Single Player and PvE Discussion, 2013 - 2015

[Barberouge]

Well if we consider the endgame as winning one Port Battle, then the endgame was PvP-centric. Anyone being able to PvE grind to join a PB instead of PvP'ers was indeed a problem.

 

I'd be inclined to reverse the statement though: it's because the game (leveling, crafting, winning maps) was PvE-centric that newbies didn't have enough ways (incentives ?) to learn PvP. The only way to learn PvP was to try to join PvP groups, and that relied on the good will of PvP'ers.

 

Being led by a boy without shifted voice was indeed tons of fun, especially when daddies were reluctant to follow but the guy knew how to achieve victories

 

What you describe happened because 3 types of population could join PBs: those who didn't want to learn PvP, those who wanted to, those who already had. Those who hadn't considered those who had as withering (how the hell do they dare telling us to learn PvP first ?), and those who had considered those who hadn't as withering aswell (how the hell do they dare joining without knowing how to PvP ?). "All assholes" vs "all tourists"

 

During the 5 years I've been playing the game, players have proposed a lot of new systems, but devs didn't listen. BTW, the current devs have well spotted the problem and imagined Port Campaigns: multiple battles (PvE, PvP based on actual PvP level) happening at different times to take a single port. Unfortunately this would come too late, and they don't have enough resources anymore to code the system quickly.

[Adair]

Yeah, the Portalus guys seem to have a much better handle on it. Changes to boarding being just one. A rageboard is all but impossible now. I hope it survives long enough to see us through to Naval Action.

 

Yeah, incentives. That's a good way to put it. Also the game never protected newbies from totally unfair fights. Before they shrank the red in the Bahamas, putting Nassau into contention put the entire rat newbie zone red. So imagine you're a new rat, you get a mission to Marsh Harbor, and before you know it, six huge frigates are on you. No chance, no notion of what's happening, and no fun. 

 

In that light, I was thinking about a fun 1v1 (which is the thread topic that I suppose we should wander back towards heh ), and I've been reading The Mauritius Command looking specifically for what the captain does during a fight. It's a series of toggles and single clicks, really:

 

Heading.

Set of the sails (which is really about speed).

When to fire and what to aim at in general terms of hull, waterline, or rigging.

Also, on firing, is it deliberate fire (well-aimed, waiting for smoke to clear), rapid fire, or fire-at-will?

Type of shot (round, dismantling, or anti-personnel).

Directing damage control.

 

That's about all I can think of in a short list. And pretty much all these are simplifications of where the crew is directing its efforts, which has been discussed as crew allocation. There just aren't that many buttons to press. Once I've formulated my battle plan, I can set it in motion with just a few clicks. After that it's just reacting to enemy action (or better, forcing them to react to me) and dealing with battle damage. For me, this kind of gameplay works just fine, but it's certainly not for everyone.

[Barberouge]

The biggest mistake of Portalus was IMO trying to put realism in a game that was designed solely around gameplay. Rageboards were fun, they needed to be removed because boarding was flawed. Removing invincibility removed the charge possibility in a game where a line can one-spike a ship at long range. Removing the gun poundage and guns number variety killed the frigate skirmishing possibility, and in general a lot of gameplay tuning options. Everyone agreed the ship combat was the best part, they've been nerfing it instead of improving the other parts (in their big plans scheme, some changes are needed before improving the others parts - but players don't have that much time).

 

The devs question has always been "how to retain new players ?" where it should have been "how to retain endgame players ?". All the endgame is designed to get a big turn-over of players. Those who continue playing after a few maps are just the grain of sand in the mechanism.

 

 

 

A naval combat should shine in a fleet v fleet environment, not in a 1v1 IMO.The battle plans are quite simple in a 1v1.

[CJFlint]

I think naval action should have fleet vs fleet, solo 1v1 and even pirating. 

 

Here's my 2 cents.

 

Fleet vs Fleet - For fleet vs fleet unlike POTBS there should be better command and control, and a clear leader. One of the biggest problems I've seen in potbs port battles that drove me nuts. In a really prefect world there was a clear leader. But other times there was no clear leader, and that's when people get confused then the "fog of war" comes into play. Who ever the leader is should have like a command and control map or control panel were he or she can give orders to the other players. Like way points formation ect. Outside of Vent there was no command and control what so ever in POTBS other then group chat which really isn't good enough. We have to use 3rd party software just to have some command and control in POTBS. There were times not every one was on Vent. So having command and control built right into the game is key.

 

1v1 - When I did pvp in potbs, as a national I did more RvR, or group. As a pirate I was more of a solo or small group pvper with not as much focus on rvr. I really enjoyed 1v1 ship com, and small group pvp. I'm not going to lie I also enjoyed pirating or ganking or capturing ships at times. I felt it was a big part of the game, hence "PIRATES of the Burning Sea". Nothing got my heart going more then a good even matched 1v1 though, were it came down to the wire of who was going to win. Its an asome exp, and I learned a new respect for the other player win or lose if it was a close match. It should be in Naval Action. 

 

So I want Naval action to be verstile and the players to have freedom. If the decide to be a solo or small group hunter, give the players the tools they need. I want total open world freedom. If the option to say be a fleet naval officer or be say a lone rouge pirate or be a privateer or even a trader. If the players want to group up and have epic fleet vs fleet fights, put some sort of command and control system right in the game. I want to see more realism and less of this some fiction some non fiction that we saw with potbs. I don't want it to be just focused on one thing only.

[Costanius]

Hi,

another ex-PotBS Beta-Tester and player here. I love the Age of Sail!

 

I as well am hoping for some kind of Open World gameplay or another Age of Sail-MMOG, avoiding the flaws and problems of PotBS.

 

Wish You good luck with the development...the screens look great so far!

[PIerrick de Badas]

What kill potbs was the PB problem... Most of the endgamers play PvP or just farm fleets in PVE.

The problem was in OS red area when a group flip a port and succes in pvp to destroy defenders. Then they control the port area, they destroy anyone trying to defend the port, defending grinder how make fleets to flip a port.. and then the guys who Pvp where not in the PB...

Other problem was ...not the balance but the time devs spend on balancing.

I play potbs around 4years or maybe more and the game was few times balance. I play all classes on different account and then i was able to have a large view on the game. So maybe 2 or 3 time the game was really balance but as soon as devs introduce new ships (and i'm not speaking about the El drago bark (you can got it levle 7) and the fishing galeon (level 23)...so as soon as new ships were introduce it destroy balance. Instead of changing the ships, dev change the skills and then, players complain what make devs changing ships. But... they changed the skills was need a buff/nerf in other class or ships... and devs fakes improvment when they were just changing many things they changed before...

 

The problem was not good or bad development but a bad tactic...

 

About the topic? I don't give a **** of playing alone. Show us what you do, try to listen to some good advice, make advertisment (+++).

 

There is a really large amount of players that loves pirate game. One of the problem of potbs was that many people have never hear about it. I know the game cause my brother told me about it. I speak about the game with some people that started playing but noone have ever see any ad about the game. Few site were design to it and then good or bad many people just never play with it because they never heard about it...

[B2Kcodrutz]

We loved that game (i personally spent 3 years in it from beta till 2010). 

If I can name one problem in Potbs - it is overdesign. There were too much useless stuff in the game. Ships having no purpose in combat (Capri MC vs Oliphant), upgrades or items that were never used and many other things. 

Economy was very interesting in the beginning, but at the endgame it became a bit boring. 

Konstantin would kill u for making economy boring ))))

[adambomb]

Bring it all on, I'm ready.

[CJFlint]

What kill potbs was the PB problem... Most of the endgamers play PvP or just farm fleets in PVE.

The problem was in OS red area when a group flip a port and succes in pvp to destroy defenders. Then they control the port area, they destroy anyone trying to defend the port, defending grinder how make fleets to flip a port.. and then the guys who Pvp where not in the PB...

Other problem was ...not the balance but the time devs spend on balancing.

I play potbs around 4years or maybe more and the game was few times balance. I play all classes on different account and then i was able to have a large view on the game. So maybe 2 or 3 time the game was really balance but as soon as devs introduce new ships (and i'm not speaking about the El drago bark (you can got it levle 7) and the fishing galeon (level 23)...so as soon as new ships were introduce it destroy balance. Instead of changing the ships, dev change the skills and then, players complain what make devs changing ships. But... they changed the skills was need a buff/nerf in other class or ships... and devs fakes improvment when they were just changing many things they changed before...

 

The problem was not good or bad development but a bad tactic...

 

About the topic? I don't give a **** of playing alone. Show us what you do, try to listen to some good advice, make advertisment (+++).

 

There is a really large amount of players that loves pirate game. One of the problem of potbs was that many people have never hear about it. I know the game cause my brother told me about it. I speak about the game with some people that started playing but noone have ever see any ad about the game. Few site were design to it and then good or bad many people just never play with it because they never heard about it...

Yes I agree with what you are saying...I had some optimism when they left SONY.......at 1st . It sounded at 1st like the developers were really going to make worth while changes finally. But I logged in last week and noticed some things I really did not like at all. The 1st thing I noticed is there was zero changes to interface or graghics.....nothing what so ever. POTBS needs that the most. There was no new content what so ever, no epic missions...nothing. The only thing they did change were combat specs on ships and avcom. There was a bunch of new BS in the burning sea store>>> But what really got me was, everyone kept saying "Pay To Win". Are you kidding me POTBS, you want us to pay....to win on a completly out of date broken game? It was almost insulting. Game company's can get away with the pay to win, if they have a really cool game. POTBS is not that anymore at all. When I heard that was were it was heading a few times from other players I got discusted...went to programs and uninstalled. POTBS is pretty much lame now days. I really hope the nice folks making naval action will take a really close look at POTBS's success and failers and learn from it. There def is something to learn both good and bad from it.

 

Now I have a question for the Developers or any one who may know regarding this thread. 

 

How is naval action going to be with multi player? Is it going to be a MMORPG? Is it going to be like rise of flight, a single player game with option of multi-player? Or is it too early to know yet?

[Ampen]

When your endgame is entirely pvp, that's pvp-centric. And yes, you had to do all those pve things, which was annoying to pvp'ers, no?

 

But I don't really care about the definitions. It doesn't change the fact that new players were STILL useless in pvp, especially if you fleet-ground them up to top level. It was an annoying waste of time that taught them nothing about playing the game. Which is another annoyance about games of that sort, where pvp and pve are very different creatures. If there's a level grind, it should be teaching you how to play in the endgame. Some games do, and do it well. Other games don't, and POTBS is one of them.

 

 

It's not about definitions, it's about facts. The endgame (winning a map) seemed to be PvP on paper, but in reality not only did it require mostly PvE (generating cash, hauling goods, generating unrest, generating contention), but PvE could circumvent PvP (avoiding fights, attacking when everybody slept). 80% of the maps were won by the best PvE grinding nations.

 

Grinding to 50 for the first time was about learning the physics and the skills. PvP started after joining a PvP society and actually learning how to use the skills and perform the group maneuvers. I agree leveling up was annoying, but it only took 3 days. Still 3 excessive days.

 

I've been playing PS2, and the new players ("the zergs") were "useless" aswell. They needed to actually learn the tactics and strategies by joining an outfit and being taught everything. That's inherent to any PvP game.

 

 

 

That was a major problem in Potbs. Their progression was level based. We are against player levels.

Another problem was useless (fake) content. Most ships were not usable at pvp and had no purpose. 

 

 

Isnt that where community comes into play, to teach and foster?

 

 

The biggest mistake of Portalus was IMO trying to put realism in a game that was designed solely around gameplay. Rageboards were fun, they needed to be removed because boarding was flawed. Removing invincibility removed the charge possibility in a game where a line can one-spike a ship at long range. Removing the gun poundage and guns number variety killed the frigate skirmishing possibility, and in general a lot of gameplay tuning options. Everyone agreed the ship combat was the best part, they've been nerfing it instead of improving the other parts (in their big plans scheme, some changes are needed before improving the others parts - but players don't have that much time).

 

The devs question has always been "how to retain new players ?" where it should have been "how to retain endgame players ?". All the endgame is designed to get a big turn-over of players. Those who continue playing after a few maps are just the grain of sand in the mechanism.

 

 

 

A naval combat should shine in a fleet v fleet environment, not in a 1v1 IMO.The battle plans are quite simple in a 1v1.

 

 

What kill potbs was the PB problem... Most of the endgamers play PvP or just farm fleets in PVE.

The problem was in OS red area when a group flip a port and succes in pvp to destroy defenders. Then they control the port area, they destroy anyone trying to defend the port, defending grinder how make fleets to flip a port.. and then the guys who Pvp where not in the PB...

Other problem was ...not the balance but the time devs spend on balancing.

I play potbs around 4years or maybe more and the game was few times balance. I play all classes on different account and then i was able to have a large view on the game. So maybe 2 or 3 time the game was really balance but as soon as devs introduce new ships (and i'm not speaking about the El drago bark (you can got it levle 7) and the fishing galeon (level 23)...so as soon as new ships were introduce it destroy balance. Instead of changing the ships, dev change the skills and then, players complain what make devs changing ships. But... they changed the skills was need a buff/nerf in other class or ships... and devs fakes improvment when they were just changing many things they changed before...

 

The problem was not good or bad development but a bad tactic...

 

About the topic? I don't give a **** of playing alone. Show us what you do, try to listen to some good advice, make advertisment (+++).

 

There is a really large amount of players that loves pirate game. One of the problem of potbs was that many people have never hear about it. I know the game cause my brother told me about it. I speak about the game with some people that started playing but noone have ever see any ad about the game. Few site were design to it and then good or bad many people just never play with it because they never heard about it...

 

Wow, at least one can say POTBS is inspiring people, right? Nice to see some familiar names.

 

I played a few fights in there as well as Wrangel on Roberts, and for those of us that enjoyed PvP, there are alot of versions about what killed/broke/whatever the game.

What I had a hard time understand, and what actually would speak for the topic of this thread, is that there's alot of players in POTBS never interested in doing PvP, there's even alot of players not even interested in interaction with other players.

 

So, the endgame of POTBS could be pretty much anything depending on what kind of players you were. We had one guy in LaC that absolutely loved Fortaleza, an avcom group quest. Not once did I notice him doing anything else with the rest of us, even though the game basically was a sailing game.

That the endgame was about conquest mattered little to him, or to other players like him, or to fleeters for that matter. They had their own enjoyment in the game.

 

For this reason I think that there could be a market for a solo career, or what you'd like to call it, in this game, but that's for developers to decide.

 

Still, valid points are being brought up in this thread. What I enjoyed most with combat in potbs was it's complexity, even more so when you fought in groups. I had the luck to run into players that were engaged in PvP, and that was devoted to learn others how to PvP, but I saw my fair share of players coming and going during the years, drowned by the complexity.

 

I do think this would merit for some sort of solo-play initially, to get into the mechanics of the game, but it will be very difficult to make that something wich will learn players the basics needed for PvP. Since there's humans involved, it's prone to evolve, it won't be static, and hence static or linear missions or whatever won't solve the training issue.

 

And this was part of what made it difficult for new players to get into PvP as I see it.

All you fellas that fought there, think: how often did you sit down on vent or chat with fellow mates, to discuss new setups, different tactics, lineups, manouver, etc?

 

First you learn to sail, then to fire, then using your skills, all against bots. Then comes PvP:

Blocking, linefighting, brawling, target calling, fire discipline, spiking, rear bombing, charging, disengage, board and counterboard, reinforcement points, ganks and counterganks, turn as one/turn on line and above all communication?

Add to that RvR fights, with opponents joinging fleets, blockading, port battles etc?

 

Conclusion: I think it's fair to say that if this game evolves into a good PvP game, then if it's gonna contain a single player component, it will have to be biased towards just that, or it will be without meaning for those interested in the single player version. If what we want is a good PvP game (and god knows I want that), creating a single player component will probably take recourses from the making of the PvP component. and if the prime goal of the developers is to make a good, complex and challenging PvP game, I'd rather they'd soley focus on just that.

[admin]

 

 

How is naval action going to be with multi player? Is it going to be a MMORPG? Is it going to be like rise of flight, a single player game with option of multi-player? Or is it too early to know yet?

 

Current priority is a multiplayer combat. from 1 on 1 to X v X. 

Once combat is done and fun we will decide together what we do next. 

We are almost done with core elements that need to be tested and tuned, once we finish boarding development. 

 

the next steps are (not in the order of priority)

• RPG system for player, crew, ships and officers
• Game types
• Leaderboards and achievements
• Better damage visualization 
• Guilds, clans and corporations
• Open map prototyping
• Crafting and trading prototyping for the open map prototype
• AI
• Co-Op missions as a result
• Performance optimization and tuning for PC/Mac

We have a lot of work to do to make a great game  .

[admin]

Wow, at least one can say POTBS is inspiring people, right? Nice to see some familiar names.

 

 

Still, valid points are being brought up in this thread. What I enjoyed most with combat in potbs was it's complexity, even more so when you fought in groups. I had the luck to run into players that were engaged in PvP, and that was devoted to learn others how to PvP, but I saw my fair share of players coming and going during the years, drowned by the complexity.

 

 

Exactly the POTBS problem: It was brutal to rookies. You had no chance if you had no trained group with you. 

We are trying hard to solve this issue while keeping depth in combat

[CJFlint]

Current priority is a multiplayer combat. from 1 on 1 to X v X. 

Once combat is done and fun we will decide together what we do next. 

We are almost done with core elements that need to be tested and tuned, once we finish boarding development. 

 

the next steps are (not in the order of priority)

• RPG system for player, crew, ships and officers
• Game types
• Leaderboards and achievements
• Better damage visualization 
• Guilds, clans and corporations
• Open map prototyping
• Crafting and trading prototyping for the open map prototype
• AI
• Co-Op missions as a result
• Performance optimization and tuning for PC/Mac

We have a lot of work to do to make a great game  .

Sounds exciting!

 

So further down the road this will become an open world RPG with trading, conquest exploration ect ect. Well that's what I'm looking for.

 

Not to bash POTBS too much, but they let me down as a loyal player. It seemed like every patch they put out after late 2011 has put that game further in the hole. I really kind of sick of talking about it there is one last thing I would like to bring up about POTBS and something to consider.  

 

The developers of POTBS spent a large portion of there time adjusting or "Balancing" avatar fighting styles and character classes. They would put out a patch, then group of player with certain class would complain, then the developers would put out a balance patch. Then this would cause a another group to complain. This created an endless cycle, and put the game in a hole, because the developers spent more time tweaking class balance then adding content or improving graghics, which they spent little to no time on. This in my mind was due to bad design in the 1st place. I think naval action not have different  character classes at all, but instead have good character development. So everyone starts the same, with maybe really minor differences, but after that it is up to the player to decide the fate of their way there CHR turns out.  When I say character meaning player profile or even player career. What ever it turns out being.

 

I am a huge fan of Rise of Flight, and for the most part have been vary pleased with. The attention to historical detail is amazing. I have faith if that the same level of detail and DLC post release for Rise of Flight is applied for Naval Action, this will be something pretty cool for age of sail genre players. 

[Ampen]

Current priority is a multiplayer combat. from 1 on 1 to X v X. 

Once combat is done and fun we will decide together what we do next. 

We are almost done with core elements that need to be tested and tuned, once we finish boarding development. 

 

the next steps are (not in the order of priority)

• RPG system for player, crew, ships and officers
• Game types
• Leaderboards and achievements
• Better damage visualization 
• Guilds, clans and corporations
• Open map prototyping
• Crafting and trading prototyping for the open map prototype
• AI
• Co-Op missions as a result
• Performance optimization and tuning for PC/Mac

We have a lot of work to do to make a great game  .

 

This looks like a good lineup. Are fights gonna be pre-arranged sort of like in WoT, or do you plan on something more dynamic, like on the os in potbs? Might be posted somewhere, but got curious when reading the first line about 1 on 1 to X v X. Could it be 3X v X, or do you imagine some sort of cap to prevent ganking?

 

Exactly the POTBS problem: It was brutal to rookies. You had no chance if you had no trained group with you. 

We are trying hard to solve this issue while keeping depth in combat

 

Yeah, this is the real trick, I suppose. Depth usually means complexity, unfortunately.

Taking rookies with you in a complex game is very rewarding though, no matter what happens you tend to develop some amazing survival skills.

 

Still, I thought about some sort of naval tradition around this issue. After all, most naval games will probably be more or less complex, since sailing itself contains alot more variables than just running around. Besides, risks are if you start with a less complex game, it will evolve into something more complex, also a problem for potbs as I see it. It was even more difficult for rookies after PnP with stacking penalties etc.

This is where I start to think naval tradition, since what new people will learn from that point mostly would come from veteran players taking the time to introduce them, in essence the veteran players stand for the naval tradition. If there was a way to promote naval tradition, my guess is the game could be just as complex as you like.

[Barberouge]

Hey Karl

 

I remember devs speaking about a hardcore sailing simulator mode. In normal mode I'd favor ship management complexity aswell as long as it doesn't interfere too much with group tactical gameplay. The rookie friendly / complexity dilemma could be circumvented IMO by proposing different ship management levels.

[Ampen]

Hey Karl

 

I remember devs speaking about a hardcore sailing simulator mode. In normal mode I'd favor ship management complexity aswell as long as it doesn't interfere too much with group tactical gameplay. The rookie friendly / complexity dilemma could be circumvented IMO by proposing different ship management levels.

 

Hiya Barberouge!

We've pug-ed and stuff, and PuGs in potbs for me show the real dilemma. Sure, ship management is one thing, but tactical development by players something else. And the more players play a game, the more tactics will come up, so even if the game itself might be fairly user friendly, PvP might still become complex.

This is why I brought up naval tradition or something, to encourage veteran players to always bring new players etc. I remember a discussion on the potbs, I think you made quite a few posts in it as well, regarding getting new players into PvP. As I recall it that discussion went on like forever, not because of the steep learning curve of the game, but because the steep learning curve of PvP. Skills and ships might be one thing to learn, to use it in PvP is completely different.

[Barberouge]

I thought you were speaking about tunable mechanics rather than inherent tactics. For sure in a sailing and cannons fighting game, the tactics should always come out as about the same: line fighting i.e. blocks and focus fire, maneuvers to take the wind advantage, charges... But those are tactics that are difficult to have effects on regarding playing difficulty (except maybe tuning the overall speed of the fights).

 

The tunable mechanics though, such as ship management, can easily change the playing difficulty.

 

I think PotBS had quite a simple fighting environment. To increase the difficulty, they created complex skills. I don't think the environment mechanics and the fighting tactics can be separated regarding PvP difficulty. They are linked and reinforce each other.

 

Basically NA will feature at least almost the same environment as PotBS: different maps with sea and land, ship physics depending on wind, wind direction changes, different ships in the battle, customisable ships creating more diversity. What won't be in NA as we saw them in PotBS are skills.

 

But in NA there are already some differences from PotBS, such as collision damage. This one will bring a huge change in fighting difficulty. Remember how many times our ships collided with no consequences ? This will be over, group sailing will require more attention. And there will be much more environment mechanics differences, such as shoals, sinking mechanics, maybe more weather changes such as wind force, swell, also friendly fire and so on...

 

So as the global environment mechanics will be more rich, I think the ship management could be more simple. Where PotBS had simple environment and complex skills, NA could have complex environment but more simple ship management.

 

The steep learning curve of PvP will still be there, but the first approach should be more rookie friendly. Also there won't be PvE levelling as in PotBS, players will be able to join PvP battles from the get go. Also there are other ways to avoid rookie - veterans encounters that would badly hurt rookies.

[Ampen]

You do have some points. I'm guessing friendly fire will cause some confusion as well.

 

Still, there's a few advantages with complex enviroment and simple management compared to simple enviroment and complex skills, one being that with complex skills, tuning of skills often meant tactical adaption. This doesn't have to be equally true with a complex enviroment. If so, the trade of PvP or what we choose to call it, would be easier to get into.

[Barberouge]

Refreshing the gameplay with skills tuning can be a way to change the best tactics, but even when this happenend in PotBS, the veterans were the ones adapting the fastest. Also it shouldn't be the main goal of skills tuning, but rather finding a gameplay that offers better fights and more tactics. And there should still be data to change, such as for example the damage of a cannonball.

 

But some kind of naval tradition (is that what you called trade of PvP ?) should still be there whatever the simplicity of ship management. However, for players who want a more complex gameplay, a possibility should be offered to choose a more detailed ship management. This would please historical fans and players only interested in battles.

 

Also I forgot to mention that devs spoke about the possibility of introducing an aiming system. Not that I'm a huge fan of this one, but if done well it could add to the richness of the gameplay.

[Ampen]

What I mean with naval tradition, is that in a sailing game, there's a complexity from start if you do it proper enough.

I think what most veterans of potbs liked with the game was that it was not easy, if you wanted to have a really good group, all had not only to be veterans with knowledge of the different manouvers and such, but also all players had to be able to take initiatives on their own if needed. You could never be sure a linefight didn't turn into a brawl, a well-timed/lucky boarding could tip the fight and so on.

 

What I'm trying to say is that I think it would be benefical if there were some incentives for veterans to bring (and by that, train) new players. Handing down the naval tradition.

[Barberouge]

For sure learning to rookies should remain important to be ready for the tactical possibilities. Maybe naval tradition wouldn't even need incentives in NA ?

 

Also yes, devs have been speaking about a mode like WoT.

[Johny Reb]

This is my first time reading about this game. I'm an avid Potbs veteran and a leader of one of the largest most established societies in the game. Portalus is struggling and I'm afraid its time is limited unless they make something happen soon. This has led me to search out other options. I've been looking at wind of luck which has some interesting tweaks and takes out the "magical" shots but I'm afraid its for kids. This game on the other hand looks like it could be what I was looking for when I originally found Potbs.

This discussion appears to be going in the direction that puts the WoT players against the Potbs players.

I personally would love to see a WoT styled game that has tall ships but that type of game is for those who want to play for minutes not hours. The problem with WoT is that there is no team work. So many players, very few clans, and no repercussions for loosing a fight, limit the realism of the game and all but eliminates player coordination. It reminds me of an Atari game with plenty of fun but no lasting sense of accomplishment.

As for Potbs, the admins comments about it are spot on. It was over designed in all the wrong places. You can buy an epic mission with real money where the drops are worse than what you find in everyday npc fleets. Poorly designed rewards.

But... in Potbs there are many that don't care to do anything but economy. That's where they feel most rewarded. Take that out of your game and you will loose a third of the guys who play burning sea.

The direction this game is headed, a combination of the two styles of gameplay, seems to me to be spot on. Don't cater to either one. Be open minded and unique with the game you create, take the best of both worlds and add some of your own. That's the recipe for success.

Ill be watching this game closely as will many members from my soc.

P.S. any rough estimate for open beta? havnt found that info yet.

[admin]

 

P.S. any rough estimate for open beta? havnt found that info yet.

 

We are going to be in closed focus testing for a while. But we plan to start offering early access packages for sale this year. 

[CJFlint]

We are going to be in closed focus testing for a while. But we plan to start offering early access packages for sale this year. 

So as soon as this year there will be beta? I would love to try beta!

 

How long do predict it will take to release complete version? 

[Johny Reb]

Exactly the POTBS problem: It was brutal to rookies. You had no chance if you had no trained group with you. 

We are trying hard to solve this issue while keeping depth in combat

I cannot see a way to design a game in which a new player can jump into a group fight with a bunch of veterans and be as valuable as the vets without turning it into a boring kids game. Part of the fun was that you needed to train and that seamanship mattered and didn't come easy.

So, I suggest that missions are created that require needed group fights against npc's that can actually be lost. If you don't sail together, concentrate fire, have good strategy than you will sink or have to run. This could be a great training ground if designed properly.

 

I actually don't mind the leveling although I hate when all it becomes is grinding. Having something to attain to is inspiring and motivating. Maybe this could be done without "leveling" per se. Maybe through a ranking system linked to achievements. It could be more like a rep grind, though more fun, that unlocks certain aspects of the game. Maybe the leveling wouldn't be traditional but more like the "titles" found in Potbs and less like leveling and more like rewards.

It could be like leveling if you had to get through certain achievements that would open pathways to other rewards.

Brainstorming:

It could be like a skill tree setup(but not a skill tree). No single linear path but the choice to follow different paths.

Examples of unlocks could be: Access to larger ships, the ability to talk to a port governor which could be designed to have advantages, rep that drops prices of stuff or gives you better reward when you sell stuff, The ability to form a guild or corporation, etc.