Players losing ships is bad, and here is why.

[Bartholomew Badgerbeard]

That's pretty much the same as my experience playing Eve Online. Only extremely rich players could have an all out battle for the fun of it, most fights were just people ganking whoever they could catch off guard so there would be no risk to themselves.

 

For me the reason why the notion of an all out war of attrition in a game like this is ultimately unacceptable is because the casualties are peoples grades and health and social lives. Any game that ultimately measures you by how much you play over how well you play is total cancer in your life if you want to win.

 

I think we have obviously had very different EvE experiences. While I'm not denying what you say is certainly a large part of the game, there is (or certainly was) scope for near-endless pvp fun. I was by no means a rich player (in or out of game) but I still spent the majority of my game time engaged in some form of PvP activity. That said, after seven years of skill training my main did not fly capital ships, they simply did not interest me all that much. Small ship combat was where it was at for me, and while I did take part in many a gank, I also flew around solo or small gang just looking for any fight out-numbered or not. My point here is the structure of the game allowed for all kinds of "meaningful" activity, and it was the better for it. I'd hope to see a similar level of variety in NA.

 

My fear (possibly unfounded I grant you) is that without ship loss it is only a matter of time before the population of any given server is predominantly sailing around in first-rates, at which point crafting loses any real meaning in the game, which in turn has a knock on effect to the trader playstyle. I've never found a game without permanent loss that had an enjoyable crafting/ trading aspect to it that allowed for a "change of pace" when I felt like trying something different. For me, true immersion comes from the game as a whole, not just one aspect of it.

 

I do understand that for many people losing a ship they had to work damn hard to acquire is painful, especially if playing to a restrictive schedule, but as long as there are still options to get out and involved (basic cutter I'm looking at you here), I honestly believe that the benefits of permanent loss out weigh the annoyance as far as the overall game experience is concerned. I am however a very patient person by nature, I fully accept that with my game time it will be a very long haul indeed to get a first-rate (assuming I ever do), and that even then I'll have to take my chances with it if I actually want to fire the guns in anger.

[Sylven1]

Shame PVP has mostly devolved to the majority of players of running. I attacked 6 different players last night, all 6 ran. Some even had superior ships.

Although one was " brave " enough to come back with 4 others to try and get me. Pretty typical night. Fun reading chat and seeing the frustration of others with lack of PVP.

The fear of loss does not add anything, other than an excuse to avoid fights on a pvp server.

People ran from open world PvP all the time in World of Warcraft. Even fights they could win. And yet there was no fear of loss in World of Warcraft.

[HMCS Warrior]

We should be losing ships. It's not like they are impossible to replace. There must be consequences. Without risk of loss this game would be a lot less interesting for me. I enjoy the thrill and pressure of possibly losing an exceptional ship and her modules. If you don't want to pvp the pve server is that way -------------------------------->. Cheers.

[Aetrion]

People ran from open world PvP all the time in World of Warcraft. Even fights they could win. And yet there was no fear of loss in World of Warcraft.

 

Sure, but people would also have hours long battles over Hillsbrad Foothills though even though there was technically nothing to gain from it and just enjoy the fight without fear of loss. Those battles were so popular that Blizzard created a battleground from that zone.

 

As far as people running from PvP if you're not trying to be in a fight at the time it makes perfect sense to try to get on with whatever else you're doing. Even in Naval Action there might be times when you're hurrying to meet up with a group or heading to a mission or something where you don't want to be interrupted.

[Benjamin Hornigold]

Imho the game needs the Ship to be SUNK after it sinks the FIRST time, the Durabilitys encourage bad gameplay

[Ruthless4u]

Imho the game needs the Ship to be SUNK after it sinks the FIRST time, the Durabilitys encourage bad gameplay

And 1 dura turns this into an Econ game instead of pvp.

Which would you rather have?

[Balsafer]

Imho the game needs the Ship to be SUNK after it sinks the FIRST time, the Durabilitys encourage bad gameplay

 

1 dura ships nobody would fight at all

[Nash]

1 dura ships nobody would fight at all

 

we do have 1 dura first rate tho

Anyway, Aetrion, you used dark souls as an example then I will use this: "git gud"

 

For the topic, I think that its ok for people to run always since everyone do it sometime. But when people realize that they can capture  frigate and 3rd in 15 minutes and use them as pvp ship, you will see people go for crazy stuffs.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Nash

[Hyperion74]

Here's the game I want to play.

Log on, set sail, get in to a fight, have fun.

Here's the game I don't want to play.

Log in, check store for oak planks, click on a bunch of stuff to make pine tar, think of setting sail to fight, shit need to go to bed.

That's rather simplistic. That isn't this game.

In order to fight you need a ship.

In order to have a ship you need to make money to buy one.

In order to have a ship to buy, someone's gotta make one.

That is the game.

I accept that.

 

The OP was only suggesting an aspect that he thought might work. He is neither right nor wrong. Everyone else is neither right or wrong. NA is an MMO so it needs aspects that appeal to many different types of players. Discussion about how to make that work is vital. If the devs are wise, and I think that they are, they will take a look at these threads and learn a bit about their players so that they can make a game we all will enjoy.

 

In order to have fighting in PLAYER v PLAYER, you gotta have players. There must be a balance. Something to keep the person who doesn't have time to grind playing and participating in PvP. Something to keep the econ/grind player participating. Something to keep the PvP God playing. That's all we're looking for and in order to find that balance we need these threads.

 

Hell, let's run em out to the end. If you think it's too long, stop reading and stop posting. I have enjoyed this thread. Lot of good points. Lot of assyness as well. Don't enjoy that. If you disagree with someone, say so, no need to be a dick about it. OP is not out to get you. He's brought up some good points and given some valid examples. So have many others. I would ask that some respect be shown to the others on this forum.

 

Here is what I would like to see.

 

Most people, it seems, want a player driven economy. In order to facilitate this we need loss. On the other hand, that loss shouldn't be devastating.

{So far money hasn't been much of a problem for me. Missions are great, good chink and lots of fun. Some NPC's are a challenge.}

It was pointed out that a lot of PvP'ers run rather than fight. A chase can be fun, embrace it. Make the mechanics a little better for a long chase.

{Running has always been a valid tactic.}

Have a lossless PVP mode. DUAL. Does not effect conquest or econ. First this is good training. Second this is a chance to sail like an idiot if ye want. Third just good plain fun.

 

This and POTBS(the other game) are the only MMO's that I have ever played. Don't know any others. All I know is what I would like to see. I try to take in the opinions of other players and will not be buthurt if it turns out that a compromise has been reached and there is something there that I don't like. To please ALL players, there must be a COMPROMISE.

 

Well those are my thoughts. Not much to offer. We'll talk again.

[Aetrion]

Here's the game I want to play.

Log on, set sail, get in to a fight, have fun.

Here's the game I don't want to play.

Log in, check store for oak planks, click on a bunch of stuff to make pine tar, think of setting sail to fight, shit need to go to bed.

 

This is exactly why I think ships should not be what the economy is about in the game. If we simply say "It's a game about ships, you never have to worry about having an awesome ship" then people are free to drive around and get into fights with each other to their heart's content. 

 

The economy aspect can be used for tons of other things. The ship crafting could work the same way we're used to from lossless MMOs, which work fine despite what the haters say. Most of the really huge resource investments should come into play only when you're actually doing the conquest stuff. It's only the really hardcore players who are into clan warfare who really want this crazy hardcore stuff anyways, so it seems by far the most reasonable course of action to put the bulk of the cost on the activities specifically designed for clan warfare.

 

When losing a fight doesn't mean losing your favourite ship people are going to seek out fairer fights and people won't have to fear getting ganked so much. For the people who just want to roam and fight that's the ideal situation. For the people who want huge clan wars with attrition and loads of grind - just put the costs in the harbor sieges and territory control rather than slapping everyone who just wants to have some fun with them.

[drogoran]

no loss v loss both have their merrit

 

i usualy dont run from fights since the money and xp i get out of it usualy more than covers the lost durability

 

as long as i can earn enuf cash to rebuy a basic shop variant of the ship im sailing before its out of durability there basicaly is no loss

Edited February 14, 2016 by drogoran

[Aetrion]

Yea, but then you can't make use of any of the upgrades, and from what I understand the highest tier ships don't even have durability, so the game still puts people on uneven footing in sea battles purely based on how much time they have to accumulate money. I'd much rather have the naval battles be down to skill alone and have the economy portion of the game come into play only when you're actually taking over parts of the world. 

[drogoran]

Yea, but then you can't make use of any of the upgrades, and from what I understand the highest tier ships don't even have durability, so the game still puts people on uneven footing in sea battles purely based on how much time they have to accumulate money. I'd much rather have the naval battles be down to skill alone and have the economy portion of the game come into play only when you're actually taking over parts of the world. 

 

on 0 dura mode upgrades become risky like hell yupp

 

but even that can be negated by using basic shop bought ones that can be found almost everywhere

 

if one is expecting high atrition rate of ships use the inexpensive and plentifull

 

mastercraft is no guarantee of victory

 

but il be happy regardles of 5 dura or 0

[Aetrion]

To me a lot of the fun in the game is lost if it's all about what I can replace, not about what I can achieve.

 

Progress can be made at your own pace, which means if you don't have a lot of time or you play many different games you can still have fun with it. Upkeep on the other hand requires you to put a certain amount of time into the game in order to have access to good stuff, so it puts pressure on you to play all the time.

 

Upkeep is IMO only a sensible mechanic when it's used to manage something that people should be competing over, like the ability to hold a port for example. Progress is a lot better of a mechanic when it's about stuff where if everyone had unlimited time everyone could be at the top end.

 

So, if everyone had all day to play the game everyone could run top end ships all the time, the only reason why anyone wouldn't be able to is because there are limits to how much they can play. It's stupid to restrict a player based on that. On the other hand, not everyone can own a certain city, only one empire can own it at a time, so there it's reasonable to say that it just falls to whoever puts the most effort into holding it.

 

To me that's where I will always draw the line between whether an upkeep or a progression mechanic are better. Progression for personal achievement that doesn't take anything away from other players, Upkeep for competition where other people can't have the same as long as I have it.

[Aubrey]

Seriously, I dare to say that - by now - every single person on this board knows your point of view after 22 pages of the same claims and assumptions.

We get it. We really, really get it.

Now it is your turn...

[Justme]

Screw it.

How about 1 dura for all ships, even basic cutter. Once you lose all ships then create new charecter.

[Aetrion]

Screw it.

How about 1 dura for all ships, even basic cutter. Once you lose all ships then create new charecter. find a different game and leave a negative steam review.

 

Fixed that for you. 

[Justme]

Fixed that for you. 

It's what all the 1 dura guys want, even if they are not smart enough to realize it would happen. If we go 1 dura, it has to be 1 dura for everyone even new players in the most basic ship.

[Aubrey]

It's what all the 1 dura guys want, even if they are not smart enough to realize it would happen. If we go 1 dura, it has to be 1 dura for everyone even new players in the most basic ship.

Why would that be a bad thing?

[Justme]

Why would that be a bad thing?

Therin lies the problem.

[jodgi]

Funny thing, over the past week I tried to engage in 2 dozens pvp battles.

Of the 24, only 4 fought. Pm'd the remaining 20 asking why they ran.

5 did not respond.

1 did in Spanish so could not read.

4 responded they did not have time to battle.

2 admitted fighting is only fun it you have an overwhelming majority.

Other 8 responded it was not risking a life/dura on their ship.

Thoughts on this?

And yes I'm aware it's a small sample size.

The Rakers and other PVP oriented players have the the same "experiment". Over the period the OW has been a thing the result are the same as yours. Still a small sample, but statistically significant. Most real sciences do the same with extrapolating smaller numbers over the entire population, perfectly valid scientific method.

Hence the urgency of my PVP nagging.

Unless we do something with the detrimental 5 minute timers and the perception of loss we might end up with a game where PVP, and with it loss in itself, is only a theoretical part of the gameplay.

[sailNE]

Also developers absolutely must split caribean map into three lanes. And where is the opportunity to play on Android and iOs? And I want to add anime drawings to sails, that would be so awesome! Screw the greatest sandbox ever made I think! Oh, and flying immortal ships- wouldn`t THAT be an amazing game!

 

Just in case:

Edited February 14, 2016 by sailNE

[Aubrey]

Therin lies the problem.

No please, explain in detail why that would be a bad thing.

 

Honestly, I am not surprised you struggle to answer this simple question, and instead use empty words to evade the topic.

I know why I asked in the first place.

[Neith]

For me everything is fine with possibility of losing ships. If they will change this or do something with that probably i will stop play this game.

 

I don't wanna start next game, where everything is created or changed for the one-hours players, for the crying players or casulal players. Really wanna play in hard game and i hope this game could give me it.

[Ruthless4u]

No please, explain in detail why that would be a bad thing.

 

Honestly, I am not surprised you struggle to answer this simple question, and instead use empty words to evade the topic.

I know why I asked in the first place.

I can't answer for him/her but for myself I have no intrest in a AOS version of dark souls mixed with EVE.

It's pretty obvious yourself and a few others only want a hardcore game, one that does not appeal to filthy casuals with families and lives outside of 8 hour gaming sessions. Hate to tell you us unwashed masses actually do matter. I'm more likely to spend money on this game and in greater amounts than a minimum wage hardcore gamer with more free time than money or sense.

It's all well and good to make a passion project game, but at some point you have to keep the lights on. Please don't use EVE as an example, this is not eve and never will be.

Currently I could not imagine a 1 dura system for everything including new guys in basics a good thing. In my mind it leads to one thing frustration. Want to see players leave, ask them to start over and over again when they get sunk, select nation, etc, etc.