[19 mln vs 60 thousand - the cost of crew - moderated]

 

Crew management, yes! It is currently sorely missing and making the game very arcade, even Pirates! had better management.

And yes, it's the somewhat arcade style I like very much! Combat should focus on the *player's* sailing and fighting skills, not on the fact whether I had visited a port to fill up crew. I like to play a soccer game where soccer is the focus and not the player management, so I like naval action's system as simple as it is: higher rank, more crew, bigger ship. That's great. In my opinion we do not need any micro crew management. And in Pirates! you never have to sail over an hour to get to any enemy. That's a completely other approach.

[19 mln vs 60 thousand - the cost of crew - moderated]

I don't know if implementing a crew management is a good idea -- the main focus of this game is naval combat and I would neither like to fiddle with crew's mood nor repeatedly have to sail to ports between fleet fights just to fill up my crew again. This might be more realistic, but I think it cuts off the game flow, especially for fleets in front of enemy coast. Imagine that you sail over half an hour to an enemy coast, and you have to sail back after the first fight. This makes no sense at all. And I might be forced to quit the game earlier for a day, because there are no sailors left to hire. I don't like this idea at all. And last not least: it's a great disadvantage for small nations who have less population and less sailors to hire.

[War and Port battles rework - moderated]

Why not held a kind of "council" where every player can start a voting period (e.e "War against France") for 24h.

Whoever is in a town might vote for "peace" or "war", a simple majority decides.

 

I like the idea of war effort points very much. These points enable the player to spend them for ships, upgrades, etc. instead of money or even can bring back lost dura points. So a successful captain might get plenty of advantages which should make PVP more lucrative. Even for lost battles you should get few of these points.

[Port Battles : Spectator Mode]

Almost every game mechanic could be used for exploits ... Just click on Steam Broadcasts and spy out any enemy player sailing along a coast and see which enemy ships and fleets are underway :-)

[Port Battles : Spectator Mode]

Great Idea! I would love to have a spectator mode. The question is if this should be done "ingame" or over a "Steam watch option" where you could iterate through the battle participants and watch the battle from their perspective.

[Distinction between PVE and PVP Battles]

Yesterday it happened again. I sailed towards a battle sign but could not join it. I strongly recommend to distinct the battle signs which a player cannot join anyway from these he can join. Make them complete uninvisible, or give them another color, that's my opinion.

[Distinction between PVE and PVP Battles]

I'm not quite sure. It recently occured to me, that I sailed towards a crossed sword sign, got far away the message that "combat is too far", inside the circle that "combat is too close" and on the edge of the circle no message at all and no "join..." too. So I thought that this must be a "mission" or kind of "restricted battle". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that either these missions should not be signed at all or get another colour so that I could clearly see what battles I might be able to enter or not.

[Distinction between PVE and PVP Battles]

PVE battles are restricted to group members, so I think it would be very helpful to make a visual difference between PVE and PVP battles.

 

At this moment you spot a battle sign within reach but you don't know whether it's a PVE or PVP mission so it could happen that you sail towards the sign, just to find out you cannot join the battle, because it is PVE.

 

I think PVP battles should have e.g. red swords and PVE silver swords. This simple mechanic would prevent players from sailing to battles they aren't allowed to join anyway.

[Short announcement on the 1.5x BR reinforcement limit]

Oh man. This whole discussion circles around the 1.5x BR rule like flies around a rotten apple.

Every decision has its advantages and tweaks.

 

We have now the possibility to join a battle at a chosen point round the battle circle. The enables a group of small ships to completely surround a larger ship making it impossible to flee from battle. It does not enable a group of big ships to surround a small ship. But it also enables a group of big ships to jump as a group into the battle to chase a smaller ship, enabling the smaller ship to flee if it is faster. It also prevents a battle from getting extremely unfair *after* it has initially started.

 

Given the fact that the starting point in a battle can now be chosen and the fact that a possible escape from a battle might also be harder with the "land in battles", the battle joining rules are quite fair; so far I can see only *advantages* from all possible viewpoints.

 

Of course, we have OW and this means we have a certain degree of unfairness (a group crossing the ocean for half an hour just to discover a possible target which flees might be as upset about it as a trader who left his port just to discover that he ran into an enemy fleet which captures his ship), but hey - IT'S A GAME!

[Inconsistent enemy group size in Fleet Missions]

We encountered yesterday quite the same problem.

We were mainly frigates (2 slots open in group) and one 3rd rate.

 

152 xp missions gave us (two times) only one or two frigates and a bunch of mercs / niagaras as opponent which means we were totally superior (and earned almost nothing)

 

169 xp mission gave us 6 (!) Ingermanlands, 2 (!) Pavels and some frigates which means we were totally inferior (and gave up before the battle had started)

[Short announcement on the 1.5x BR reinforcement limit]

I'am a player who does both - single player missions when nobody else is availiable or its a matter of time / playing in small groups / joining side battles during port battles -

and i think the 1.5x mode is simply great because

 

- you can still attack a single enemy when you are in a close group

- you are somewhat protected from unfair situations which develop minutes *after* the beginning

- you can circle the battle zone and then join (if 1.5x ratio ist not yet reached) to cut off the way of the enemies

 

so it's a great benefit for the game experience without restricting the possbile actions too much - Well done!

[Reputation]

Yes, good ideas!

Probably should we concentrate on the "sacrifice = reward" effect and leave the "running away = punishment" option aside ...

Running away could make sense, when the ship is too damaged to have any chance on victory and when the whole action is just a distraction to lead the focus of the enemy away from other more important things ...

[Reputation]

I've come to the conclusion that a kind of reputation system might be very useful.

There should be a reward for players who sacrifice themselves for dragging bigger ships in battle to

 

- protect traders who can safely sail into the port

- stop flag carriers from carrying the flag into the port

- stop enemy fleets from harrassing

 

and to punish players who cowardly flee from the battles.

 

Overall it should be the players free decision what to do in a situation, but their choice should have some consequences.

 

One result may be that better reputation leads to faster leveling or lower ship prices (the admiralty might give a kind of subvention for players with good reputation) so that they could afford better ships (Mastercraft?) and better equipment. Or even to availability of "higher" rewarding missions for admiralty.

 

A worse reputation might lead to slower leveling or higher ship prices (pay the full fee) or to "lower" rewarding missions for admiralty.

 

This would be a win-win situation. Players do not always blindly run away from battles when they know they would have an advantage even if they loose the battle.

 

I don't know how this could be implemented exactly but I think it would be a great improvement.

[Remove 1.5BR anti-gank programming]

 

A group of 6 players sails for half an hour to get to an open world patrol site. Along comes a single target after 15 min on station. The target starts running and gets tagged by a tackler. The slower bigger ships are outside the tag ring. The computer program now enforces the 1.5 BR rule and denies the three remaining group members from getting into the action. So now those three players have to sit there on the OS most likely doing nothing for what in NA can be an hour long battle. So now they invested almost two hours into the game and get no action.

 

You are wrong.

From my viewpoint you get no fun or action either when joining a completely unfair BR battle.

What's likely to happen?

The inferior ship will run away, so the probably bigger ships have no chance to catch up and get therefore get no action, whether they are in battle or not. They should simply do some more patroling along the coast and search any suitable target for them - I think this is not hard at all ...

[Remove 1.5BR anti-gank programming]

I think the main problem is this:

When you fight with 10 ships against 1 it is NEITHER satisfying for the superior (because they will get almost no xp) NOR for the inferior (he will not have the chance to do any remarkable damage before sinking, so he's trying to run away) and in the end you'll find on the gankers side, that you have indeed wasted 2 hours of gameplay, independent whether you had any battle or not. So I'll welcome the new 1.5 BR rule and am eager to test it the next weeks.

[Navigation MUSt be improved]

The measuring tool would be great. Just draw a line between two points and see approximately (regarding the current wind situation) how long it would take you to go there. You can decide whether you will arrive at a port battle in time or not, rather than wasting time to travel there, just to recognize that you were too late ....

[Land sighted.]

Best news I've ever heard! Can't wait to test this!

[Navigation MUSt be improved]

Ok, my opinion:

navigation should not be improved, because I like it as it is: you have to navigate through landmarks - that really fits very well in the game concept. But why not allowing the spyglass in open world too? You can spot enemy fleets earlier by scanning the horizon and you can spot towns earlier too, which lets you easily adjust your course.

[Increase OW PvP Rewards]

This is indeed a problem. Lately I ran more and more into the following problem, and this is a *big* problem I think:

PVP Battles are not as attractive to the players than PVE.

I am currently in Master and Commander rank so that port battles are not suitable for me. Instead I mostly patrol in front of my own coasts in hope of finding a suitable PVP battle. There are plently of occasions but they all fail due to the following reasons:

 

1). The attackers are in minority and ran away

2). I am in minority, was tagged and ran away, because I get almost no xp when there are 10 ships against 1: I do not have the slightest chance to make any remarkable damage before sinking .... which is of course the same reason as in 1).

3). I have a slighty superior oppenent (like yesterday a trinc vs my renommee) but no one joins the fight although there were at least 10 (!) ships of my nationalty around - why?

 

I think it's because the PVP system is not so attractive. I assume that the other ships were heading for PVE missions. I can understand this, because in one hour of gameplay you manage to fight 2 PVE battles which bring you far more xp and gold than patroling for your own nationalty in front of a harbour and getting no fight because everybody is only thinking about his own advantage.

 

I propose to give good *awards* (xp or gold or both) for courage (e.g. when a single ship engages 10 enemies instead of running away) and to give bad *malus* for superiority (which hopefully would have the consequence of more balanced battles, so nobody would try to overrun a single ship with ten own ships any more).

 

That might a be a really good argument for balanced PVP battles. And last not least it is a reminiscence to historic traditions: a captain would surely have got excellence rewards for courage for his own nationality.

 

But the consequence I would love to have the most is, that PVP would be more attractive to players, which must be the main objective in this game.

[Gunnery Practice]

Hi,

 

in the British Navy of 1800 it was common to practice gunnery whenever possible. They fired broadsides on a dummy target made of barrels and planks. To shorten the times when you were lying still waiting for enemy ships to get out of a running battle (which might be up to half an hour depending on the number of ships involved), it would be nice to have a gunnery practice mode (which creates a sandbox area with your ship and a barrel target) so that you can concentrate on aim training with your brand new carronades or long cannons and so on ... and to be able to keep an eye on chat meanwhile .... and exit and join the others when the enemy fleet is dropping out ... That would be way more fun than just waiting.

 

Greetings,

-- MI

[Modification of XP System]

Hi,

 

I think this is already planned but to be sure:

I propose the players should get XP just for exploring, btw. if you've visited all cities of an island or a certain coastal area (need to divide the long coast lines into several smaller areas) you gain XP to be an explorer for your nation (which might therefore gains knowledge of the vessels seen in this vicinity...) or even for spending time on sea or traveling. (That might make longer trips oversea rather promising than boring) ...

 

See you, 

--MI