Game is bleeding players

[charognard666]

I play computer games for 35 years now, so I've seen this happen in other games before.

Devs having a brilliant idea and programming great gfx etc, but unable to "think in the heads of players"

End of story: in the best case a niche game for 1K players, in the worst case : servers go down forever.

 

They fail to understand, that it is not their opinion on what is right or wrong in a game, that counts.

It's the opinion and the fun of the players that does.

 

(Example: Devs tell us, it's okay that an AI 3rd rate outruns and outmanouvres your average player owned frigate. Sorry, but the players know better: it should outgun us, but it shouldn't outrun us)

 

Players having fun  and the word of mouth resulting from it:  those are  the only things that in the end decide about the number of players a game has.

 

No dev opinion, no review, no rating, no hype, no advertising ... will change that.

 

Seeing that the devs are not working to solve the urgent problems of the game but fiddle with fineties like crew management instead, I have told my friends not to buy this game (yet).

 

PvE content is minimal, the game is extremely unforgiving towards new players and it is casual unfriendly.

 

Desagree cause yes devs make the game they want, and target public will be find. Nobody want it became the new fashion mmo for everybody and pvers... You would be right if players (especially steam big audience) had a brain... It's not the case....

[Hethwill]

 

the game is extremely unforgiving towards new players and it is casual unfriendly

 

I totally disagree.

 

The game is challenging towards new comers and doesn't reward failure ( the biggest mistake in the world of multiplayer games ) while providing a nice array of game activities and opportunities ( read: in development, alpha revision build ).

 

This simple basic premise is enough for a long time gamer ( seemingly you have half a decade on top of many of us ), from computer products to tabletop wargames and tactical to immediately like it.

 

Historical, challenging, vast, elegant, visually enticing.

 

Nothing to dislike.

 

Salute.

[Aetrion]

A game can be challenging and casual friendly. Casual in MMO terms doesn't mean the game is easy, it means the game has content that you can engage with at your own pace. This game doesn't allow that. There is no incentive to try and gain XP and what not for someone who doesn't play all that much because all you can currently gain by playing for a long time is the ability to crew ships that you can only really use if you spend a lot of time grinding for stuff and stockpiling extra vessels.

 

This game absolutely is hurting itself because it's falling into the trap of listening to the "Well nobody else is having fun, so we're the majority here" crowd. Of course nobody else is here if they don't have anything to do in the game.

 

If you ran a Pizza place that only served mushroom pizza and someone came in and asked for sausage would you go: "No, we don't have that, because everyone who regularly comes here only orders mushroom". Well duh, of course all the regulars order mushroom pizza if you don't have anything else. That doesn't mean you aren't losing major business by not offering some other toppings, and asking only the regulars if they want other toppings for their pizza won't tell you anything useful about how to expand your business.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Aetrion

[charognard666]

A game can be challenging and casual friendly. Casual in MMO terms doesn't mean the game is easy, it means the game has content that you can engage with at your own pace. This game doesn't allow that. There is no incentive to try and gain XP and what not for someone who doesn't play all that much because all you can currently gain by playing for a long time is the ability to crew ships that you can only really use if you spend a lot of time grinding for stuff and stockpiling extra vessels.

 

This game absolutely is hurting itself because it's falling into the trap of listening to the "Well nobody else is having fun, so we're the majority here" crowd. Of course nobody else is here if they don't have anything to do in the game. It's like you're doing a customer survey in the turd sandwich store and everyone who eats there seems to like turds.

 

There are tons of casual games, let this one as it is ! A game where a casual can find some enjoyment, if he has the right soul, but a game for NON-casuals players plz..

[Jan van Santen]

.... while providing a nice array of game activities and opportunities ....

 

 

 

.....Historical, challenging, vast, elegant, visually enticing.....

 

 

 

Are we playing the same game ? 

 

the "nice array of game activities and opportunities" in PvE translates to just 1 single quest and the "opportunities" to 3 trader ships distributed over a huge map.

 

Historical ? 

 

Historical 3rd rates didnt sail or turn faster than a frigate.

 

Challenging ? 

 

grinding and frustrating is more like it.

 

Vast ?

 

Yes, but it's empty and that's what we discuss here.

 

Elegant ?

 

Ships yes, UI no

 

visually enticing ?

 

To visuals one gets used to, to lack of content one doesn't...

Edited March 17, 2016 by Jan van Santen

[Mrdoomed]

A game can be challenging and casual friendly. Casual in MMO terms doesn't mean the game is easy, it means the game has content that you can engage with at your own pace. This game doesn't allow that. There is no incentive to try and gain XP and what not for someone who doesn't play all that much because all you can currently gain by playing for a long time is the ability to crew ships that you can only really use if you spend a lot of time grinding for stuff and stockpiling extra vessels.

This game absolutely is hurting itself because it's falling into the trap of listening to the "Well nobody else is having fun, so we're the majority here" crowd. Of course nobody else is here if they don't have anything to do in the game.

If you ran a Pizza place that only served mushroom pizza and someone came in and asked for sausage would you go: "No, we don't have that, because everyone who regularly comes here only orders mushroom". Well duh, of course all the regulars order mushroom pizza if you don't have anything else. That doesn't mean you aren't losing major business by not offering some other toppings, and asking only the regulars if they want other toppings for their pizza won't tell you anything useful about how to expand your business.

This isnt a restaurant so the comparison is nonsensical. You would be more correct in saying if a group of friends wanted to open a pizza place and money is no concern and decided to only serve mushroom pizza they could turn anyone wanting carebear pizza away.

Thats a better comparison.

[Aetrion]

There are tons of casual games, let this one as it is ! A game where a casual can find some enjoyment, if he has the right soul, but a game for NON-casuals players plz..

 

I don't see why we can't have both.

 

Add a meaningful progression system where you can keep what you earn to the game that takes a few hundred hours to fully get through, and most of your "casuals" will be perfectly content while all of the hardcore people will blaze past that in no time anyways.

 

All the systems that the hardcore players want and need are perfectly possible without crapping on the more casual side of things.

[Malachi]

Historical 3rd rates didnt sail or turn faster than a frigate.

 

 

 

You´d be surprised how many french frigates were caught british SoLs (most of 50 and 60 guns) during the Seven Years War.

[Hethwill]

Are we playing the same game ? 

 

the "nice array of game activities and opportunities" in PvE translates to just 1 single quest and the "opportunities" to 3 trader ships distributed over a huge map.

 

Historical ? 

 

Historical 3rd rates didnt sail or turn faster than a frigate.

 

Challenging ? 

 

grinding and frustrating is more like it.

 

Vast ?

 

Yes, but it's empty and that's what we discuss here.

 

Elegant ?

 

Ships yes, UI no

 

visually enticing ?

 

To visuals one gets used to, to lack of content one doesn't...

 

We will have to stand with our own cups then, given the volumes are the same but mine is indeed half full. I won't dwell into the Alpha Revision Build, it should be obvious and IF any real interest is shown by the game then the SEARCH for information would be beneficial for both of us.

 

What I enjoy about the Emptiness you feel is exactly the "full with opportunity" feeling, but I must apologize as I play on a player versus player environment in which both worlds pve and pvp coexist in cruel harmony. It is never the same and every day brings something new.

Mind you that I do not even trade nor craft and keep myself into the Action part of Naval which includes the navigation, exploration and obviously all the combat.

 

I have no master in hydrodynamics but given the software limitations we are getting there. And given turning ability is highly misused I suggest you compare turn time versus turn travel distance versus ship dimensions.

Historically 3rd rates wouldn't even be allowed to engage any ship with a rate lower. So let's say an Admiralty mechanic would be introduce that would give you negative reputation for engaging lower rates with a higher rate. Would that be pleasing ?

 

Mind you, you put up some nice points of view especially regarding the shallowness of the PvE environment.

 

Salute.

[Jan van Santen]

You´d be surprised how many french frigates were caught british SoLs (most of 50 and 60 guns) during the Seven Years War.

 

no, im not surprised, since i know that 50 or 60 gun ships arent 3rd rates  and weren't considered SOL's either during the days of the historical Trincomalee or  Constitution 

 

 

Historically 3rd rates wouldn't even be allowed to engage any ship with a rate lower. So let's say an Admiralty mechanic would be introduce that would give you negative reputation for engaging lower rates with a higher rate. Would that be pleasing ?

 

 

 

Histrorically a 3rd rate was allowed to return fire and wouldn't try to evade a fight when a Frigate was crazy enough to attack it

 

btw: no, we don't have the half full/half empty case here. 

We have different cups, yours is PvP and mine is PvE.

And i was referring to PvE only, thus not your cup.

 

What we have here is you comparing your PvP apples to my PvE oranges.

 

But i don't mind you praising PvP, it just is meaningless when answering a post clearly stating it's about PvE.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Jan van Santen

[maturin]

Even the real Lynx was captured by an SoL.

 

 

 

no, im not surprised, since i know that 50 or 60 gun ships arent 3rd rates  and weren't considered SOL's either during the days of the historical Trincomalle or  Constitution 

Yeah, and the 74s were as fast or faster than the 50-60 gun ships.

[Aetrion]

Historically 3rd rates wouldn't even be allowed to engage any ship with a rate lower. So let's say an Admiralty mechanic would be introduce that would give you negative reputation for engaging lower rates with a higher rate. Would that be pleasing ?

 

I would actually really like having admiralty rules in place, but the rule against engaging lower rate ships said you had to offer them a chance to surrender before opening fire, not that you couldn't fire on them if they refused or opened fire on you.

 

 

Larger ships generally weren't all that much slower than smaller ones. Even their maneuverability wasn't that much worse once they started turning. The main difference was that making any change at all to how their sails were set took a lot longer. Ships simply didn't have "responsive controls" so to speak, every move had to be planned in advance, and the bigger the ship the further in advance you had to plan it.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Aetrion

[Hethwill]

True, but as the ships of the line had their own specific use and orders they were not event regarded as an option to engage in these high seas skirmishes unless of course the fleet / convoy was engaged.

 

That's where brigs and frigates enter

 

And yes we need Admiralty mechanics with reputation, fame and obviously infamy rules. Many ideas have been shared since long ago.

[maturin]

SoLs were expected to engage any enemy, no matter how small. Even a tiny cutter with swivels is capable of doing millions of pounds worth of damage to the national economy.

 

Only in battles against similar opponents were they expected to disregard the enemy's frigates, although frigates began acting more aggressively in fleet actions as time went on.

[Hethwill]

Thank you for the clarification then.

[Jan van Santen]

Trying to derail a discussion by nitpicking is fun, but not exactly constructive. 

 

The issue here is simple: PvE is actually not an MMO with just 100 players during the day and 250 players at prime time,  distributed over several nations and a huge but empty map.

 

The playerbase on PvE server was larger , the max I saw were 550 online 2 weeks after EA release.

 

So yes, on PvE server the game is bleeding players.

 

The reason for that is: PvE is unattractive and I haven't seen any dev action or plan to counter that, yet.

[kumisz]

That might be because PvE is fully enjoyable in PvP servers too, with minimal risk if you avoid hotspots.

 

But, as a mainly PvE player myself, I hope for more diverse PvE gameplay too.

 

Trying to derail a discussion by nitpicking is fun, but not exactly constructive. 

 

The issue here is simple: PvE is actually not an MMO with just 100 players during the day and 250 players at prime time,  distributed over several nations and a huge but empty map.

 

The playerbase on PvE server was larger , the max I saw were 550 online 2 weeks after EA release.

 

So yes, on PvE server the game is bleeding players.

 

The reason for that is: PvE is unattractive and I haven't seen any dev action or plan to counter that, yet.

[charognard666]

Trying to derail a discussion by nitpicking is fun, but not exactly constructive. 

 

The issue here is simple: PvE is actually not an MMO with just 100 players during the day and 250 players at prime time,  distributed over several nations and a huge but empty map.

 

The playerbase on PvE server was larger , the max I saw were 550 online 2 weeks after EA release.

 

So yes, on PvE server the game is bleeding players.

 

The reason for that is: PvE is unattractive and I haven't seen any dev action or plan to counter that, yet.

 

I think NA is a pvp oriented game with some pve inside, making a pure pve server was a mistake... without offense mate ! 

I enjoy making some pve, like in Elite Dangerous, and i'll be happy with more pve content or activity, but always in a PVP world with risks and dangerous waters

Edited March 17, 2016 by charognard666

[Mrdoomed]

I don't see why we can't have both.

Add a meaningful progression system where you can keep what you earn to the game that takes a few hundred hours to fully get through, and most of your "casuals" will be perfectly content while all of the hardcore people will blaze past that in no time anyways.

All the systems that the hardcore players want and need are perfectly possible without crapping on the more casual side of things.

You do keep what you earn , just as you lose what you fail to protect. Gold is so easy to make in this game nothing is outa reach. I play very little and have tons of gold, ships , ports, shipyards etc.

If you cant keep stuff there is a flaw in your play perhaps.

[Aetrion]

Elite Dangerous has exactly the same problem though, it gives you absolutely no incentive to play the game if you don't have the time to pay the absurd upkeep for the good ships in it, since there is effectively no way to get stronger that doesn't boil down to putting equipment on the line that you simply can't afford to lose unless you're an obsessive grinder. 

 

Going on the PvE server usually has very little to do with not ever wanting to fight another player, and is more about wanting to be able to go to the bathroom or refill your coffee without getting ganked.

 

 

If you cant keep stuff there is a flaw in your play perhaps.

 

The problem is not that people can't figure out how to protect their stuff, the problem is that they find the game boring as hell when they are forced to play that way. Avoiding fights is easy. Having fun in a game where you avoid fights is hard.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Aetrion

[victor]

Elite Dangerous has exactly the same problem though, it gives you absolutely no incentive to play the game if you don't have the time to pay the absurd upkeep for the good ships in it, since there is effectively no way to get stronger that doesn't boil down to putting equipment on the line that you simply can't afford to lose unless you're an obsessive grinder. 

 

Going on the PvE server usually has very little to do with not ever wanting to fight another player, and is more about wanting to be able to go to the bathroom or refill your coffee without getting ganked.

 

 

 

 

The problem is not that people can't figure out how to protect their stuff, the problem is that they find the game boring as hell when they are forced to play that way. 

 

Are your bathroom and kitchen really that dangerous?

[Hyperion74]

I started on the PvE server and that is still mostly where I sail. I dabble in PvP on occasion and will probably do so more in the future. If this game were run my way, it would be just Age of Sail lovers who want a cool ship and a good fight. That ain't gonna happen and really should not happen. I beta tested the other game(POTBS) and enjoyed it for a while but that got Fraked Up Beyond All Belief because of the MMO aspects, You know, magic spells, stupid clicky controlls, ect. I hope that doesn't happen here. This game is still alpha and obviously has a long way to go. I have faith in the Adonis like Devs. Them what paid 40 dollars or 2.6853-947.2=9-10 Euros(no, don't know Euros) should have understood that this is an early access game and will probably return. One day we may have big port battles and RvR stuff. Don't know of course. Hope so. Most of my friends don't know the difference  between a flying jib and a shovel, you know, the thing for mucking out the manger, so they probably won't play. AOS is a niche but we wooden war ship lovers need this. So far we have been pretty well served.

I probably ain't adding much to the conversation by this rambling dissertation, but here it is,

Edited March 17, 2016 by Hyperion74

[Hethwill]

no, im not surprised, since i know that 50 or 60 gun ships arent 3rd rates  and weren't considered SOL's either during the days of the historical Trincomalee or  Constitution 

 

 

Histrorically a 3rd rate was allowed to return fire and wouldn't try to evade a fight when a Frigate was crazy enough to attack it

 

btw: no, we don't have the half full/half empty case here. 

We have different cups, yours is PvP and mine is PvE.

And i was referring to PvE only, thus not your cup.

 

What we have here is you comparing your PvP apples to my PvE oranges.

 

But i don't mind you praising PvP, it just is meaningless when answering a post clearly stating it's about PvE.

 

Granted That I agree, that PvE needs more dynamics for sure.

 

 

And regarding E:D I cannot even... it is a top game. The only displeasing factor with it is the auto target and fire and forget weaponry.

Hard to digest for a prophead  ( nothing beats annoying Annies with a ice cold viper ihihih, similar to be using a Privateer in NA  )

[Mrdoomed]

Elite Dangerous has exactly the same problem though, it gives you absolutely no incentive to play the game if you don't have the time to pay the absurd upkeep for the good ships in it, since there is effectively no way to get stronger that doesn't boil down to putting equipment on the line that you simply can't afford to lose unless you're an obsessive grinder.

Going on the PvE server usually has very little to do with not ever wanting to fight another player, and is more about wanting to be able to go to the bathroom or refill your coffee without getting ganked.

The problem is not that people can't figure out how to protect their stuff, the problem is that they find the game boring as hell when they are forced to play that way. Avoiding fights is easy. Having fun in a game where you avoid fights is hard.

Im sorry but you are so wrong i cant even list the ways. Remember for everyone if you guys that have your problem there are hundreds or a thousand that dont.

Its obvious you dont even play the game and im just gonna guess you come here to keep track and see if the game changes but to say you have to do and endless grind just to play a ship is assine. I work 6 12-14 hour days a week in the cab of a truck and still have more gold than i know what do do with and 5 ports filled to the gills with ships and i even keep some for sale just to keep them in hold.

I know you dont care to try and enjoy the game but like i said perhaps its your play style. If you can only be happy in the biggest baddest ship and get to win just cuz you played more days rather than have skill and also only play a hour a week then yeah good luck.

If you adjust your play to your availability you will never have any trouble. Play smaller ships amd play with friends and you will have plenty of ships and gold but it seems you just prefe5to be mad this isnt world of Warcraft with ships instead of panda bears.

I promise you people will help you.

[Justme]

Hundreds of thousands, I'm hoping you are referring to games in general and not this one lol.

What really kills games is the wannabe hard core guys who make stupid demands, and when they get what they leave because they can't hack it. The game dies due to being unplayable to the majority of people.