Players losing ships is bad, and here is why.

[Aetrion]

Again, saying that just because ships are permanent there is no loss at all is a total strawman. I was never advocating for a game where operating your ship incurs no costs at all and getting sunk has no consequences. The only thing I take issue with is that the game directly threatens the most important thing to a ship game, which is your ship, and as a result discourages people from taking any risks at all if they actually care about their ship. Caring about your ship shouldn't be a crippling handicap in a game about ships.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Aetrion

[Meraun]

1: That is not a crafting system to me, that is a waste of time.

2: 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".

 

3: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.

 

Your Tone is extremly agressive and rude... i doubt you were every tought any manners.

 

1. This is your Opinion, i like crafting ships and  its EA (one of the most stable and develope EA i have seen in a wihle) i'am sure it well have more depth by release (i also happy with the current system)

 

2. if you wann play an " log on, have some action, log off" game you might go to World of Warships, War Thunder or somethinkl like  this. This game is NOT meant to be taht way.

99% of the Players waht tah? Really? Waht about Minecraft? Kerbal Space Programm? Space engineers? Life is Feudal?  All those games and their

sucess proofes your wrong...

 

3. If you believe a niche product is a bad idea, i believe you have not a fucking clue waht your talking about. This game doesnt need 1'000'000 Players 50'000 or more  well be enough to make this game profitbale.

Why woud you wanna have a game like there is dozend other already? THATS a garbage business decision.

 

Edit: because of bad attitudes from my side

Edited February 9, 2016 by Meraun

[Meraun]

 Caring about your ship shouldn't be a crippling handicap in a game about ships.

Really? i think caring about my ships is the most imporant thing IN this game. And the chance of losing it is the ultimate thrill in this game. If you dont feel taht, its just not your game.

 

World of Warships might be your case.

 

Edit: Because of bad manners from my side

Edited February 9, 2016 by Meraun

[Aetrion]

saying 'i don't like building ships' in a game where that is a key element is your right

 

i just happen to strongly disagree with your views on this

 

Except it doesn't feel like a key element. It feels like a half assed afterthought.

 

This game has an excellent tall ship combat system. 

 

It puts a high level of skill into maneuvering by including a good simulation of wind and manual sailing, giving it a unique strength when it comes to how it compares to other "capital ship games", in that while movement is slow it is complex enough to keep you busy and allow you to be really good at it. 

 

It has a solid system for gunnery that requires you to be accurate and has a complex enough damage model to make ammo choice and aim really matter. It also manages to make firing at very large slow moving target challenging without going the WoWS route of just making your shots completely random.

 

It has a simple but elegant crew management system, and it even has a somewhat skill based boarding system. 

 

Those are all excellent systems, very well developed, fun to play with, elegant in the number of inputs, complex in the number of outcomes.

 

 

The crafting system on the other hand is just meh all around. It doesn't have any high skill elements.

 

Resource acquisition doesn't have any dedicated systems, it is done purely through trade with NPCs and breaking up of captured vessels, which is to say, there is no actual gameplay for it, you simply pay for resources with time spent grinding PvE content. Even if they added the ability to buy plantations and mines and lumber-mills it wouldn't change anything, that's still just an extension of clicking gold into resources.

 

Crafting itself is nothing but clicking resources into finished items, and they had to go as far as creating a dedicated XP system for it because the only way to allow anyone to "get good" at crafting is to give them a skill rank. The player certainly can't influence the outcome meaningfully. 

 

Permanent upgrades are rare drops as far as I know, so that's just more PvE grinding. 

 

And then selling the ships isn't really a high skill element either, because the game creates a constant demand for them and from what I can tell building them and selling them in the capitals is the easiest way to go about it, so it's not even at Eve's level of market economy where you can make a profit by moving player made goods because where they were made affects their price.

 

The only thing that actually seems to have some merit so far in this game is the trading system, since people genuinely do seem to be able to find trade routes that are highly profitable, but if too many trade runs are made eventually the demands are met and the profits decline. That's a solid system, but it's not part of the player run economy, the resources are generated by the towns.

 

There is no way to fix the crafting system either. Ships can't go out and gather resources in interesting ways, and since all you can do is craft slight variations on pre-existing ships there isn't any kind of complex building system you could implement to really challenge peoples creativity and design abilities in the actual assembly process either. It's just not that kind of game. 

 

 

 

So when it comes right down to it, holding the entire game hostage for the benefit of this woefully underdeveloped crafting system that will never be what this game is good at just doesn't seem like a smart move.

 

 

 

 DO you ever research before you post? Waht about Minecraft? Kerbal Space Programm? Space engineers? Life is Feudal?  All those games and their

sucess proofes your wrong...

 

And no, all those games you just mentioned don't prove me wrong. They prove me right, because without exception those are games that are crafting games at their heart and encourage players to develop a high skill at crafting.

 

They have extensive systems dedicated to resource acquisition and making it a challenging process. They have highly complex systems that let the world interact with what exactly you build, with thousands of different possibilities to put the pieces together. In Kerbal you don't just click the rocket blueprint and instantly go to the Mun, you need to put hundreds of parts together in a configuration that can do it. In Minecraft you don't just go into a menu and buy diamonds, you have to dig around in dangerous caves full of monsters and lava flows. In space engineers you don't just slap a speed mod on a premade ship to make it go a little faster, you have to change the actual engine configuration around and potentially make sacrifices in other aspects of your ship to give it the acceleration you want.

 

Those games are built from the ground up around crafting, and reward doing crafting well. Their crafting systems are complex, fully developed, let you build creatively, and allow players to attain high skill at them. That's the EXACT opposite of what this game's crafting is like, and will always be like.

 

 

 

This game's singular strength will always be tall ship combat simulation. The notion that we need to clap that in irons for the crafting to flourish instead is simply absurd.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Aetrion

[Hyperion74]

My opinion as a player who plays at odd hours( I work nights) and who does not have lots of time to play.

 

On the PvP server, I think that it should work like the other MMO's. There needs to be loss so we can have an economy. A possible work around for this, and it will be complicated, is to have nations act like nations. Brittan or Spain did not make the captains of their navies buy their own ships. I have no idea how this would work but it would be fun. Perhaps clans or societies could provide ships for their captains. Ships would still be built. Money will still change hands. This will be a problem for captains who are not in a soc. They could be privateers maybe. Privateers did have to buy their own ships. Of course pirvs did not sail first rates either. On the other game(potbs) early going was tough. If a ship was lost you were screwed in all aspects. When there was money in the bank loosing a ship did not matter. I never sailed in a first rate either. There needs to be some kind of a navy system. If a ship is lost then you go back to a smaller ship or something like that. That way a player can work up to a frigate of what ever. At least make a ship cheaper with the navy discount. All I know is that grinding without help makes for a long slog to get one's desired ship. There has to be some kind of middle ground. MMO's are pretty unkind to "casual" players. Someone, some genius some where will find an answer eventually, I hope. 

 

Aetrion, you make some awesome points all throughout this thread. Well done sir.

A well done to many other posters out there as well. These are things that need to be discussed.

I tried bringing up something like this last year when the game was first sold for testing and it got ugly real fast. There was some of that ugliness in this thread as well. I really don't like the "Go play some other game!" . That attitude is Assy and it chases away many potential players. OP is right, if we don't get players, we don't have a game to play.

Loss is devastating for a player who only has a few hours a week to sail. The "go play another game" people can't seem to grasp this concept. There is no other age of sail games out there that looks and plays as good as this one. There really is no other option for those who love wooden war ships. One of the draws of a MMO/PvP game is pitting your skills against another actual brain. If a player is only limited to a crappy ship and doesn't have time to grind, there aint much point in plunking down money to buy it.

 

"Go to PvE!" you say, Well I do, but when I figure out the game I will want to PvP. If I can't get a frigate, I probably won't bother. It needs to be a little easier for players with limited time. Don't call that lazy, it is not, it is reality. Lossless ships could be an answer. I don't know.

 

As for the promised premium ships. Those definitely need to be lossless. Maybe limit those to PvE or dual or something like that. I will pay to sail a first rate now and again but in a PvP battle I will probably stick with a frigate or a 74 for a port battle. We're still developing this game so these threads are necessary.

 

Oh, one more thing:

 

PUPPYMONKEYBABY

 

Bam, that just happened.

[jodgi]

Post 2 in a serie, Post 1:

OP makes a well thought out and clearly worded post and follows up with questions and challenges raised against his ideas. Then he has to deal with stuff like this:

 

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

 

 

Your Tone is extremly agressive and rude... i doubt you were every tought any manners.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

i believe you have not a fucking clue waht your talking about.

 

 

If you dont feel taht, its just not your game. And instead of trying to to ruin it for

the other 96.7% who like the way it is, you just ...

Everyone's entitled to an opinion. However, misquoting, spergs, personal attacks, lol-did-not-read-disagree-anyway, demonization, don't-agree-please-go-away, misrepresentation, and this level of shitposting is not helping anyone, especially not your own "cause". I understand that it is hard to argue with someone who is able to sort his thoughts and have full command of the written language.

Right above this post Hyperion demonstrates how it is possible to disagree but still acknowledge the "opposition". He even throws in nonsensical humour at the end. Stuff like that defuses strife and lightens up the discussion. Thank you, Hyperion!

Edited February 9, 2016 by jodgi

[charognard666]

Well, I'm playing this game since few days only, I have read the 7 pages, and this is my 2cts : 

I'm coming from Elite Dangerous, and the first reason why I have buyed NA and want to play it is : because i can loose my ship and some playtime, depending of my actions ! The second is because i was Potbs players and a naval simulation fan loosing many time on subsim forums ^^

 

On ED forums we have posts like this one, and honestly, the only right answer is : Mate, sry, you haven't choose the right game... 

[Tremor]

Loosing the ships is fine.

 

I do not want not working World Of Warcraft default mechanics in this game.

[Meraun]

Post 2 in a serie, Post 1:

OP makes a well thought out and clearly worded post and follows up with questions and challenges raised against his ideas. Then he has to deal with stuff like this:

 

 

 

Right above this post Hyperion demonstrates how it is possible to disagree but still acknowledge the "opposition". He even throws in nonsensical humour at the end. Stuff like that defuses strife and lightens up the discussion. Thank you, Hyperion!

 

Some of my post's were written in a temper. i edited them, you were right about taht.

 

But i do believe some of its post are agressive and rudeas well..

 

"Business model is Garbage"

" Crafting is a Joke"

 

About my english: I guess my english is decent, but its not my Motherlanguage.. So i guess i do have an amount of grammar mistakes in it.

But on the other hand its better than most peoples Swissgerman :-)

 

But i do stand to it: If you cant lose Ships, at least for myself, it woud take the Fun out of the game. It woudn't be as intense as it is now.

As he stated: If you replace to loss with something als equaliy painful, why change it at all?

 

I also believe it woud kill the Economy. But yes you coud build the Economy around something else. But i very much like the System as it is.

So i can defend it as well

[Gunnar Rask]

Speaking theoretically, the ideal would seem to be that the developers arrive discover an acceptable price for ships so that players won't throw them away carelessly, while also not making ships so easy to lose or expensive to replace that it becomes prohibitive for the average player to engage in PVP actions.

 

However, I still think it'd be worthwhile to try a very generous ship replacement option for a couple of weeks, nothing proves a hypothesis like actual testing.

 

Edit: There's also several hybrid versions that could be used, wherein loss occurs but perhaps not complete loss or some compensation could be offered.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Gunnar Rask

[Meraun]

My opinion as a player who plays at odd hours( I work nights) and who does not have lots of time to play.

 

On the PvP server, I think that it should work like the other MMO's. There needs to be loss so we can have an economy. A possible work around for this, and it will be complicated, is to have nations act like nations. Brittan or Spain did not make the captains of their navies buy their own ships. I have no idea how this would work but it would be fun. Perhaps clans or societies could provide ships for their captains. Ships would still be built. Money will still change hands. This will be a problem for captains who are not in a soc. They could be privateers maybe. Privateers did have to buy their own ships. Of course pirvs did not sail first rates either. On the other game(potbs) early going was tough. If a ship was lost you were screwed in all aspects. When there was money in the bank loosing a ship did not matter. I never sailed in a first rate either. There needs to be some kind of a navy system. If a ship is lost then you go back to a smaller ship or something like that. That way a player can work up to a frigate of what ever. At least make a ship cheaper with the navy discount. All I know is that grinding without help makes for a long slog to get one's desired ship. There has to be some kind of middle ground. MMO's are pretty unkind to "casual" players. Someone, some genius some where will find an answer eventually, I hope. 

 

Aetrion, you make some awesome points all throughout this thread. Well done sir.

A well done to many other posters out there as well. These are things that need to be discussed.

I tried bringing up something like this last year when the game was first sold for testing and it got ugly real fast. There was some of that ugliness in this thread as well. I really don't like the "Go play some other game!" . That attitude is Assy and it chases away many potential players. OP is right, if we don't get players, we don't have a game to play.

Loss is devastating for a player who only has a few hours a week to sail. The "go play another game" people can't seem to grasp this concept. There is no other age of sail games out there that looks and plays as good as this one. There really is no other option for those who love wooden war ships. One of the draws of a MMO/PvP game is pitting your skills against another actual brain. If a player is only limited to a crappy ship and doesn't have time to grind, there aint much point in plunking down money to buy it.

 

"Go to PvE!" you say, Well I do, but when I figure out the game I will want to PvP. If I can't get a frigate, I probably won't bother. It needs to be a little easier for players with limited time. Don't call that lazy, it is not, it is reality. Lossless ships could be an answer. I don't know.

 

As for the promised premium ships. Those definitely need to be lossless. Maybe limit those to PvE or dual or something like that. I will pay to sail a first rate now and again but in a PvP battle I will probably stick with a frigate or a 74 for a port battle. We're still developing this game so these threads are necessary.

 

Oh, one more thing:

 

PUPPYMONKEYBABY

 

Bam, that just happened.

 

 

hmmm....

 

well why dont we go down the EvE path a bit futher?  Insurcences maybe? Or, if you lose your ship in PvP against a enemy ship, the Admirality woud be you lets say 80% of your ship? As payback for fighting for your Nation?

 

A complete other way, wich i think is as dangerous as removeing the loss of ships woud be Premiumships?  of course i dont mean pay to win ships, ships you buy with money? With 5 Durabilitys?

i personally dont like it because everyone well scream P2W.

 

or maybe a system were, if you level up you got the Basic ship of its tier?

 

-Like Basic cutter in 7th rate

-Basic Brig in 6th rate

-Basic Ceberus in 5th rate

-and so on so on.

 

Will you woudn't lose everything  a basic ceberus woud still not be able to stand against a 5th Rate  "FINE"  Belle Poulle with 5 Dura's.

 

A problem woud be taht in Portbattles you woud only see basic tier ships...

 

you coud go on with that system till 4th and exclude all SOL's.

 

i do believe this woud be a fair Compromise  if this gets a  Problem!

[Sylven1]

Post 2 in a serie, Post 1:

OP makes a well thought out and clearly worded post and follows up with questions and challenges raised against his ideas. Then he has to deal with stuff like this:

Everyone's entitled to an opinion. However, misquoting, spergs, personal attacks, lol-did-not-read-disagree-anyway, demonization, don't-agree-please-go-away, misrepresentation, and this level of shitposting is not helping anyone, especially not your own "cause". I understand that it is hard to argue with someone who is able to sort his thoughts and have full command of the written language.

Right above this post Hyperion demonstrates how it is possible to disagree but still acknowledge the "opposition". He even throws in nonsensical humour at the end. Stuff like that defuses strife and lightens up the discussion. Thank you, Hyperion!

You took what I said totally out of content. I wasn't calling the OP or anyone stupid I have made a comment with. I said if you play stupid you deserve to be punished. As in if you keep ramming your Fine Snow into a 3ed rate and loosing, you DESERVE to lose your ship. That is what playing stupid is.

EDIT- it also goes with my Diablo reference. In Diablo 1 and 2 you loss a hardcore character you lost EVERYTHING, all the gold, loot, experience, everything. Now in D3, loot, gold, and paragon levels are shared with all your HC toons, even when starting level 1. So you level two characters, gear them both and keep one as a back up cause hey, you get to keep all your loot in your stash and paragon levels. Now you can play "stupid" and take risks you never would in D2 HC because you don't really lose anything in D3 HC.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Sylven1

[Hyperion74]

Now I like Meraun's idea of a basic ship for rank level.

[jodgi]

You took what I said totally out of content.

I was pointing towards your threat of quitting the game as a way of reinforcing your views.

[Sylven1]

I was pointing towards your threat of quitting the game as a way of reinforcing your views.

It's not a threat. I would quitnif the PvP server wasn't as it is. I would find it boring. As I do other games that have soften where there is no real risk.

[Hyperion74]

Jodgi

 

PUPPYMONKEYBABY is not nonsensical. I saw it on the internet.

[ParaBellum]

IMO the fact that you need to lose a ship 5 times in order to actually, finally lose it already provides quite a bit of a safety margin.

 

Without at least some kind of feeling of danger the game would lose much of its appeal to me.

[Tindahbawx]

I'll be honest here, I would get far less enjoyment from playing if I couldn't make people lose their stuff permanently.

[jodgi]

I'll be honest here, I would get far less enjoyment from playing if I couldn't make people lose their stuff permanently.

Hah! Brutal honesty, I like!

I'm an asshole too, as you may have noticed, but I'm wondering if I'd enjoy 5 fights (alleviated fear of loss) per arbitrary time unit more than 1 fight (full on devastating loss) per unit.

[Dedlox]

Well after today's patch, they are practically throwing gold at us. If you can't afford to pvp on this amount of gold and free captured pvp ships, then find a battled base browser game.

[maturin]

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.

When posts are hidden, other posts that quote them are also hidden. Even if they are acceptable.

[jodgi]

We'll have to see how it affects player behavior in the OW. Whatever encourages PVP is good imo, I have no babies I'm not willing to kill.

[Poyraz]

In my opinion, considering the vision for realism of Naval Action ie. the developers, I would say ship loss is a definite must-have and every ship has to have only one durability. If a ship is sunk, it is sunk.

 

We have a simulation-like game play for ship combat; so, why should we not have this realism aspect at every department of the game.

[Hethwill]

In my opinion, considering the vision for realism of Naval Action ie. the developers, I would say ship loss is a definite must-have and every ship has to have only one durability. If a ship is sunk, it is sunk.

 

We have a simulation-like game play for ship combat; so, why should we not have this realism aspect at every department of the game.

 

Similar to one life events in flight sims. Pretty much.

[Aetrion]

or maybe a system were, if you level up you got the Basic ship of its tier?

 

-Like Basic cutter in 7th rate

-Basic Brig in 6th rate

-Basic Ceberus in 5th rate

-and so on so on.

 

I really don't see why that would be better than just making the ships permanent and having other penalties for getting killed and other things to trade. After all, losing a battle should never be completely free, and there certainly shouldn't be such a thing as a "Basic Victory" you can spawn an infinite number of.  The point of asking for permanent ships is that ships would be a lot more expensive to craft, and a lot more of a long term investment. It's to encourage people to try and go after that all exceptional perfect ship rather than having to keep a ships disposability-factor in mind. The perfect disposability of basic ships would just make them superior to other ships in most situations. I am against disposable ships and having to treat them as such.

 

 

The kinds of things I would do as a compromise between every ship being inevitably destroyed and no loss ever hurting anyone would be more things like:

 

- Have the game set up so that all gold and experience earned during a voyage only become yours to keep once you've made it back to port. This is the Darksouls principle, the game doesn't punish you for failure, but it only rewards you for success.

 

- Allow ships to be overhauled to restore their durability. An Overhaul kit for a ship class would cost as much to build as the most basic version of that ship, so that if you have a really great exceptional version of your ship you can overhaul it for the price of a disposable version.

 

- Have the crew on a ship gain it's own independent experience pool that affects how fast they work, and is reset if the ship is sunk, so that operating a ship without sinking for some time will make the crew maybe 5-10% more efficient than if it's an all new crew.

 

- Allow durability to slowly recover over time, so that if you don't get sunk very often it's not a problem, but if you get sunk a lot it is. This lets people who have less time to play the game get a bit of a leg up because if they are only available on weekends for example their ships can recover under the week.

 

- Change repair kits so that every ship type has its own specific repair kit that works on any ship of that type, and can be crafted using a fraction of the same materials that the ship is made from. Buying repair kits from the harbor would be more expensive than buying player made ones.

 

 

 

So, basically the kind of stuff I'd like to see is the exact opposite of basic ships that you never lose and never pay for. My beef with ship loss is that it discourages people from reaching for the stars when it comes to ships. Buying a really cool exceptional high end ship is basically just a recipe for disappointment when it's inevitably winding down to zero durability and likely can't be replaced, or was too expensive to be disposable in the first place. Having to think of your ship as disposable and having to keep how disposable it is in mind as one of its most important characteristics is exactly what ruins the fun in trying to get your dream ship. Having something like basic versions of every tier wouldn't fix that, it would just give you the ultimate disposable ship for free while still putting that perfect custom job behind a huge barrier of grind.

 

 

In my opinion, considering the vision for realism of Naval Action ie. the developers, I would say ship loss is a definite must-have and every ship has to have only one durability. If a ship is sunk, it is sunk.

 

We have a simulation-like game play for ship combat; so, why should we not have this realism aspect at every department of the game.

 

Why not have realism in every other aspect? Because you would be more likely to lose ships to bad weather than to enemies? Because during the entire Napoleonic wars there were only a few dozen naval battles? Because the vast majority of ships that were captured were stolen while they were in the harbor? Because there were days, weeks and months with not enough wind to even come close to  a ships top speed? Because even at 15 knots sailing from Charleston to Bermuda would take several days? Because repairing a damaged ship could take weeks? Because gunpowder was prohibitively expensive before synthetic nitrates?

 

I mean, I could go on, but the bottom line is, this game isn't realistic, nor should it be. Most ships and captains never actually saw battle in their entire career.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Aetrion