Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'release'.
Found 7 results
ONLINE player count
King of Crowns posted a topic in Current Feature Improvement SuggestionsOnline player count info should not be available on release. we have seen spiraling effects as a result of that number in the past. simple remove it. needs to happen.
Navalus Magnus posted a topic in Early access discussionsHey devs, your doing a good job with this game so far! As i‘m close to finish the british campaign as it is right now and i‘m looking forward to the next part. That leads to the following (ugrent 😉) question: When can we expect the last parts of both campaigns? Could you give an estimated date please?
http://www.navalaction.com/ With the launch seemingly around the corner a quick glance at the NA website seems to promote mechanics that are no longer in the game and does not list all the nations accurately. While I'd personally love to have outlaw battles back on the table and less nations.....I feel like the game's website should at least accurately reflect the current status of the game. Especially 1-2 weeks to launch. The ships also need to be updated as there are more than 10 now and the trinc has been completed for oh...3 years. Also should maybe update this.....kinda makes the game look dead. While I can sympathize certain omissions by a small dev team....the rush to launch, lack of release updates and an outdated website does not particularly bode well for this games release and continued support. I feel like our DLC money should at least be able to fund a website that was updated within the past year or 2. Kinda sad honestly. What do you guys think?
Link Accounts on servers
Sir Texas Sir posted a topic in Current Feature Improvement SuggestionsI got to thinking about the War and Peace servers and since it seems that they want to make one server extreme peace and the other extreme war and not a mix of PvP/PvE for the most part. How about we upon release have the two servers linked account wise with just you level? So if you want to level up in peace you can, but if you want to jump over and enjoy some war action you still can at that level, but still have to get your ships and supplies. Of course most folks might just use redeemable DLC ships this way. This will make many players happy that don't want to deal with constant ganking or might not have time for a dragged out battle but could go kill some AI for a little xp. Of course all gold/reals, Doubloons and other things will still be locked per account. I would even go back to share labor hours so you can only use them on one or the other or until your out. There are a lot of players that like PvP, but just don't want it forced upon them. This might even encourage the PvE guys to play some on the War server cause they can still go back to peace side and level up on there own. The down side to this is that upon release both servers you will be wiped to zero xp and have to start over.
Clan name + tag on release wipe
Njord posted a question in Feature proposals and Gameplay Help Q&AWill we keep our clans through the final wipe meaning only clan warehouse will be wiped but not the clan itself? @Ink @admin
When the games goes full release, limit the ships available at the start of the release, and as time progresses, gradually add more and more of the ships to give a gradual increase in the firepower and speed for the ships introduced later. At the beginning, no 1st or 2nd rates, no ag;s wapen's, endy's, indiamans or heavy rattles. Just an assortment of vanilla ships - then every few weeks introduce new ships. This will give new players starting more chance, and limit how quickly anyone or any nation can become dominant.
Credit System for NA Veterans
Jean Ribault posted a topic in Current Feature Improvement SuggestionsPremise: My understanding of the developer intent for game veterans at release is for players to keep their previously earned rank XP and crafting XP, and that those items remain tied to our Steam accounts. While there is merit to the idea that players have earned their XP over long periods of gameplay and shouldn't have to re-grind for it, I put together a proposal below for an alternate approach that could work using a credit system. The main worth of a credit system is that game vets would still keep rewards for some (or perhaps most) of their previous gameplay, but at the same time there would not be a complete transfer of rank and craft XP in 1 fell swoop as is currently planned. This still allows players to reap rewards for time spent, but more closely levels the playing field at release, between new customers and veteran alpha testers. Proposal: I propose a credit system, with a cap of let's say 25,000 credits, and scaling downward from there based upon your total XP earned. New customers or newbs with very few XP points at release would receive 0 credits. Since some players who've been around for 2 years could actually have less gametime spent than a 6-month player, it would be more logical that credits would not be time-based, but rather only XP-based. So everyone has between 0 and 25,000 credits at game release. Those players with any credits at release could apply them towards starting gold, ships, materials, upgrades, roll them back again into rank XP or crafting XP, etc....essentially any game asset that is attainable you can spend your credits on. You have a time window to spend them and must spend them prior to doing anything in the game. The cap of 25,000 credits (or whatever the appropriate number is) should be a scalable reduction in worth of the total XP that players have attained. For sake of argument, lets say rank and craft XP are equal in value. So the meaningful conversion is simply this: Credits = (Rank XP + Craft XP) x Conversion Factor So for example if prior to release you had just made it to rank level 8 and craft level 18, you would have earned at least 41,000 rank XP and around 8000 craft XP. You then have 49,000 XP to convert to credits. The conversion factor in this proposal is really subjective, but as a starting discussion point let's say it's going to be 3-to-1. So your 49,000 total XP yield you 16,333 credits in this example. You can then trade in those 16,333 credits at release. If you decided to make them all rank XP (and given a 1-to-1 trade-in value), you would start the game at rank level 7 with no other assets (except a basic cutter with cannons). Goals: They are multiple: - To avoid blindly taking away everything players have spent time accumulating, testing, grinding, etc. I believe you should get something for your investment. - To avoid allowing players to keep everything they've earned in alpha; not realistic for games really, and arguably poor for the outset of the final game configuration (- So it's a compromise of the two points above) - This method allows for leveling the player base much better at release (you still obviously keep your actual experience, no one can take that away) - This method allows you to spread your initial earned advantage over more things than just rank XP and crafting XP; you can choose gold, materials, upgrades, etc. So you choose and are in more control. Discussion: Some may disagree and say they earned it all and should keep it all, but bear in mind others are of the very opposite opinion that a total wipe of XP and assets similar to other alpha game experiences is more appropriate. This idea is a compromise of those ideas and gives you more control. The conversion factor above is what I might consider reasonable, but others will want conversion to be better than 3 to 1, or maybe worse at 4 or 5 to 1. Also, should rank XP and craft XP be equal in value for credits? I made them so in my example above. What are your thoughts? Any merit to this idea?