Fargo
-
Posts
553 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Fargo
-
-
Nobody can tell what will happen, especially when multiple things are going to change at the same time...
The point is these 25 first rates might face 250 3rd rates crafted in the same time for the same mats. If 25 ships can fight 250 ships because of tow times, there might be something wrong with it.
Its not like a nation decides what ships will be crafted. If crafters can sell 3rd rates for better profit than 1st rates, there would be more 3rd rates around. You cant really predict this, the price development alone is quite complex.
5 hours ago, Fletch67 said:Other than that we need an answer to get more diverse fleets into port battles.
Well, then set BR limits that favour mixed fleets...
But restrictions like this contradict the sandbox style of NA. If you have 25 first rates availiable, you should be allowed to bring them as the strongest fleet possible in deep water. Simply because there is no plausible reasoning why you shouldnt.
I mean if i restrict it in this simple way, i accept that economy has no meaning for conquest.
-
3 hours ago, rediii said:
sorry didnt read all the comments. Facts:
- If you don't set hard limits the best mix of ships to win will be used. This is everytime a specialized fleet. Because long range shooting is not effective it will allways be ships that are strong close range
i dont see any possibility to get a mix of ships into portbattles except hard limits (which are bad). But in the end a single type of ship dominated battles in the age of sail anyway: Lineships (or not?). Maybe there should be a 3rd kind of portbattles: 3rd rate battles
You mean the best mix to win a battle, but this mix might be worse when its about winning a war...
Another fact is that at some point all these stored ships, gold and mats will be gone.
If then 1st and second rates are very inefficient to craft, it would become more important to gather full 3rd rate fleets. The first rate only nation would get outnumbered very quickly.
3rd rates could become the efficient and sufficient ships to fight port battles, if they are valuable enough to keep crafters busy over time. There is no need to bring full 1st rate fleets when the enemy doesnt.
If "inefficient" here would mean 30+ days to craft one first rate, then yes its extreme, but it is an possible option. Even if there was high demand for first rates, the availiable amount of labour/mats in the nation would limit the production.
11 minutes ago, Rickard said:that is not true ! most clans have so much resources stacked that they can build 10 first rates for days on end
...any changes before a wipe are not worth thinking about.
Arguing with broken mechanics or their results is very short minded while the goal is a game that is working and balanced.
-
1 hour ago, Fletch67 said:
It does not matter how expensive you make first rates, people will always bring 25 of the biggest and best ships allowed in in order to win no matter what the cost.
The only way to go is to make first rates take more than one ship slot out of your 25, say 3 places. So if you bring a full fleet of first rates you would get 8 ships inside 8 x 3 - 24.
Either that or do it by BR.
I think it does matter, at some point people wont be able to keep up the production. There is also the option to go away from insta-crafting. A first rate atm takes about 7 days to craft in total, but one crafter can produce one ship in less than 2 days if all mats are stored. A crafting duration of 7 days would be completely different.
I dont see the difference of your proposal and BR limitation. For example define Frigate BR = 1 Slot, total BR = 25 x Frigate BR.
-
I think any kind of restrictions are bad, not adressing the cause of the problem.
Having less first and second rates around in general would be best, making them expensive and the crafting time consuming. So maybe wait for the upcoming changes in crafting.
Another idea is to increase xp/time needed for high ranks again. Im thinking about the time after steam release. Grinding ranks took much longer, but as a player you felt important sailing brigs and frigates, cause there were no larger ships and npc fleets around. OW felt more plausible in general.
If 3rd rates would be sufficient for portbattles, achievable for all casual gamers, the upper ranks could be some kind of late game motivation for the more hard core players.
-
5 hours ago, The Spud said:
PvP1 KPR, i buy my medkits at 10k (that is 10.000) or below, I haven't even seen them for sale for 40-50k. I bought 50 a couple weeks ago, haven't checked since. If they would be 40-50k, i would start making them myself. But I could probably get some of them from my clan too if the cost would realy be that high. Might very well be they're priced allot higher elsewhere, but I wouldn't know. Will check later.
2-3 month ago before 9.97 you had to craft or buy them from players. 40-50k was a good price for both sides btw.
-
1 hour ago, The Spud said:
I think I just fail in getting my point across here, I don't disagree with you guys.
I just think that its stupid to have one option that makes the crew cost 500 a piece and then you can buy a large medkit as low as 7500 gold, making it 50 a piece for crew with just a little more effort. Those are like way too far apart, that just doesn't make any sence at all, the default offered solution to hire crew is basicaly a scam.
I would assume its a mistake. When i played last you could buy/sell for 40-50k. The npc price was 75k i think, so no reduction at all. Maybe somebody just forgot a 0?!
3 hours ago, Wind said:This can fix only half of the problem and info is hidden. Everything in Naval Action is hidden for new guys. Note that.
I would suggest Devs to add a warning window that would show players what they are missing before they set sail into the Open Sea. This can take care of major mistakes new players make and rage for no reason causing Naval Action huge damages in reviews.
If this really is a known problem, why is there no simple solution yet?
Hints in the loading screen, simple Information windows when you click something the first time. Some basic starting suggestions linked in the sign in window, just something?!
-
29 minutes ago, The Spud said:
I consider 1 crew loss = 500 gold as being the core mechanic of the game, and I see medkits and perks as a way to reduce the effect of this core mechanic. We must see if by the regular way PvP is profitable. If we see its not and people have to use perks/medkits to make it profitable, then I think the core mechanic is not working as intended.
Thats why it would be interesting to see how much money you actualy made after 20 battles, cause battles is what this game is mostly about. If you would concentrate purely on making money, then you wouldn't be doing missions you would be out doing trade runs, crafting or capping trader AI's (which can land you +-60k each time for 5 minutes of "battle".)
So to speak, if someone with a total disinterest for crafting, trading or AI trader capping would play this game could he make a decent profit doing so.
As a side note, at this moment, with the lack of tutorials, I have found that new players will just hire crew at 500 gold each. As they don't know about officer perks or medkits. They'll hire an officer but don't know how to use the perks or how to reset them.
What im asking for is the definition of "profitable" and "decent profit", thats the point.
If they dont know how to find med kits, they will get to know that, its not that hidden. The majority is using med kits and the reason for crew cost was to make running larger ships expensive. If you balance npc crew to achieve this, med kits will negate the effect or end useless. Its pointless to have med kits when you dont treat them as a core mechanic.
If low rank rewards are too low, change the fixed mission rewards. Crew cost needs to be related to high rank combat.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, The Spud said:
What we should do as a better comparison, i'll try to do it myself too, is for the next 20 battles write down your crew loss and the money you made. Preferably not 20 missions, just PvP, screening and PvE combined (maybe not PB's), the battles you would normaly do. And then at the end make a comparison. If we take crew lost x 500 and compare to your earnings, we'll get a better average of how many money you can make from doing PvP.
Obviously if you focus on making money like capping traders AI or player your profits should be nice.
Use npc medkits right now and its only x 72. With player crafted prices it was x 300 some time ago. Why not use med kits? I guess buying crew in harbours is ment as a last resort in case there are no medkits availiable.
The problem is if you balance general crew cost, medkits will become imbalanced, not worth to craft. Players crafting stuff drives economy, players buying npc crew does nothing.
"180363-143500=36.863 For spending 50 mins, with 5 kills made and 1.5k damage etc... "
What would be a fair reward?! Nobody can answer this right away. You have to see this in relation to prices etc., how much time it takes to buy a new ship of your rank, the actual numbers cant say much. And talking about new players we should test with lower ranked missions.
Your example using player crafted medkits would result in 95k profit. A new Bucket would be about 2mio, about 17 hours of pure pve in your case. With labour hours you could make 200k profit/day in addition. When you play about 4 hours/day its 8 days for a new bucket. This could be discussed for example.
And it wont make sense to adjust mission rewards to actual inflation prices, this should be done with the economy update and asset wipe.
-
Odd that I then have been possible to do that and still does, both by snugging the enemy ship so you wouldnt fit a human being standing straight up between the ships and from further away.
You dont get my point. Lets assume you are able to land all shots that close on full speed, try it with battle sails then, going upwind, or when the enemy stern is turning with your ship... close raking is not an option.
-
I and many more makes stern rakes with SoL against other SoL and smaller ships also. How is this not possible? The key is to fire a bit later and just keep practicing until you get a feel when you should unload your side.
I said "close", and i mean really close. Its technically impossible to get all hits in, no matter of your skill (unless the enemy turns in your favour). You can land a good amount of hits, but not straight and only if your ship goes fast enough.
-
Auto fire seems stupid, but it would be helpful if you could change the broadside speed. Its always unloading in 5 seconds and for larger ships its just not possible to reach this speed (~20kn) to get a close rake in.
-
The large amounts of millions are the problem here, not the larger count of contracts.
Trading and crafting with the aim to make profit is one of the basic conditions for a working market, freedom of trade is another one.
-
To be honest if someone is using pumps and pump perk it will mean you will have to make sure he sinks rather than leaving it to time.
How can you make sure he sinks? The RUS Essex got graped down to 70 crew and did not sink, shooting leaks when the ship is already lower in the water might not work either.
-
In general im enjoying the tournament so far, huge compliment for the organisation!!
However, i think you shouldnt mind changing rules if they are conflicting with current game mechanics, in this case pumps making some kind of ships nearly unsinkable in time. Rules are the same for both sides so its not "unfair", but in the end every team will be pump and repair fitted cause it provides the best odds. Thats boring, we like to see fair pvp, not broken survival tactics and it might be most annoying for the teams themself, participating for good and fair pvp.
Yes teams should be able to win using the clock, but achieving this only by mods and perks and with ships already taking water has not much to do with skillbased pvp. Its not even possible to counter this effectively with grape or somehow. The TDA vs RUS match is a perfect example how only pumps could easily decide a match in favour of the "worse" playing team.
Its good that balancing issues got revealed now, but you should address them for the next stages of the tournament.
-
2
-
-
We play this tournament for pvp,? or for circumnavigate the rules? score a kill then run? bountyhunter was almost full hp, while lg cerb was 5% on 1 side 10% on other so 1 volley from die, and essex 10% on 1 side 30% on other so again 2-3 volley away to die, bounty was completely able to sink both of them. they runned and when judge decided to force them to turn and fight take that decision on last 40 sec when was pointless. so they turned and give a token broad from faar just for proof they did it. then circle away again (first time in tournament judge need to force ppl to stop run and engage, i watched all LG match and they are the most boring of the tournament running and running)
They were so low because they had to focus down a ship that was technically out of the match... Pirate had to sacrifice a lot of hp just to make sure the trinc sinks in time. In a normal fight he would have been able to fight the cerb with about 40% hp on both sides.
If anything is boring than your max firepower, pump and repair mod tactics...
-
2
-
-
I like it, but the chance for a specific trim and 3/5 slots is just 12.5% right now. You might have to craft 8 ships and scrap half of them for stiffness reasons. Maybe this gets reworked with the upcoming crafting changes, then contracts might be a nice feature.
-
For example a 3rd rate like in your list, without frame parts :
- At NPC default lowest price for mats : 188078
- At default prices + 5% fee on resources used : 197481.9
- At default prices + 5% fee on resources used + 10% applied on this total for the shop fee : 217230.09
217230.09 vs your 240264.80 listed for this ship, yours ends up with a price 10.60% superior to the real value.
217230.09 is the ship real production price at which i have to base my selling price to start make some benefit on his sell . (Well... i need to include frame parts price + LH's cost on this but it's another thing
)All three numbers equal 200k for me
If you want to be that precise you also cant calculate with 5% and 10%.
If you want to sell a ship for 2mio, adding 10% equals 2.2mio. If you put it on sale for 2.2mio your fee will be 220k, you sold for 1.98mio. To sell for 2mio you have to add 11.11%. For resources its 5.26%.
So what is the best option in that regard? Hold the full production line in-house. Do not go over open market, do not pay 5% for any step.
The best option is to craft nothing yourself other than ships
-
I think repairs often protract battles unnecessarily, because its so hard to focus down ships.
Sometimes you loose large amounts of hp when you have to stay next to enemy ships, waiting for repairs to finish.
In port battles ships get seperated and destroyed, minutes later they fight again with about 30% hp (And suddenly they sail very defensive). Repairs could be desabled once your side armour got destroyed completely, to reward good players/fleets, speed up battles, and make repairs more tactical.
Repairs should stay, but it should be a risk to repair close to enemy ships. Taking damage could also reduce the amount of restored hp significantly, or damage to crew could increase while repairing.
-
2
-
-
81.5 hours is the cumulative number of hours needed to craft 1 Medkit Large.(120 * 0.2 (Food Supplies) + 30 * 0.5833 (Rum) + 0 (Tobacco) + 40 (Medkit Large) = 81.5)
I know
Just saying that 81.5 is pretty litte for something with that high resource value. Ratio of lh count and resource cost is about 5 times different for carriages for example.We can do a complete economics thesis on labor hours and their role in this game.
I'll save it up for another topic, because there is no solid formula that dictates the price/hour.
You cant dictate it while you cant dictate market prices, but you can calculate it for actual market prices. Depending where you are in the chain of ship production, the highest valuable ships are dictating your price/lh. You dont need a formula, the market tells you.
If your tool is able to read out the market prices for everything, you could add a column for lh prices. The results would be pretty funny right now, but as a shipbuilder it would tell you what materials are currently overpriced, depending on the ship you are going to build, and what ships would provide most profit in general.
-
Ah i just read the wrong colums... it fits with your high resource prices. Fraction of lh is pretty low for medkits.
You should include a guide for lh, because thats what people are struggling with. Whats the value of your lh, how do you estimate it, how is demand and supply for ships affecting it. Its nice to know the resource cost for mats and ships, but thats usually the smaller fraction.
Another small suggestion, maybe arrange ships in their classes and for increasing amount of lh. Would make it easier to compare similar ships.
-
Medkits seem to be too expensive while you dont include lh.
-
While on another stiffness streak again (7 ships until now...), i thought about improving the current system with as little effort as possible.
Its just sad to see all the stiffness rotting in the shops sometimes at prices, not even covering the notes. Ill keep it as short as possible:
Current situation
- speed and stiffness imbalanced (essential trim vs situational trim)
- no disadvantage for speed in terms of stats
- useless wood/trim combinations like teak/stiffness (liveoak/speed faster and stronger)
- rigging quality useless (leightweight ropes and blocks does the same)
- build strenght/planking used for every combat ship
- one optimal, RNG based build for every ship (no diversity, no decisionmaking)
- non optimal build = rotting
- liveoak not balanced (value of stats too high)
Possible solution
- changing rigging quality with speed -> speed as a main trim
- adjusting liveoak to -5% speed
Results
- RNG between yard turn speed and lesser heel (seems balanced)
- same principle for the main trim as for fir, liveoak, extra planking and speedtrim: either slow and tanky, or fast and weak
- players have to decide between survivability and speed for combat ships
- players have to decide between crewspace and speed for boarding ships
- lesser useless wood/trim combinations. For example liveoak/speed would provide +3cm armour, teak/strenght +1.4% speed instead (liveoak balanced)
- no useless trims anymore
- difference between same ships trimmed for different purposes and playstyles becomes much clearer
- no speed on tanky PB ships anymore
- greater variety of ship builds
- different demand for different trims
- less frustrated crafters
Of course as an alternative you could just exchange stiffness with something better like reload time, or manouverability, but this wont result in more decisions to make. Fir without speed would always be bad. As long as such important boni are based on RNG, there will always be ships you have to throw away.
Thanks for reading!
)
Just saying that 81.5 is pretty litte for something with that high resource value. Ratio of lh count and resource cost is about 5 times different for carriages for example.
1H 2017 Player proposals
in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Posted · Edited by Fargo
Important problems to be solved
Features (additions or cutting)