Patch 14: Part 2 experimental patch increasing realism in ship behavior

[z4ys]

5 minutes ago, admin said:

...

There are multiple activities players can chose in the game.
...

They all start with p and end with e. Once you said only minority is doing and interested into RvR around 3%. Why it has to be now the main focus? Because there is still no solution found to bring people together in OW and dont make them run away?

PvP =/= PvP like a wine isnt a wine. Its a pooling of all kind of wines. Same for PvP.

[Valentine Karrde]

Pvp also is about the least realistic age of sail experience we have. Instead of a glorious broadside duel, we have turn wars/mast sniping. If I want turn wars, I'll play a flight sim. Who wants to have their masts lopped off in a few seconds and be crippled for the rest of the fight? Sounds like loads of fun to me. If you cannot detect the sarcasm it's there.

[vazco]

2 hours ago, admin said:

Gameplay changes
Victory marks (marks received for winning the map) conversion is now only available for the PVE server

Do I understand correctly that in order to be able to craft Victory ships to be able to beat eg. Swedes we first have to beat Swedes in order to win a map and get Victory marks?...

Giving victory marks for conquest was a bad concept. It promotes only the strongest nation and alt creation, and there's no way for a smaller nation to topple the top power and get marks.

In return, it promotes nations that are already winning, making toppling them harder.

[Demsity]

1 minute ago, Valentine Karrde said:

Pvp also is about the least realistic age of sail experience we have. Instead of a glorious broadside duel, we have turn wars/mast sniping. If I want turn wars, I'll play a flight sim. Who wants to have their masts lopped off in a few seconds and be crippled for the rest of the fight? Sounds like loads of fun to me. If you cannot detect the sarcasm it's there.

If you think that ships just sailed in a straight line, exchanging broadsides to each other then I have news for you friend.

[CaptainCaveMan]

3 minutes ago, z4ys said:

They all start with p and end with e. Once you said only minority is doing and interested into RvR around 3%. Why it has to be now the main focus? Because there is still no solution found to bring people together in OW and dont make them run away?

 

It is interesting that there are hundreds of posts concerning the lack of PvP and those wishing to engage in that activity only.  There have been so many changes that have tried to bring people together to do that very activity, yet the population still hasn't increased...yet those same posts are made by such a small number of the overall population.  Are we waiting for some magical update/upgrade to the game that will make this change and have players rushing into a game so that they can get ganked?  Where do you see the error in the overall thought process?

[CTC_ClanLeader]

On 7.12.2017 at 11:29 AM, admin said:

 

Update 21st December: Experimental

Gameplay changes
Victory marks (marks received for winning the map) conversion is now only available for the PVE server

Improvements
Crash reports sent only take into account logs of the recent crash (speeding up returning to the game significantly after the crash)

@admin

Thank u for announcing this early so everybody can convert PVE Marks to Victory marks before the patch comes .... not...

Edited December 21, 2017 by CTC_ClanLeader

[CaptainCaveMan]

1 minute ago, Demsity said:

If you think that ships just sailed in a straight line, exchanging broadsides to each other then I have news for you friend.

and if you think that ships sailed in reverse I have news for you friend.

[Knuddel]

Did you think just 1 secound about what you are doing there?

admin

• Administrator
•  
• 
• Administrators
• 
•  30,376
• 11,908 posts

• Report post
•  
•  

Posted 2 hours ago

Important experimental update.

Gameplay changes
Victory marks (marks received for winning the map) conversion is now only available for the PVE server

Komment from myself: Makes realy sence to drive with 25 secound rates against 25 first rds....  you think that will motivate guys???? Realy??? Thats just stupid!

Improvements
Crash reports sent only take into account logs of the recent crash (speeding up returning to the game significantly after the crash)

 

Conversion was removed to increase importance of port capture and victories in conquest. Expected effect = more port battles and more pvp; higher importance of port control and port victories.

 

 

[Demsity]

9 minutes ago, CaptainCaveMan said:

and if you think that ships sailed in reverse I have news for you friend.

And if you think that mitochondria is not the powerhouse of the cell than I have news for you, friend.

See? I can also take statements that you have not made and correct them.

[Seraphic Radiance]

46 minutes ago, Spitfire83 said:

25 players that want to RVR including grinding the PBs.  Every night 4-6 hours for what 1 or 2 weeks to win a victory mark.

Right on the point.

@admin you guys are focusing on the wrong thing too much. Work on real rewards and pve content. Do you understand that you just put all the aggressive fishes in one tank with no little fish to hunt. What happens to predators if there is no little fish(pve) to hunt? They eat each other, game over. Think about how you can bring and maintain little fish population first. 

Edited December 21, 2017 by Seraphic Radiance

[admin]

19 minutes ago, Valentine Karrde said:

Pvp also is about the least realistic age of sail experience we have. Instead of a glorious broadside duel, we have turn wars/mast sniping. 

You mean we have this (pic below) instead of some imaginary age of sail experience? 

[vazco]

Wow, there's not a single person here who would back this change to Victory Marks.

Please tell me, how can we get any port if we won't have 1st rates to raise hostility of a port? If we go in 2nd rates, it's enough for enemy to show up in their first rates and sink us all. It's next to impossible to win a PB without a 1st rate in battle.

Giving access to strategical goods (and 1st rates are  as strategical as nukes) should be promoted based on a level of activity, not on who is in a stronger team. 

 

In my opinion nations should have karma based on activity of a given nation, which would give them victory marks every week. If nation gives up ports, don't show up for battles, they should loose karma. If they show up and fight (loose ships), regardless of results, karma should go up. If they win, they should have some small extra Karma boost. This way active nations would have good ships, and inactive ones which prevent others from playing the game would be penalized.

[Knuddel]

Better Way: Smaller the Map, reduce cost of ships, smaller the economy, makes exp demending on Rank of those players (Rear admiral vs something smaller is just ganking...and thutch things assisting is just weeken the Playerbase... And reduce the XPs fresh players need Dramaticaly!!! (So they can drive with the same ships there are ganked in)

[Seraphic Radiance]

8 minutes ago, admin said:

You mean we have this (pic below) instead of some imaginary age of sail experience? 

Sorry, but after few port battles game becomes boring. There is no end goals or rewards that would keep players interested. Game is lacking content and details. The amount of work needed to do the work is not worth it and some even quit or stop showing up. Please get obsessed with PvE content before it's too late, game needs it badly. 

Edited December 21, 2017 by Seraphic Radiance

[Felix Victor]

4 minutes ago, vazco said:

there's not a single person here who would back this change to Victory Marks.

Exactly.

[Amihai]

Win contest == Profit -- WRONG.

Control territory == Profit -- GOOD.

But looks like it's to difficult for developers. Jist remove extra labor from server with one click. Easy.

[z4ys]

 pvp main content besides ships = access to both contents limited

How i feel treated

[Baron De Bourbon]

Seems this project is bound to come to an end, because developers are focusing on their new child. aka naval action legends. With the attitude of admin, it is clear devs are not interested in opinions of their supporting base.

[admin]

2 minutes ago, Baron De Bourbon said:

Seems this project is bound to come to an end, because developers are focusing on their new child. aka naval action legends. With the attitude of admin, it is clear devs are not interested in opinions of their supporting base.

We are interested in opinions of the supporting base but will push our design if we disagree with those opinions. 

ps legends is a side offshoot of a proven tested design (sea trials). NA is still a main game. 
 

[vazco]

@admin I propose a system which I think is way better. Please note, it would need to be tuned, it's just a rough idea. Details below:

 

 

[Baron De Bourbon]

3 minutes ago, admin said:

We are interested in opinions of the supporting base but will push our design if we disagree with those opinions. 

ps legends is a side offshoot of a proven tested design (sea trials). NA is still a main game. 
 

Well, exactly what I have said. You are not interested because you simply ignore your supporting base opinions.

Why would I want to support you and your company if you just ignore to what people like me, supporters are telling you?

PS, legends looks more appealing than naval action because you do not need to get involved in everything to get ship sailed. You do everything in your capacity to make sure that this what will happen, Naval Action will stay as a side project.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Baron De Bourbon

[admin]

Just now, Baron De Bourbon said:

Well, exactly what I have said. You are not interested because you simply ignore your supporting base opinions.

Its not a bad thing at all. Its a forum - forum (vague translation) a place for opinions. Disagreeing does not mean ignoring. We disagree with your opinion but we never ignored it. We tried Victory marks for everyone and they did not achieve what we want.

[Baron De Bourbon]

Just now, admin said:

Its not a bad thing at all. Its a forum - forum (vague translation) a place for opinions. Disagreeing does not mean ignoring. We disagree with your opinion but we never ignored it. We tried Victory marks for everyone and they did not achieve what we want.

What exactly do you want? Is it not to increase pvp action? Then explain to me how can reduction in production of ships will increase pvp action?

[Christendom]

3 hours ago, admin said:

Important experimental update.

Gameplay changes
Victory marks (marks received for winning the map) conversion is now only available for the PVE server

Improvements
Crash reports sent only take into account logs of the recent crash (speeding up returning to the game significantly after the crash)

 

Conversion was removed to increase importance of port capture and victories in conquest. Expected effect = more port battles and more pvp; higher importance of port control and port victories.

Can we have map wins only be contested ports?  Neutral ports should not count towards Victory wins

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, Spitfire83 said:

25 players that want to RVR including grinding the PBs.  Every night 4-6 hours for what 1 or 2 weeks to win a victory mark not realistic only nation that has the commitment to bother is the Russians and there not doing it for victory marks.

Doesn't include grinding cash for ports that don't make profit, grinding mats & upgrades for losses in fights..

Edit...

And the motivation should in part be pvp marks/ pvp in general but I know I can get those fighting at kpr without any of the hassle of setting up RVR ports, repairs to PB area, ships to be in place etc.

And you need reserves not just 25 for a campaign like you describe because of real life commitments, counter attacks etc.......

@admin be realistic 

The way he say's to win the map is exactly how BLACK/Pirates on PvP2/GLOBAL took ports and won.  We hit key ports that where worth the most or had rare goods in them and controled only those ports.  So you didn't need to own every port on the map. I think they should do more of the ports with imporatant points out there.  The other thing is at that time when we had the control of the map you could only get points by conquest of a port or later the victory points gain of the map.  So that is what we did to get our points.  Once you didn't need to do that we didn't care about vicotry of the map and let GB the largest nation gobble up all the empty ports cause even though we where the RvR power nation we could not compete with there total numbers.  That and it didn't help none of the big nations fought each other and had a care bear alliance.

20 minutes ago, admin said:

Its not a bad thing at all. Its a forum - forum (vague translation) a place for opinions. Disagreeing does not mean ignoring. We disagree with your opinion but we never ignored it. We tried Victory marks for everyone and they did not achieve what we want.

On global we stop trying to win the map mainly cause we didn't need to have one free Vicoty points any more for owning it.   GB just keep gobbling up the ports until they where way ahead of every one.  We even owned all the important ports like Cart and the rest of the 3 pointers.  So even with them if your not largest enough nation you can still not win the map, even though you can win tons of ports, but if you can't win and hold them than your always going to be beat by the largest nations that can just hold a larger number even if they do zero PvP.

Look at my reward system kinda like how POTBS was when you won the map.  Every one that was in a port battle during that time gets one 1 Victory Mark.  Than the top three winners of the map gets points depending on postion (this goes to all in that nation even folks that didn't fight). This allows small weaker nations to still get points if they fight, but rewards the top nations for there hard work.

17 minutes ago, Christendom said:

Can we have map wins only be contested ports?  Neutral ports should not count towards Victory wins

Your weekly points honestly should be this, only ports gained from attacking other players/clans.  Also the win conduction should be based off the clans more than the nations.