Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

56 Excellent

About The_Scipio

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    on my couch

Recent Profile Visitors

401 profile views
  1. In order to deal with the ganking problem, IF the ganking is perceived as a problem in the beginning, is to understand, why does Ganking actually occur? Note, just because you see ganking as a problem doesn't mean the guy next door see it the same way. Is it because people en general fear that they can lose ship and officer dura, and therefore resort to participating in ganking fleets. Basically you need to carry out a RCA "Root Cause Analysis" in order to understand and deal correctly with a problem. And based on the numbers from http://steamcharts.com/app/311310#1m An Analysis should have been carried out already in spring 2016, when the numbers fell rapidly, I fear that it is too late now to do anything about the problem. In my opinion the game lacks a clear path from the developers, instead they try and implement various player suggestions, kudos for that, but I think that approach greatly influenced the rapid decline in the player base. In spring 2016, a lot of players argued about big zerg nations, now they argue about zerg alliances - see the problem persisted, though in a different way. What I mean is, the devs tried to counter big nations vs. small nations problem, and well did they succeed? I answer this myself, no they didn't! but what would the correct approach be then? let the players have a choice in regard to the politics and alliances? for instance let the players decide whether they want to honor the alliances or become a privateer under their own nations flag who can attack alliance partners, but the trade-off is, such players cannot vote for alliances etc. or they are targets also for their own nation, because they are renegades - that would introduce PVP also in home waters, and provide players with an alternative of the black flag, but still a life of being not tied into an alliance they don't support. The trade-off here would be that such players can't enter into alliance held ports for instance. I don't think just by introducing new shiny things aka ships or special missions / rewards can bring back people or even hold on to what is left of people. The developers NEED to look into the core of the game, what makes the game exiting and fun, and in the end attracts people to it, and what elements in the game does the opposite. No matter what, any game which want's to be successful needs to cater for the average players, not only the elitists.
  2. These are my suggestions, maybe they have been suggested in other threads buried deeply in them, hence why I haven't paid attention to them, Anyways off to Armored Warfare to get some action. So long sailors
  3. Actually no, I don't expect them to read it - maybe read, but not to comment, anyhow the devs. asked for contributions and ideas, this is what I had of ideas to make the OW more open, by providing more alternatives and roles to the OW. right now options and roles in OW are limited. My idea could bring new life into OW and more action. OW: BR / Battletimer (Skip it!) - hell no, defensive tags everywhere that one could be tweaked,
  4. Well even though I'm not active in this game anymore and haven't been for quite a while now. (But I truly want to return, if they find a way to make the game fun, again) I'll try give a shot at proposing something which might cater both the RVR player and the WOWS player style. People keep talking about the style of the game, should it be OW RVR focused only?, thereby only catering for the hardcore players? Or should it be more arcade like just like WOWS catering for the more casual players? That discussion leads nowhere other than a continued arguing about rights and wrongs, combining both concepts in this game should be possible, in fact the foundation is available already. OW - RVR What I suggest is, keep the OW RVR, but improve it (That has been said numerous times, and even louder since patch 9.96 which was horrible imo.) anyway, OW should be OW but without much meaning other than creating an OW environment, which would cater traders, smugglers, PVP'ers and all other types of players including PVE'ers. Now before everyone starts screaming "we have it all now" Why say it again, let me quickly say, yes OW does exist today, but is it fun? Everyone is using and abusing exploits, each new patch introduced a new exploit option for abusing. Below I have tried to summarize what I believe could make Naval Action fun again, and keep it fun! Teleporting ships (Skip it entirely, but increase OW speeds by 100%) The title says it all, no more teleporting, but increase speed in OW by 100% or let the player pay for a transport of he’s ship to a wanted destination where the player has an outpost, with the risk of the escort fleet being attacked and the ship captured. This effectively means that either way implies a risk of losing the ship either by sailing it yourself or having it sailed as an AI. A large payout for the transport means a bigger AI fleet up to a certain limit only, a smaller payout means a smaller AI fleet. Only the transported ship can be captured and only in battle will it be visible which ship can be captured. However even though the playership is in fact now an AI ship, it will fight harder and hence be harder to capture since it can carry various upgrades etc., but it can be captured though, whereas the AI fleet ships hired to escort the playership cannot be captured. Should an attempt to capture fail, the AI fleet will respawn at a random point, so that it cannot be planned to just continue to attack until the fleet is sunk and the ship is captured. OW: BR / Battletimer (Skip it!) Skip everything that can be abused, skip the battle timer, skip the 20 sec. wait timer when you tagged or got tagged, if you are alongside a ship and press attack, you are alongside that ship when battle starts!, if people are close and want to join the battle, let them - and that goes for both sides, which means no BR limit - this will effectively deal with ganking fleets - but then again, superior fleets was a natural thing in those days, so why whine about it? Having no BR limit, and no time limit, gank fleets can be countered, if wanted. OW: Personal fleets (Skip it) / introducing convoys instead. Skip the option of personal fleets for all players, do you want a fleet to escort you, either get someone to help you, or pay for the escort fleet, this includes AI fleets, but here with a max no. of ships and BR allowed. One option here could be, that you put out a tender or hire someone, just like you once did for materials (Sorry guys, it's really been a long time since I played this game....). Convoys could also be included, an announcement was made in a specific harbor, that at a certain date / time, a convoy will leave with a certain destination, then a player or trader can either sign up for the escort role or being escorted (If he sails a trader). The convoy can consist of several nations, but once in the convoy you all sail under the same flag and can be attacked by others and not attack your fellow convoy sailors. In order to avoid exploits the information of the convoy, and destination should be kept confidential. And all who’s interested should pay a fee to participate (players wrongfully abusing the convoy principle should have a penalty / fee to pay….not really sure how to avoid exploits here. Maybe by giving the convoys a random start point, so when you are in the convoy and ready to sail and a timer counts down, the convoy will spawn in a random point within a certain distance from the harbor (Could be an option) so an immediately attack can be avoided and thereby give the convoy a fighting chance. OW: Logging off in battlescreen (allow 30 min. then you will return to OW no matter what) First of all, increase the overall battletimer from 90 min. to 120 min It has been proposed before, that when you are in battle, sometimes a huge enemy fleet is waiting just outside the two crossed swords, meaning you will exit battle basically on top of an enormous revenge fleet. This usually results in people camping in battlescreen. Instead provide these people with options! A way to counter this battlescreen camping is that the distance you travel while in battle shall be linked to the open world, so that once you exit battle it wont be at the predictable spot X, but instead at point Y or Z, based on what direction the player headed inside the battle, and the speed he was sailing at - this also means, that now it will be an advantage not to exit battle instantly, but instead use whatever time there's left to sail as far away as possible from where the battle started, meaning the player could actually have a real chance of escaping now. If you on the other hand decides to exit battle instantly and sit in battlescreen, you can do so while you go to the toilet, get something to drink etc. but you have only 30 min. in battlescreen then you'll get kicked, HOWEVER! a third option should be introduced, hence the increase of the battletimer from 90 min. to 120 min. Instead of only having two options stay in battle and spend the time sailing trying to escape by creating a greater distance from whatever you expect to be on the outside waiting for you, or log out into battlescreen, a third option should be introduced, give the option of logging back into the now empty battle from the battlescreen (This option gives the player the option of doing some personal things after battle like getting something to eat, drink, toilet visits etc.) and still providing them with an option of a escape. Also in regard to the crossed swords, make them increasingly smaller depending on where the battle goes (though the crossed swords should disappear once the battle is ended. Could also solve the battlescreen camping because of revenge fleets. OW: Map coordinates (Get rid of them) Map coordinates as they are now, helps navigation, but also makes it too easy, to report enemy ships and their position, return to how the map looked before summer 2016 e.g. no coordinates. OW: Special ships /Special perks / upgrades Make these so-called "hard-to-get" ships / perks / upgrades available for everyone. OK by participating in tournaments, you get them faster, but still, they should not be exclusive as they are now. Every crafter in this game who is dedicated enough should be able to obtain these blueprints etc. without participating in tournaments or whatever, but it should be a hard job for them to get them this way. OW: AI fleets (Reduce size and make them more diversified) AI fleets should be aggressive and have the role of a more stationary / predictable form of patrolling territorial waters. Meaning if a player from a hostile nation is within a certain distance, the nation AI fleets will attack the player. However in this instance no other human players from the outside will be allowed to join the battle on neither side, unless the player under attack was sailing in a group with another player or more players from the same nation, then these players will be pulled into battle as well. Officer and officer perks You hire an officer for a type of ship, you train him but you cannot retrain the officer to fulfill other roles without losing experience on the officer. This approach counters how officers today also are being exploited but giving them different perks. Once a perk is chosen it will cost you severely to reset a perk and chose another one. Also you cannot use an officer trained on a SOL on a frigate, or a trader, each officer have special abilities and skills. And likewise, if you have an officer who is not being used actively for a certain time, he will slowly lose some of he’s skill (he will grow old). Maybe also skip the officer lives? Regardless of your ship being captured or sunk, the officer always lives, but you MUST pay a tribute to the player who saved your officer in order to get the officer back (The tribute should be fixed and reflect the officers skills / perks / level) and governed by game mechanics, however once the officer is back he will have lost some of he’s skills or perks, meaning he will come back demoted. So if you have an admiral, he will only be a commodore now. The officers skills could in fact also be linked to how the ship he’s commanding performs (independent of the perks he has)…. The tribute thing could be expanded to also include captured ships, so if a player loses he’s ship, he could have the option of buying it back………….from the capturer. WOWS style arena battle Change small / large battle into the arena style we see in WOWS. This means PVP, but with no risk of losing your ship like now. However the earnings from such battles should therefore also be decreased. Also no upgrades etc. will be allowed in these battle types. Small / Large battles will be fought on equal terms / setups, the only difference would be the different wood types of the ships participating. And the officer you have on board the ship. Also there should be a mix of ships in each battle, meaning you could chose to enter a large battle in a Cerberus, because even though it’s a large battle each fleet would consist of groups of each ship classes just like historical naval battles. So the Cerberus joining would have to fight ships of its own size, or larger depending on where the player sails.
  5. I actually think I managed 6 months of playing this game, before I got so bored by no real end-game mechanics, no clear direction, so I had to ditch the game. Maybe the lifespan of Naval Action should be extended to between 5-6 months (Hint, then the devs can charge even more)....but anyway I would say 6 months is the max this game can keep most people occupied before looking for something else, maybe not as good looking as Naval Action, but way more exiting.
  6. True, this game is dead in it's current state. They tried the bandage before by merging PVP3 and PVP1, what happened, the population kept declining. People who really loved the game, now hates it - read steam reviews...with the current rating on steam, only a few new players are joining which is the death sentence to any game. It's pretty easy doing an analysis, The analysis is "Cause and effect"! From February / March 2016, where there was like 1500/1700 people online, lot's of PVP even 1vs.1 and not least, the PVP was actually fun too. Now where the population has declined to like 500 people at prime time, and the only PVP if it can be found is 1vs. a lot (I'm guessing here because I haven't bothered even logging into the game for more than a month, not even to use my crafting hours). This game in my opinion is now in it's death spiral - do something drastic, or die. Simple as that. Look at other games, where the Devs. implemented too many variables (Upgrade options, special retrofits, special events fits, in this game it's fine wood etc., and all too many other less significant things) these games die slowly simply because people (the cash cows) get fed up with the worsening of the game. A good example of another game which suffers from the exact same thing as NA, is AW, why is it that WOT despite being hated by so many, in the end squashed AW? WOT is simple and actually fun, yes WOT has it's flaws, AW is complex at least when playing PVP. The ordinary gamer - the one game developers feast on, don't want a too complex game, they want fun the very few hours they have available when coming home from work and needs a safe heaven from the wife or girlfriend. They don't want a freaking new job, spending numerous hours just to craft a ship worth fighting in, instead of a grey shitty ship. And since it's next to impossible finding good PVP, people try PVE, and get bored, and stop playing the game. Go figure...Two very devoted players said it (Tommy Shelby and Lord Viscious) said the truth about this game, which can be boilded down to a very simple phrase: Fix it or kill it fast This is coming from a guy with this exact attitude - and the reason I went back to World of Warships, at least I can PVP there, and have some fun.
  7. Mine start by not starting the game at all, which have been the reality for a long time. Until I hear at the game is on the right path and fun again, I intend to continue letting the game collect dust.
  8. Sorry dudes, I already have one job, which pays my bills, this game is slowly turning into being another job you have to spend too much time on without getting much back, other than killing lots of hours, but getting you nowhere, than wasting hours. Guys, try keep it simple! In my opinion you are overdoing a lot of things now, playing this game even now means hard work has to be carried out, which is ruining the fun. And the hard work that needs to be carried out in this game is not paying my bills. Crew cost a fortune, you lose shitloads of crew now in battle, back then a life was worth less than a plate of meat, try incorporate that! Officer loses lives, ok, I'm fine with that so be it, Now, to build a reasonable ship, that will take you a week, only to potentially lose it first time you leave harbor due to ganking squads from all nations including pirates haunting. Yes we all do it, fights have become 5vs.1 / 10vs.1or to or three (only PODW) fight outnumbered and do it good, the majority only fight when the odds are on their side meaning unfair fights. Having ships only only being available from special events, no thanks, let ships be hard to get blueprints for, but special events, NO! Take a look at the playerbase, Saturday night (Nov. 5th) a Saturday which should be primetime, there are around 645 people online on PVP 1.......that alone tells a story (NOTE! I was only logging in saw the numbers moved a ship, but lost interest fairly quickly again, and spend my time playing another game with a friend). Please guys this game has potential, but keep doing what you do now, this game will become at best, a niche, at worst, an abandoned failure. How I myself value a game is pretty straightforward. If I like a game and the play style, I keep playing it, if not I abandon it. So far only two games have kept my interest - both are MMO's, one is a game I have been playing since 2012, the other as a tester since 2015, I still play both of these games, however I doubt I will continue with NA....this game I only started playing since 2016 I was exited about NA at first, played it intensively for 6 months (Like I did with the other two games) but NA lacks something, to keep it interesting, and then again I refuse spending so much time as I have to do in NA, only to get very little in return, besides some great friends, which I also start noticing are away with longer and longer breaks in between now. To me NA looks like a game with no clear objective nor visions, there are no endgame, not even a hint about what an endgame could / should look like, nothing enhancing / promoting fair and intense fights, only rob and steal with little to no risk involved. Have to stop now, Already spent too much time again on this. My end comment: Sorry to see a beautiful game "slowly" or whatever, heading towards the trashcan.
  9. Warrior is a great ship, I visited Naval dock yards in September with the exact same goal, See Victory, well Victory was awesome, despite they ahve taken down her masts 5 years ago, but seeing Warrior was maybe even more awesome. She's in good shape, and a very long / tall ship. You get a pretty good understanding on what she was capable off, not forgetting that the weight of a broadside from Warrior vastly exceeded the weight Victory could throw at her enemies - Warrior has 68 pounders where Victory only had 32 pounders. Anyways Naval Dock Yards is highly recommendable if you happen to be in Portsmouth.
  10. Just to let you know. We have had quite a few players joining our ranks after the summer break. RDNN is growing and successful in our operations as well as in the tournament. Our playerbase is international e.g. vi cover the timezones from Hawaii to Australia. Feel free to come to our TS and have a chat about your future career in the Danish-Norwegian navy: TS adress: na.danmarknorge.org Alternatively, PM me here and I'll come back to you. For already established players who want's more fun e.g. switching nation, we offer you full discretion and will help you with transfers etc.
  11. RDNN in the Danish nation is also recruiting, and we do have US, Canadian players within our community, PM for more info.
  12. True! In my opinion it's a choice whether we want total annihilation of a nation before being able to claim victory, or another way of defeating a nation. For instance, that each nation has a zone around their capital which cannot be captured, but instead once a nation is pushed back to this area, That nation being pushed, shall be considered defeated and the winning side are allowed access to the defeated nations ports maybe and subsequently the two nations winning / defeated, cannot attach each other before a cool down. Only after the cool down can the defeated nation start claiming back lost ports etc.
  13. The dutch are currently tasting their own medicine, and they don't like it which is understandable - maybe too bitter. However weeks ago, when they almost crushed Spain together with Brits, they had no problem, as a matter of fact, it was the nature of the conquest game. Now when they see their territory shrink, they talk about "safe zones" etc. e.g. their recipe of their own medicine is way too bitter now they have to gulp it down.
  14. Nop, casual players will suffer from the Arena game mode, why? Because it will be like clanwars in WOT for instance, and casual players are not allowed into these, unless they are in a clan, and even then players are hand picked. But still I would support the "arena" PB, if it was the creator of the attacking force who decided which and what he want's in the PB fleet. I'm perfectly fine with Casual players, but organized battles, should mean choices also the the fleet organizing which will mean better and more intense fights.
  15. You cannot avoid exploitation of such an approach. But somehow putting a largely populated nation at some disadvantage and similarly adding some advantages to the small nation, could maybe generate more players towards the smaller nation, so in the end nations are somewhat equalized. In the end it's our belief it would improve the gameplay simply by having more equal nations fighting each other, thereby countering the "zerg" we have been seeing too much until now and have sent the game into a death spiral. It's pretty easy, when you create your account, first of all you are given the choice, do you want to play easy, medium, hard, or very hard, based on your choice, you are then presented with certain nations, for instance do you want to play easy, Brits and Dutch show up, medium, equals France, hard, equals Denmark-Norway, Sweden or Spain, Very hard equals pirates.... Off course this will be dynamic, as if you see a big increase in the nations player base, the nation will go from hard to medium and so on, and the other way too. Just to elaborate the problem as it is today, a theoretical example; we could all just create alt. accounts and join the Brits for instance. Imagine every player now only playing he's alt. account in the Brit nation....not many (zero) to fight ehh? maybe such a drastic behavior would open the eyes of the developers seeing the problematic issue we have with a too unbalanced game, as of today? Either way, something has to be done about it, or this game will eventually end up as a beautiful failure with a player base so low that the game isn't sustainable in the end. This is the reality! therefore please stop arguing with the usual arguments "We have more PVE'er than you etc." it's about active players regardless of them being mostly into PVE or PVP, even PVE'ers will join PVP when they greatly outnumber the opposing side.
  • Create New...