19 mln vs 60 thousand - the cost of crew - moderated

[Qwolf]

I like the idea of lost crew.  This would be particularly painful and interesting if they crew members gained experience through battles, only to later be killed or captured.  For example, if a young hired midshipman who survived many battles became an invaluable second in command, his loss could be serious setback, necessitating the hiring of an expensive new second in command, or the promotion from within of a younger officer gaining experience through battles.  The crew itself could gain experience, experience that would be lost through death or capture.  There would also be a certain fun and sastifcation in watching a young mostly useless officer slowly gain the experience needed to become a valuable asset to your ship's crew.  Perhaps with particular strengths and weaknesses (boarding, sailing, aim, etc.)

 

A possible interesting wrinkle would be captured crew exchanges, which are historically accurate, negotiated at the national level between belligerent countries.  Whole ships' crews were exchanged by belligerent nations enabling experienced seaman and officers to return to battle.  Yet another thing to press your leadership (see political system post) to accomplish, crew exchange, beyond war and peace.

[CptEdwardKenway]

They are expensive only because of an inflation and people being too lazy to level their own crafting.

 

The resources themselves are VERY cheap comparing to battle rewards. I doubt Net cost of resources for Santi (if you get all resources from production buildings) will be more then 100-200k. And one admiral fleet order can easily give you such amount of money.

 

But currently a lot of people WANT ships not willing to even craft needed mats themselves. And there are not so many crafters willing to craft ships just for gold. Cause currently the only real money in game are LH and mid/high grade notes. 

 

My crafter is currently 38 and I need to craft Trincos to get Constie BP. So far after 4 yellow Trincos I still  wasn't able to get the BP. Currently I am willing to craft Trinco FOR FREE if customer provide all needed materials and notes. But people are too lazy and just wanna buy ships for useless gold... Only 1 of 4 Trincos I've crafted for a guy who at least had needed notes.. So I am stuck to selling them for insane amount of 500-600k in port and at the same time buying very overpriced carriages and other mats to sustain myself.

 

If more customers will be willing to at least craft some materials and notes themselves - ships will become much cheaper.

Sometimes it's not possible to craft everything alone. Crafting a Santi from zero? Takes ages. Plus you can't farm every resource on you own.

It's not inglation it's because people can set any price they want. Everyone sells in capital and everyone must buy in capital.

If trader are forced to sell on different shops prices would drop. But unless they all sell on just one shop the price will raise constantly.

[CptEdwardKenway]

Naval action players ideas are simpler. The problem of penalising a player so they cant play as they wish beyond having to find a replacement ship is that there is assumption that the loss is entirely the fault of the player responsible. This is not how it really is. Being rammed to death rewards the rammers if they have a dura and the target ship does not. Some players are also focussed more than others and they are often the better players or known leaders. A nation or clan would not penalise in the circumstances so why should a game mechanic.

I think it's not a problem. If someone fights with the only santi in his team he should be aware to be the main target. But main thing is to reward the hard work of players. If frigates almost sink a santi at the moment it has no impact because the moment the santi escapes the ship is 100% ready for action. So at the moment it's more a penelise for weaker ships and advantage for stronger ships. I just would like to see small ships earning reward for there hard work for almost destroying big ships.

In real it was not different. At trafalgar everyone was looking for the flag ship. Main target for example was first Victory than Bucentaure and the Santissima Trinidad. 2 ships engaged Villeneuves flagship and 3 or 4 ships the Santi. If you sail the big ship or if you are a well known captain you are maim target. It's part of the game.

[Ned Loe]

Please stay on topic. Suggest ideas and improvements to proposed ideas. 

 

Thanks. 

[Retrin]

if you add something like this .. the crew idea ..

 

then think about adding captain reputation .. better captains equals more prizes, equals more prize money, equals more crew for said captain.. perhaps cheaper crew .. or better crew .. or .. well .. take it from here..

 

Captain reputation .. based on ships sunk, ships captured, cargo looted, distant sailed, ports visited, cargo purchased .. gather all the info/stats .. base it on crew lost vs crew killed vs crew pressed ..

[MikedaBike]

Great idea, having read the post and understoood it (something half the posters seem to have not done) i fully support the testing of these new ideas to check if they are as viable as they seem. Good job.

[Thurston Beers]

I like the idea of adding an incentive to boarding. As it stands right now, there is no point in boarding another player unless they are in a hauler. There does need to be an incentive to surrender instead of scuttling yourself. However, Crew should not be limited. Crew should not be lost when sunk. The last thing I would want is to have to constantly recruit more crew every day just so I can go pvp. 

 

• "You lose crew when you lose the ship (all durabilities)"

I do not sail one dura boats anyways. So the whole crew as a resource would be useless unless you lost some every time you sunk. 

 

I propose an alternative: Create royal sailors. Royal sailors are limited. They can only be recruited by nationals. They cost a fortune. They are lost when you sink, even if you lose only 1 durability. They are stolen in boarding combat, but kept if surrendered. Royal sailors can be recruited only in nation owned ports using labor hours and money. They are tied to the captain like XP, however they can be sold/traded. Royal Sailors give a small bonus to the combat effectiveness of the boat. for example increase reload rate by 3%, yard turn by 2%, boarding prep gain by 2%, etc. Small bonuses, but big enough that people would want them for their "end game" boats. Boats can still be sailed with regular sailors. 

Edited April 29, 2016 by Thurston Beers

[BungeeLemming]

IMO its time to get a surgeon!

 

Currently:

When we loose crew they are dead by design. The ghosts however gather back and appear on the OS again.

 

Now lets forget about Admins idea of only loose crew with last dura.

I think about loosing crew always.

 

What if each man who is out of combat (lost for the ongoing battle) has a chance to recover from injuries?  From reading RL battle reports it appears that about a 3rd of the casualties are dead. The others are wounded.

In a perfect world like we play it in Naval Action our wounded men can be 100% fine and back in action after we enter the OS again.

 

Short version:

• A man gets hit, is out of action for this fight. Wounded for now.
• after the fight we enter the OS again and the man has a 66% chance of beeing alive again.

Example:

My Constitution has 450 men. I loose 100 crewmembers during the fight.

Back on the OS I now have ~410 men left to fight the next fight. (statistically)

 

Back in port I can hire new seamen to get my ship 100% back in action.

 

With the current crewsystem a undercrewed ship is not as badly hampered than it was in the old builds. A 300 Men Constitution is very well able to stand a good chance in battle. (Had that several times by now due to explosions or exessive incoming fire)

 

______________________

Another additional but maybe too bstract thought:

 

Enable us to transfer crew between ships. Lets say I sail with a few friends and I was the only one suffering extreme casualties (for whatever reasons).

Why not give us the option to redistribute our group's crewmembers between us.

Instead of me sailing with only 50% crew we could exchage our crews. Now everyone is sailing undercrewed. But I am enabled to figt with decent numbers.

 

____________________________

 

 

What happens when I loose a ship?

The casualties are tracked. In port we will have the same appearance as I described above. ofc you lost and casualties are greater. But thats life.

[ITFHunter]

Make Crew "craftable". I would build a "House of Pleasure"/"brothel" which generate 24 crew each day. A crew "gathering" will cost 5k Gold and can be sold for 15k in ports which consumes it. (that Suggestion is only a joke.....)

Honestly, don't mess with mechanic where your player will lose to much time. We already spend a ridiculous amount of time with sailing from A to B. Look at your stastics how many battle time you have compared to online time of your playerbase. If you want to increase the cost of ships, make it the easy way. If some buy a consti for 900k, he has to pay to the "Nation" for each crew member, I dunno, 1k gold (?). With that u would reduce the amount of Gold which is in the game and the ships will be cost more.

[mikawa]

I still don't see any reason for the proposed crew mechanics.

My main question about the whole thing is still unanswered:

 

What benefit for the gamplay do you expect from the need to re-recruit crew, making crew a non-craftable resource in game?

 

In my opinion there is only a drawback in it, banning players into ports due to lack of crew, instead of having them sail out and fight.

Edited April 29, 2016 by mikawa

[BungeeLemming]

The benefit is the cost.

 

Ships by now are peanuts. With one good battle I monetize my Constitution.

With a nother one or two I can produce a 1st rate. And thats absolutely out of balance.

 

2nd issue are the 1st rate-only PB fleets. PBs should be fought by a wider variety of ships.

You lost a Santissima? No big deal. Just gonna craft another one. For a lousy ammount of effort if you think about it. (Think about it.. if you can have victory or santissima.. santi is simply better in a linefight situation)

Only "balancing" factor we have is labour hour. Which in return is not increasing cost if you organize in a clan. (which most of the rvr dedicated ppl do)

 

Crew could bring another balancing factor.

Loosing a lot of crew might hurt you.

By now, loosing crew.. does nothing.

 

another part is realism but I take it at least important since gameplay needs to be improved rather than simulation.

[mikawa]

 

With one good battle I monetize my Constitution.

Really? How? I must do something wrong in this game. I'm far away from that. My top ship is now a Trinco and the last battle gave me exeptional 90k gold which was the biggest gain I ever made, but I'm still 3 or 4 battles away from buying a Consti. I'm saving money for it since two weeks, and with that calculation I'll leave aside that with every lost battle I'll get closer to lose my Trinco (which I would like to replace too in case of loss).

 

Strange.

[BungeeLemming]

To produce a Consti you need about 120k. Given you do all by yourself or with good mates which sell for prod costs. (okay I forgot notes: another 24k)

one average battle is 90 - 140k in a consti. heavier guns, more dmge.

 

Problem is the market which sells ships for obscene ammount of money.

Clans however dont have to face that problem. And most dedicated rvr ppl are organized to a degree that ships are not expensive at all. Also if you fight in a PB you get an insane amount of money and extra goodies..

 

 

now - back on topic plz^^

I know I was the reason for this excourse but it should be settled (I hope)

[mikawa]

Ok, now I understand. Thanks for your clarification.

[Banana_Joe]

I like the idea of just buying crew-packs similar to the "repair-kits". you Need x amount of them per day at sea and to fill up the ranks after a battle. Maybe offer them as a cheap common Version and a more expensive Version with a bonus on reloading time or something like this.

 

Maybe you could even craft them if you introduce barracks for a new Kind of builing in your outpost.

[Hethwill]

The very basis for this idea is:

 

- Maintenance of the ships regarding crew was 4 times as much as the price of the ship.

 

Do not go over that part and start thinking "repair kits style" things.

[Yngvarr]

 how can we make it as simple as possible and less of a micromanagement nightmare?

 

Cheers,

 

Hugo

 

I agree with the micromanagement issues.

i'd hate for this game, that i currently enjoy, to start feeling as if i'm starting my second day job.

[Aposky]

Crew needs to be paid - Great addition, but please make it one one payment (no monthly/daily fee).

Crew can be killed during combat - Yes please!
 

My proposal on how to replenish crew:

- passive recruitment, ship docket at friendly port (not free port) will replenish its crew with time automatically, even when player is not logged in. The higher players rank and in bigger port he is docket at, crew will replenish faster.

- active recruitment, player can pay to get his crew immediately when docket at friendly port.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Aposky

[mouse of war]

So as a nation becomes more populous, existing players will find their available crew decreased?

[Hethwill]

So as a nation becomes more populous, existing players will find their available crew decreased?

 

More captains demanding more crew, less average crew avaliable to hire overall. If there's less captains of course the offer is increased.

 

Not more controlled territory.

[mikawa]

There are two problems merged into one topic:

 

1.) Balancing for RvR needs:

I think here might be the proposed crew management be useful, but how it is implemented should be carefully chosen, not to forget the needs of single player towards the behaviour of big clans. Also single players should be treated fair.

 

2.) Balancing the number of 1st rates:

I think the proposed crew management isn't here useful at all.

I propose to put this game onto three columns instead:

 

a.) XP (existing) handles only the "rank" of the player but does say nothing about the quality of your actions, like in a forum you have a certain "rank" but this does not say whether your posts are useful or redundant

b.) Craftsmanship XP (existing) works fine as far as I can tell

c.) Reputation (new) - better reputation means you are allowed to sail out with bigger ships - restricting the number of 1st rates in a port battle, this does indeed rate the quality of your actions for your nation

Edited April 29, 2016 by mikawa

[CptEdwardKenway]

The benefit is the cost.

 

Ships by now are peanuts. With one good battle I monetize my Constitution.

With a nother one or two I can produce a 1st rate. And thats absolutely out of balance.

 

2nd issue are the 1st rate-only PB fleets. PBs should be fought by a wider variety of ships.

You lost a Santissima? No big deal. Just gonna craft another one. For a lousy ammount of effort if you think about it. (Think about it.. if you can have victory or santissima.. santi is simply better in a linefight situation)

Only "balancing" factor we have is labour hour. Which in return is not increasing cost if you organize in a clan. (which most of the rvr dedicated ppl do)

 

Crew could bring another balancing factor.

Loosing a lot of crew might hurt you.

By now, loosing crew.. does nothing.

 

another part is realism but I take it at least important since gameplay needs to be improved rather than simulation.

 

That's why I would like to have a cooldown/timer when a heavy damaged ship escapes a battle till his crew is refilled and ship is repaired. If he gets tagged again right after he escaped he is finished.

 

Players should be more careful what they do and smaller ships should have more effect in battles. If a few small ships are damaging a Santi but they get destroyed and Santi escapes the next smaller ships would be able to finish the Santi. Like now the Santi can jump from one battle to the next and every battle she starts with 100% crew and 100% hull if repairkits are avaiable.

 

It's more yolo style without any risk for big ships/fleets at the moment.

[Aetrion]

I really like the idea of having crew be a limited resource that needs to be preserved more than ships, but at the same time, I feel like if the game has a crew system that gives such a significant drawback to using a ship of the line then the fact that they have arbitrarily reduced durability just kind of turns into a double tax on them. It also seems to me like losing crew only when durability hits 0 just further encourages scrapping 1 durability ships instead of taking them back out to sea to avoid the losses.

 

Personally I think having the game based more on your ability to recruit and retain crew than on making captains buy their own ship makes a lot of sense. It opens all sorts of avenues for interesting gameplay that is more in line with how battles were really conducted back then, because a huge amount of it comes down to a human element, where morale and honor and loyalty were just as essential as gold and cannonballs. 

[Enraged Ewok]

That's why I would like to have a cooldown/timer when a heavy damaged ship escapes a battle till his crew is refilled and ship is repaired. If he gets tagged again right after he escaped he is finished.

 

Players should be more careful what they do and smaller ships should have more effect in battles. If a few small ships are damaging a Santi but they get destroyed and Santi escapes the next smaller ships would be able to finish the Santi. Like now the Santi can jump from one battle to the next and every battle she starts with 100% crew and 100% hull if repairkits are avaiable.

 

It's more yolo style without any risk for big ships/fleets at the moment.

 

I think like this would hurt smaller ships more than SoLs. In a gank situation it's already near impossible for a 3rd rate or higher to get away from 2-3 Trincs/Constitutions once the battle has started. It simply doesn't have the speed to do so against any smaller ship with a chaser. It will eventually get run down, dismasted, and sunk or captured. The only option available is to fight, as running just prolongs the inevitable and makes the ship less effective in the fight due to damage aloft from chasers. Meanwhile, it is possible for 5th rates and below to escape the popular PVP gank ships even if heavy damage has been taken. Making them a guaranteed kill if/when they get tagged again reduces the reason to use them even further.

 

Regarding fleet battles, my own experience is that unless the small ships drastically outnumber the SoLs, the SoLs will annihilate the smaller ships with little damage to themselves. The only thing that will stand up to a SoL fleet is another SoL fleet, skill being near even.

[Chromey]

love the idea of adding more realism to game!

 

Trained seamen was always a problem back then especially for England who had to kidnap their own citizens to man thier ships.

 

Clans/nations who have unlimited 1st rates will  have to be alot more careful due to losing them in battle will cost them something they cannot cheaply replace which is crew.

 

Keep up the great brainstorming Naval Action Devs!

 

ps. Please add marine spirtes on decks to ships who have them so we know which ships to run away from in battle