Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Wraith

  1. One can always hope, but I think that perspective might be a bit optimistic given the development support it’s received so far relative to the other new games announced, etc.
  2. I think you’re projecting a bit too much to generalize. But you’re not wrong in that psychological “don’t-lose-at-any-cost” mentality is influential. As a designer the way you deal with that is to make skill balance against random chance, like many less hard core board and matchmaking games do. Alternatively, you scale rewards to promote better players to seek out better players, and encourage worse players to continue to feed themselves to equal and better players because that low probability of success is massively rewarded when it happens. PvP in a low/no-cost setting is a requirement, however, if the psychological aspects of PvP are to even enter the equation.
  3. I disagree. Almost every other successful and sustainable MMO with PvP and sandbox sensibilities has mechanisms for three things: 1) No PvP zones 2) Restricted PvP zones (no loss, or partial loot) 3) Free for all, full loot/loss PvP zones What these successful games also have in common are successful means to encourage people to venture outside these zones that reward the higher risks involved. That’s primarily what is missing, and potentially what longer haul trade routes could achieve.. but ideally we’d need to tie upper tier ship production to gathering and resource procurement to those “nul-sec” high risk areas as well. In other words, it’s not just about reinforcements.
  4. It will only get worse as we continue to lock the means to PvP (best ships in the class) behind PvP rewards, and the equivalent RvR ships behind RvR rewards. As the cost of ships and the mods to make them competitive go up, the willingness to do anything risky goes down. Hence driving the move towards less and less risky kinds of PvP: ganks. Cheap, competitive ships, with lower barriers of entry to everyone drives up PvP. This is the DLC ship paradox. The problem is that the economy and crafting needs to be interesting enough to keep the ship economy humming, thus driving forward cheap and low investment PvP/RvR. It's a balance that very difficult to achieve and requires hard work, simulation and testing time that so far have not been conducted.
  5. Definitely agree.. Would be nice to test all of these.
  6. I think that people need to keep their expectations in check here.. Given the aggressive release schedule that the dev's have planned I'm not expecting to see any customization beyond things that affect numbers behind the scenes. For example, perhaps guns might be installed or upgraded on forts and towers but I'm guessing there will be no interface or functionality for actually changing the placement, etc. Ship crafting changes and customization will likely only allow clans to tweak the percentages of generating certain existing trims on crafted ships, etc. and not entail massive shifts in crafting customization or the interfaces to do so, etc. I think it's important to keep expectations in check given the amount of change and balance that needs to happen before release, and how much developer time that might take. Just sayin'. (Of course, keeping low expectations always leaves room for pleasant content surprises.)
  7. How do you propose to capture a port from another clan? give the war server a try, we don’t bite.
  8. Sounds great @admin, thanks for the update and for what sounds like some very interesting times ahead.
  9. Voted no but only because the join timer should be longer. Make it 3-4 minutes for group hunting. That is and always has been the sweet spot.
  10. It would be nice if it did but it doesn’t and unless something has changed the loot tables are not regionally affected at all for NPC traders.
  11. No one has blamed ROVER because as proponents of small frigate and shallow water ship diversity and their use you guys are finally on the receiving end of some crappy dev decisions. This is in contrast with the reflexive ass smooching that makes every dev decision look like it came straight out of your own heads in the past.
  12. Which is still garbage. If you want to duel then you shouldn't have to dick around with a gank zone to get there, and you shouldn't have to deal with some gamey concept like a ring of death anyway. For all those people that want bite-sized, instant, fair-and-balanced PvP then give it to them using Duel Rooms, Small and Large Battle rooms, etc. Don't force them to do something they don't want, right @jodgi? They still have to engage in the OW economy to get their dock queen ships, mods, and books, etc. But having some silly arena mode within an OW sandbox game that at best exposes those people gameplay they don't want, and at worst requires they participate in it just to get the rewards (Combat Medals in this case) to continue playing the PvP game they want is just poor design.
  13. Yeah, game-play gated currencies work (just as gameplay-gated crafting resources work in other MMOs) as long as you need those different currencies/resources for *all* aspects of the game. But gating the gameplay behind the currencies you get to conduct that gameplay effectively blocks players with different playstyles from dipping their toe in and gaining experience. Inherently, both the generalists and specialists suffer under such a regime and it's just poor game design.
  14. The best is to remove gank-or-be-gank zones entirely. Just reintroduce duel rooms, small and large battles and be done with the b.s. patrol zones and replace them with true, player-generated PvP zones aka raids.
  15. That said, the beach balls we have in Naval Action are completely unrealistic, especially given the time compression that should be implemented during battle.
  16. Or are experiencing the typical revenge gank... I wouldn't necessarily call it a "mistake," more a cost of doing the business of finding PvP, especially in low population times like US prime time. 🙄
  17. No one. But it wont fix the fact that battles are 3-5 times too short relative to the cost in time and play that it takes to get a fight.
  18. Sigh. The fixes applied here make no physical sense in a combat model that purportedly is supposed to be all about reality. Carro damage doesn’t need to be nerfed, dispersion needs to be nerfed.
  19. 100% yes. Make scrapping yield useful amounts of repair materials at the very least and make crafting repairs yield nontrivial amounts of crafting xp.
  20. Why would combat missions remove the motivation to kill everything that moves? (Kill and sink mind you, there’s no motivation to cap...) In fact this probably even enhances the motivation given the extreme risk vs. reward for trying to clear a combat medal mission. Trying to get enough kills without losing ships so you come out ahead will always reinforce the ganking and noob smashing.
  21. Sounds like good rationale. But it’s almost like we could go back to the old model which we’d alteady balanced quite well? The more changes we make the closer we get to what we had with some minor adjustments of reload speed. Funny that. Speaking of walking things back, the turn rates on fore and aft rigged ships are in need of s serious buff, as are turn rates for smaller square riggers. I get that you are basically trying to run experienced captains off from using them for PvP entirely, but it makes no sense that they are as sluggish as they are relative to ships with much, much larger mass and momentum. Sailing them just feels bad even with perfect yard management.
  22. Reputation? I wonder who has proposed that in the past? (HINT: A metric hello kitty ton of the testers in this game.) But you know, twiddling damage model knobs is way more important. Back on topic, this has been asked and answered in the past. You should have sunk him outright after warning him and if you couldn't, then indeed, this is tribunal worthy.
  23. 100% agreed on this. Waiting for 15 minutes outside a closed battle instance was miserable back in the day.
  • Create New...