Players losing ships is bad, and here is why.

[Bach]

I disagree with this. Every ship class has its use, to say everyone will be sailing around in 1st Rates is absolutely positively false. Not only will they be far too expensive to constantly lose, they also get outclassed by smaller vessels in a lot of ways. This didn't happen in PotBS(The version of it that didn't suck, not the current version), people were primarily in things like Hercules Frigates and other medium ships, as they were efficient for the job. Smaller faster ships will always be needed in proper PvP for tackling, its true in this game as soon as they add a fast small ship with bow guns, you will see that ship in every single PvP fleet, 100% guaranteed.

One of the biggest problems with this games community is that most players want the best ship possible, even though they are completely ignoring the fact that all ships fill a role, no ship is good at everything. This is an issue with current gaming and it's something that does not fit into this game.

I know what you are trying to say but I also played both games.

POTBS once ship losses, insurance and easy Econ made ship losses irrelevant all you ever saw on the OS was Vengy, HercsMC and other elite speed ships. Making players take zero losses in pvp doesn't promote them to pvp. POTBS literally cured ship losses and all it ended up doing was destroying the economy, making only a handful of ship designs viable and yes we all had a 1st rate we used to farm NPC. The issue isn't material it's psycological. Nobody likes to lose. Everyone likes to win. If you present a group of players with the freedom to chose a percentage will choose to only fight when they can win. No matter how much free stuff you give them. Then a large group of the remaining percentage will be forced into the exact same fast ships in order to combat the win only guys. This is why without Econ bounds everyone will just gravitate to ships that can out gun whatever catches them and outrun what can out gun them. This us why POTBS OS ended up being only a handful of ship designs. Without outside pressures like Econ and loss forcing it NA would also just degrade to everyone running around in Ronemees. Unlike POTBS a cutter or Lynx isn't fast enough to pin any brig or frigate in battle. So the little useful fast tiny tackler thing doesn't hold here.

So the short version is that lack of losses doesn't make players pvp. It just lets them run away in a better ship. It's the psychology not the economy.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Bach

[Prater]

In Eve there are players who are only manufacturers or miners.  That is the main thing they do, I was one of the manufactures.  They might from time to time take part in pve, but mostly all they do is mine, trade, or manufacture.  That is possible because of supply and demand.  Without loss, that is not possible.  It was the same in PotBS.  Sure, you can set the economy up in different ways so that it will work without loss, but without loss of ships, the main part of the economy is gone, and the demand falls, and it is no longer viable for players to be only crafters and or only traders.  That is what loss does, it protects those who mainly want to play econ and it gives them a game.  Without loss, they don't have a game, except trying to run from pirates every now and then, and how often do you get chased in a trade ship?  Not often.

[Justme]

Wishful thinking...if game doesn't punish you for mistakes then in reality all you will ever see is people mindlessly derping around carefree because they know they can just respawn, you played world of tanks you should know that. Why would anyone learn anything if the game will just handhold you throughout your mistakes up until the biggest ships? Besides we already know what happens when people pvp without ship loss from sea trials, redeemable prewipe era and now small battles. They still run in basic cutters and not fight even if they don't lose anything besides wasting their own and opponent's time. Potbs had skirmish room, it was basically sea trials style lobby/practice room where you could arrange teams and it had no loss. It was empty most of the times because everyone was busy hunting in open sea where you could actually lose your stuff and your actions had consequences.

Can we keep open world so that players actually have responsibility for their actions and consequences for fucking up so they would you know...actually benefit from improving themselves?

 

If they ever add loss-free version of small battles I am fairly sure it will share the same fate with potbs skirmish room.

Since when did punishing player start to take precedent over having fun?

[Remo]

I know what you are trying to say but I also played both games.

POTBS once ship losses, insurance and easy Econ made ship losses irrelevant all you ever saw on the OS was Vengy, HercsMC and other elite speed ships. Making players take zero losses in pvp doesn't promote them to pvp. POTBS literally cured ship losses and all it ended up doing was destroying the economy, making only a handful of ship designs viable and yes we all had a 1st rate we used to farm NPC. The issue isn't material it's psycological. Nobody likes to lose. Everyone likes to win. If you present a group of players with the freedom to chose a percentage will choose to only fight when they can win. No matter how much free stuff you give them. Then a large group of the remaining percentage will be forced into the exact same fast ships in order to combat the win only guys. This is why without Econ bounds everyone will just gravitate to ships that can out gun whatever catches them and outrun what can out gun them. This us why POTBS OS ended up being only a handful of ship designs. Without outside pressures like Econ and loss forcing it NA would also just degrade to everyone running around in Ronemees. Unlike POTBS a cutter or Lynx isn't fast enough to pin any brig or frigate in battle. So the little useful fast tiny tackler thing doesn't hold here.

So the short version is that lack of losses doesn't make players pvp. It just lets them run away in a better ship. It's the psychology not the economy.

 

Wait, how does it not hold? A privateer can catch and hold practically any ship in the game currently aside from a speed equipped renomee, which if someone only goes for speed on a renomee they will be in deep crap.

 

You are only looking at the game as if it will never have new ships included.

[Kaos]

Since when did punishing player start to take precedent over having fun?

It's not punishment for punishment's sake but a reason to improve the average player's skill level to certain degree above what it would be if there are no consequences for failing all the time. Maybe you like the idea of bashing clueless noobs who didn't even bother learning manual sails because game handholds them but that's not my kind of idea of fun.

[Slamz]

Because you wonder if you have what it takes to beat me, if you best me you have the bragging rights of having beaten a raker in a fair fight. Maybe you learn a thing or two. People here pretend they learn something from bullying bots, you're better than that. Because you like to have fun trying to outwit an actual person instead of letting your brain rot clicking at bots.

 

That's a very short term perspective. You're basically talking about enjoying the mechanics of combat. I dunno about you, but I think for most people "enjoying the mechanics of combat" lasts somewhere between 1 and 6 months, just based on the curve of population dropoff in most games. They buy the game, they learn the mechanics, they have a lot of fun, they reach a peak, they lose interest and they stop playing.

 

MMORPGs combat this by "endless content", as I mentioned earlier. If you can keep moving the finish line then you can keep a lot of people interested. If you see a way to do this for Naval Action, you should start a thread about it because the devs might be interested.

 

Otherwise, Naval Action has to try and get people to feel invested in the game world and the community -- things that will keep them interested long past the point where they feel they have "played out" the combat mechanics -- and I think that's going to happen with a vibrant economy (friends!) and ship loss (enemies!).

 

People overlook the value of a good enemy. I'm pretty sure the whole reason I played Everquest PvP server as long as I did was because there were some enemies who just didn't need to get away with being able to log in and not be murdered at least once per play session.

 

 

Last night I was fighting a pirate and he spent probably a good 30 minutes trying very hard to escape. He was in a basic cutter. The free one. As I was spending 30 minutes trying to keep him in range and finish him off I thought, "You know, I could just let him go. Or he could just surrender. It's just a free, basic cutter, after all. Why are we even doing this?"

 

In your world, I think one of us would have quit early on because seriously why bother. Who cares. Once one person gets ahead the other might as well surrender because anything else is just a waste of time anyway. You took away the lows but you lost the highs too.

 

In this world, he kept running and I kept chasing because darnit, that's 1 durability! And his guild has cost my guild some goods. And my guild has cost his guild some goods. We had a certain history. Maybe he had a bunch of blue mods he was afraid to lose. Maybe he had a cargo load full of compass wood. Maybe it was just the pride of knowing he'd kept me from getting his 1 durability, even if was free. The mere fact that some sort of loss was possible gave this fight an intensity we would never have in your world.

[jodgi]

(Redacted content lost context when Doran was modded4fun)

Pls, no bulli. Posting on mobile.

Kaos, going nekkid anyway.

[jodgi]

That's a very short term perspective. You're basically talking about enjoying the mechanics of combat. I dunno about you, but I think for most people "enjoying the mechanics of combat" lasts somewhere between 1 and 6 months,

So you're saying I'm special? Wait! Short bus or "A beautiful mind" special?

2001 was the last time I played a single player game or RPG. I've done nothing but , as you say, combat mechanics since then. I had a fantastic 10 year run in AH before the euro hours became lonely. I never tired from it, if you learn to love the fight the fire never dies.

Naval Action already has what it takes to be such an eternal flame (giggles) game. I do pick up on players being dazzled by fluff and context, it's fine, but it wears out real quick for me.

The Fight never fails you.

[randommexi]

I would agree with this if they decided to remove crafting and the entire economy.  At which point, I would just quit the game.  cause all I do is crafting and economy...

 

thanks but an utter fail idea.

[Mr. Doran]

Wait, how does it not hold? A privateer can catch and hold practically any ship in the game currently aside from a speed equipped renomee, which if someone only goes for speed on a renomee they will be in deep crap.

 

You are only looking at the game as if it will never have new ships included.

 

No Bungee, I can not let this stand. The world must know how wrong he is. Square riggers can not be caught by "fore-aft" riggers  running down wind or even better the wind polar known as "broad reach". 

 

And yah Jodgi quit posting your utter fail ideas K thanx!

[Bach]

Wait, how does it not hold? A privateer can catch and hold practically any ship in the game currently aside from a speed equipped renomee, which if someone only goes for speed on a renomee they will be in deep crap.

You are only looking at the game as if it will never have new ships included.

*snip*. Post deleted. The angry guy handled this better than I could have.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Bach

[Mr. Doran]

NPCs in NA are speed nerves to make them catchable by the likes of a privateer. They also don't stern load chain shot. A Mercury down wind is faster than a privateer. It's pretty close to a match on a 90. The priv only has 6 guns on it and it's got to turn to fire since it's got no nose guns. If the target is a player it will have long guns in the stern loaded with chain. Priv sail hp are very low. A trader Lynx will out run a Privateer when commanded by a player on any tack. If a privateer did find a frigate that was slower than it with no long guns in the stern it would still take the Priv like a half hour to slow it down enough past the 30% sail repair for a ship that could destroy it to catch it. I think you are thinking to much like POTBS where the little ships with the "magic snares" could get the tackling done in short order. Here you would be better off tackling in that speed fit Renomee

 

Tackling in a speed fit Ren? Go back to your packet boat in POTBS. Only tackler is Trinc and don't you forget it. 

[Remo]

Did my posts get deleted? What rule did I break? Thrice now have I had one of my posts disappear. If that's the way these forums will be handled, ghost deleting posts that are on topic and civil while others get to troll like it's 4chan then this is my last post here.

 

Good day gentlemen, enjoy.

[jodgi]

Did my posts get deleted? What rule did I break? Thrice now have I had one of my posts disappear. If that's the way these forums will be handled, ghost deleting posts that are on topic and civil while others get to troll like it's 4chan then this is my last post here.

Good day gentlemen, enjoy.

Stuff like that happens when you come in contact with Doran, like you did. I used to make my mother proud, now look at me!

Doran is like King Midas in reverse.

[Remo]

Stuff like that happens when you come in contact with Doran, like you did. I used to make my mother proud, now look at me!

Doran is like King Midas in reverse.

 

So Testers get special privileges on the forums then?

 

I can't believe my eyes, my game cost money just like yours and I'm the second class citizen. If I could get a refund just based off of this I would.

 

I am completely at a loss...

[Gunnar Rask]

That's a very short term perspective. You're basically talking about enjoying the mechanics of combat.

I'd like to offer a completely different perspective, if the basic mechanics of combat aren't fun, then I don't play a game. Conversely, if a game has good combat I'll play it for years so long as there are other people to play with or against.

 

For example, I love the idea of EVE online, but because combat is pretty unsatisfying to me I don't play the game (despite the fluff, background, lore, community, and everything else that exists both in and outside the game).

[Prater]

So Testers get special privileges on the forums then?

I can't believe my eyes, my game cost money just like yours and I'm the second class citizen. If I could get a refund just based off of this I would.

I am completely at a loss...

No, I think you are completely wrong on that point. Jodgi was joking. The mods typically tell you if a post got hidden.

[Justme]

So Testers get special privileges on the forums then?

 

I can't believe my eyes, my game cost money just like yours and I'm the second class citizen. If I could get a refund just based off of this I would.

 

I am completely at a loss...

You realize due to the game still being in a testing phase that makes you a tester.

[Remo]

No, I think you are completely wrong on that point. Jodgi was joking. The mods typically tell you if a post got hidden.

 

I was not warned.

 

As for whether or not he was joking, I can't tell, he doesn't make any sense half the posts he makes. No offense intended of course.

[Aetrion]

 

You mean like when the Hiei found itself unable to bear on three destroyers which passed so close that she couldn't obtain depression (closest 20ft)?

San Francisco was taken as her target instead at 2.5km, being far enough away to bring under fire.

Generalisations are risky things to make.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Hiei

http://www.combinedfleet.com/atully03.htm

 

This thing you're being so smug about isn't even mentioned anywhere in the descriptions I can find of battles the Hiei fought.

 

And besides, it wouldn't invalidate what I said. In World of warships a top end destroyer might have something like 6-8 5 inch guns, a battleship has 20. It wouldn't even be any kind of contest between those two ships when it comes to fast firing ordnance that can sink destroyers, except the players don't get to control the 5 inch guns on battleships, they only get to control the main battery, and the AI controlled guns are notoriously inaccurate and have lower range than they did in reality. This is simply an example of bending historical accuracy a bit in a way that overall makes sense because it allowed them to bring destroyers to even footing with a battleship, thereby ensuring that people would use all classes of ships, not just the biggest one.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Aetrion

[Gunnar Rask]

So this may be my inner empiricist speaking, but it'd be pretty interesting to try a "low" or "no loss" economy for a patch.

 

Although, I'm aware that most people probably aren't as willing to try things out (and I'm also understanding of why people might not be).

[Aetrion]

Yes, in an economy where all you can build is ships it would require a shift toward other craftables to have ongoing demand for crafted goods. Personally I would prefer if the game went for a market simulation rather than a crafting simulation, because in all honesty, the crafting systems in this game are just never going to be particularly good, simply owing to the fact that this is not a game where I can dig a mine shaft or build a lumber camp or create a farm. When it comes to crafting sims the voxel sandbox genre beats the everloving crap out of everything else in existence. I do not give a flying fish about driving from harbor to harbor, clicking buttons to trade gold for resources, then clicking ships into existence out of those resources. That is not a crafting system to me, that is a waste of time.

 

If I want to craft a ship I fire up Space Engineers where I can actually craft a functional spaceship from individual pieces, putting every single engine and reactor and weapon exactly where I want it, and the resulting vessel has its own unique look, characteristics, strengths and weaknesses. That is what a crafting system looks like. This game does NOT have a crafting system, it just has a system that sucks away your time clicking around menues to get ships that you can't even customize and that you only need because the game insisted on deleting your old one. That's a waste of time system, not a crafting system. 

 

As far as ruining PvP, that's entirely your subjective oppinion. From my standpoint PvP is currently ruined by the fact that people just go around trying to set up cheesy ganks rather than actually being able to log in, find a decent fight, and have some fun. Given that games where the entire mode of operation is "Log in, get into a good fight, have some fun" dominate the market with easily 99% of the players preferring that over what this game is currently trying to do I don't think you have any point there other than simply saying "I'm hoping the devs really want to make a niche game".

 

That would be a totally garbage business strategy though. If you are the only high quality tall ship combat game in existence you'd be a total moron to restrict your audience to a tiny niche instead of just taking the big piece of the pie while everyone else is still looking for their fork. They don't have to fight anyone over being the top dog of tall ship combat simulation right now, so any system that takes the number of people who want to play tall ship combat and cuts it down by throwing in other unrelated ambitions is simply a terrible business move.

 

 

All the conquest and player economy ambitions the game has are perfectly possible without deleting peoples stuff if they get sunk. It's just a matter of acknowledging alternatives, many of which I already discussed in this thread.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Aetrion

[Ghroznak]

From my standpoint PvP is currently ruined by the fact that people just go around trying to set up cheesy ganks

 

And so the truth emerges.

 

I'm not trying to be rude, but I will be blunt. Thinking you will find a "fair fight" in an open world PvP game is a complete pipedream. EVE Online has proven as much, and still proves it today. Many other games with open world PvP, or RvR, has proven the same (e.g. the now closed down Warhammer Online).

 

I've seen countless new players in EVE Online thinking they will find some solo PvP as they roam around in their ship, or some unsuspecting miner they can ambush. Well, that's not how the world works, and most of those players end up completely annihilated as they themselves either get ambushed by enemies who are vastly superior in numbers, in strength or both. Or they think they found solo PvP and all they found was a trap, then get blown to bits again by superior numbers or enemies in superior ships.

 

Same thing with Warhammer Online, and any other open world PvP/RvR game out there. It's all about strength, or numbers, or both. Whoever rallies the most numbers generally wins.

 

As for ganking... well... again, to be blunt, welcome to open world PvP. People will set up gate camps, or port blockades, or roam around in groups to destroy and loot unsuspecting enemies. Again, this is just the way of the (PvP) world. You can like it, or dislike it, but that is how it is in every single open world PvP game in the world.

 

But now you want to change the system so that when you get ganked at least you don't lose your ship.

 

Well... being blunt as a well used hammer... I have to tell you that what you truly want is a PvE server.

 

There is no ganking there, and the only way you lose your ship is if you overestimate your skill or the capability of your ship and take on too powerful AI.

[Aetrion]

the game is in alpha

 

port buildings are being discussed

 

please link the page where you get your 99% stats from - ty

 

your 'solution' simply isn't a solution - i haven't read anything that in my opinion is a viable alternative

 

what you describe is more akin to an arena type battle game, and this game isn't that - it's far deeper and more involved than 'log in and fight'

 

admittedly that won't appeal to every gamer - the counterpoint is name me one game that does

 

Yes, the game is in alpha, that's why we are discussing fundamentals and not whether ship XYZ needs 2% more hitpoints to be competitive.

 

Port buildings wouldn't solve anything. In order for a system to constitute good gameplay and not just a waste of time there has to be a way to get good at it. You cannot be good at buying resources or clicking them into products or buying port buildings. Sure, you might have to figure out where they are cheapest or which you need the most, but that's not a skill, that's just research.

 

You have to play something like Anno 1701 before there is enough of a challenge in where to place the buildings to actually have creating buildings be real gameplay. You have to be playing a game like minecraft where you can dig a mineshaft complete with dangers like collapses and lava to actually have finding resources be real gameplay. You have to be playing a game like Space Engineers where you build a ship from the ground up and how you assemble it determines it's performance to actually have building ships be real gameplay. 

 

This game can't offer any of that, so trying to sell crafting as a core mechanic of it is just an awful joke.

 

As for the 99% statistic...

 

http://www.statista.com/statistics/251222/most-played-pc-games/

http://steamcharts.com/top

 

There is no absolute statistic for how many people are playing what, but if you do even just some basic market research it becomes very obvious that what you're asking for is simply not popular. I'm not asking for the devs to try and beat League of Legends, but I am pretty damn certain that if League of Legends forced you to grind botmatches for hours to buy your hero back if you lose them 5 times instead of just hiding in the well the second the opponent gets a slight advantage it wouldn't be anywhere close to #1.

 

 

If you think I'm describing a battle arena game then I don't think you really understood a word of what I said. I want the open world game, I just want the open world game to actually be the core of the game, I don't want it slowed down to a crawl by arbitrary grindy garbage that isn't even real gameplay because there is no way to actually get good at it.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Aetrion

[Sylven1]

Yes, the game is in alpha, that's why we are discussing fundamentals and not whether ship XYZ needs 2% more hitpoints to be competitive.

Port buildings wouldn't solve anything. In order for a system to constitute good gameplay and not just a waste of time there has to be a way to get good at it. You cannot be good at buying resources or clicking them into products or buying port buildings. Sure, you might have to figure out where they are cheapest or which you need the most, but that's not a skill, that's just research.

You have to play something like Anno 1701 before there is enough of a challenge in where to place the buildings to actually have creating buildings be real gameplay. You have to be playing a game like minecraft where you can dig a mineshaft complete with dangers like collapses and lava to actually have finding resources be real gameplay. You have to be playing a game like Space Engineers where you build a ship from the ground up and how you assemble it determines it's performance to actually have building ships be real gameplay.

This game can't offer any of that, so trying to sell crafting as a core mechanic of it is just an awful joke.

As for the 99% statistic...

http://www.statista.com/statistics/251222/most-played-pc-games/

http://steamcharts.com/top

There is no absolute statistic for how many people are playing what, but if you do even just some basic market research it becomes very obvious that what you're asking for is simply not popular. I'm not asking for the devs to try and beat League of Legends, but I am pretty damn certain that if League of Legends forced you to grind botmatches for hours to buy your hero back if you lose them 5 times instead of just hiding in the well the second the opponent gets a slight advantage it wouldn't be anywhere close to #1.

If you think I'm describing a battle arena game then I don't think you really understood a word of what I said. I want the open world game, I just want the open world game to actually be the core of the game, I don't want it slowed down to a crawl by arbitrary grindy garbage that isn't even real gameplay because there is no way to actually get good at it.

But what you are asking for is a LoL type no harm no foul if you die mechanism. I and many others don't mind playing a niche game where you actions have good and bad possible outcomes.

If this game becomes an unlimited respawn you face no ill effects for being stupid, I'll be the first one to quit.

EDIT-I used to play Diablo 1 and 2 hardcore only, never played a softcore character. I was pissed when I realized in D3 all my hardcore characters loot was shared along with gold, and then when they added parigon levels and tied it to account instead of individual characters I quit Diablo 3 and haven't played it since.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Sylven1