Bring back random elements to crafting

[Corona Lisa]

Most probably wont like it, but I believe having random elements in crafting is good and a much needed money sink for this game.

Inflation is inevitable, because PvE missions and rewards for fights generate more and more money. This game needs something to balance this out.

Example - The Division:

Its a shooter with MMO elements. Each Weapon there has 3 attributes. There are over 30 different attributes. That means if you want your perfect weapon you need to buy this gun over and over again until you get a godlike roll. But you probably will get a decent one only after a few rolls (with 2 good attributes).

https://www.reddit.com/r/thedivision/comments/4ai3is/list_of_possible_weapon_talents/

That means you can get something good even if you are a casual / dont have so much money, but if you want the perfect stats you need to invest a enormous amount of money.

Also each player has a different playstyle so a weapon who is shitty for one guy can be very good for another player.

 

Not sure how exactly to translate that into Naval Action, but I think its needed to counter inflation.

[z4ys]

30 minutes ago, JonSnowLetsGo said:

Most probably wont like it, but I believe having random elements in crafting is good and a much needed money sink for this game.

Inflation is inevitable, because PvE missions and rewards for fights generate more and more money. This game needs something to balance this out.

Example - The Division:

Its a shooter with MMO elements. Each Weapon there has 3 attributes. There are over 30 different attributes. That means if you want your perfect weapon you need to buy this gun over and over again until you get a godlike roll. But you probably will get a decent one only after a few rolls (with 2 good attributes).

https://www.reddit.com/r/thedivision/comments/4ai3is/list_of_possible_weapon_talents/

That means you can get something good even if you are a casual / dont have so much money, but if you want the perfect stats you need to invest a enormous amount of money.

Also each player has a different playstyle so a weapon who is shitty for one guy can be very good for another player.

 

Not sure how exactly to translate that into Naval Action, but I think its needed to counter inflation.

You know that on testbuild you dont get money for dmg? So wasting resources on rng will be pain.

[JollyRoger1516]

RNG is the bane of any serious crafter!

[Remus]

Totally agree on inflation pressure, and I strongly favour having some way to get high-level players to spend enourmous amounts of money with minimal impact on everyone else, but I don't think this is the answer. My main concern isn't the money but the use of labour hours and resource materials in this way. Both these things (well, probably not all resources, but some of them) should be regarded as valauble commodities that aren't to be wasted in this manner.

Besides which, with current blueprints, you wouldn't actually be sinking any more money. A player making ships can only spend about 50000 gold a day on crafting before running out of labour hours (if he makes all the resources or buys at cost - not too difficult on the live servers). Even if he makes 10 ships to get the one he wants, he and his suppliers are still only spending 50000 gold a day, which doesn't really ease inflationary pressures.

Blueprints will change and it might be worth looking at again when we know what the new ones look like.

[Remus]

Just now, JollyRoger1516 said:

RNG is the bane of any serious crafter!

Agreed, but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong or bad gameplay. And I can assure you there is plenly of randomness in real life manufacturing (it keeps me in a job!)

[Anolytic]

When they remove gold reward for damage that will help a lot I think. Also decrease the amount of resources available to be harvested from buildings per day could help a bit. I don't think RNG is something that we need back, but we definitely need money sinks.

[Guest sruPL]

No.

[Elric]

We had this with ships....  and it was frustrating as heck.  2/4, 3/4, 3/5 - then the build mystery...  so much wasted resources...  so many awful or marginal ships.

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 hours ago, JollyRoger1516 said:

RNG is the bane of any serious crafter!

It never failed I craft a ship for some one else and I get a 3/5. I craft one for myself and I get a 2/4.

[William Death]

NO!

Building a ship is a process. There is NOTHING random about it. I've built several wooden boats myself, and if I want to build one extra tough (strong hull + build strength) then all I need to do is increase the number of frames (ribs) and increase the planking thickness and frame thickness (of course, the dimensions of the keel will have to be increased as well, and all measurements on the plans will have to take into account the increased size of the timbers used). There is nothing random about that. I guess if the boat is built by a shoddy shipwright (as in one who is not a level fifty crafter) than his "strong hull + build strength" may not be as sturdy as mine, but it certainly wouldn't come out as a "strong hull + rigging quality" ship.

RNG does not apply to shipbuilding if the shipwright knows how to make a ship and is using the proper materials.

If someone wants to point to certain ships of the same design with different handling characteristics, I'd wager that the ship that had a worse reputation as a sailor was probably stowed differently or canvassed differently. If plans are followed precisely, there is VERY LITTLE difference in one hull to the next.

[Teutonic]

I agree a money/material sink should be in the game to counter inflation.

that being said I personally don't want to see RNG come back into my crafting, it would be such a pain.

[Raekur]

And don't forget the wonderful aspect of a NON crafter wanting someone to build a ship with specific elements. How many resources do you want a crafter to waste to get that, who should cover the costs of the ships that were built that did not match what the purchaser wanted?

[Fargo]

The problem with rng as a money sink is, that by definition some rng outcomes need to be so bad, that ships become trash and get thrown away. Because if potential trash ships would be bought and used and therefore reduced demand, not more ships would need to be crafted than before.

[JollyRoger1516]

8 hours ago, Willis PVP2 said:

NO!

Building a ship is a process. There is NOTHING random about it. I've built several wooden boats myself, and if I want to build one extra tough (strong hull + build strength) then all I need to do is increase the number of frames (ribs) and increase the planking thickness and frame thickness (of course, the dimensions of the keel will have to be increased as well, and all measurements on the plans will have to take into account the increased size of the timbers used). There is nothing random about that. I guess if the boat is built by a shoddy shipwright (as in one who is not a level fifty crafter) than his "strong hull + build strength" may not be as sturdy as mine, but it certainly wouldn't come out as a "strong hull + rigging quality" ship.

RNG does not apply to shipbuilding if the shipwright knows how to make a ship and is using the proper materials.

If someone wants to point to certain ships of the same design with different handling characteristics, I'd wager that the ship that had a worse reputation as a sailor was probably stowed differently or canvassed differently. If plans are followed precisely, there is VERY LITTLE difference in one hull to the next.

Same here it's my past time to work away on small boats in my garage and there is nothing random about it except for in what plank my dogs will leave a bitemark

Also I remember the RNG in games like Payday - wanted to craft a UK flag mask - only needed 3 things to do that - RNG made me wait over 800 hours to get the third part! You do not want to bring that into Naval Action where the RNG would be applied to important things instead of cosmetics.

In the end the money sink would only punish the crafter and honestly we are already punished enough with the blueprint availability and the resource shipping (low player numbers mean the economy has to be run by us instead of dedicated traders). We can't afford to lose more players to annoyances - the game is already dancing along the cliff.

 

Edited April 3, 2017 by JollyRoger1516

[admin]

We experimented a lot with randomness in crafting, and found that players still try to build a better ship. There is no point to fight with that desire. 

[Cmdr RideZ]

3rd to 1st or even 4th to 1st rates, could be so expensive to repair that costs would be always greater than income.

This would decrease inflation probably, but it can be that in the end HC players will have always enough money.  As investing 8 hours per day to a game is a bit different than 2 hours.

Hard question, but I have to agree that inflation could be our enemy in the future.  Something else than ships that we could randomize?

 

edit.

Or add some national targets, like repairing towers/forts etc.

You attack a port, destroy towers/forts the 1st time.  The next time attacked and if your nation has not repaired those, will be harder to defend.

Indeed, just and idea.  Could be what ever in the end.

Edited April 3, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ

[Fargo]

1 hour ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

Hard question, but I have to agree that inflation could be our enemy in the future.  Something else than ships that we could randomize?

Where is the connection between inflation and rng?!

To reduce inflation the first step is resonable balancing between gold rewards and ship cost + further costs.

To control inflation just give people something expensive to buy/craft, that is valuable, but not necessary to play. This can be higher quality ships (only providing minor boni), first+second rates (not necessary in a 3rd rate meta), one specific ship of each class, or simply paints and marks.

[Red Jack Walker]

15 hours ago, JonSnowLetsGo said:

Most probably wont like it, but I believe having random elements in crafting is good and a much needed money sink for this game.

Inflation is inevitable, because PvE missions and rewards for fights generate more and more money. This game needs something to balance this out.

Example - The Division:

Its a shooter with MMO elements. Each Weapon there has 3 attributes. There are over 30 different attributes. That means if you want your perfect weapon you need to buy this gun over and over again until you get a godlike roll. But you probably will get a decent one only after a few rolls (with 2 good attributes).

https://www.reddit.com/r/thedivision/comments/4ai3is/list_of_possible_weapon_talents/

That means you can get something good even if you are a casual / dont have so much money, but if you want the perfect stats you need to invest a enormous amount of money.

Also each player has a different playstyle so a weapon who is shitty for one guy can be very good for another player.

 

Not sure how exactly to translate that into Naval Action, but I think its needed to counter inflation.

Hell NO!!!!!!!

[Remus]

1 hour ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

3rd to 1st or even 4th to 1st rates, could be so expensive to repair that costs would be always greater than income.

Yes, I'm heading that way myself, that it's the upkeep (rather than building) of big ships that is the gold sink we need. And by upkeep I probably mean repairs as it has to be a usage-based system rather than a calendar-based system so as not to terribly penalise players who only play intermittently.

However for it to work as a gold sink, repairs would have to be directly purchased from NPCs, not crafted, because otherwise you're up against the the same problem we have now that you can only sink so much gold per labour hour.

Your second idea of towers/fort repairs looks like it's already being considered by the devs as part of a taxation system, but this will surely be low payments spread out over many players whereas what we probably need is large payments that affect just a few.

[Cmdr RideZ]

11 minutes ago, Fargo said:

Where is the connection between inflation and rng?!

Well, rng is one option.

Anyway, about the connection...

When HC players grind 12 hours per day, that will create money.  We have to make everything to be very expensive to counter this.  At the same time casual players are suffering because they cannot ever play that much -> Casuals cannot ever own more expensive things.

We need something where HC players can put their money, so that they feel that they also get something from it.  At the same time take care that in reasonable amount of time casuals are able to get forward.

Eventually, HC players will have everything and if they need something more they buy it.  They make more and more money and eventually it will probably cause inflation.

We will have 1 dura ships as well.  If people do not sink ships, but instead capture those..  Hmm..  We do not have to craft ships either?

Maybe devs already have a solution for this, I do not know.  But right now, as I do not know what is the solution and if there is one..  I am kinda worried.

[Remus]

3 hours ago, JollyRoger1516 said:

(low player numbers mean the economy has to be run by us instead of dedicated traders). We can't afford to lose more players to annoyances - the game is already dancing along the cliff.

Yes, true, but the main reason everyone has to get involved in running the economy is because everything takes so long to make. I'm crafting level 26 and I can basically make one gold fifth-rate every 2 days. I've got the materials for more and I'd happily do more hauling, but I'm always stuck for hours. If I bought LCs, I'd need 2 a day to double production and at 500k each I'd have to charge about 3 million for a Surprise to make it worthwhile.

[monk33y]

I wish that we had a crew Size by rank and a worker size. Sliding scale, either fight or work! If we were limited to workers production of raw materials would be harder. Inturn slowing the crafting etc. What we get should stay but how we get the items should be slower. Example a single first rare should take 10 days to craft etc,  and 15 days to gather resources. What you craft should stay the same. First rates should be rare!! 

I have no idea how long was the construction of the victory (including grow times on timber) 

But I'm guessing they would have been pissed if rng ruined it on finishing!! 

Edited April 3, 2017 by monk33y

[Fargo]

2 hours ago, Remus said:

Yes, true, but the main reason everyone has to get involved in running the economy is because everything takes so long to make. I'm crafting level 26 and I can basically make one gold fifth-rate every 2 days. I've got the materials for more and I'd happily do more hauling, but I'm always stuck for hours. If I bought LCs, I'd need 2 a day to double production and at 500k each I'd have to charge about 3 million for a Surprise to make it worthwhile.

One golden 5th equals 5 golden 5th rate duras each 2 days, what seems more than enough. Labour has nothing to do with gold balancing, the high labour value we are used to is a result, not a cause of rising prices/inflation. 

2 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

Well, rng is one option.

But only if its rng between "good" and "trash" and therefore affecting ship cost (50% trash doubles the cost on average). Its the cost that matters, rng is just a very stupid way to increase it. Why not just increase the cost directly instead?! Its an option, but not sensible. We saw the results of trash ships swarming the market, generating fake supply.

2 hours ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

When HC players grind 12 hours per day, that will create money.  We have to make everything to be very expensive to counter this.  At the same time casual players are suffering because they cannot ever play that much -> Casuals cannot ever own more expensive things.

No we dont. As i said, all we need is something valuable, but not necessary. Hardcore players would have faster access to lets say expensive second and first rates, but the average player wont suffer while the common PB ships are 3rd rates. It would only take them longer to sail a first rate from time to time, but nothing is restricting them to do PBs in competetive ships at any time. 

Its possible that 90% of 2k players on a server are HC grinders and 10% casual players would suffer from average balancing, but 1) its highly unlikely, 2) it would be a successfull game.

Edited April 3, 2017 by Fargo

[monk33y]

First rates should be a rare sight! Seeing a group of them heading to a port battle should be a sight to see. Getting the chance to attack a first rate in open world should be a once in a Blue-moon thing. 

I don't understand this mentally of I want it all and I want it now, for nothing!!

We have so many ships that are a joy to sail but we currently only sail the big boys!!! 

[Cmdr RideZ]

I am not saying that rng is a must, just saying that it is an endless pit.

I am 100% fine with some good money sink that works equally well.

And yes, I also hate rng.

BUT

rng is better than economy that sucks.