victor Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) PBs should be for all! Also for the players you apparently dislike - or at least will have the devs to ignore... That way more would enjoy the game... ;-) I'm not a member of a big clan, but ....... i think that PB shall be controlled by major clans since only major clans can organize a real strategy and are able to carry on the RVR machine, which is not just "hey, mate ... let's go grab some ports". For this very reason the game need the implementation of an effective diplomatic & alliance system in the game. For small clans and lonewolfs, there are OS roaming gangs and small scale battles that may be much more funny than the boring slow paced order fest called port battle. But there could be a quite simple solution for your needs: let's say the DEVS add a brand new box "rogue" near to the box "smuggler", with the following effects - everyone (included members of your faction) can attack you but you can attack only the members of other factions (so not your same faction, unless they do not attack you) - you cannot activate rogue and smuggler at the same time - you can activate/deactivate rogue only in free towns or in your own faction ports - when you are rogue you cannot: 1) sail trader ships; 2) buy/sell anything from shops in other factions ports; 3) place or claim trade orders in ports of other factions. You will be free from any diplomacy, but you and our clan will bear directly in the game the consquences of your freedom. Edited July 26, 2016 by victor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson09 Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) Then create flag, organize fleet and invite people to have fun with you. Dont whine that clans are ruining everything. They not. They actually create content! And im damn casual player im saying this! Want fun? Create one! It`s damn sandbox. Do it by yourself! Thx for highlighting this CRITICAL point !!! Exactly what I did. What happened ? BUYING A FLAG was strongly opposed by the big clans, you "should do it" only with talking to clan leaders first and so on... I got black-listed, called a spy, and it took me weeks KOTO took me off a pirates-blacklist.... The point fox2run was also pointing to was: Some people want to "dictate" the game, be leader of 100 + players....lord protector and so on. And by applying brutal force (can be done at Pirates ingame) or "toxic" rant in TS or ingame chat, many players are put off. Many leave. Personally, I believe, listening to many of so called clan leaders..., it made me remind of small "Hitler´s" or maybe better in today terms,...some ERDOGAN´S are out there.... They want to rule you, if they can´t, they beat you. So, be happy fox2. Here comes the positive ascpect of anonymity of MP gaming. No one can do this to you.....(so, isn´t Naval Action just a copy of real life behaviour?) "Detainees beaten, tortured and raped after failed Turkey coup", Amnesty says Edited July 26, 2016 by Wilson09 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox2run Posted July 26, 2016 Author Share Posted July 26, 2016 PBs are not designed to be for all. Take it as it is. Succesful PB runs can only be done with a degree of organization, time management, planning and, of course TS3. If you are not willing to invest into this sort of gaming, PBs are nothing for you... Id say that this is a wrong approach. The fun has to be for all - I can only hope that devs takes this into consideration. Let alone the term: "this game is not for you" or "PBs is not four you" is really bad for buisness. PBs are so coll and fun - but the mechanics behind them are totally failed. Ive heard of players begging for more humane timers, Ive seen people get angry on TS, kicked etc.... its not good for anyone. It has to change. IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ledinis Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) At the given moment all PB's are free for every player. If you want to participate in one get on a nations team-speak to find people that want to do it or organize a group yourself. No one is forcing you to listen to anyone if you wish not to. I have never been in a clan (besides my own made one for the sole purpose of having unlimited storage via guild storage) and yet i participate in PB's on a regular basis. So sorry to say it my friend but youre just making up problems from thin air. Edited July 26, 2016 by Ledinis 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrdoomed Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Id say that this is a wrong approach. The fun has to be for all - I can only hope that devs takes this into consideration. Let alone the term: "this game is not for you" or "PBs is not four you" is really bad for buisness. PBs are so coll and fun - but the mechanics behind them are totally failed. Ive heard of players begging for more humane timers, Ive seen people get angry on TS, kicked etc.... its not good for anyone. It has to change. IMHO. Um port battles are neither fun nor cool . I find them to be the worst most insufferable thing ive done in the game. Remember, just cuz you like something doesn't mean everone does. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anolytic Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 PBs should be for all! Also for the players you apparently dislike - or at least will have the devs to ignore... That way more would enjoy the game... ;-) I have no dislike for any players, and I did not say I wanted the devs to ignore anyone. The game has to be balanced between aiming for the casual and aiming for the hardcore player base. I said I hope they do not balance it too much in favour of the casual players, because long term the game will be healthier focusing on the hardcore players. This is not an EA game. This is a simulator. People are recreating tactics from Trafalgar, and trying to figure out how to best fight with realistic mechanics. If you dumb it down and remove the tactics and coordination aspect the game is going to be ruined for a significant portion of the in-game population, and the players who create content and help improve the game by testing and reporting bugs are going to leave. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox2run Posted July 26, 2016 Author Share Posted July 26, 2016 Taking the big things like PBs and "diplomacy" out of a few guys influence is not nescessary dumbing the game down. I think many players like to see a big furball battle in OW now and then without being a member of a clan with all those kind of selfmade rules and rants and raves that follows them. Maybe they could tweak the PB-mechanics so that ports are fought for at sudden times or make "Trafalgar-zones" at sea where people could join 24/7 without the limit of BR or time....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson09 Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 This is not an EA game. This is a simulator. People are recreating tactics from Trafalgar, and trying to figure out how to best fight with realistic mechanics. If you dumb it down and remove the tactics and coordination aspect the game is going to be ruined for a significant portion of the in-game population, and the players who create content and help improve the game by testing and reporting bugs are going to leave. Sure. But tell me one thing then ? Why are the so-called "hardcores" are crying all the time about dropping numbers and no-one (pirates) is going to defend the Ports ? The requirements to attend PBs and play according to their rules are so strict, the casuals are put off. Okay, accepted. PBs for the I-am-online-every-day-gamer. But please, stop insulting the casual fishermen fishing fishes in pirate waters. The "hardcores" get what they deserve, dropping numbers in PBs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikodemus Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 PBs should be for all! Also for the players you apparently dislike - or at least will have the devs to ignore... That way more would enjoy the game... ;-) PBs are for all if you have like minded players get together pull a flag and attack the port. that simple. If the Nation is giving you a hard time about it join another nation and attack there ports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 The requirements to attend PBs and play according to their rules are so strict, the casuals are put off. Mind elaborating on what these off-putting requirements and rules are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anolytic Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Sure. But tell me one thing then ? Why are the so-called "hardcores" are crying all the time about dropping numbers and no-one (pirates) is going to defend the Ports ? The requirements to attend PBs and play according to their rules are so strict, the casuals are put off. Okay, accepted. PBs for the I-am-online-every-day-gamer. But please, stop insulting the casual fishermen fishing fishes in pirate waters. The "hardcores" get what they deserve, dropping numbers in PBs.... Hardcore doesn't have to be about being online every day. At least that is not what I meant. It is about players who want to play the game as a simulator, exploring ship strengths and weaknesses, tactics and play with conquest mechanics. You can still be "hardcore" and part of a big RvR clan if you are only online for a few hours every Saturday evening. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Id say that this is a wrong approach. The fun has to be for all - I can only hope that devs takes this into consideration. Let alone the term: "this game is not for you" or "PBs is not four you" is really bad for buisness. PBs are so coll and fun - but the mechanics behind them are totally failed. Ive heard of players begging for more humane timers, Ive seen people get angry on TS, kicked etc.... its not good for anyone. It has to change. IMHO. The fun has to be for all? what the hell is that supposed to mean? What one person finds fun another person hates. You have to make your own fun in this game that's the whole point of a sand box game. Some people get their kicks ruining other peoples fun, others enjoy helping other people out, others spend all day trading and making money, some like to afk fish all day. No one can force you to do anything you don't want to, and there is nothing stopping you from doing anything you do want to. Stop complaining for the sake of it. What do you want the devs to take into consideration? A tiny minority of gamers are not able to make their way in an online game because they got shouted at on TS or kicked from a clan for not fitting in? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Ribault Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) With regard to the point of the original post here about the home-made diplomacy, we all know that a diplomacy patch is coming soon (August hopeful), and that it will add that particular dimension to the game, in spite of any comments made here. So for the "I want to play this like it's out of the box" comment, it follows that diplomacy is a clear intention for this game as an out of the box feature. Therefore we should accept it, it's coming. As for diplomacy itself being "home-made", yes it necessarily is right now. My observation is that what we are seeing in-game now are stop-gap measures meant to fall in line with the devs intent to add this feature into the game. Sure, some of these diplomacies might fall short of actual code, but they are temporary. There's nothing wrong with alpha-testers actually testing things in an alpha game. At the same time, no one should be flamed for following their own path in the game as long as they are not being aggregious to other players. On that I think most of us agree? Edited July 26, 2016 by Jean Ribault 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nash Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) In short, do whatever you want but dont be a dick. you can be a lone wolf and play the game however you want with your clan tag, which in turn other players can also do whatever they want as well, no hard feeling here. I understand that some players want to join port battle but they dont know how, i felt the same at the beginning as well. Speaking from my experiences, for the majority, they always want people they know to join port battle with them not someone they dont know. Put yourself into their head sometime it will make sense, I know my friend limit and what their capable of. For me, I usually put people at their highest limit based on their skills but I cant do that with someone I have no idea about. So how can this relate to your situation? welp, step up and ask people if you want to join port battle is the easiest way (a lot easier if you are rear admiral). If you talk with people and people know you even if you are not in their clan, they will give you a slot most of the time since there is no way a clan can fill up 25 slots atm. Key here, make people know you, your name, your skill then ask for a slot. Also, port battle is fun but its also stressful (a lot of stress for me). The port battle commander is under a lot of pressure and expectation they want people they trust so if something bad happen they can fall back without getting too much blame. I worked my way up by doing that and at one point, I led a few port battles during our war so I kind of know how you feel when people say "pb is not for you" Lastly, this is sand-box game which mean you use all of the tools devs give us to create your own content. btw please ignore my potato english! Edited July 26, 2016 by Nash 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Nash says it all. Reputation is everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bach Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 "Stop whining", "leave", "deal with it" say no more Without all the harsh words this is basically what he is saying. A sandbox game is supposed to be controlled by the players. Their choices and interactions create the content for others to react to good or bad. It's an uncontrolled community by design. You are asking for the game developers to remove the sand box rather than interact with it. That's not how it's supposed to work. Even when the diplomacy patch comes the ability to rebel inside your own nation will still exist so we can change our nations leaders and actions ourselves. When you have a social issue in a sandbox you are expected to choose your own path to resolve it. Many of us like and want exactly that. We like a sand box because good or bad it's always what we make out of it. Please do not destroy the sand box for all of us just because you personally want someone else to fix your individual problems for you. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrdael Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 A pirate stole my empty traders shovel yesterday, so i only have 4 shovels left to play in my sandbox! Just kidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajffighter86 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 (edited) I would think pirates would be a good faction for people who aren't into diplomacy. Then again, you have a lot (not all) pirates who seem to want to play like a nation so . . . we need something more hardcore than pirates for the true pirates to play as. I suggest a zombie faction. Zombies will attack anyone without reason, and are very difficult to establish diplomatic relations with. Join the zombie faction. Edited July 28, 2016 by ajffighter86 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrdoomed Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I would think pirates would be a good faction for people who aren't into diplomacy. Then again, you have a lot (not all) pirates who seem to want to play like a nation so . . . we need something more hardcore than pirates for the true pirates to play as. I suggest a zombie faction. Zombies will attack anyone without reason, and are very difficult to establish diplomatic relations with. Join the zombie faction. That is the exact reason my friend and i chose pirates. Didnt feel like listening to a bunch of arm chair generals twlling us what to do. We also nee our game time was limited and figured pirates would be the easiest to just mess around with. We were quite suprised and disappointed to find out tne pirates in this game act juat like every other faction and we take more heat from our own faction for not playing war lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox2run Posted July 28, 2016 Author Share Posted July 28, 2016 Without all the harsh words this is basically what he is saying. A sandbox game is supposed to be controlled by the players. Their choices and interactions create the content for others to react to good or bad. It's an uncontrolled community by design. You are asking for the game developers to remove the sand box rather than interact with it. That's not how it's supposed to work. Even when the diplomacy patch comes the ability to rebel inside your own nation will still exist so we can change our nations leaders and actions ourselves. When you have a social issue in a sandbox you are expected to choose your own path to resolve it. Many of us like and want exactly that. We like a sand box because good or bad it's always what we make out of it. Please do not destroy the sand box for all of us just because you personally want someone else to fix your individual problems for you. I have to say that some framework has to be done in order to contain the worst armchair-"nationleaders" out there. They really try to rule and tell other players what they should - and not should - do. Some things simply shouldnt be left to the ever-shrinking player base. I mean: those leader-types really think, they are in a position to steer a game on other players behalf. Its bad game design to allow such things to happen - IMHO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nash Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I have to say that some framework has to be done in order to contain the worst armchair-"nationleaders" out there. They really try to rule and tell other players what they should - and not should - do. Some things simply shouldnt be left to the ever-shrinking player base. I mean: those leader-types really think, they are in a position to steer a game on other players behalf. Its bad game design to allow such things to happen - IMHO. Coup then, overthrow your current leader. It happened in my nation before and it will happen again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrdoomed Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I have to say that some framework has to be done in order to contain the worst armchair-"nationleaders" out there. They really try to rule and tell other players what they should - and not should - do. Some things simply shouldnt be left to the ever-shrinking player base. I mean: those leader-types really think, they are in a position to steer a game on other players behalf. Its bad game design to allow such things to happen - IMHO. Do what im doing and pray they make pirates be able to be pirates and not have this nation crap on us so we can do as we please. Pirates was made up of not only criminal types but also those who were just sick of bowing to a crown. I think pirates SHOULD be that option before release and i hope it is so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muminukas Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I have to say that some framework has to be done in order to contain the worst armchair-"nationleaders" out there. They really try to rule and tell other players what they should - and not should - do. Some things simply shouldnt be left to the ever-shrinking player base. I mean: those leader-types really think, they are in a position to steer a game on other players behalf. Its bad game design to allow such things to happen - IMHO. What you seem to be saying here is that you don't like the MMO sandbox game genre. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox2run Posted July 29, 2016 Author Share Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) What you seem to be saying here is that you don't like the MMO sandbox game genre. What Im saying is, that an MMO sandbox could have a better and more appealing design. There are rules how to engage and disengage a battle. So there could be rules on how to solve which nations you are at war with. Now you have a few nation-leading clans (with maybe 5-10 officers in each) that tries to impose their will on hundreds of other players. And if you disagree, you simply get kicked out of those clans. And after that bashed on the chat forums (and also in here). Designers should avoid theses kind of things to happen out of the box. I have witnessed some completely nonsense secrecy on diplomatic talks and avoiding using the nation-chat of fears for spies... (!) I mean: its a game... Newcomers ask who "we" have peace with and when players states, that all nations is in fact at war with eachother and it is possible and ok to attack whom you like, those self-ruling bigger clans really use faulty language. I have been called a owner of "low IQ" and "idiot" among other stuff. Personal attacks. So the qeustion is: how could the game be redesigned so that ALL players - not those in clans, or their officers - but also the noobs, the beginners, the lonely wolfs can have a vote in the matter - or NONE at all! Edited July 29, 2016 by fox2run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeltiberoCaesar Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) This kind of game requires a community effort to reach the goals and that can only be made by a proper organization of the comunity. There it comes the clans and those that are willing to play a MMO as a MMO and leave the solo gameplay for other games. The new diplomacy mechanic will move that "decision" to the whole community, those that cares about the RvR and those that dont care. Then, if you want to influence the outcome you will have to get closer to those that cares about RvR.... and you will also ve able to declare officially "rogue" to a clan that dont want to follow the decision of the majority. The system has been already explained, although it can change, and only those that contribute to the RvR will have vote in those matters. If you are not capable to follow a clan rules just dont join the clan. Edited July 29, 2016 by CeltiberoCaesar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts