Kaos
-
Posts
356 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Kaos
-
-
1 hour ago, admin said:
But there were a 100 on day one.
So risk free pvp against other people who are interested in risk free pvp does not interest risk free pvp fans? Does it mean that risk free pvp has zero retention?
Did @TommyShelby meet @Otto Kohl and sank each other using 60 free redeemables (all new and unique ships), without any time wasting (everyone is near mortimer and you need to craft nothing, as everything is provide)Or does it mean that wolves just don't want to fight wolves? (Even with double FPS and free ships). And getting pvp costs lower will have ZERO effect on pvp player goals?
Lets stop pretending. PvP players probably can't even retain each other. They need rabbits and should wait until we fix rabbit problems.Where do you think you got the combat feedback from? From wolves running down rabbits and telling you how to balance the game around it? For some reason all these ''wolves'' took their time and stopped hunting rabbits to participate in tournament somehow, hmm..definitely no demand for wolf meat anywhere to be seen.
There is no pretending here, maybe you don't like to fight wolves but to project it onto everyone else implying you know what others want more than themselves is a bit arrogant, don't you think?
Quality of fights > quantity of fights any time of the day, ask any seasoned pvp wolf and go look into magic moments topic if you forgot.-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, admin said:
Well. Instantly closed battles for example were a baby of active forum and private discussions with pvp players (hunters) including Rakers
And instantly closed battles indeed made pvp hunting better. But they did not increase pvp. In fact they reduced it (based on data). We given this feature a long time to test itself. Yet it failed to bring expected results.
Tinkering ROE does not change the fundamental factor that the game is full of PVE players not interested in pvp'ing since you offered so many options to avoid pvp and skip it since EA by adding missions and safe zones.
Regarding instant closed battles, I was not there anymore but if I remember correctly, rakers were the first ones pushing for WYSIWYG ROE ( 2 min timers was pretty fine I think, not sure why you removed it) implying it would improve group sailing cohesion and make people more self-aware of their surroundings but this playerbase wants to just warp into instances from beyond visual range because ganking and surrounding lone targets on OW under the mask of ''exciting and fun and you never know what surprise comes around the corner tee-hee''.-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, admin said:
Maybe the number of people who could convert to pvp has fallen drastically due to the design paradigms we have been creating with the active community here?
- Insta- closed battles (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
- No reinforcements (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
- Removal of revenge gank due to invisibility and speed buff (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
- Removal of resource transport (favor pvp hunters and not average players)
- Many other features that were pushed in to just place average players in line for easy consumption by pvp hunters
Now we are getting requests to remove missions from capitals (to let pvp hunters find target easier).
Your opinion is valuable and you were one of the players who asked for some real fixes of revenge ganks - you got them. Did you start to pvp more?
Or maybe all those changes destroy the supply of targets and because wolves don't eat wolves you have nobody to play with once average players dissapear?Is this some crafty damage control PR or do you really think like this?
Here's some reality so don't mind me telling like it is - you managed to create an environment of abundant grass fields for all kinds of grass eaters and surrounded them with all kinds of artificial safety measures so they would never transform or move out of their grass fields because they could safely reach end content inside their greenhouse. You put so much grass on their plate that pvp is something they might TRY once in a blue moon for lulz. Numbers show you that PvP is somekind of a side-feature here that is slapped on to a heavilly pve abundant game because risk reward ratio is so heavily favoring safe pve progression.
I can imagine that you created this environment for ''wolves'' that are okay with farming harmless plankton, sheep, rabbits - whatever you name it - on a constant repeat.
No wonder any self respecting pvper leaves this enviroment because they would have to plow through tons of plankton to find one inspiring fight where they can actually get excited and think: ''wow, this dude actually knows what he is doing.'' so here's a plot twist: wolves and pvers didn't mix that well as you might believe and as the numbers show - they are two different mindsets playing different games and you will be forever forced to sit on two chairs unless sacrificing one for another.
disclaimer: uninstalled this game because of 100 boring fights to 1 interesting fight ratio, never lost a dura to a player since this game hit EA. Finding another wolf was like searching for a needle in the hay on OW. Rewards don't concern me - an interesting/inspiring fight is a reward itself actually.
Regarding the topic - seems like another episode from the series of ''Hold my beer - I got this.''
No hard feelings - I still like you for what you achieved! And my deepest condolences go out to those poor deceived ones who joined this game thinking this was about RvR with majority players interested in pvp.-
1
-
There's many including albums full of magic and laughable moments but they are probably best kept discreet and not released here publicly.
ST - learning to fight from the best of the best and later beating them for the first time with the knowledge, vets know the name.
Early OW before EA as Sweden - going full massacre mode on anything that moved, giving pretty much everyone a reason to hate and ally against us, using Swedes as cannonfodder to inflate numbers where needed.
After that realizing we don't really need allies nor friends nor cannonfodder to survive, went pirate to have even more pvp targets (pirates was free-for-all mode back then, you could attack anyone - best option for pvpers who don't give a f about politics / disney pirate unity and just want to cut throats and see how far they can go getting away with it). Got so far that pirate vs pirate was turned off instead and safe zones implemented, lel.
Managed to go from wipe to pre ea wipe as a pirate without losing a dura and getting a lot of pew and hate along the way to proposing somekind of a survival gamemode for pirates with perma-death (how naive of me considering the direction game took upon EA release).
As EA released, was hoping some even more badass sadists than us join this game and we become the targets but never seemed to happen, OW felt watered down and everything got regulated and made sterile, even easier to survive and the whole game felt like focused on making pvers happy and safe to keep them on map ( makes sense since they make up like 80%+ of the population ).
Good times!
PS. Admin I think you accidentally made some magic alchemy in your labs and produced a wonderful skill based combat model, try not to kill it and water it down by flirting with perks/mods and whatever gear that favors the player who has more time to throw away chasing gear/xp instead of using their time more efficiently by improving themselves and their skills/awareness/learning from mistakes to become more competitive, I know gear/counter/perks is needed nowadays to equalize the playing field to keep the casuals in your game but you could be the one unique company that does not follow the stamp modern washed out formula (you once said money is not important to you :DD)-
6
-
-
18 hours ago, Ratline said:
It's closer, but without the npc grind.
What you claim to be an 'ordeal' I would see as multiple opportunities to generate OW pvp and emergent, player generated content. It does not need to be so long it becomes painful, but should be long enough to allow forces from each side to react and build rather than logging on and thinking 'Shit, Flash.. we've only go 14 minutes to save the region!', 'oh let's not bother and just fight the PB.'
While the new system removes "PvE grind at X hour countered by PvE grind at Y hour" it does not remove PvE grind, which is my whole point. PvE is fine, but pretending it's a good part of PvP I don't buy. The new system also does not resolve timezone issues, at least not entirely so don't believe that. If a group of Russian players decide to grind hostility against a nation largely populated by W. European players while the latter are at work it's pretty much same same.. But nvm, you don't need to bother contesting hostility anyway, just show up for the arena match.
Maybe I misunderstand something but when people were reluctant to engage each other on OW without safe odds during 5 durability system then what do people expect once they are betting the farm each time so to speak with 1 durability or they will not even bother going anywhere before building up a reserve of at least 5 ships? Where would that emergent ow pvp gameplay come from if the whole point of OW is to overwhelm your enemy with numbers (because you can) and catch them off-guard because they will most likely flee if they can? If one side is blockading something and perceives an enemy coming with more numbers then they will most likely flee in different directions instead of engaging in some epic fight and risk losing their whole fleet so the whole OW rvr is attritional and self-cannibalizing regarding player-numbers in nature instead of emergent.
Your average player probably won't bother building a reserve of 10 ships and organize 25 people before going out with what he can actually afford to lose and merely goes around reacting to everything instead of anticipating and preparing. The next time you see him after encircling his fleet is most likely in another game instead of trying to dig himself out of the hole and recover his losses and reorganize.
I always found it highly entertaining when rvr people in this game talk about deep strategies and meaningfulness of their actions when they actually had to do blunt pve grind to unlock pb's, culminating in 25 vs 25 arena pew pew and at the same time they tell anyone who finds this absurd and questions this to go play arena : )
I suppose the devs know their main audience, hence such mechanics.-
2
-
-
SC is a phenomenon that has likely secured it's place in history, I like their ability to sing the tune of selling dreams that opens so many wallets upon mere promises, pretty pictures, thrilling videos and after years people still throw money at them furiously like they hate having it. The sheer elegance of removing money from people who have it more than they have sense is admirable.
Once the facade collapses and the folly revealed, I wonder if anyone still wants to crowdfund any future next-gen project? :DD -
1 hour ago, JonSnowLetsGo said:
Can you explain why it is like Quake? I dont see it....
He is trying to straw man quake because it required min-maxing and ''milking the mechanics'' to be competitive without realizing the game devs back then just threw their audience into equal opportunity arena to see who came out on top (attracting creative competitive people, automatically setting the tone and keeping out the snowflakes by not trying to please the weak and everyone who were not able) while in this era of entitlement and getting offended at everything it is probably financial suicide to make a purely skill-based game (without trying to bridge the skill cap with artificial measures and counters or some kind league system to protect fragile egos) so devs who have not decided what chair they sit on (defined target audience) and try to please everyone have to also create safe spaces and certain zones for people who just want to relax and shoot some simple bots to get their dose, that's why we have this thread. Whatever happens, observing this cat herding is still entertaining.
-
1
-
-
A small sidefact - GBP/USD currency pair rate still retains it's traditional nickname ''cable'' in the trading world originating from this.
-
1
-
-
Problems to be solved:
- Cut most pve features on pvp server that are designed to ''help'' new players (forts, ai fleets, abundance of AI on OW that provide escape out of jail card around every next corner) but more likely delay their progression in actually getting more aware and better due to reliance on artificial crutches besides limiting potential pvp opportunities and player's own decision to figure out a way to avoid hazards. (I could be biased here, maybe most people don't want to improve in things they do)
- Stop relying on mob guidance or popularity contest when deciding on adding new features or changes, specially if the suggesters have no experience - it's mostly irrational noise ganking the few rational/experienced thoughts unless it is your tactic to implement everything based on crowd guidance so you can later use the excuse that people wanted this and the whole project is some next level troll experiment illustrating why open development doesn't work, remember you can never please all people so decide which chair you sit on.
Features to be added or cut:
- Cut or limit all the artificial modifiers (mostly perks) that would likely take you years of tinkering back and forth to find a perfect balance with your limited resources. Let player decision and positioning/calculation ability be the main modifier. Stop inventing mods/perks as artificial counters that do the thinking for players to things that can be countered by tactical decisions.
- Make OW pvp great again which would imply increased consideration put into player's ability to make decisions and cutting previously mentioned deterrence features. Something that could be considered as one type of ''endgame'' that is actually replayable. This way you don't have to spend time developing advanced AI to make it more challenging because players will fill the role of dangerous challenging enemy (maybe wishful thinking, most people seem to want easy clicker game).
- On the other hand if the goal is to appeal to lowest common denominator start adding vanity items a'la skins for ships, skins/uniforms for crew, custom sails asap including all kinds of collectible items and more handhold features/modifiers.
BOTTOM LINE is this regarding OS - player interaction including all forms of pvp and player decisions should trump the interaction with artificial and should save you developing time.
disclaimer: this is opinion of very very pvp player who values player skill above artificial progression and gimmicks so pve bears ignore this or send hate mail to my inbox.-
9
-
-
So I don't know what veteran player magnum is upset about.
It's pretty clear I think, he seems angry that he cannot grind out the bp like a drone and someone got them for actual merit in showing some skill and effort, it's kind of unheard of in modern gaming where the trend is to shower even the saddest losers with awards.
-
Regarding new RoE - anyone even slightly concerned about all the npc's that are going to get pulled into what were supposed to be pvp battles due to wider pull circle? Or your group getting pulled into battles due to some random or potential troll tagging a npc close to you? Escaping into random NPC's even easier than before due to seeing a threat coming from miles away and no late joining for hunters?
don't want to kill the hype but the potential outcomes sound entertaining -
I don't mind a fair fight - I enjoy them when they happen.
However, longer timers don't lead to more fair fights. Further, a sandbox/open world system, but it's very nature, does not require, nor promise fair fights. If you want "even" fights, you're looking for an arena based matchmaker system, not an open world sandbox game.
I'm also not a fan of battle timers at all. I like the big/little circle idea a lot. I'd rather a battle pop up, and anyone joining that battle joins at the scaled out distance and direction they were at when the battle started. This still lets you fight what you see, still prevents half of a Nation piling on the nearest fight, and still gives you the flavor of the age of sail. What you see me fighting against, tooth and nail in this thread, is this idea that somehow, keeping battles open for 30 minutes results in a fun fight. It does, for the group with the largest presence in the game. I won't even say in the area, with TP, in the game. They get to pile 25 ships onto any fight they want. If you're going to do this, may as well stop the entire idea of Open World and go back to Sea Trials, where the game can quietly die in a few months.
I think these people who favor longer timers look at it from innocent potential random encounter point of view, they might not be aware of the slaughter that an organized bigger group can do thanks to longer timers so this creates all this miscommunication in my opinion.
-
2
-
-
Thats not because of 2 min timers but because lack of new content my friend.
I like short timers, if you dont wish to get ganked just dont sail alone. And if you really must sail alone somewhere (transport mats or whatever) - remmember that speed is your life insurance. If you still do it in SOL - thats only your fault that you get ganked.
that's a bit too much common sense for this entertaining thread, don't ruin the flow man
How am I supposed to play this game w 2 min timer if I click out of port and cannot cherrypick a handful of ongoing battles with my friends in every single one of them that needs saving right NOW? Or my friends sadistically waiting in port while I call for help and when I get tagged 5m outside of port they say ''sorry man, game prevents me from helping you''. Besides looking for live targets on OS is too uncertain and my friends with live oak masterrace ships are still in port so they won't reach up. We absolutely have to change the game regarding these crucial fun killing flaws.
-
1
-
-
Now change the ROE to Character level of more than two or three in difference the younger character gets unlimited reinforcements then the seal might have a chance to get help from the older wiser seals and the clubber might just get clubbed.
Why bother if people can simply bypass this by making an alt account/twink pretending to be a fellow new player like it has happened in previous games that allow older players to meet the new players in their hen pen?
-
And yet apparently Kaos is worried that the dumbed-down game will be coddling the 5
noobssealclubbers.Can we add a copy of this zone for frigate players too while we're at it already, never really liked lighter ships to be honest and sailing to KPR to farm noobs is taking too much time anyway.
-
Those capitals are within 30 mins of sailing from each other. I would not call it dumbing down - its more raising the stakes.
If we removed wind from game that would be dumbing down.
The idea on paper is pretty if I understand it correctly - noobs learning the ropes fighting other noobs but in practice you might as well rename it ''The pit'' where seasoned players are slaughtering noobs with the aid of BR system (blocking out any further reinforcements that fresh players would desperately need against those sealclubbers in twink ships)...
Right now people have to put in some effort and sail to enemy territory to sealclub, with this idea you provide a concentrated zone that requires minimal sailing since everything would be within hand's reach. The capital could actually become safer option to spawn in for newer players if that will be the case.
I hope I am wrong
-
3
-
-
Being sarcastic doesnt help at all,if people which are playing this game share their thoughts,trying to improve the game. Liking Social Perk or not,there must be a way for those who are attacked,to get some help in a certain time window.That is why the game is still in phase of testing, to make it better.
I don't mean to sound hostile but most of these players trying to ''improve the game'' should start by improving themselves until they realize that the main problem was not the game but their own inexperience since the game already provides all the tools for proper risk management and I understand it is natural reaction first to mask poor decisions by blaming everything/everyone besides themselves.
We have gone from this period when everything was on the shoulder of captains themselves and their ability to adapt:
There are no newbie areas
to introduction of rookie zones and certain perks that dumb down the combat/OW experience.
It leaves me to wonder what improvements comes next by this point, maybe automated yards and automated raking?
-
3
-
-
Devs you better listen to these experts here or the game will tank hard before it even releases. There are market experts, game mechanic experts live on this thread, you simply cannot miss the chance to counsel these professionals!
-
1
-
-
I thought its a player responsibility to encourage devs. Thanks for support mate.
I encourage you to not try bad ideas (long timers) that took/take half a year of explaining from every possible angle to finally decide that they are not working and then try it again after certain period like something would be different this time. Same with certain other perks - you are trying to find solutions to some issues through perks that are actually not issues at all but players being inexperienced and refusing to adapt or improve themselves. You shouldn't bend over to incompetent players to get some + points on steam reviews but encourage them to l2p.
-
3
-
-
Remember our proposal for the unequal battle denial feature?
The one where the weaker side could deny some enemy ships to equalize BR like in HoTS or Dota players deny enemy heroes they dont like or they consider OP?
The only players who i remember to support us with that feature were Doran and Kaos (on forum and in private). And almost everyone (including the majority from Brits and some players from TDA) was raging about groups and friends and ability to play with friends, and unhappy friends and friends not able to enter, because they are friends with the bathroom breaks, and friends who just came out of the port, and friends with heavy ships who become separated, or friends with 1st rates who are denied the battle against the frigates and cant gank them etc etc etc?
That feature would have solved all the problems because it took care of the solo guy first. If solo guy can always find a fair fight everyone will be able to find a fair fight. And we freaking knew it. Because i always play solo and maybe with one friend and I wanted that feature.
Now you play solo (TDA online is smaller these days) - do you think you and TDA should have seen the long term benefits of that proposal? Or you are still enjoying the
gankfestmassively multiplayer freedom sandbox?sarcasm off
Doran was right - we should have done it then... I am not sure if it is too late. Or is it not?
Don't pat yourself on your back yet - I think we did not support this idea but started thinking up a compromise that would allow both sides to continue their business solo players and gankers likewise and it resulted in bombing you with lowering timer lobby which still enables ganking if squad sails tightly together on open sea BUT gives some control to a solo person who has at least somekind of awareness to stay out of trouble because he can actually see and judge the revealing situation depending on his own intelligence therefore both wolves and sheep happy.
Open world sandbox always evolves into gankbox but we figured out a way to keep solo people on the map and now we take a step back with this perk. The main problem with long timer was solo-small group players becoming passive because every agressive move was punished by long timers and always favoring late-joiners.
-
3
-
-
Regarding total victory, if it will be anything like in potbs then it should go something like this:
step 1) Once it's becoming clear that some nation/coalition is starting to win the map, half of the victim nation stops playing and pvers start hating on pvpers while not doing anything to prevent their current situation. The casuals of steamroll nation start joining the pb's to be part of the rape train and it will affect the results of the port battles for said nation due to communication and organization problems. The members of losing nation will try to escape the sinking ship to winning side before map is officially won to also receive benefits of victory, a lot of angry people because of crossteaming.
step 2) After map reset, the winning nation gains certain amount of players from loser nation (forced alliance here to make this transition easier I suppose) because people prefer to be on the winning side and the circle continues.
Good luck to the moderators of national news if this get's implemented-
1
-
-
3 prizes will be provided by the developers
Ocean 1st place
Agamemnon 2nd place
Rattlesnake Heavy to Semifinalists
Agamemnon will also be provided for the judge and active organizers
also pick a quiter spot and don't arrange meet ups in open chat
we will see if we can do something with the rooms but its very unlikely as we want to get a lot done this patch (alliances and some other things)
You need to step it up m8
In 1997 Dennis “Thresh” Fong as a winner of the Quake tournament, was given a red Ferrari 328GTS convertible that had belonged to John Carmack, co-creator of Quake.
jokes aside I think we'll see more hype once summer is over, combat is more fleshed out and perks trimmed.
-
If the missions objective is to kill an other 6on6 group, it would be possible for a big nation or group to exploit the system. They just could stay in 25 player fleets. No chance to fulfill the mission.
That means no chance in gathering points which leads to no port battle. Port safe. That just favor big groups and nations.
What I meant was group of 6 activates mission in enemy territory that could be only entered by defender team of 6, not 25. If noone reacts to this mission to keep the raiders away then it will gather those points that it would get upon successful 6v6 without a fight over time. The main goal is to offer smaller groups to have good fights instead of steamrolls. Even if they are not interested about those rvr points, they would know where to go for a fight that will not be another hide and seek or running down some innocent bystanders who don't even play this game for pvp to get some silly points.
-
Guys I am afraid you're being too optimistic here since this proposal would mean skill actually starts to matter so good luck trying to sell this idea to average player playing this game.
Was thinking something along the lines when trying to figure out a way to have smaller groups incorporated into rvr and have actually good fights but I wouldn't limit the whole 25vs25, just make one way of gathering those rvr points or triggering pb's through pvp missions which could potentially be smaller scale, like 6v6?
This land is my land - new game in development
in General discussions
Posted
Will this have any plans for multiplayer?
I can't deny that running down humans with my failfit (copper plating + speed rig) 5 slot horsie that I stole from the front of a tavern from another player who spent weeks grinding pve for it and riding into sunset looking for adventures has me intrigued.
So any plans for this day-zish human hunting simulator/survival in the wild west frontier setting or just strictly pve?