Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Preliminary discussion of the changes to conquest - clan wars are coming

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, admin said:

Well we tried to create many reasons to sail out of the safe zone. 
All features - all design before was focused on - How can we make a player a target more often. Which was loved by pvp players. But the majority left.

Problem is theres only one place to go when you want to find a fight: infront of enemy capital. But there are most new players and casuals.

So there is no option to fight versus other PvP players reliably. This means its boring for PvE guy getting ganked over and over again and boring for the PvP guy because theres no challenge.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Captain Lust said:

What he wanted to say is that you should play on the pve server if you don't like pvp... it's that simple...

I play were and how i want to play.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Captain Lust said:

Pretty much here. I suggested higher reward for pvp because pve is way more profitable and without risk and you dropped this bullcrap in response?

Look. I have been in a shit ton of port battles and open world battles. I dueled people like @TommyShelby, @HachiRoku, @Silfarion, @Liquicity and had great fun in these battles. Is it that what you want to hear?

I want to play Naval Action with my clan mates and have a good time. Maybe we have some laughs in a mission, maybe we sail around the OW to GET SOME PVP - last time I did this, enemy decided to run, despite the fact them having double the numbers, btw.

And then there come some guys who think pvp is the only way and everybody else should bend the knee to their opinion. It's always the same, in every online game. PVPers want to create a game that fits their playstle and the rest is just carebears.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, admin said:

Remember that NO reason will force you sail out of the safe zone - because you lose everything multiple times on the way out of that zone. 
So even if you promise 100mln opportunity it will be only exploited by organized groups. Average players will just lose ships trying to do that delivery order. 

You made the economy to support big groups and alts.  Even multiple repair kits is supporting big groups.  As in a big group some of you can repair your ship while others are keeping them busy.  More realistic, free for all rules are not always the best imo.

USA attacked Iraq because it was far superior in everything.  This is real life, but would not make the best game.

You made upgrades to be expensive, HC players will have those, new players will never have those?  You made it even easier for HC players to kick noobs?

I have said you many times that you need artificial rules.  You created nice signaling perk, which you should have tested as a permanent state as well.  Signaling was a good idea, gives better PvP, decreases zerg and gank.

At some point our Dear friend Lord Vicious went to play a new game called Albion Online.  It has OW PvP as well and one of the biggest reasons why so many cry is -> Zerg and Gank PvP.  People are leaving because PvP is f*ed up and economy is huge grind.  They have the same issues as you have right now.

I believe, but do not know...   People like light economy, but once they have everything in the game they want something more expensive.  It is good to start wanting something ridiculously expensive when you can afford it and the rest cannot.  I do not recommend to follow this line of development.  At least that something expensive should not be dramatic buff to your performance.  Your upgrades btw. give high buffs.

One scenario to think...  When a noob gets his Trincomalee and takes duel vs HC gamer -> His ship is not as good as HC gamers, but he still has a good change to win.

...

Plenty of reason...

I said long time ago that it would be nice to have some escort PvP mission.  Everyone is now thinking that yes, that would be cool.  Escort some ship full of gold and fight of other players, or the opposite.  In real life it will be 5 frigate escorts vs 25x 1st rates.  Then everyone comes on your face saying that your game sucks.

The only way to make content like this is -> Artificial rules.

If we still had those 5 dura ships, it would be way easier to make those artificial rules.  1dura ships have their benefits as well. But...

 

Artificial rules:

1. Escort fleet will be protected X minutes after every attack.

2. Only certain BR/Rate can attack

3. Escorts select 3 ships per player for this mission, you can lose your ship max 3 times, after that your fleet is weakened permanently.

4. Distance to escort should be so that max 3 attacks can be done.

5. Other players should be informed that there will be escorted gold ship.

(I just wrote these here, not promising these to work, it is an example to give idea)

OR

We can just play zerg and gank that most people hate.  No reasons to leave safe zones. GG

...

You can consider making global artificial rules.  For example, options...

- Max 6vs6 in OW.

- You cannot attack your target if your BR is greater than X

- Signaling perk for all + more uneven the battle, further people can see it.  6vs1 gank, and people from far can join to help.

- etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc..................... etc................

OR

Absolutely nothing can be done and we are doomed to fail and forever gank and zerg!!!  NoooOOoo!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Players already have escorts with the fleet perk. You can have multiple escorts in fact for dirt cheap. Do you think anyone will catch your trader if those 2-3 mercury in your fleet are set to demast your persuer? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sven Silberbart said:

Yes. Wee need green zones and a very good reason (money, and/or goods) to sail out.

I remember an online game having a simple idea. Two realms and at the special times an event to craft goods for selling with good profit. That was a real PvP Hotspot. The players organized themself in the green area start sailing their ships towards there. Much fights on the way to and much more fights at the hotspot. If you could craft some valuable goods without get killed start sailing the dangerous way back to home. A simple design as this:

 

 

Unbenannt.JPG

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, admin said:
  • Extremely profitable trading resources will be removed from the un-capturable ports and placed in capturable ports to provide profitable trading, privateering and potential taxation base.

 

What are extremely profitable trading resources? I've spent half an hour looking at numbers in the trader tool this week, and the best I can come up with are like 75k per trip in an LGV. I can make that kind of money in less time by running rank 4 missions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing..  My escort PvP mission is just an example, I am sure if you ask people can invent plenty of things to do in PvP zone.

You could also consider something like this...

Clan captures port A, they want to craft fort and towers for it. They need slaves to build it.  They make an order for slaves, which will create slave transportation PvP mission.  People try to transport slaves while other try to stop them, and 3rd group will try to attack attackers before they attack the transport fleets.  (edit: Idea is that you can even have PvP missions created by player needs)

You still need some artificial rules to be applied to make any scenario to work.  If you do not have artificial rules, I am 100% sure it will be zerg and gank.

Port Battles, for these you have already artificial rules set.  These have rate limits and no more than 25vs25.  Granted, you could have even better rate/br limits implemented, but you have artificial rules here.  You have more questions to ask how to make "Plenty" of reasons?

Edited by Cmdr RideZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear devs, I would just ask you for one thing. If you're copying solutions from other games, either copy them 1 to 1, or instead of copying as much solution as possible, actually analyze what goals that solution is answering. Copy goals, not the solution itself. Copying solution simply won't work. We'll just loose time...

If you copy goals well and propose your own best solutions, relevant to Naval Action experience and based on knowledge that you received in the last 2 years, it might actually work.

Edited by vazco
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Captain Lust said:

Interesting... care to elaborate? What is my attitude?

No, you clearly just want to argue and that's not the point of this thread.  Recognize that PVE is a necessary element of the PVP world.  It's integral to it and necessary.  Devs are trying to balance it so everyone can enjoy their experience here.  They want to discuss their ideas and ours for how to make it happen.  Telling someone to go to the pve server because you want to determine how others play does nothing to balance those two elements on the pvp servers, nor does it get us closer to solving the issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sven Silberbart said:

Yes. Wee need green zones and a very good reason (money, and/or goods) to sail out.

I remember an online game having a simple idea. Two realms and at the special times an event to craft goods for selling with good profit. That was a real PvP Hotspot. The players organized themself in the green area start sailing their ships towards there. Much fights on the way to and much more fights at the hotspot. If you could craft some valuable goods without get killed start sailing the dangerous way back to home. A simple design as this:

 

 

Unbenannt.JPG

Also +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...or if you don't want to risk, hire someone with experience that would define goals well and propose solutions for you :) it's worth it :)

Edited by vazco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More PVP?      I think  the penalty for losing a ship in combat is too steep for a lot of people to risk PVP Combat. The grind up is hard and a ship loss can be a huge setback, even a mid level PVP minded person is out of action for a period of time while re-tooling.(consequently, willing PVP' er not PVP'ing)

In other PVP warship games, you lose, but not your ship. People will fight PVP more if it's not a full time job replacing ships.

Maybe no dura's on ships, or certain ships, is an answer. Now before the flaying begins, I understand this eff's up open world some  and I know a combat only game is coming soon, but I think if you want more PVP in the open world the penalty for losing in battle needs to be dramatically smaller.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AxIslander said:

Aparently, your type of play chased away 10000 players allready,(numbers according to admin). and all u think of is we need more rewards for pvp to chase away the rest of the players.

 

6 minutes ago, Jean Ribault said:

They want to discuss their ideas and ours for how to make it happen.  Telling someone to go to the pve server because you want to determine how others play does nothing to balance those two elements on the pvp servers, nor does it get us closer to solving the issues

Read what he commented, please. My "type of play" is PvP.... on the PvP server ( it doesnt mean sealclubbing ) . If anything the increased reward for pvp will increase activity of real pvp players on the pvp server = more content and not chase them away. This guy clearly wants to play only pve and ended up on the wrong server, so i gave him helpful advice. If he actually wanted to play pvp too he would want increased rewards for it since it takes way more time and risk to get a good pvp fight over a npc mission. We have a PvE server for a reason. Can you comprehend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ShereKhan said:

but I think if you want more PVP in the open world the penalty for losing in battle needs to be dramatically smaller.

And / or the reward much higher but here come the mission jockeys crying out loud... God forbid pvp is actually worthwhile compared pve on the pvp server. Lets just all sit in our bot missions grinding pve like in some lobby game, only sail in OW to enjoy the scenery and the let PvP players wait for NA Legends...

Edited by Captain Lust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ShereKhan said:

More PVP?      I think  the penalty for losing a ship in combat is too steep for a lot of people to risk PVP Combat. The grind up is hard and a ship loss can be a huge setback, even a mid level PVP minded person is out of action for a period of time while re-tooling.(consequently, willing PVP' er not PVP'ing)

In other PVP warship games, you lose, but not your ship. People will fight PVP more if it's not a full time job replacing ships.

Maybe no dura's on ships, or certain ships, is an answer. Now before the flaying begins, I understand this eff's up open world some  and I know a combat only game is coming soon, but I think if you want more PVP in the open world the penalty for losing in battle needs to be dramatically smaller.

It is when your starting out, I'll agree, but once your established or have a clan that can support you its not a big deal. I have 14 ship slots currently and they are full. I think we need PvP to be easy to find and more importantly, worth it. You don't really get anything but a chance at loosing a ship right now. Make PvP profitable and plentiful and people would flock to it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ the admin and OP

I've been weighing a lot of factors before really forming an opinion on this proposed change.  I think it's got some good potential but I also do not think it will generate the desired results of player retention and increase the fun. I'll keep this short.

It does not appear that players actually play the game mostly for RvR. It also does not appear the majority play for PvP.  Both are simply  various things they can do in game. The best way I can describe it is this. After the wipe players filled the seas leveling ship classes, making money and setting new Econ chains and clans. They also RvR and PvP some while the seas were busy with activity. Then, like most MMO's the max leveled their ships, completed their crafting chains and established their clans. Then they started dropping off. Like it or not it isn't the RvR and PvP that attracts them no matter what they say. It's the building of the characters is some strange way. I think you could simply introduce new ships or areas of the map and attract just as many players for just as long as you would making this whole clan war change.  It simply doesn't address the players real concerns. Which appear to be, again like it or not, new content to explore and build.

i think you could get all the good points of the new system by simply:

Letting nations occasionally green on green in some method of temporary civil war.

Taking port conquest back to one port at a time.

Give each nation an uncapturable port near the center of the map.

Continue having the entire starting county uncapturable for each nations new players.

 

 

Edited by Bach
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

Problem is theres only one place to go when you want to find a fight: infront of enemy capital. But there are most new players and casuals.

So there is no option to fight versus other PvP players reliably. This means its boring for PvE guy getting ganked over and over again and boring for the PvP guy because theres no challenge.

I STILL havent havent heard a good answer as to why there should be ANY PvE component to RvR...    The WHOLE point of RvR hostility was to encourage "front lines"...  At least that was my interpretation. 

"War-supply bombs" should NOT be a thing....

Grinding AI fleets should NOT be a thing....

Setting a port battle should be a HUGE national undertaking.  You should have to have a HUMAN presence in that area the VERY SLOWLY increases hostility...

Literally, it should take a week or more of constant enemy activity to attempt to flip a port...

Nations should NOT be able to grind more than ONE region at a time...

There is a contingent of hardcore players that WILL do ANYTHING to change a dot a different color.  Force them to do more than PvE to achieve.

BOTH play-styles can be involved.

If you are going to give giant safe zones where people can farm in peace, then you really, really need to provide a mechanic where people can find combat...

 

<10% play the RvR game, according to your own numbers.  Why are we devoting >90% of the development of the game to it?  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flinch said:

Players already have escorts with the fleet perk. You can have multiple escorts in fact for dirt cheap. Do you think anyone will catch your trader if those 2-3 mercury in your fleet are set to demast your persuer? 

Easily.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay. Let's try this new proposal.

Here is a more general suggestion to @admin and his team. (Perhaps you are already doing this, but if not, it could very well be worth it.)

You need a serious way to get real feedback on why players are buying the game, why they are quitting, or why they are playing less. Steam reviews and this forums posts are only a limited often a skewed view. Take a page from other types of online businesses. They actually ask you about your experiences. They notice if you have not logged in for a while. They know what products you were interested in. They do things to entice you to return. I don't know if you have tools to implement such customer relationship in your current game admin tools or steam tools but you should investigate it. Get some outside help. You'll probably have to pay for it but that might be money well spent instead of trying to guess where to focus your development team next.

A couple of starter ideas...

Prepare a survey. Keep it simple. Contact a few trusted players to get their feedback and suggestions on the survey questions. Once you have a final copy of the questions, don't post the survey here but use a real survey site. Contact the entire list of registered players -- not just forumites -- asking them to complete the survey.

Look for players who haven't logged on in some time (two weeks?) whatever. Contact them and tell them a 200,000 gold redeemable has been placed in their account. Or a Heavy Rattler. Or a mystery chest. They may come back and use it. They may stay. Either way, enticing someone to return is worth that little bit of Econ inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

I STILL havent havent heard a good answer as to why there should be ANY PvE component to RvR...    The WHOLE point of RvR hostility was to encourage "front lines"...  At least that was my interpretation. 

"War-supply bombs" should NOT be a thing....

Grinding AI fleets should NOT be a thing....

Setting a port battle should be a HUGE national undertaking.  You should have to have a HUMAN presence in that area the VERY SLOWLY increases hostility...

Literally, it should take a week or more of constant enemy activity to attempt to flip a port...

Nations should NOT be able to grind more than ONE region at a time...

There is a contingent of hardcore players that WILL do ANYTHING to change a dot a different color.  Force them to do more than PvE to achieve.

BOTH play-styles can be involved.

If you are going to give giant safe zones where people can farm in peace, then you really, really need to provide a mechanic where people can find combat...

 

<10% play the RvR game, according to your own numbers.  Why are we devoting >90% of the development of the game to it?  

After having let RVR be a secondary priority and not worrying about ports has made the game 10x more enjoyable than it was a month ago.  I'm not convinced an RVR system is really needed to enjoy this game.

Edited by Christendom
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hodo said:

Sounds like you are giving up on this project with that last part of the statement.  

And NA Legends will be a meh hit at best.  No offense but the current market for instant action games is flooded.  A slow paced age of sail game will be popular for about a month until the next faster paced more exciting less realistic age of sail game comes out.... then the plague of locusts will jump there.  

 

Oh, I'm saving this for later.

Because you know twitch shooters and are usually right, right?

We'll talk about this further down the line.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sven Silberbart said:

Yes. Wee need green zones and a very good reason (money, and/or goods) to sail out.

I remember an online game having a simple idea. Two realms and at the special times an event to craft goods for selling with good profit. That was a real PvP Hotspot. The players organized themself in the green area start sailing their ships towards there. Much fights on the way to and much more fights at the hotspot. If you could craft some valuable goods without get killed start sailing the dangerous way back to home. A simple design as this:

 

 

Unbenannt.JPG

Whats the difference to the chest event?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please delete the pve missions on the pvp server! Its a PvP Server not a PvE Server! 90% of the guys make everyday only PvE! Thats a big problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...