Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Norfolk nChance

Members
  • Content Count

    1,570
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Norfolk nChance

  1. Thanks for all the feedback guys. Keep it coming both good and bad points are truly much appreciated. I should have added a thank-you page not just to @admin, but to YOU the community that really make the game come alive for me. We as a whole (Dev’s & testers) sometimes forgot this with over tweaking in my humble opinion. Name dropping was a big part of the fun within the story, from @Banished Privateer to @Wraith to even @Ink and many others. The community make this game come alive just to repeat myself... The appendix I stripped back a lot. Originally, I included a lot of my research notes and links. Just this very short piece took an awful lot of background fact finding. Definitely added to my knowledge of the whole period. The Cast in Order of appearance, was very important with three types of distinct characters, The real-life person, the player character in NA-OW game and the purely fictional entity. In the end it felt I was making it too easy for the reader to add a wiki-link page to see if Captain Miller or Shia Delma or Lazare Carnot were real-life people or not. Again, this applies to the ports and the ships mentioned. The idea, if you like was to encourage the reader to dig deeper into the history if he liked a certain idea or aspect of the story. This led me to a new appreciation for the old ‘Age of Sail’ writers like O’Brian and C.S Foster pre-internet. The leg work they did was amazing. I’ve got a good book collection both technical and fiction, google and the wiki were indispensable plus a couple of other dedicated websites. However, the big surprise was how much I gained from our own FORUM page. The HISTORY and Shipyard sections became a real go too in cases of ambiguity or ideas @Fluffy Fishy and gang are a real resource. This was my first attempt and amateurish I’ve no illusions. I really enjoyed the process and really appreciate honest cold feedback. Hopefully one of you out there maybe inspired to have a go at something like this and do a much better job. The purpose originally was to show ideas like a campaign for RvR, but with some deeper dimension within a complex storyline. In the end, it was just a short dark tale set within NA-OW... Norfolk. Ps the Capt. Norfolk nCook guides mentioned can be found here. https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/26689-the-elite-archive-guides/
  2. The Haitian Campaign (a Naval Action Open-World story) This is a fictional story I’ve being playing with set within NA-OW. The PDF has hyperlinks and printer friendly. The Maps maybe an issue though. Norfolk Haiti_Campaign.pdf
  3. @Coco Well done nice work and glad to see an updated craft guide. This was my first guide I wrote for NA and is a tad out dated to say the leased... https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=821902779 This is the problem with any sort of guide. However, as I keep pointing out try to show the method or strategy behind the tactics. This way the player can use the idea and develop his own route even if the game mechanics have changed. This includes PvP guides as well... My Crafting Experience Understand the build mechanics before embarking on any build. Piss Poor Planning Pisses off Norfolk. In my day the Trader Lynx had no guns therefore no carriages needed building. Its Labor from basic parts and CREW space made it the easiest and cheapest to do. The fact that Oak Log was used in several first stage construction to second and final means this was the ideal main source material. All base materials should easily be found in all the adjacent ports to a Capital PORT. Build an oak farm. NEXT, is set the warehouse up logically to build T-Lynx’s in sets of 20x. Estimate production costs. With your perks, an old perk not sure if it still exists was called Shipyard Connections. This added 15% to the AI bid price of your ship. Using excel, workout the actual cost of the build to then hit the AI bid. I had it down to 100Gold only. This method, is so much more convenient than trying to sell the ships to players. Analyze the break-up prediction cost as well. I found selling into the AI worked the best. Planning... The problem comes to money. Early on you simply don’t have the resources to do something like this. Later on, yes and training up a CRAFTer ALT as a Clan ruler is vital to free up other players. This ALT would then build and store the clan FLEETs not the individuals unless passing over a time zone. The Clan ALT would then be the focus for the resources in order to build much larger ship fleets with specialist woods etc... My advice to New players is split the goals up. Aim for Rank 20 then do something else. Comeback aim for 30 and then 40 and finally 50. Its logarithmic scale will have players not sticking with the original plan, deviation is the killer. It took three days to train Norfolk nWay my ALT to level50. That’s with resources and planning from my MPC. On its own an MPC must plan realistically. Really like the work you’ve put in. Well done Norfolk nChance [ELITE].
  4. @Mr. Doran I agree with your first point totally. The I-farm also... The WoWs (don’t know tanks) I found a different experience. I found myself being farmed this is totally true and very frustrating. However, my clan leader pointed something out which was a bitter pill to swallow. I’m sailing in too high-level ship for my talent... Slow down, learn the class and don’t run up the ranks too soon... Similar here in NA-OW with players too inexperienced and yet carrying a Rear-Admiral rank. In WoWs ship level 5 break sees the Seal clubbers am sure you know them. My problem with WoWs was the random battles with my ship bling on that finds me teamed up with utter morons. Not Newbies or Beginners I mean morons. Losses here become a costly waste. Grouping is only with 2 other clan mates but I’d like that wider. It’s a crap shoot. The RANK battles see a much better player quality and focus in my opinion. The Scenarios and Campaigns helped a lot and NA should adopt them. Learning the finer points of the game. I don’t know about you, but in NA-L I used to like the solo weekend trials competition the most. The ability also to play as a large group was a big plus over WoWs... Norfolk
  5. @Fluffy Fishy Great topic and agree with @Haratik hoping it takes off. My short answer is Sane like you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques-Noël_Sané The reasons will probably be different and I’ve got the history wrong somehow so please correct me. I’d like the link to the other thread, but of Sane’s three four major works this is the one reason why he stands out. The fact that his peers copied it reason enough. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Téméraire-class_ship_of_the_line The Temeraire design is the main reason for me. How it was adopted, copied and tweaked then by the Royal Navy, Spanish and the Dutch. The sheer volume of ships produced of this type against others is testament to the change in warfare at sea. Even though it was a very costly build. The ability to build massive line ships by most leading Nations wasn’t the issue with the likes of HMS Victory, L’Ocean or the Santisima Trinidad. The problem was bringing these massive gun platforms in a line to bear onto the enemy’s line to have a polite exchange. The Permeant Fighting Instruction laid down by the Royal Navy and then adopted elsewhere allowed the ability to control many line ships at one go from a single Flag ship. Unfortunately, a Captain or Admiral from either side could quickly work out and see which line would in all likeliness win. This then leading to an Ossification to the English tactic with neither side actually ever engaging... Fleet Tactics and Naval Operations by Hughes & Girrier https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1682473376/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Ch2 Tactical Development, Page 42 English Tactics Ossified The 74-Gun third-rate Temeraire-class balanced fire power and speed in perfect harmony. Ships of similar size built at the time leaned either too much toward fire power at the loss of speed or vis-a-versa. The French adopting a distance type of hit and run attack against the sails and rigging sat perfectly with this type of ship. https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28367-14th-february-1797-battle-cape-st-vicent/ If time have a look at the battle details and Collingwood in the HMS Excellent. He caught up to heavier built Spanish ships and yet was still able to deliver enough alpha once they became in range. Summary Naval Warfare needed to change from the mid-1700s. I think Sane’s design of just this one class of ship helped progress fleet tactical engagements. Humphreys and Slade yes also contributed in their designs I agree. I would like to mention the Swedish shipbuilder Fredrik Henrik af Chapman and his thinking about the parabola method as well. This for the time was incredible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredrik_Henrik_af_Chapman Would love to hear others views and thoughts. Great subject. Norfolk
  6. did you notice a huge difference between RTX2060 and the 960...?
  7. not my intention @Mr. Doran, but I see your point. The idea was to help with content from a basic start only. NnC
  8. @mikawa https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=934048215 really like the idea. I did this above an age a go and obviously dated, but more than just the graphic cards inclusion as well. My build PC not Laptop... Intel i7-6700K CPU @ 4.00 GHz Kingston Hyper X 16.0 GB RAM 64bit OP Windows 10 Home GPU GeForce GTX 980 Ti v419.35 I live in Hong Kong with an average ping rate of 180. This rate has remained the same since Unity5 change over. This is my main problem with engagements but is not a graphics issue. Issues – After a STEAM patch update this PING can double to 300+. This is usually solved by looking at the Properties – Local Files – then “Verify Integrity of Game Files” Average FPS I have locked at 60. V-sync and Anti-aliasing off Everything else on High or Ultra settings. Like @Liq said I too need to dial it down with larger engagements. Norfolk.
  9. @LeBoiteux said... But that requires a tremendous investment for GL devs. Will it be their future priority ? Ordinarily I’d agree. However, the Dev’s must have already an overlay interface for the program. I doubt they hard coded the tutorial progression missions as an example. I’ve seen some stunning work already on U-Dread, and with @sterner and his progress on just the first phases of U-Admiral. To design an SDK overlay in which to design and playout RvR player-built content actually doesn’t seem a tremendous investment in either time or Money. It could help solve a lot of issues regarding content. Unfortunately, neither @Ink or @admin have replied to say either way. Which of course is their prerogative. NnC
  10. @sterner Wow nice, you need testers etc. soon? Norfolk.
  11. Idea: NA-OW Editor Short Version at the bottom of the post… Grab a glass of red, you’ll probably need it. I’ve noticed heavy feedback lately about lack of content or RvR. I want to suggest an idea if possible, first to use in PvE that then could help the Dev’s with wider campaigns into PvP as well. @admin The Idea: Is to allow a player base program like an EDITOR or SDK that’ll allow them to build mission scenarios of their own. This can be replayed via STEAMs Workshop for friends and others to also try. I’ve mentioned this idea before. Is this possible in concept @Ink or @admin ? I know it’ll be a lot of work but would be less work than writing all your own campaigns and mission threads. Please watch these two old ARMA2 YouTube videos. They’re only 5 minutes each. The ARMA editor has changed a lot and is much easier to use now, but I wanted to show you the nuts and bolts here. Parts 1&2 both 5mins each https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Af6e0n7fQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bynzzMt7Fg4 Use PvE first… Use the PvE server first for obvious reasons. Templated Campaigns and designs by players could be built for restricted rank access or multi-fleet composition needs in order to fore full the walkthrough. Let me know what you think, good or bad… Norfolk nChance [ELITE] ARMA III Editor evolutions https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kynF_6kRGMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOm7TocJzZA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIvLIg6gQB0 Short Version: Thursday night after a bottle of white Cloudy Bay and a couple of lines, Mrs. nChance and I have roleplay. What makes it work is the storyline and scenarios and outfits and tools or input. The more input we put in the better the outcome… The same is true in NA. The ability to build content scenarios to play out could heighten the enjoyment of open world. However, always agree on that safe word first…!
  12. @jodgi positive spin and @Ruthless4u dead in the water views all are valid... A Question I have for all of you, except the Dev’s... @admin What things are absolutely needed at the bare minimum for a NA-L style game to work? For me, its mostly said in my posts before... Universe Sync models with NA-OW, all ship models are the same in the Franchises Universe. An historic detailed Player Character Statistics log. And CLAN construction ability. https://worldofwarships.eu/en/community/accounts/554819715-NorfolknChance_UK/!/pvp/overview/ A Grind path that can be accelerated in time via a PREMUIM ACCOUNT purchase. EVENTS, include PvE, Campaign, Tournaments and clan events. And fixed opponent selector... I want to fight @Ruthless4u 1v1 or His Clan v My Clan... Different styles of arena scenario’s on random battles. High-touch and very regular client contact from the game’s publisher. That’s quite a lot, but not impossible. The small team of GLs will need at least a very dedicated permanent and proactive team just to NA-L. What do you all think? Doubters also included... Norfolk
  13. A little help if possible. This is part of my Naval Action Story. In the tavern section PuLp Fiction, is the title. A fictional account of the battle Cape St. Vicent told from the perspective of Norfolk. It’s not edited yet, but would appreciate any critiques good or bad. Whether the story line or inaccuracies in the tale... Norfolk
  14. @Wraith You make a great point about speeding up OW, and it makes sense. The issue I have is PING. @Banished Privateer talks about two clients with 30ms ping. In Asia or Hong Kong, I’m fast with 180ms. Go out to our Antipodean brothers and you’re looking at 300+. Now @Socialism points out it’s a server sync issue, not ping related. If so, no problem. Increase the speed and let’s see... In Battle, I would like to test slowing things down. Just to see how it plays out. Norfolk
  15. @Niels Terkildsen Look I think both you and @Mr. Doran have made some great points. I myself became bored of WoWs and the RANK Tournaments the only vehicle I wanted to play in. It aims I think at a younger audience than NA. However, they do put an enormous amount of effort in keeping you interested. The Open-World makes the PvP important. It builds content as to why to you are fighting. This includes the craft and build structure effort put in. EvE did or does the same. NA-L I loved to bits including the grind path, but even I could see without real content input, the retention rates would suffer. The whole franchise actually needs BOTH. NA-L to feed NA-OW. You learn more about PvP combat in NA-L that becomes applicable in OW PvP. This applies to PvE to a smaller degree. WoWs I had over 1,000 PvP battles in months. The same was true with Legends with hundreds within a short space of time. You or I gained much more from the experience. https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/ Look at the dates and external content input. That is what NA-L will need to survive. Not its sail or combat model but its client connectivity. That’s what a small firm GLs must try to replicate with NA-L at the very least. Norfolk
  16. I don’t think its as black and white as in the opinions expressed. It also folds into the argument of content in OW that is now lacking. Right now, NA-OW needs to be fully launched. The content issue needs resolving. In the past with more PC numbers the players drove the content. It needs NPC campaigns and mission hurdles to help drive the player content once more. Once NA-OW is launched, then and only then a NA-L arena style game can be planned. It uses exactly the same models and universe with cycle updates. Otherwise the NA-F (franchise) loses its economy of scale. On the TEST of NA-L this wasn’t the case. All models and updates need to be the same from PvP, PvE to NA-L. The low retention argument for NA-L test is flawed. The NA-L arena will have a Premium Account grind drive, but will give a potential client a FREE first look into the NA-F. The only issue I have from my investigations into WoWs, is for this style of game to work and earn revenue it needs Dev PUSH content. This I have not seen in any Game-Labs product so far. WoWs success even with a weaker model comes from Out of game context driving in game content... Without it the excellent combat and sail models will not sell themselves or keep the client interested over the longer term. This mainly for arena games but applies to open world sandboxes also... Norfolk
  17. @Wraith said Seriously though, the game purchase model without a subscription, and the mechanics-breaking DLCs have hamstrung the game and its development in important ways as well. I think is correct, but and correct me if wrong... only EvE has succeeded in the sub model. The important thing to look at is the NA-F or Franchise. Once NA-OW is launched, this platform is perfect for the NA-L arena style game with Premium Account grind built in. This FREE look into NA subs the whole franchise. @van Veen Yeah wow, I like that... even demotions for bad behavior instead of straight Nation ejection. Practically, though that’s a big idea on its own. Love it. @victor Unfortunately, I can’t disagree with you. Could @Ink code something like this to test. Very basic Rank 6 PvE mission. Limit entry 3x PC Co-Op Tiny steps though to test. Link missions into a small campaign. These are optional of course but structured in such a way to deliver the right skill book at the right time. The missions solo, PvE, Co-Op, PvP cover crafting, trade missions and mix fleet needs... Start with just three tasks, one opens two, opens three. One is solo, two is Co-Op. The final is a small port raid that needs at least 1x Mortar Brig to succeed. Rewards... cash, books, entry to 5th rate progression... NnC
  18. @Sir Loorkon You couldn’t have said it better “meaningless…” Each rank should be seen as an achievement and not a CREW hurdle. The Skill limiter again just the thought is giving an understanding as to what they do. This is not an easy task, but will provide meaningful content. NnC
  19. Do we promote too fast...? Grab a glass of red, you need it... Backdrop... Last week saw some very interesting threads posted. This is one below... https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28422-what-happened-to-the-2500-players/ In all fairness to the community it is worth reading through all the views. Unlike most this doesn’t deteriorate into the usual “This is my view...” blinkered repeats back n forth. It gives many different and clear insights into their view of this game. Even @admin makes a very good point also worth the read. The Content Argument This is mentioned a few times, but what does it really mean? Players stating there is little if anything to do. In fact, every player is focused now onto the same goals to reach. Unless that PC is Hardcore it will prove near impossible to achieve from a Newbie or casual standpoint. How can Naval Action receive a BAD review due to lack of content from players having plus 250hours invested in the game saying it lacks content? Even one with 13k hours invested? The comment by @Wraith... “this is inherently the problem when you build a game around players being content, rather than having content attract and retain players, who generate additional content, etc.” This to me answers the 2,500 down to a few 100 players we have now. The Players actually provided the content as I’ve mentioned like East v West, the Care Bear Alliance or rogues like [SORRY]. For Good or Bad it actually was player driven content. That in itself is not enough, and needs NPC Game Content that then drives the people driven one in this Light Sandbox we work in. Fun Factor Unfortunately, @victor as mentioned this a few times in the past... “The reason of the decline is simple: the game used to be funny ... Is it's no longer a game, basically ... it's a work? Games shall be funny and NA it's not” He’s NOT talking about grind path either. What’s Changed...? This Question by @Christendom I love and have asked it myself a few times in the past... “We're 3+ years into development and it feels like the game is maybe less ready for release than when I picked it up almost 3 years ago. I'm sure I'm not alone in this opinion. In that time frame we've changed ROE, RVR and even a new crafting system....but it still feels like the same tired old stuff without any imaginative increase in content...” Now I must agree, the game is definitely an improvement from three years ago, but three years’ worth of time taken? How much more does the combat model need tweaking or even overhauling God forbid? The Core Game play Then we see @koltes post breaking it down into four areas... To keep players interest game should have targeted the following making the below interesting and entertaining as well as challenging: a.) Character progression; b.) Recreational activities; c.) Competitive activities; d.) End game content He goes on like others to mention the Economy, skills and clan Nation mechanics all known views. @jodgi regret comment “I kinda regret this topic now. There has been some... discussion, but it has attracted so many posters that just came here to dump a turd smelling of discontent. I touched on this in my previous post, but it's cringy to witness these besserwissers swooping in giving, often contradictory, "advice". I'm not mad or riled up or anything... just... dejected” he said This I disagree with and is a great thread full of insight. No, it wasn’t a dump on the game at all and you shouldn’t feel dejected one bit. This entire thread made me think a lot about the game as a whole. With all due respect to my peers and @admin/Dev’s there was nothing NEW here that I hadn’t heard or read about before. No new revelation or solutions either. Norfolk Reviews I gave my opinion first regarding my reluctance to return to the game even as a fan boy and hardcore player. Then to the Content problem and backstory needed for PvP and PvE to sit on. The NPC Nation Overlay and Campaign arc thread mission ideas suggested. Again, nothing I haven’t said before. It led me back to thinking as in the OP 2,500 days and my memories. Then the compare reviews of our two peers EvE and WoWs. We have a much better sail and combat model than either, and have had it for years as @Christendom suggested. So, what is the difference...? Is EvE better... WoWs what’s the long term attraction...? https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/26423-idea-norfolk-compares-apples-to-oranges-to-avoid-a-lemon/ this I believe shows even without the resources of the other two Game-Labs NA-OW still delivers. Both @admin and crew have done a remarkable job. The difference highlighted is client connectivity. This my main arguments with the NA-L concept. The other main high light was the newbie treatment and tutorials. Idea: The Slow Promotion Model Concept Question: How long did it take your Main Player Character (MPC) to gain rank 10 Rear-Admiral or equivalent from rank1. From a BASIC Cutter, how long did it take you to get into your very first SoL Victory, L’O or Santi...? Take your ego away and answer honestly. Now, if you’ve played EvE or WoWs... EvE how long before you got into your first BASIC Capital ship? In WoWs how long did it take before you could participate in the RANK tournaments? These levels in all three games whether PvP or PvE are really the point of the game’s Ultimate promotion level stages or top out. The Games, each from this point on take a different view to the player. I’d suggest of the three NA first, WoW second and EvE third... Rank Promotion Built on Time as well as Performance Imagine a Promotion level built on XP like now but also with a time element. The like XP in Craft and Rank is also Logarithmic in scale. Getting longer between levels. Think of ALT promotions now... How would this impact their use? You’d need to invest real time in them just like your MPC. Within each level certain Skills and skill books must be also achieved and found. The skill or book once activated, takes time to produce its 100% statistical effect as you use it. Career Direction Once again, Crafting or Piracy or Port Ownership or Clan Leader. In the same way, unique skills and the different grade qualities layered both on time and xp. A Fleet Admiral skill book cannot be used or developed by a Rank 5 level player... and so on. Campaign Activity Completing NPC Nation campaigns solo, co-op and pvp gain these entry levels. Make up requiring mix fleet compositions to succeed a specific mission. http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Campaigns http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Scenarios The Output Effect Here now each player has a different short- and medium-term goal to that of the general Hardcore topped out player. Focus, training and community interaction is needed at all levels, the rewards equally become more relevant to that individual player. Summary It seems like I’m introducing even more grind. However, what its designed to do is understand what each level or rank of promotion is. Building the content with layering campaigns and limited skill knowledge defines each rank, making them more important rather than just a crew hurdle. Do you remember the difference between Rank 6 and 7...? Using this system will get much more activity in content that’s fun and not grind drive. Just an idea Norfolk
  20. The thread is drifting to subjects we’ve discussed before… https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/26648-idea-dynamic-npc-nation-overlays/ http://lorebook.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1:cosmos-epicarc-guides&catid=1:cosmos-epicarc-guides&Itemid=2 The EvE long and deep Onion layering is vital for long term retention. The EPIC arcs seem vast in scale but are four similar long campaign mission storylines. This would really help NA-OW, but is hard work to develop. However, back to the OP way back when we had 2,500 PCs, we didn’t have mission arcs. The player size did create its own arcs like Lord Vicious and [SORRY] or other shenanigans afoot. EAST v WEST or the Care Bear Alliance and so on… Good or Bad these things created story arcs or Lore. The arena or Legend path seems like a good solution, but in my opinion is a false dawn. I simply don’t play WoWs now, it just became boring or stale over time. The Legends model should be a FREE loss leader into the franchise with a Premium Account grind path. NA-OW needs a real and believable BACKSTORY that PvP or PVE sits on. https://community.eveonline.com/backstory/races/ Why are we here? This then leads onto YOU writing your own story within this Universe. NnC
  21. @Wraith So, and correct me if wrong you’re saying NA-OW as an MMO has a too finer concentric focus or singular objective? The new, casual and hardcore players all are too focused on the same goals. The input needed to achieve them immediately isolates the newbie (leads to low retention) and kills off the casual player with too high a mountain to climb. I assume EvE Online [EvE] distribution bell curve looks like the lower Healthy graph? The game [EvE] unlike NA-OW opens up to the player more like an onion in layers. Taking much longer. The newbie or even Casual player has no concept or intention of building a Capital ship in Low-Sec? NnC
  22. @Ruthless4u You’re not a troll, and keep the shock quotes coming. It makes people look, think, react and see. It’s funny I think @jodgi thread and the Legends views alongside. Very similar in my view. Game-Labs fails miserably at Client interaction. NA-OW looks great, but how different is it to the start of 2017? Be honest now... Forget about scale for a second but in percentage terms... How much does Wargaming.n split resources (time/HR/money) between the in-game content to the out of game client contact? 50/50? Game-Labs focuses 100% on in-game content that still causes a fracas of community splits. The problem is large but not impossible to solve. The U-Dreadnaught project @Nick Thomadis is doing I hope in these early stages starts to look at client facing constant contact interfaces like WoWs. NA-L is long term no doubt, but it needs this other part currently absent from the Game-Labs model for it to succeed. NnC
  23. @jodgi Nice question... tough to answer though. Some very good replies already. Over the last week these two threads really got me thinking... https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28415-your-first-hour-in-na/ https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28340-first-month-in-the-game-my-experiences/ ... why hasn’t @Norfolk nChance returned to the OW game yet? This post Legends finish, the PvP mergers and exploring WoWs. What has changed within the Game as a whole over this last year? What hasn’t changed...? Then let’s look a little further back to this point... https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/20652-the-junkie-his-dealer…/ @Teutonic makes some really good points also. The original bitch was 1x dura to fine woods to tech tree. Night-flips I don’t believe an issue. Continually tweaking combat mechanics did take its toll though. The irregular STOP START in updates and progress reports... Poor Dev feedback at times My reluctance to get @Norfolk nChance going again is a worry. The hardcore, spreadsheet-ing, fan-boy isn’t afraid of the grind or hard work. The problem is in belief... The belief the underlying model hasn’t yet surfaced at even this late stage of EA. The mods, skills, BR systems, and RoEs will change again. At this stage, I’d probably be expecting a more “tweaking” type of changes. Not wholesale change, which I still think will happen somewhere. This is the energy vampire. NA-OW needs to feel stable deep down. The Dev’s maybe in my unqualified opinion focus too much on an already great combat model at the expense of the wider games polish. Norfolk.
  24. @Ruthless4u has a good point here. I may not agree with it, but it is his view. The view portrayed as a fact is for shock value only. He doesn’t know if OW will be a success or not. However, it is true in my opinion that an OW successful launch is the first step to then think about a Legend style game implementation. OW fails, then I believe no Legend development would be possible. I don’t want to hear anything from @admin or another Dev regarding a Legend style game until POST NA-OW launch. He, @admin has already stated where the current status lies and I want him to stick to it. Get OW launched... @Hethwill is a Moderator and a valued community contributor. His views or opinions regarding a Legend style game in the future has as much value as @Ruthless4u or indeed @Norfolk nChance he is not a Dev or a lackey either. I’m a NA fanboy but you know this already. @jodgi POST https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28422-what-happened-to-the-2500-players/?tab=comments#comment-622741 Is what worries me. I’ll reply directly to it separately, but why hasn’t NnC returned to the OW game yet? What’s the problem...? All of you know my views regarding Legends well enough. This “Daydream” post I found funny re-reading my original reply to the OP. If time have a read above, it led me to then write the Compare Apples to Oranges to avoid Lemon idea post. The NA-OW to EvE Online to World of Warships https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/26423-idea-norfolk-compares-apples-to-oranges-to-avoid-a-lemon/ In my humble unqualified game development experience believe the Dev’s focus way too much on an already good combat model. This at the expense of developing out of game context to drive in game content. This creates a distance between client and provider. This relationship is fundamental to the success of WoWs, and yet is totally absent in NA-OW. NA-L fundamental success is anchored on Game-Labs developing a high touch system with its client base. Norfolk nChance [ELITE]
×
×
  • Create New...