Forthcoming patch final discussion.

[Stilgar]

1 hour ago, Captain Lust said:

Honestly i'd prefer it being a burden - otherwise you won't see any neutral ports ever again ( as far as i understood the system ). Also it prevents zerg clans from hoarding half the maps ports to some extent. But the most important is it destroys gold in the pockets of the rich / hardcore players to help the economy / inflation and even the playing field a bit compared to casuals and new players. This is why not making it a burden would be a severe mistake...

I see your point and partly agree, but make it too much of a burden and nobody will bother taking ports and doing much RvR. Trading should in principle increase the income, but I am pretty sure trading will happen in capitals mostly, thus limiting options for strong economy in captured ports.

[Stilgar]

1 hour ago, victor said:

you caputure a port in a good location (i.e. a port which is used by traders for their routes), set free access to all factions, put taxes lower than IA and it is likely to become a trade hub: high number of transactions  should generate a high income in taxes for the controlling clan.

Yes, this is kind of game to be played I guess.

[Captain Lust]

1 hour ago, Stilgar said:

I see your point and partly agree, but make it too much of a burden and nobody will bother taking ports and doing much RvR. Trading should in principle increase the income, but I am pretty sure trading will happen in capitals mostly, thus limiting options for strong economy in captured ports.

Yes, of course it needs to be balanced but it shouldn't be cheap to own ports is what im saying...

[hiclipucli]

This big patch need a map reset for sure. But all others also be reset ? gold, ships, resource ?

[Skully]

3 minutes ago, hiclipucli said:

This big patch need a map reset for sure. But all others also be reset ? gold, ships, resource ?

At the moment the plan is no, just a map reset, not a full wipe.

But there are side-issues though which may make a wipe a viable option. Just prepare for the worst, it can only get better. 

[victor]

2 hours ago, Skully said:

At the moment the plan is no, just a map reset, not a full wipe.

But there are side-issues though which may make a wipe a viable option. Just prepare for the worst, it can only get better. 

This time ... if they wipe assets and resources, I'm really done with testing and I'll wait for the final release to get back in the grin ... err ... game.

Edited September 3, 2017 by victor

[Guest]

Really hope that assets will be made into redeemables, with the map reset it's gonna be such a massive hassle to sail around to faraway ports that you no longer own to empty them out.

[Skully]

17 minutes ago, Aegir said:

Really hope that assets will be made into redeemables, with the map reset it's gonna be such a massive hassle to sail around to faraway ports that you no longer own to empty them out.

You can avatar TP into Neutral ports, so effectively you'll have full access to your assets, unless the new map made them part of a different Nation.

 

[Skully]

2 hours ago, victor said:

This time ... if they wipe assets and resources, I'm really done with testing and I'll wait for the final release to get back in the grin ... err ... game.

I just want to add to this that there might be wipes in the final release as I'm still not convinced it is possible to create a perpetual game here.

And to be honest have the wipes been really bad? It gives everyone equal opportunity again.

[victor]

44 minutes ago, Skully said:

I just want to add to this that there might be wipes in the final release as I'm still not convinced it is possible to create a perpetual game here.

And to be honest have the wipes been really bad? It gives everyone equal opportunity again.

To be honest as well, after more than 3500 hours ingame, I would be just tired to slowly regrind everything from scratch once more. It would be the third time.

Edited September 3, 2017 by victor

[Captain Lust]

5 minutes ago, victor said:

To be honest as well, after more than 3500 hours ingame, I would be just tired to slowly regrind everything from scratch once more. It would be the third time.

I don't mind wipes, i like when everyone starts fresh in cutters but looking at the last wipe i have my doubts NA would survive another... so many folks whining about their pixels. I can understand it is frustrating to lose progress but it's just a game and everyone starts over so i don't see a problem. If they wipe at release maybe the game will get enough new players to replace those who will quit because of the wipe... we can hope 

[Skully]

37 minutes ago, victor said:

To be honest as well, after more than 3500 hours ingame, I would be just tired to slowly regrind everything from scratch once more. It would be the third time.

29 minutes ago, Captain Lust said:

I don't mind wipes, i like when everyone starts fresh in cutters but looking at the last wipe i have my doubts NA would survive another... so many folks whining about their pixels. I can understand it is frustrating to lose progress but it's just a game and everyone starts over so i don't see a problem. If they wipe at release maybe the game will get enough new players to replace those who will quit because of the wipe... we can hope 

Hence I said back in the days,

On 8/12/2016 at 3:05 PM, Skully said:

On 8/12/2016 at 0:09 PM, McHackou said:

Losing capitals and total victory....

is a nice thing, however if players lose all money, ships and upgrades they have worked for so hard, that will let a lot of players leave and, if known before buying, will let many casual players not buy that game!!

You will not lose anything if you lose your Capital.

Everybody will lose everything if one Nation / Alliance wins the season...

(Hehe, so what should we prevent at all cost?)

Thus defining a proper end-game and at the same time making players responsible for keeping a perpetual game going. 

[DrZoidberg]

On ‎2017‎.‎09‎.‎03‎. at 7:04 PM, Skully said:

I just want to add to this that there might be wipes in the final release as I'm still not convinced it is possible to create a perpetual game here.

And to be honest have the wipes been really bad? It gives everyone equal opportunity again.

The problem is not that to be equal or not, the problem is if there will be player to play with, or not. Atm after losing 15K + (some says 100K+, but i dont belive this) players and getting bad reviews on steam i doubt there will be many after release. Devs have to change a lot, but i dont think they will. 

Edited September 4, 2017 by DrZoidberg

[DrZoidberg]

On ‎2017‎.‎09‎.‎03‎. at 7:48 PM, victor said:

To be honest as well, after more than 3500 hours ingame, I would be just tired to slowly regrind everything from scratch once more. It would be the third time.

Man, u paid for the game, right? Do u think the devs need u to play more, and use thier hardware? As i see they dont care about any player loss from the start, they dont care any issues causing player leak (long OS sailing form start, laughable PVP rewards after wipe , supressed PVP, supressed nation issue, no real contact with players). I think this game system was created for a fast player base recycle with a minimal hardware input, the problem is that they forgot that the leavers will make bad reviews on steam make impossible to get new players. Worst developing ever i saw. They fall into thier sword, but we suffer aswell. I wait this patch, but if everything continue i leave and i make my review aswell. I have only this against this kind of developement.

 

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by DrZoidberg

[The Wren]

4 minutes ago, DrZoidberg said:

Man, u paid for the game, right? Do u think the devs need u to play more, and use thier hardware? As i see they dont care about any player loss from the start, they dont care any issues causing player leak (long OS sailing form start, laughable PVP rewards after wipe , supressed PVP, supressed nation issue, no real contact with players). I think this game system was created for a fast player base recycle with a minimal hardware input, the problem is that they forgot that the leavers will make bad reviews on steam make impossible to get new players. Worst developing ever i saw. They fall into thier sword, but we suffer aswell. 

 

 

I see your point and agree that there is no economical difference for the Devs if you play this game for one month or for years. They still only have your initial $40.

On the plus side I paid my money back in November 2016 and played the game a lot while recuperating from surgery from February until June. I couldn't play real extended times but it did keep me entertained for those months. I feel I got my nickles worth out of this game and whatever comes next is only gravy.  

Even after saying this I am still very frustrated and disappointed with the current state of this game. There was so much potential that seems to be slipping through the Devs fingers.

[Captain Lust]

8 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

How one clan can control half of the map and defend all ports at the same time? If your territory will be overextended, your defending abilities will lower to 0. Let's say you get 3 ports attacked at the same time, you need 75 players to defend and no screening fleet at all.

I don't know im not a RvR player... ask the pirate zerg clan that dominated global server to the point of people quitting...

8 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

If maintenance cost will be too high or not profitable, majority of the map will remain grey. There will be no RvR.

Hence i said it shouldn't be too high but not too low either - barely profitable at best. Maybe the first port is very profitable and it costs more the more your clan has. So this way there will be some neutral ports to be used by everyone (maybe) and a chance for smaller clans to fight other smaller clans in RvR when the big clans / zerg clans are saturated. There has never been much RvR if you look at the playerbase as a whole. There are few players that care about RvR and of those even less who actually can do it because they're the chosen elite that organises PBs with their clan excluding the rest. Not only do too many ports in the hand of one clan give them too much power, it also excludes the rest of the players yet again. I'd really like to see some noob clans skrimish over unimportant backwater ports, rather than a big zerg clan coming in stomping them both to get their #34 port... A big clan can still own half the map but they also have to actually pay for their ports and that is how it should be imo. Not only does it make sense and helps economy alot, it also makes the choice of which ports you own actually matter instead just grabbing as many as possible. So in thise case if nation A caps all ports of nation B ( "one porting" them ) they suppress them hard and we all have seen how this affected players, but this time nation A pays ALOT of gold every day in doing so and thus weakens them, restoring balance somewhat. It's like the roman empire, nazi germany or this really fat guy at an all-you-can-eat buffet - you get too greedy, you lose ( collapse of empire / heart attack ) aka "bite off more than you can chew"...

Edited September 5, 2017 by Captain Lust

[mikawa]

This discussion goes now on since weeks. Any conclusion in sight?

[fremen]

Yesterday grind hostility to attack Cayo Vacas. After two missions the battle was triggered at once, without the 30 min of delay.

Was changed this feature?

[victor]

10 hours ago, DrZoidberg said:

Man, u paid for the game, right? Do u think the devs need u to play more, and use thier hardware? As i see they dont care about any player loss from the start, they dont care any issues causing player leak (long OS sailing form start, laughable PVP rewards after wipe , supressed PVP, supressed nation issue, no real contact with players). I think this game system was created for a fast player base recycle with a minimal hardware input, the problem is that they forgot that the leavers will make bad reviews on steam make impossible to get new players. Worst developing ever i saw. They fall into thier sword, but we suffer aswell. I wait this patch, but if everything continue i leave and i make my review aswell. I have only this against this kind of developement.

 

 

Actually they should care (and I suppose that this time they will actually think twice on it, before wiping assets and resources once more). Besides bad reviews, in fact, no MMO can survive if there are not enough players in each server.

At the end of the story, this game - at least now - is not designed at all to be appealing for new players, so - even at launch - Devs should count more on returning (and/or still playing) veterans than on newbies.

Edited September 5, 2017 by victor

[admin]

On 02.09.2017 at 6:44 PM, Bach said:

Thinking about the new rules I have a couple questions.

Will this just require a map reset

map reset only

[mikawa]

2 minutes ago, victor said:

At the end of the story, this game - at least now - is not designed at all to be appealing for new players, so - even at launch - Devs should count more on returning (and/or still playing) veterans than on newbies.

The dog bites himself in the tail.

Because of constantly changing game mechanics there are neither up-to-date tutorials nor any documents it's just all try-and-error. This isn't user-friendly and a ship loss means a middle catastrophe to a new player exept for any basic cutter of course. I can understand why they quit.

[fremen]

3 minutes ago, admin said:

map reset only

There are great news. Imagine we must move all our assets (ships, goods) to national and protected towns.

Another question. In my last battle port in testbed, one of the NPC defenders was a Pandora. The battle was shallow (Cayo Vacas). The Pandora is really a 6th class ship like the Prince of Neufchatel?? I think its a overpowered ship compared to rattle or prince....

[Red Dragon 13]

6 hours ago, admin said:

map reset only

Admin, any indication when this will happen?

[Jean Ribault]

Do we have a new map to look at yet?

[Teutonic]

9 minutes ago, Jean Ribault said:

Do we have a new map to look at yet?

on the testbed