. That's the goal.

Many parts of the game are either entirely unrealistic, or shifted towards the arcade, to promote gameplay fun. Crafting a ship takes 0 seconds despite taking months and years. Moving between outposts. Replacing entire masts mid-combat. Repairing hull. Reviving disabled crew members with Rum. The instanced nature of battles and BR. Further items that were changed for gameplay fun - the time flow in battle vs. the reload of cannons. We have very fast days in battle instances, not corresponding to the reloads, that are also faster than historical. There's a Balance between Gameplay and Realism, and the Map Size / Travel Times in the game are still hugely tilted towards time-waste, counted in hours. We can fish for salt, but Trade Winds, modified to improve and fit the gameplay, are unacceptable? Does anyone have a Gameplay based counter argument?

I wonder if any of the weekend warriors have an opinion on this suggestion?

Oooh, a video. I like videos!

These suggestions make good sense. Implemented when?

It's similar enough, as many things are in the game while being entirely unrealistic. The "theme" fits and the gameplay is hopefully improved. You seem to have only one counter argument so far against the gameplay - "AFK sailing": If someone is willing to risk AFK sailing a lane that can be easily camped by enemies and intercepted, that's on them. Risk reward.

I'm not one, but this is my attempt at the general idea: - You have the code to draw lines and designate areas in the sea (at least in-match, if not in OW), so you can adapt that to delineate the location graphically and define it. - IF the location of the ship is on the path, THEN Ship_Vector is adjusted by automatic rudder equivalent to 20% of player control AND the speed gets a boost equivalent to BOOST ( Ship_Vector, Path_Vector ), a function that returns in % how much the ship's vector matches the path vector, the boost returns 0 if the vectors are closer to perpendicular. Elaboration: - If you enter the path, it tries to keep you inside at 20% of equivalent of your rudder strength (so you can steer out, or go perpendicular and ignore it). - The closer to the path direction you are, the higher the BOOST in speed you get (if you steer out, you go back to normal speed). - The function of BOOST can also work depending on location on the path, ie, if it's a cross-sea path it can start slower, increase in impact, then decrease back to zero gradually. That's the basics at first glance - obviously IANAP and this requires professional thought. What would be the problems you foresee as a programmer? Specific examples would help me explore the idea.