Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Capitalism

Members
  • Content Count

    173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Capitalism


  1. Nah, though I've been quite supportive of many of your essays on mechanics so far, this I'll have to disagree with you on. 

    Three minute join timers were the goldilocks timers.  Just enough to hunt in groups but not so much that it was magical-teleport-in-from-anywhere.  And I'd add that I'd leave the undocking and leaving battle timer as they are so that you could still be somewhere waiting but not completely called in from out of the blue in order to defend a mate that was tagged right outside of your Outpost/Battle, etc.

    In any case... We need one, consistent RoE, nothing that varies between zones, etc. This just breeds endless frustration, complacency, and bugginess. 

    • Like 4

  2. 1 hour ago, admin said:

    it takes many drops of rum to fill the barrel

    With these little drops of rum is there any chance you could introduce the DLC and permit ships as rare NPCs, make everything below a 2nd rate capturable?  This seems like a test worth doing to see how it might affect the balance of ships in the open world, people's willingness to PvP (using captured ships would be viable, random wood/crew space DLC and pemit ships would still be less desirable than custom built, rare wood DLC/permit ships but would even the playing field somewhat) and could fit nicely with the reduced emphasis on crafting?

    Having more/cheaper ships across the full range of what's available just makes sense if you want to get people out on the water fighting.

    • Like 1

  3. Even my alts have alts these days. There are times when one of our alt clans has more players online in another nation than all the others.. lol.  

    So ask yourself this: When players have multiple max rank, max crafting rank accounts with all the books at their disposal... which one is the "main?" :P

    • Like 4

  4. I think that rare woods should be tied to PvE players, thus making a link between people who PvP (generating combat marks), those who PvE ("gathering"), and their intersection which are people supporting or participating directly in RvR.

    If we make the "gathering" of rare woods based on time spent in game rather than labor hours then everyone wins (more targets on the open water, more PvP opportunities, etc.). Basically the "gathering" would go like this: traders drop rare woods quite often, but an even more steady supply available for base crafting materials including fine woods by capping AI ships, sailing them back to your crafting port and breaking them up.  By driving up the number of timbers and crafting supplies recovered from broken ships then we get close to traditional "mining" activities of other MMOs (making active time spent in-game matter) rather than just passive labor hour accrual or AFK hauling.

    You might argue that doubloons are just a go-between for this "gathering" activity, but let's be honest.. getting doubloons is basically best done by AFK sailing these days which I don't think is good game design.  I think if you married resource gathering to the ability to cap AI 3rd rates and below (and introducing all DLC ships as open world AI), thus alleviating pinch points on permits and evening the playing field for DLC owners vs. regulars, the game would be a much happier place.

    • Like 5

  5. 22 minutes ago, Socialism said:

    I’m mildly excited, though I think to enter a region you need to take the secondary ports and then the capital.  Effectively a clan can lock down a region with just 1 timer if I am understanding admin correctly.  

    Also if you want folks to actually participate in RVR the availability of rare woods needs to be considerably tweaked.  

    Alternatively, we can just pay a friendly, foreign clan to come out in a fleet of fir Rattvisans and let us sink them a couple times to grind hostility in front of one of the county’s noncapital ports without a timer. ;) 

    But I agree on the fine woods 2.0 problem. I think it needs to be addressed through significant bumps to “gathering” via PvE traders and capping and breaking down AI.

    • Like 1

  6. 37 minutes ago, jodgi said:

    It's beneath anyone who can add two and two together to be so trite.

    I can certainly add up the kills and captures from my three gold Requins of various builds (two Fast, one Very Fast, all with Elite Pirates) if you like? They seem kinda pay-to-win to me since there's literally not an engagement that I can't pick or leave if it's not advantageous to me? Can anyone compete with those?  Not really... I'll run from nearly anything that could sink me, and kill or cap anything that can't.  Those are wins in anyone's book.

    Can you name another ship that's nearly invulnerable that's as combat effective?

    I don't think my above response fits the definition of "trite," then does it? Especially once you consider the ramifications of putting a stake in ship crafting just so people can save time. And especially now that you have something with as heavy a broadside weight as a Ratt that anyone can click out with zero time invested.  It may feel fine for someone like you who would rather have a lobby based game and considers spending time on anything econ a complete waste. But the way DLC ships are implemented is literally at odds with everything that an Open World sandbox is about, and it hugely punishes players that don't have DLC because to get something as combat effective as a T/Wo or Lo/Wo Ratt it literally costs days of grind and even worse, RNG for permits.  Even if the player with the Ratt dies at a rate 15:1 compared to the player-crafted 4th rate du jour, it's literally still a win for them in terms of pain and time invested in the game. And I find that sad for those players that can't or don't buy the DLC.

    I know you don't engage in RvR but a screening fleet of Ratts vs. an outrageously expensive port battle fleet of meta, crafted ships?  Who cares if they are sunk 10:1 if they get even one Bellona or Aggie with mods on them through luck or numbers alone?  That's a huuuuuge win for the DLC fleet in terms of time invested/lost in the game between those players.

     

    • Like 1

  7. 1 hour ago, Hethwill said:

    *yawn*

    If i'm a US fellow i'll pay 69 dollah for a certain product. But if i'm a certain EU country i'll pay 69 euro ( 69 euro is NOT 69 dollah "my dude" ). And actually will pay less in rubles, 45 if i'm not mistaken.

    The only thing complicated is your attitude towards prices in other countries for the same product.

    The only thing complicated is also - you either want and can, or you want and cannot. And that is on you. No one else, let alone Steam international transaction departments.

    Math is hard and boring, I understand, but you don't have to be patronizing or snide if you don't understand it. But developers set the prices of their products and so it's not very complicated to understand that US and EU players are paying significantly more, relative to the cost of the entire game, for DLC content. 

    Look at my name: I don't care whether the developers try to make a buck or cash out in any way they see fit.  But it shouldn't be surprising that non-Russian Steam store users feel a little hard done by, is it, especially when DLC ships are quickly becoming the only way to compete?


  8. On 4/13/2019 at 4:50 AM, Sea Archer said:

    Making rare wood really rare was intended to create more pvp, as I understand. But with some ports having permanently rare woods, the owning nation or clan has a permanent advantage over the others. This without taking the risk to leave port an being captured.

    To have an even chance for all players to get some rare woods and to bring players out of ports in more dangerous waters, I propose to make rare woods only capturable in NPC traders. Since you cannot cap those of your own nation, players will have to leave their home waters for that purpose and increase the chance to meet an enemy. 

    The bred and butter mats should  be available like now, with at least a bit of hauling necessary. I dislike the idea of having them all in one port. After all its a game about sailing not in port  crafting. 

    I definitely agree about "gathering" via NPCs as opposed to meaningless labor hour extraction or doubloon grindwalls. In addition to traders carrying fine woods I'd hugely bump up the number of logs (I'd rename them timbers to be slightly more accurate) that are recovered from breaking up captured ships making that a viable crafting material acquisition strategy. 

    Make PvE ship capture pay for those players who do it...

    Making all crafting resources available other than fine woods in any one port seems incredibly short sighted as well... as was the removal of the blueprint system.. In general, 2016-era crafting was so much better, it's just sad.

    • Like 1

  9. 6 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

    Read what I wrote. Steam, Gog, Epic, etc regulationes per country and the country where you live in and the taxes you pay for products reflect end price. Read what I wrote, not what you want reality to be.

    In some countries 2/3 of the price of a steam product is tax. :) 

    What part of what I said makes you think I misunderstood what you wrote? I hate to be pedantic, but the tax rate of individual countries on individual stores, or the rake that the store takes for each country is irrelevant to the difference in the ratio between the DLCs and the main game within each country, right? It’s just distributive multiplication at that point.

    The only thing that would complicate this is if DLC content is taxed at a different rate than the main game, or if Steam’s rake is different between sales types, but I find that extremely unlikely given that in all tax codes I’m familiar with an online sale is an online sale of electronic goods or services...

     

    • Like 1

  10. 22 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

    I advise you to check Steam policies and taxes per country before making 1:1 comparisons.

    It is the same with ALL steam games, with ALL EpicGameStore games, with ALL Slitherine games, with ALL GoG games...and so on.

    I believe it’s the ratio of the DLC costs to the main game that people are taking issue with, and that’s set by the developer no?


  11. 16 hours ago, LIONOFWALES said:

    Not a bad map mate... but the one in game is better... sorry.

    Are you being serious? Felix’s provides all of the tools that the in game map is missing, so much so that the dev’s basically endorse it over their own tool and quit working on it, lol (they’re removing the trader tool as of the last word).


  12. On 4/12/2019 at 6:01 AM, jodgi said:

    It's not, though I appreciate the effort to include me in the grand eco scheme.

    You play EVE so I fully understand why you fight for eco.

    I've given a very wide berth to EVE, not because of spaceships but because that game is a near perfect example of eco gameplay. 

    Funny enough, it also has ten+ thousands of active daily players and an extremely vibrant PvP, PvE, RvR, and social tapestry to satisfy all play styles. 

    Coincidence?

    • Like 4

  13. 19 minutes ago, Diceman said:

    Been a Rear Admiral twice at least in this game...

    Been max level craft qualified twice too. 

    I’m aware of what I speak...

    I also like the grind... no I love the grind. 

    I particularly enjoy the mid range ranks and all the various ships to try... not interested in meta ships at all to sail. Just to craft a sell to pubs.

    Well masochism aside, surely you acknowledge that you exist at the far end of the typical game playing spectrum?  But aside from those of us who've ground several alts to max rank and max crafting there aren't too many folks who can reflect on the new player experience as you can.  And my conclusion is that it's far, far worse now than it was at the beginning of Early Access, but I'd be interested in your perspective. Mine is this:  

    Grind is not content.

    And the content that we have for new players throughout that grind has actually shrunk considerably (removal of crafting, change in mission structure with a focus on RNG and random loot, etc., huge emphasis placed on DLC and combat/pvp rewards, etc.). New players have never had a more confusing and hard to navigate path to end-game content as they do today and adding more grind to the gameplay experience actually doesn't result in players playing longer.  In an OW sandbox game players should be the content, and when you drive them away through mechanics and grind then what do you have left?  No content.

    • Like 2

  14. 10 minutes ago, Diceman said:

    Bought a Hermione.

    Will decide about the Ratt when I get enough crew...

    Ta...

    Pretty opinionated on in depth game mechanics when you can’t even crew a fourth rate yet. You might consider reserving judgement until you actually have experienced end-game content, lol.

    You can’t really expect to understand the impact DLC has on the economy and RvR if you don’t actually engage in those things... 🙄

    • Like 2

  15. Since they’re blowing up econ and crafting anyway, and DLCs are not going to change, I feel like our time would be better spent lobbying to make all AI ships, 3rd rate and under capturable, and return all ships (even those with permits and DLC) to be found in AI fleets.

    This would hugely lower the bar for all players to have access to these ships. It would even the playing field a lot between those with fancy woods and the DLC ships, while also motivating people to go out, find and cap nice AI builds and put them up for sale. 

    There would still be motivation to have the DLC for convenience and to build non-crew space, purpose-built ships, but for general PvP your captured Bellona or Trinco would probably be just fine.

    • Like 1

  16. While I like the idea of player controlled emplacements, AI forts don’t need any more advantages.

    After the recent buff it’s taking around 200 hits to kill a fort from a MB, which in my opinion is too much. Combined with a buff on accuracy, range, and damage the fort will have you under fire at anything other than the very extreme of the MB firing range, which only reinforces the meta to use a counter mortar brig.

    By doing so, you basically ensure the MBs are occupied taking potshots at each other, rather than bombarding land targets, which just doesn’t seem realistic (or like good game play) to me? 

    • Like 1

  17. This is a terrible idea that will hurt new players more than help them. 

    Ask yourself why such a shortcut to Master and Commander rank was instituted in the first place... If you were around when it was instituted the rationale given was that we saw a huge dropoff in players before they even made it through sailing a Brig. So the idea was to kick them immediately into a ship they could be effective in PvP and clan activities with.. and with the new damage model heavily favoring anything with larger guns this is even more important than it was at that time.

    • Like 1

  18. 28 minutes ago, mikawa said:

    The duelrooms are not liked by community.

    That's exactly the opposite of reality. 

    The community loved duel rooms, small, and large battles. They made training up new players, testing builds, and getting better at PvP a much more manageable affair. It was the dev's that didn't want to maintain them because they were handwringing at the time trying to prop up server populations and were also removing any extra work they would incur during the UI rework/localization efforts.  Clearly the removal of them failed and left us with even less content than we had before and we still have plenty of people asking for their return.

     


  19. 9 minutes ago, Koveras said:

    I don't disagree, but there has to be an incentive for ppl to go into the OW for other reasons than RvR.. Econ needs money sinks, stuff that is readily available but exorbitantly expensive - like mods, special guns (edinorog guns etc) and crafting unfortunately will take a backseat due to the 'rare' woods, permitwalls and the availability of competitive DLC ships.

    I think that's the huge irony of all of the changes recently and the ones talked about here. Essentially the active and passive money sinks of crafting and taxes have no way to keep up with inflation now that most of the motivation for trading and crafting has been removed.  People are amassing huge amounts of reals from delivery and passenger missions with essentially nothing to spend it on, all while satisfying their ship/combat needs with DLC ships that are free.

    With all of these changes in the economy so "close" to release I doubt there's any way to properly balance the economy, and inflation will eat away at the entire game ecosystem.  This is the nature of non-player-based MMO economies and seems to be a huge failing of the Naval Action mechanics and testing. All of the economic bones of such games have to be in place throughout a long enough period of testing in order to understand the complex interactions in place... and sadly, after three years we're no closer to that than we were on Day 1 of Early Access.

    • Like 4

  20. I’m excited for the port control changes as it’s something I and others have been asking for for a long time. But let’s face it, we would have bought cosmetic DLC to support you (consumable paint packs, flag packs, ship models, etc.) at a rate that might have been sustaining, while leaving the pay to win nature of the current DLC out of the mix. With a line ship in elite woods now at daily disposal players with it are simply at a huge advantage over other without it.

    And this is particularly true with the RNG, permits and pay walls for woods in place.

    If we are basically flushing crafting down the toilet I’d propose a major change that I think would make everyone happy: Enable the capture of all ships, 3rd rate and below and add even the permitted and imported ships to AI fleets. This would even the playing field, create interest for PvE-oriented players while still allowing for ship builders to create the ships with the very best, purpose-built builds, but with a much smaller edge granted to DLC holders that’s focused mainly on convenience.

    • Like 6

  21. On 4/6/2019 at 6:15 PM, o7Captain said:

    What makes Prince de neufchatel so special over Niagara that it costs combat medals ? In my opinion any 5 or 6th rate permit shouldnt cost any combat medal.

    Because it's the only ship in a group that can get even close to a DLC Requin's sailing profile. i.e. we need to reduce the availability of anything that can compete with those.

×
×
  • Create New...