Norfolk nChance

completely agree Norfolk nTexas

@dron44I you could always help by taking the higher ground. Secondly my mother joke is better than yours... N.

Put things into some realistic context here... Was this toxic behaviour or cyber bullying? I think not, was it school yard, in poor taste behaviour? Probably yes. Does it deserve a warning probably yes, a ban no. The @admin problem… The thing is with this sort or reporting and behaviour we play into @admin hands. He’s wanted and warned in the past how he’d like to shut down global chat. It wastes @Ink time. If @admin decided to do this just because of this one-sided behaviour offered as evidence it would be a travesty. I don’t want to lose Global chat. This was not toxic or bullying behaviour. However, I do think @dron44I and @Jack Aubrey owe some form of apology… If you want a real mom joke…What’s the difference between your mom and 3 dicks…? Your Mom can’t take a joke… Regards Norfolk nChance

Would like to see this a campaign mission here... https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/29028-book-when-britain-burned-the-white-house/ Norfolk

Book: When Britain Burned the White House Peter Snow, 2013 https://www.amazon.com/When-Britain-Burned-White-House/dp/1250048281 Hadn’t done a book review for sometime and thought this is one might be useful for the New Ultimate-Age of Sail testing by @sterner. A Campaign mission around this incident would be interesting. The book tells of the 1814 invasion of Washington DC by British forces. Anybody from the UK will know John Snow the journalist very well indeed. He and his nephew have done some great battle re-works over the years. In this work John Snow gives a very readable piece covering the amphibious assaults on Washington DC and Baltimore. The key is Snow’s narrative bringing the story alive making it read like a thriller. With colourful details regarding personalities and their interactions with one another. The notes on Harry Smith and George De Lacy Evans giving new revelations was an insight on the events. I buried the book in a weekend without even noticing… The book contains several maps and glossy prints of the participants and the White House of course. However, the book only gives a brief outline to the British-US war of 1812 and its outcome. Also, from a Naval-Action point of view it is lacking in big picture detail surrounding the Naval events. It does cover the FORT McHenry bombardment from British Bomb ships though. Summary For me from an armchair strategists’ point of view, we start to see the development of British Armed Forces working together as a team. Before we’d seen the Royal Navy as a delivery system only, like in the Peninsula campaigns of Portugal. The influence of Admiralty butting heads with Senior Army hierarchy is interesting here while fighting the young American’s. That friction of Navy, Army and air force still exists to this day in many ways… The book I would recommend actually to all GL Forum members from UG to NA-OW. I bet you’ll struggle to put this book down…! Regards Norfolk nChance [ELITE] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_Washington

PORT BATTLE realistic thinking... That wizened old salty bad-tempered Senior Pirate with a Southern drawl needs to be listened too. Whether you look through the bitterness or take it at face value, complicated ideas WON’T go for whatever reason. Offer a small TESTER try-out idea before any form of Grand plan. Think about testing this first. Something very easy that @Ink would spend little time on. Idea: PvE Co-Op PORT BATTLE @admin Take one fixed Neutral PORT, example La Navasse. Same Nation Groups raise hostility via missions popping the PORT BATTLE trigger. A fixed time start is given on the next server cycle. Like Co-Op EPICs minimum fleet size of six with a maximum of ten ships. Make it a fourth-rate battle limiter (not port BR method). This is just an EPIC overlay onto a PORT. No extra programming needed with three Circles. If successful, the Nation takes the PORT for a maximum of five days. After which time the PORT will default back to its Neutral status. Within them next five days at least ONCE at the same start time an AI PORT BATTLE attack will be triggered. You and your fleet will need to defend an incoming AI force set on retaking the PORT. Can this simple mechanic be done first? I think its worth a try and see how it goes. From there then you build out... Norfolk

@jodgi Are you sure Ping Rate as nothing to do with it? My Asian Ping now slipped to 220 in Battle Instance and the Tutorial/Exam sequences. This could be a huge problem if your correct. I was damn sure Ping Rate was to blame, turns out I’m just cr@p at Naval-Action... Norfolk nClue

@no one That’s a whole different subject my friend. In my opinion players should be forced to start PvE before entering PvP. WoWs do it, EvE Online does it etc... Its how they give the Newbie BASIC training. Its how these two games keep Newbie retention levels... Our Ranking systems is flawed, is too quick and is focused on CREW size only. It needs changing... Your idea is good, I really like the PORT BATTLE. Norfolk

@Bull Hull “That rationalization about "forcing another player into a PvP Instance against his wishes" is a lame fear mongering straw man and false dichotomy.” Is it? Take a look at EvE Online High-Sec missions and Seal Clubbing or Ganking. I do see your point of view, and I’m just showing you why they (the Dev’s) won’t allow it. Remember I’m the one that first wanted PvP in PvE… Ask a Mod like @Hethwill to comment on it. Dev’s probably won’t… Norfolk

@no one I just think any form of PvP in a PvE environment will not be allowed. I’ve pointed out a few times now that the Dev’s won’t budge on this issue. No matter how appealing it is... I agree The closest I got was the Smuggler Flag system welcoming all. Even just open to AI aggression was a no. The Co-Op EPIC, missions against AI is the only path. At Battle Instance even friendly fire is impossible. PORT BATTLE Co-Op from an attack against AI defenders or vice versa I really would like to see. And should be possible... The reason why the Dev’s won’t allow ANY form of PvP on the PvE Server is consensual manipulation. Forcing another player into a PvP Instance against his wishes. Whatever system from flags to Duels no matter how water tight will be still not looked at. Co-Op helps you to learn to fight as a single unit. It will help with PvP, but to learn PvP you must be on that server... Norfolk

In the OP I missed quoted the amount of @Liq hours played in the game. https://steamcommunity.com/app/311310/negativereviews/?p=1&browsefilter=mostrecent In fact, Admin had mentioned a BAD review (pointed out by @liq) who had 13k hours of game time on a single client. The link above shows this review. The example I wanted to show still works, but the error was obviously mine. On a side note I personally won’t write a game review until the game is launched. It’s a struggle to take in a player’s BAD review who’s had 13,000hours worth of content on a single client. It focusing on current play NOT past or future… And that’s the point… The game can and will change before launch… Apologies to @Liq and his single account. Norfolk

I’m sad, but more surprised the idea wasn’t liked by either Tester or Developer alike. General and current game play thoughts direct from the horse’s mouth would give much more clarity in mind than just single line Patch note entries. From someone willing to listen and another willing to be heard, this was in my humble opinion a nice bridge. Oh well, back to the old drawing board so to speak... Norfolk on the Sofa

Idea: Mrs. nChance’s sister…! or The NA-OW Developer Diary (YouTube) Short version at the bottom. BEST READ THIS FIRST. @admin Grab a glass of red… (a Saint-Joseph) The Idea Here in NA-OW, communication can be a mine field. This worse than my current sleeping arrangements, with many different languages, time zones and no face to face contact. Keeping everybody, both Dev and Tester on the same page is a daunting task. However, having parties informed of current events regularly in an easy format help bridge these gaps. Putting everybody on the same page. The NA-OW Developer Diary (YouTube) This very short once a month video covers the current patches, near future roll out ideas and other general information worthy of note. This is filmed in RUSSIAN the Dev’s home language with English subtitles. With this added to the GL & STEAM Forum Dev patch note gives better feedback to the tester. He will feel much closer to the project and his inputs are listened too. This stage is a preliminary information build into a marketing campaign for the full game launch. It won’t solve all the problems, but will bring the community (Dev & Tester) much closer together. Some Examples This is a 12minute WoWs Dev Diary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnxDKWlm-eE&list=PLVmXzlhZvJVRF1k1CD98EmOXQYaVhLVUN&index=5 Although I feel its too long, we get to see what these Dev’s are trying to push. You get to see and hear them speak freely. The home language setting with English subtitles gives the tester a good insight. The “lost in translation” often seen in the forums is better mitigated here. The [Wargames.n] resources obviously help sell the product, but Game-Labs can use this format effectively as well. The idea to show an in-game clip with a new mechanic the Dev’s roll out help with the understanding and processes under taken. This next clip is a very cheap 2minutes from the EvE Online Devblog. Listen to the first guy and what he says using the forum. Highlighting problem discovery etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgt_aR0SOuY This final link below is to the WoWs Dev Diary YouTube page. The clips range in time from just four minutes to fourteen in length. They don’t need to be long, just short information insights. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVmXzlhZvJVRF1k1CD98EmOXQYaVhLVUN Summary I’d like to see something like this idea from the Game-Labs team. I don’t need it all jazzed up and polished like [W.n] does it. Just seeing the team talking about the game, giving their insights and thoughts. I suggest to start with, restrict access and lock the public comments below. The Forums will be the place for feedback not YouTube. As the Dev’s get used to the Blog then start to open it up. This would work into launch build up. Even post Launch it would continue to help sell the product. The other franchise products in the early stages could think about this also. Thanks for reading, Norfolk nChance Short Version Communication is always fraught with danger. Take Mrs. nChance for example, asked me the other day “Hey Norf, tell me something I’m good at…?” which I replied “You’re a better f***k than your sister…!”. She got the right answer, but not the one she was expecting. I got the sofa and it cost me a new handbag. Talk about shooting the messenger… The NA-OW Developer Diary (YouTube) A monthly short video covering current game status, patch roll outs and other general information. In Russian with English subtitles gets the Testers to see & hear the Dev’s at work. This compliments the FORUM patch notes bringing the community (Dev & Tester) closer in understanding and on the same page… I later apologized to Mrs. nChance realizing how hurtful my comment was even though it was the right answer. To appease her I said “Look I’m sorry, why not tell me something that’ll make me both sad and happy at the same time…?” “Well Norf, you do have the largest dick of all your mates…!” was her reply.

first language is Yorkshire No Way to your second point... I tried to answer as fairly as I know the situation. Again just my humble view

Norfolk nWay

@toblerone I do see and understand your point of view. Without being a total Fanboy or defending @admin & Game-Labs I think your history might be a tad harsh. They openly listened to all and sundry. Without repeating myself too much, since 9.96 the Dev’s interactions with both forums (STEAM) structure have improved dramatically. They are a small foreign developer not a marketing company. I’ve mentioned already my criticism at not promoting the ALT route. This making a rod for their own back when final funding was needed. The only option left was an EA-DLC route... Damned if you do, damned if you don’t... I stated... Solve the Problem then... Managing your data flow properly. This is key for any business. Game-Labs need to retake control of their data flow. Retrench, agreed and use outside help like English speaking Mods to communicate data flow. Abide by your own rules and don’t engage. This is rock bottom. Unban all recent PCs... Balls of Steel. Why? The reviews can’t get any worse. The bonus is if GL turn it all around, it will lead to a ballistic tour de force into the launch. Use the Equalizer method will suck in Cat2 users pre-launch giving a steady and continuous rise in active players right up until D-Day. Think how do we rebuild client confidence into our product. That’s done by selective and controlled communication that you feel confidant at handling. Start small and build on it. Games-Labs are now turning from Developer to Publisher... Game mechanics are ever changing, I default to you and my peers for better insight. However, in my humble opinion the issue is about understanding client communications. I’m probably wrong, Norfolk

@Sir Texas Sir It’s a really good idea and would look simple to implement. Just playing Devil’s advocate for a moment and not sure if correct... The difference between a ship in Open World and Battle Instance is a lot. The Packet Update output from your OW ship would only be type, location, speed, direction & total BR. Your Computer shows your ship details and fleet etc to you. The ONLY time the packet changes would be at a Tag or BI drop. The server wouldn’t hold that data post port. I reckon, (and probably wrong) it’s not been done before now is because the Server cannot tell what actual ship you were sailing in OW post port trigger. The guess would be continual load increase across the server in OW as it would need to capture start and finish journey for all the population... N. Ps yes on the trader craft thing also great idea...

I might be wrong here, but seem to agree with you @HachiRoku and @Hethwill and for that matter most of the thread... Questions: What Is Game-Labs as a Company? Developer or Publisher? What is the difference? This I think is where the lines cross or get confused. The early closed Test stages of U-Dread & U-Age of Sail worked so well. The conversations between Dev, Tester then the other Testers was brilliant to take part in. And this seems a much better method than open platform. Was Sea-Trails before STEAM similar? I was post STEAM. However, the tester pool will need to grow as the game builds. This is means tighter control over the Test Base. Closer to launch, then the Publisher phase comes in with ever loser controls right up to the launch. We seem to have it ass about tit here. I would suggest shrink the forum down by a lot. The same too for STEAM just Dev News Locked, Gen Discussions and Tech Support. NnC

@MacaroniMax My personal view on the wipe is everything goes, and I mean everything including all DLCs. Not sure how that would work in practice though. The only thing I want to take into the new Universe is my name, and given an option to change it. The 4400hrs I’ve experienced testing the product is enough for me. However, we run into some real problems with this method. Hear me out and I’ll explain... On launch day Game-Labs have three target players. The first category is current players playing right now. Second category set and by far the largest of all three is the Old Player who once played and will probably give it a go on launch. And the final category is the brand-new player the smallest group of the three, but with time adds to Category1. Category1 players are in effect GLs current Customer base. I believe the majority of the community actually do understand and want a complete Rank and Craft wipe. Forget about the PR fubar. A few years back the idea of having to re-climb the Craft ladder was a massive worry. Current game mechanic as caused a shift to Skill Knowledge and Books taking its place... This threat of losing these items is the same effect Craft had in the past... Category2 players bought the game and played it. Over the last couple of years, they gave up due to many reasons over the development phase. Some have tried to restart with difficultly learning a new curve and how much the games mechanic as now changed. They will give up playing again within two months of coming back, this all pre-launch. When the Launch happens, they will probably try it again to see the changes to the final product. Category3 players Buy the game on launch Day1. They became interested via the pre-launch marketing drive and thought to give it a go. They expect everybody to be on a level playing field at the very start of the Universe. However, concerns surface, that Category1 players with all their game experience get to keep Skills and books, even their P2W DLC ships and warehouses and other stuff. If this is true, what’s the point? Elite Dangerous and other disasters alike. In fact, you can’t buy the standard game, you need to double the purchase price for all the DLC extras needed to just stay level never mind compete. No, they’ll give it a miss. Understanding Carry-Over Imagine back to when you first started at Rank1. Now think about how long it took to get to Rank10. Between 1 & 10 how much Gold and Resources where added to the economy and game as a whole. Do the same with craft from 1 to 50… How much gold, resources etc…? It’s quite a lot you’ll agree. If on day1 on the new Universe YOU redeem both Rank10 & Craft7(50) how much have they contributed to the economy or game as a whole? Actually zero, and in that lies a massive economic sink hole. Do it with Knowledge or skill books or whatever it still impacts negatively the same result. This also true with any DLC product except Paints and flags. The below link is my old ‘Junkie & the Dealer’ post about the May’17 wipe. We’ve all learnt a lot since then, but I wanted to highlight ‘The Dealer’. The Dev’s softening the blow (excuse the pun) giving away a couple of ships with both your Rank & Craft xp seems fine. https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/20652-the-junkie-his-dealer…/ Unfortunately, the economy took an age to get going, why? There was no impetus to climb ranks or craft levels and thus there was an invisible sink hole in the economic game. Have a think about this for a minute. My final suggestion at the bottom of that post is... well... funny So, here is where the Idea: The Equalizer came from. Rank Promotions Change & Books I genuinely believe the Game promotes way too quickly. The drive for Rank promotion via xp is to gain access to larger crews only. In itself there is no achievement. In my experience and am sure some will agree, I’ve seen too many new players within weeks sailing a Bellona to get crushed hard by the game. This system I would like to see changed at the launch with three component hurdles for each Rank. 1. XP gain, like now an xp hurdle needs to be achieved to rank up to the next hurdle. This XP number grows exponentially each rank level. 2. Time Hurdle, similar to XP with growing length of time. 3. Final Mission offered. Once 1&2 are achieved the PC is offered a Rank Mission. Can be attempted many times until won. When successful the Rank is increased plus you are given specific Books to be redeem. This system although marginally longer for you and me, will be invaluable to the New Player. This is where they learn to sail. The game giving RVR missions that can grow to include Co-Op etc. Each mission will give specific rewards Cash + other + Books. These books, then help show the player the advantages/disadvantages to their use. The Books given will be of higher values further up the ladder. This helps build the PCs game development and keeps him interested longer. I think current the game seems to funnel all players down a certain goal path, whether ship design, books or guns... The Economy If we go with my total wipe from the very start, the Caribbean economy will take an age to get started. The wheels start to turn as the AVERAGE player Rank and Craft level starts to rise. The idea of using REALs for Time spent or “The Equalizer” method gives the game two key advantages. The first is the Category1 players will spend REALs from Day1 and continue to do so as they build out their infrastructure strategy. BUYING a stock-shop offered SoL on day1 is not a problem but you can’t sail it yet... The inward investment builds as the rank and craft level increases. The second and more importantly is the attraction to Category2 players (the largest group). The level playing field is a great starter hook to get them to try. The Cash bump is the hook that’ll keep them interested longer. Unfortunately, without it, they’ll probably quit again within two months... Wouldn’t the New Players Category3 be upset with 1&2 cash bumps. Well actually no, we all start on this level playing field which is what they want and need. The Cash, early on is a massive hinderances in the early stages. Think Bellona... Sorry to push my idea, but total wipe wouldn’t attract the largest group of players for long enough. Norfolk. https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28817-idea-the-big-wipe-equalizer/ https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/20652-the-junkie-his-dealer…/ https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/28448-do-we-promote-too-fast/

@admin Should @Ink have your OP published on STEAM...? or best left as is... Norfolk

@HachiRoku That’s a real missed opportunity. Never call someone a RETARD ever. He has every right to take your comment down Snowflake or not. Next time call him an Idiot or something smarter... I can’t post on his YouTube now... saying Hey why the double standard and go on... taking down Hachi’s criticism would have been a great post. @admin thought you’d stopped interacting? This is whole thing as nothing to do with the original issue. It was an escalation in players wanting to be heard, or felt like they were being ignored. Now when Mrs. nChance does this same thing you can guess how she reacts... I need to manage her expectations... Just my view, wanting to be heard... Norfolk.

@Vernon Merrill It Would be a big call, but I think @admin could easily turn the public perception around by my complete idea proposed. It is a risk I know... The comments here I find amusing and we as a general rule focus on the STEAM Reviews. Yet we as a whole put little if any effort into supporting the STEAM forums. The ideas are all discussed here and here alone. The once a month YouTube done properly gives people a sense of been heard. Even if their idea is not liked, rather than just ignored. This reinforces the repetitive negative posts. Shouting from the roof tops, like in the case of Banished... Client interfacing is what all businesses are about. The action by @admin although I sympathise, it actually moves Game-Labs further away from its customer and not closer... But that’s just my opinion… Norfolk

@admin Although I understand your action and point of view, I hope you’ll review this situation in the future. I Will continue to support you and Game-Labs, with half-baked hair brain ideas and suggestions over glasses red. Closed testing for both U-Dreadnaught and U-Age of Sail has worked really well with the testers focusing on the Dev’s and each other’s feedback. The only worry is the tester group will need to grow as each game comes closer to development. Norfolk nChance

A Little update… @Cetric de Cornusiac I agree it is a balls out move, but how much more harm can it actually do? How many more bad reviews will be written? However, I think a YouTube wide post and some gesture like this might do some actual good. @Snoopy Just look at this on STEAM. Your point proved TESTER…? Bear in mind the FORUM is a tad aggressive. the #27 POST https://steamcommunity.com/app/311310/discussions/1/1771511442689858469/?ctp=2 Regarding a YouTube saying what GL have done wrong is not quite what I was trying to get across. My fault entirely. The First YouTube would be were the game stands right now and what the Dev’s are looking at short to medium term. The Monthly Video, would highlight patches and forth coming items near term. Then maybe highlight well viewed posts or some ideas posted selectively… “Norfolk’s Idea call the Equalizer, seems ok on the surface but impossible to code…” “PVP on PvE Server was a popular topic, however our stance is final PvE is PvE…” “We miss judge the lower BR attacker and exit or retreat window. Will play with some ideas on this…” No need to answer all subjects, but it gives blanket wide coverage. Also what they’re looking at like the BR comment. Dev Blogs These are some Dev blogs, at least watch the EvE one… ARMA II Basic Dev overall https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srn2Sp6L708 EvE Online Dev Blogs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgt_aR0SOuY WoWs Dev Diairies https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVmXzlhZvJVRF1k1CD98EmOXQYaVhLVUN Norfolk

Yeah @jodgi does make life complicated... sick bastard. @Mr. Doran The external account discovery adds an impossible assumption, I guess. Keeping it simple with a constant regression like you suggest per account I can’t see another way. The DLC discussion I’m not touching as @Sovereign hints at with issues. However, I am convinced that Carry-Over Books and skills is a big no like the rank and craft. These also cause an economic deficit. The REAL for Time with a change in Rank Promotion needs more work. Would @jodgi and @Sir Texas Sir be happy with a ratio suggested...? Do you think you’ll have too much of a start advantage? Norfolk