DJ JazzyJeff Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I'm just wondering what the Naval Action community thinks about the ship durability feature. Me personally, would like to see the game go more towards a hard-core system of you "lose your ship it's gone." With the current system, going into battle and losing your ship isn't that big of a deal because you have 4 more copies of the ship. Making it more realistic by giving ships only one life makes the game more exciting and will have the added benefit of expanding the in game economy. Let me know what your thoughts are below and/or in the poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomms123 Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) Everything below 5th rate got 5 duras, 4th rates got 4 duras, 3rd rate 3, 2nd rate 2, 1st rate 1 dura. Before every ship had 5 duras most players thought this were kinda bad as when everybody had 2nd rate or 1st rate you went around in those and farmed that made it very easy. Some wanted it to be that all ships would only have 1 life, but that is according to my opinion to hardcore. Edited February 29, 2016 by Tomms123 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Fishy Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) I like it how it is, it makes you think seriously about swanning about in first and second rates while allowing more leniency on frigates. I think someone already asked this so it may be closed down. Edited February 29, 2016 by Fluffy Fishy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Rice Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 like it how it is now.... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry d'Esterre Darby Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 This has been pretty well hashed out. Durabilities are designed to prevent you from having to go ship shopping constantly. A durability is simply a "copy" of your ship. There's no difference, other than long amounts of time and annoyance, between having a ship with 5 durabilities, and 5 ships with no durability. It lets you get into the action much faster and with far less downtime. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrakkenSmacken Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) More "hardcore" = less players, especially since it took me over 40 hours to get my first self built snow. If I lost 10 hours of work in a single bad moment, especially from being ganked or some other place holder game mechanic, I would be gone from this game forever, and that's just a cheap ass snow. I am a very patient person willing to throw hour and hours at a game I think I can make progress in, that would push me over the edge on a game that already has a significant amount of grind. Top that off with the more realistic human response, run at first sight of trouble every single time, or move in packs large enough to not ever be threatened, and you have an escalation the the very things that are getting a huge amount of complaints from players already. I personally would like to have a way to get durability restored via a crafter with the appropriate BP and 2/5 of the required supplies per durability. That way "my" ship would feel way more like "my" ship. Named, and repaired for as long as I play. Edited February 29, 2016 by KrakkenSmacken 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodgi Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 You might hear a lot of loud opinions on the matter, however... They tried to give us some 1 dura only ships. Nobody used them. Check my sig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xAzDKr Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 -1, the ship durability system is one of the things that prevent this game from getting too grindy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pigafetta Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I agree, the "no durability" option it is just a technicality and it will complicate uselessly the game. Durability is a nice way to save time and effort, giving also the chance to really master the ship one is using a the moment. Imagine you have a flotilla at your disposal all in one ship... simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aetrion Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I think ships should be an unlock and never go away at all, because I think it's silly to try and shoehorn the "realism" of sinking ships into a game where battles happen easily 10.000 times more often than in real life. Most warships in reality were not sunk but broken up because they were obsolete and it wasn't economical to keep them crewed and maintained. In this game however people can stockpile hundreds of ships purely for the purpose of replacing constant losses. Since the frequency of battles is unrealistic in the extreme to begin with, slapping ships that can be mass manufactured and stockpiled over the top of that just ups the total amount of things that are unrealistic. The game should put more emphasis on maintenance and equipment on ships and less emphasis on actually replacing ships. The end result would be a lot more realistic and also give people a lot more reason to buy cosmetic options and such for ships. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justme Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 1dura means no one will use the ship due to fear of losing it, which makes said ship pointless to have in game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrakkenSmacken Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) I think ships should be an unlock and never go away at all, because I think it's silly to try and shoehorn the "realism" of sinking ships into a game where battles happen easily 10.000 times more often than in real life. Most warships in reality were not sunk but broken up because they were obsolete and it wasn't economical to keep them crewed and maintained. In this game however people can stockpile hundreds of ships purely for the purpose of replacing constant losses. Since the frequency of battles is unrealistic in the extreme to begin with, slapping ships that can be mass manufactured and stockpiled over the top of that just ups the total amount of things that are unrealistic. The game should put more emphasis on maintenance and equipment on ships and less emphasis on actually replacing ships. The end result would be a lot more realistic and also give people a lot more reason to buy cosmetic options and such for ships. Going to add a bit more to this. Realistically most ships of that time were captured and prizes of war, after crew surrendered to overwhelming odds or had been beaten down. There were very very few fights to the death. 50% crew loss was catastrophic. Just look at how often Admiral Nelson wrote about prize money and it's impact on crew moral. The goal was not to sink, but to capture. So if they stripped Dura, then I would expect ships crew to force surrenders of their captains at somewhere between 20-50% moral without requiring boarding, and that moral would drop much faster than it does now when a ship is obviously out matched. But then this would basically be a different game at that point. Edited February 29, 2016 by KrakkenSmacken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aetrion Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I don't think it would be a bad thing if they shifted the game from "Your ship is a giant liability" to "Your crew is your biggest liability", because that would make the game actually feel realistic. Right now the game is so obsessed with disposable ships that nobody wants to even talk about how stupid immortal crews that eat air and drink seawater are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amendus Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 If every ship had 1 dura (at least frigate and above) there would be more demans for crafters and traders. Bad thing: prices will skyrocket at start Good thing: if people want to sell stuff they need competetive prices. People have less money because they need to spend more, thus making ships cheaper over time or they wont be sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aetrion Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 (edited) Crafters and traders should be making ship equipment and repair parts and such to be in demand. Creating demand out of depriving people of the one true measure of progress and identity in the game just leads to frustration, not to a positive relationship with the crafting side of things. Edited March 1, 2016 by Aetrion 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ JazzyJeff Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 I am grateful for all the great feedback you all have provided regarding this topic. I guess where im coming from is more of an EVE style "You lose your ship its gone" type of game. I dont want this to turn into EVE by any means considering there are a lot of things i disliked about the game, but that was one of the things i did like. However; im still pretty convinced that only having one "life" to the ship would add so much more value to it for you, making every battle more of a challenge and exciting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aetrion Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 (edited) I think the thing that is under the most threat in a battle should be your crew, not your ship. I do think crafters should play a major role in keeping ships supplied and equipped, but I just have no love for the idea that in a game where you essentially are your ship and it's the only avenue you have to represent and express yourself that should simply be a consumable that you have to keep buying over and over. It also just has a really negative effect on the quality of battles in the game when losses are so harsh that people can't be bothered to ever enter a fair fight. In a weird way it's precisely because the economy is built on replacing ships at the moment that we actually are seeing a problem with stuff like capturing NPC vessels and so on. If the economy was built on repairs, supplies and upgraded equipment rather than just churning out exceptional vessels it would create a much more distributed demand that can't be as easily met by raiding NPCs or relying on individuals with rare blueprints. Tying the primary loss mechanic to crew in some way would also allow to have the additional risk of large ships represented in a much more consistent manner that people can't just break with stockpiling. Edited March 1, 2016 by Aetrion 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cainn Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I wouldn't mind losing the durability system due to ship loss, the most painful part of losing a ship to me is losing the upgrades on it and not even the loss of the actual ship itself. I really hope with the upcoming economy changes they change the current crafting note system. The fact that it takes 1000 labor hours and a max level crafter to make an exceptional upgrade seems a tad rediculous to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crayon Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 (edited) The dura system is stupid. Why would I bother capping if the player retains other durability. There should be an extra penalty for the player whose ship is capped. If there is only 1 dura, capping a ship is the ultimate disgrace for the captain piloting the ship that is capped. Edited March 1, 2016 by Crayon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justme Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I am grateful for all the great feedback you all have provided regarding this topic. I guess where im coming from is more of an EVE style "You lose your ship its gone" type of game. I dont want this to turn into EVE by any means considering there are a lot of things i disliked about the game, but that was one of the things i did like. However; im still pretty convinced that only having one "life" to the ship would add so much more value to it for you, making every battle more of a challenge and exciting. How is forcing players who want to fight to spend 3x the amount of trading/Econ work to replace a ship exciting ? I have played an Econ only age of sail game like so many here want. It did not last past 6 months before it died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrakkenSmacken Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 The dura system is stupid. Why would I bother capping if the player retains other durability. There should be an extra penalty for the player whose ship is capped. If there is only 1 dura, capping a ship is the ultimate disgrace for the captain piloting the ship that is capped. because "Ultimate disgrace" is such a fun game mechanic. I know I look forward to being ultimately disgraced over and over again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musuko42 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 No durability, but the option to take out insurance policies (of varying level of cover and cost) on your ships, which will pay out money or a replacement ship in the event of loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 No durability, but the option to take out insurance policies (of varying level of cover and cost) on your ships, which will pay out money or a replacement ship in the event of loss. The whole point of durability is that you can lose three battles in quick succession but still be able to play the game that night. Getting paid for losing is pointless. You can't sail a wad of cash when you show up in a random free port after a defeat. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrax Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 No durability, but the option to take out insurance policies (of varying level of cover and cost) on your ships, which will pay out money or a replacement ship in the event of loss. Pah ... This game needs to have a level of risk. If there is NO risk, it rather makes the whole game pointless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodgi Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Pah ... This game needs to have a level of risk. If there is NO risk, it rather makes the whole game pointless See, I am fundamentally different from you (which is OK, for both of us). But I'm seriously scratching my head over this. I come to a any games to fight other players, if the game doesn't have that I simply don't play that game. So the concept of needing a reason to fight other players is profoundly alien to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now