Suggested Changes

[Taranis]

Here is a list of suggestions that I think would greatly improve the games:

 

1. The quality of a crafted ship should be based on the level of the crafter relative to the blueprint (ie: remove notes as a requirement).  This would hopefully allow players to invest notes in the actual upgrades more.
2. All ships should have a Durability of 1.  It is more realistic and actually give people the sense of possible loss.
3. Players should have to travel with their gold (instead of having some nebulous virtual bank in all ports) - again to make prizes and pvp more meaningful.  An alternative to this would be for captured players to pay a ransom (a % of their cash).
4. The prizes awarded from port battles should be based on the assets of other players that were in the captured port.

[SteelSandwich]

1:

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/7542-crafting-additionoverhaul/

 

3:

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12946-the-national-bank

 

Just something along the lines of which you were thinking i reckon.

[Galileus]

1. That would be awful. Producing a gray ship would cost exactly as much as producing gold ones. It would devalue gold ships into normal ships and make anything lesser worthless.

2. All ships could have durability of 1. It's a design decision, on the same axis as "MMO or single player?". No option is better than the other, and thus there is no "should".

3. Ransom sounds ok-ish, but in general I dislike it for the extreme amounts of risk you present the player with. Loosing time, ships, now money as well? Especially for a new player it would be way to easy to loose everything and just quit.

4. I see no reason for that. It would only mean 99% of the ports would give you no awards at all.

[Taranis]

The game is supposed to be PvP.  High risk, high reward, valuable action - not the boooorrrrrrriiiiiinnnnnnggg everlasting grind.  Some of the mechanics are counterproductive. 

 

Are you sure you would not be better suited for PvE?

[Galileus]

Are you sure you would not be better suited for PvE?

 

A wonderful response to argumentation I laid down - ad personam! Let's insult each other and make our decision based on that! Surely the more vile and toxic the insult the better the reasoning, isn't that true?

 

Tsk. Shape up. If you want to propose changes, be ready to defend your arguments or to drop ideas proven insufficient. Insults will not replace logic.

[Migui]

I would love to get rid of the durability concept but then you have to face the horde.

LOL in a game where you print money by shooting it's ridiculous.

Also ransoms would be pretty cool.

Edited April 7, 2016 by Migui

[Hethwill]

Again I think you are missing a lot of what Naval Action PvP is, and I guess you race a lot around to find loopholes, all fine and dandy.

 

There is no boring grinding and PvP is very rewarding in the FUN feeling.

 

Let's go through them 1 by 1:

 

1. As Steel posted. Also I think the player is not a shipbuilder but a manager.

 

2. This is a tricky one, so watch what you wish for. I am all for ironman modes so it is easy for me to support his one.

 

3. A mix of Treasury and Provisioners across the Outposts could be interesting instead of the abstract counter. The rest I see no point in having, especially ransoms.

 

4. The prizes from ports should be the stock from the port itself, as loot if conquered and as reward if defended.

[Taranis]

A wonderful response to argumentation I laid down - ad personam! Let's insult each other and make our decision based on that! Surely the more vile and toxic the insult the better the reasoning, isn't that true?

 

Tsk. Shape up. If you want to propose changes, be ready to defend your arguments or to drop ideas proven insufficient. Insults will not replace logic.

 

Sauf que pour une reponse iniciale aussi negative de ta part, ajoutee a ta signature, et maintenant cette tirade qui ne tante qu'a troller... on note un soupcon d'hypocrisie.  Au moins certains essayent de proposer des ameliorations.

[Galileus]

// Edited out, because man, whatever

[Grundal]

Good ideas OP!

 

The dura should be lowered.  For sure.  Maybe 3rd rate and higher at 1 dura and the rest at 3 or some number greater than 1. 

 

The crafting notes and BPs has been stated to be revamped....at least I saw a post from the Admin about BPs.  There has to be something better than current method.  Although the current method is not overly terrible.

 

cheers,

[Taranis]

I know this is not a shared opinion, but for me, PvP is the heart of Naval Action - which is why I think it should be more central, more meaningful, more rewarding.  At the moment, you lose 1 dura on your trinc - pff, big deal.  You win a pvp engagement - great: here's 15K of gold - again, not that meaningful.  If you capture an enemy ship lower than a 3rd rate (which should be a big achievement - you right now just give it away because it has only 1 Dura)....  PvP should have more of a sense of do or die.  The game is tilted / almost forces you to do PvE to then be able to do PvP - it should not be as biased.  I know that others don't like scoreboards, but I would be a fan of having a ship level scoreboard for instance: how many prizes have i taken with one given ship, as opposed to another.  I can certainly understand that some players who only want to PvE would disagree with me - the two populations are not mutually exclusive at all.  As some stated above, the game rightfully allows for some functional specialization.  Players could elect when they create their character whether they want to be excluded from PvP or not - they could otherwise share the same open world... 

[Mored]

there are so many reasons why this would not work.

But the biggest one are the players itself.

 

Players always find a way to play like they want. Example PvP, i really like pvp and it would be nice if you can find enemys with a mechanic that will not let them flee or outnumber you but thats not how it works.

In reality it looks like let see what we can gank today.  So for example we did a pvp campaign last sunday against the Spains with Renommee and Trincos only.

We captured Ingermanland,Constitution,2 x BellePoule,Pavel,Frig,Constitution,2xTrinco and a Trader Snow.

We sunk 2x3rd and a Constitution (fire destroyed them before we could board them).

We lost a Trinco that was ganked and not one of the fights was "fair" i dont see a reason to punish these players more than necessary for beeing at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Its always the same, some people think if they do a lot of ganking they have a high skill in pvp. If you want more action, do battles. If you want more reward attack ports...