Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Zorg the Merciless

Safe zones and Newbies

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Wraith said:

So why are we floating around the lowest player numbers ever?

It has gotten too easy / tedious to achieve stuff. Combined with there not being leaderships in most nations. Bad mix. Because when a new player hits Rear Admiral he thinks hes done with the game. Whereas back in my day when I got to the max rank (was the 2nd brit to reach it on PvP 2), conquest / rvr was booming - not because the ports were needed but because both sides were enjoying it. Now it seems like most of the RvR vets, after 100s or 1000s of hours of doing the same over and over again got bored. Cant blame them, really. And new, capable nation leaders dont fall from the sky :)

It seems like most vets now have shifted towards a more Privateery / OW PvP oriented game preference. This can be confusing to newer players - they dont have a clue about what happened in this games 2 years EA stage, rvr wise. Nobody tells them why there is no active conquest going on.

I think fixing patrol zones to a reasonable RoE combined with making safezones safe again and advertising (after UI) could help; "growing" the playerbase ans attracting more RvR interested players maybe even capable of leading a nation. Fresh blood is needed

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Liq said:

It has gotten too easy / tedious to achieve stuff. Combined with there not being leaderships in most nations. Bad mix. Because when a new player hits Rear Admiral he thinks hes done with the game. Whereas back in my day when I got to the max rank (was the 2nd brit to reach it on PvP 2), conquest / rvr was booming - not because the ports were needed but because both sides were enjoying it. Now it seems like most of the RvR vets, after 100s or 1000s of hours of doing the same over and over again got bored. Cant blame them, really. And new, capable nation leaders dont fall from the sky :)

It seems like most vets now have shifted towards a more Privateery / OW PvP oriented game preference. This can be confusing to newer players - they dont have a clue about what happened in this games 2 years EA stage, rvr wise. Nobody tells them why there is no active conquest going on.

I think fixing patrol zones to a reasonable RoE combined with making safezones safe again and advertising (after UI) could help; "growing" the playerbase ans attracting more RvR interested players maybe even capable of leading a nation. Fresh blood is needed

You're also skimming the fact the main dedicated RVR groups are allied and continue to smash anything trying to develop and why is that? Cause it's easy pvp marks with minimal risk to the elite modded ships....

Edited by Coraline Vodka
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RvR is less rewarding than PvP and PvE.

Do you remember when you received 800k or even millions after a good PB? When you received ressources or purple/gold upgrades? When ports dont make you grind more to keep them?

Thats one of the issues. 

However I think the main issue is ALTS. Many guys purchased so many alts that they can have any upgrade or ressource in the server. Whats the motivation for going to conquer a port if you get it easier by using alts?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

RvR is less rewarding than PvP and PvE.

Do you remember when you received 800k or even millions after a good PB? When you received ressources or purple/gold upgrades? When ports dont make you grind more to keep them?

Thats one of the issues. 

However I think the main issue is ALTS. Many guys purchased so many alts that they can have any upgrade or ressource in the server. Whats the motivation for going to conquer a port if you get it easier by using alts?

and a chest full of goodies.  Wasn't a perfect system, but it sure seemed like we had a lot more port battles back then.....even when they required 25 people.  Grinding up PBs now is far more tedious and if you do get a fight and win, your reward is a nice tax everyday for owning it that unless the port is one of 5 on the map, won't make a profit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Christendom said:

and a chest full of goodies.  Wasn't a perfect system, but it sure seemed like we had a lot more port battles back then.....even when they required 25 people.  Grinding up PBs now is far more tedious and if you do get a fight and win, your reward is a nice tax everyday for owning it that unless the port is one of 5 on the map, won't make a profit.

Did we get paints for winning a pb? I cant remember... It was so long ago.

Just imagine if devs link customization items to RvR and PvP. 

In the last stream of Reverse I could see that the guy have 1200 pvp marks. We might need something more where to spend those marks.

Share this post


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

It has gotten too easy / tedious to achieve stuff. Combined with there not being leaderships in most nations. Bad mix. Because when a new player hits Rear Admiral he thinks hes done with the game. Whereas back in my day when I got to the max rank (was the 2nd brit to reach it on PvP 2), conquest / rvr was booming - not because the ports were needed but because both sides were enjoying it. Now it seems like most of the RvR vets, after 100s or 1000s of hours of doing the same over and over again got bored. Cant blame them, really. And new, capable nation leaders dont fall from the sky :)

It seems like most vets now have shifted towards a more Privateery / OW PvP oriented game preference. This can be confusing to newer players - they dont have a clue about what happened in this games 2 years EA stage, rvr wise. Nobody tells them why there is no active conquest going on.

I think fixing patrol zones to a reasonable RoE combined with making safezones safe again and advertising (after UI) could help; "growing" the playerbase ans attracting more RvR interested players maybe even capable of leading a nation. Fresh blood is needed

You make a lot of good points, and I'd agree with almost all of it.  And I think @jodgi thinks I'm more opposed to PvP patrol zones than I am. I've got nothing against them in principle as any content is good content. But most of the discussions I've engaged in around them have stemmed from that I think they're a lazy crutch for putting in better, player-generated content opportunities. And this relates exactly to the decline in motivation across almost all nations for RvR and other types of activities: the barriers are too high and rewards too low.

Since EA started I've been calling for new and more interesting ways to engage players of all types. To focus too pointedly on consensual PvP is a mistake for a game treading status as open world and decidedly more hard core and sim-like than a pure action game. It's been a long, slow attrition of players due to that lack of content and it's not going to be helped by RoE tweaks and tweaks to the BR or combat model.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Did we get paints for winning a pb? I cant remember... It was so long ago.

Just imagine if devs link customization items to RvR and PvP. 

In the last stream of Reverse I could see that the guy have 1200 pvp marks. We might need something more where to spend those marks.

paints and ship notes    occasionally a BP.  Was a good system to create a market for the items you didn't need.  I made a lot of cash off paints. 

There is just no incentive to do RVR now other than to get a PVP fight and unfortunately it usually revolves around 1 team getting slaughtered by a well coordinated group of PVPers that are allied up with all the other well coordinated PVPers.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Liq said:

It has gotten too easy / tedious to achieve stuff. Combined with there not being leaderships in most nations. Bad mix. Because when a new player hits Rear Admiral he thinks hes done with the game. Whereas back in my day when I got to the max rank (was the 2nd brit to reach it on PvP 2), conquest / rvr was booming - not because the ports were needed but because both sides were enjoying it. Now it seems like most of the RvR vets, after 100s or 1000s of hours of doing the same over and over again got bored. Cant blame them, really. And new, capable nation leaders dont fall from the sky :)

It seems like most vets now have shifted towards a more Privateery / OW PvP oriented game preference. This can be confusing to newer players - they dont have a clue about what happened in this games 2 years EA stage, rvr wise. Nobody tells them why there is no active conquest going on.

I think fixing patrol zones to a reasonable RoE combined with making safezones safe again and advertising (after UI) could help; "growing" the playerbase ans attracting more RvR interested players maybe even capable of leading a nation. Fresh blood is needed

Lack of content is killing this game.

PVP only gameplay leads to a 300-400 population on the server.

If devs do not invest resources in development of new content, the game will never raise its numbers.

Therefore, we just have to hope that DLCs will sell big time. And I fear that this will be actually the last call for Naval Action.

Edited by victor
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What needs to happen first of all is move the safe zone for every nation away from the capital.  Make starter areas for new players and more risk averse players that are safe.  Everyone should start with an outpost here and at their capital.  Then as a new player you can decide to play it safe or not. 

 The starter area should provide everything needed to play the game, but at half the rate of outside it.  Double the rewards and eco will be a powerful incentive to leave the safety by choice, without forcing anyone to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Safe zones will never be safe with this idiotic AI that beaches, stucks into the wind and doesnt know how to properly fire a broadside.

For the average player is very easy to fool these npcs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

Why not a neutral nation for players?

We had that. I don't remember the discussion leading up to removal.

Edit: Or did we? At least we had neutral towns and AI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2018 at 12:08 AM, victor said:

Lack of content is killing this game.

PVP only gameplay leads to a 300-400 population on the server.

If devs do not invest resources in development of new content, the game will never raise its numbers.

Therefore, we just have to hope that DLCs will sell big time. And I fear that this will be actually the last call for Naval Action.

I would agree with that.  But with the size of the development team, a lot of what folks think of as content beyond PvP is unlikely to happen.

Which means content needs to come from players.  What initially held my interest in this game was the presence of a player economy (production / crafting / contracts).

The economy is broken at a structural level.  1) It stovepipes economic activity inside the capital regions.  Raiders congregate off the greenzones because that's where the targets are -- which is why we are having this argument in the first place.  2) It is extremely vulnerable to manipulation.  3) There are areas of PvP game play that appear structurally hostile to merchant activity, way beyond what you might expect in an engagement in the real world between a lightly armed trade ship and a raider.

I've discussed these elsewhere and I'll not belabor them here.  After five months I've concluded the economy is nearly unplayable.  Which is why I am sitting out until after the rework.

But I haven't seen anything in developer announcements to give me any particular optimism.  Most of what I see appears cosmetic and doesn't address the structural problems.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Marcus Corvus said:

I would agree with that.  But with the size of the development team, a lot of what folks think of as content beyond PvP is unlikely to happen.

Which means content needs to come from players.  What initially held my interest in this game was the presence of a player economy (production / crafting / contracts).

The economy is broken at a structural level.  1) It stovepipes economic activity inside the capital regions.  Raiders congregate off the greenzones because that's where the targets are -- which is why we are having this argument in the first place.  2) It is extremely vulnerable to manipulation.  3) There are areas of PvP game play that appear structurally hostile to merchant activity, way beyond what you might expect in an engagement in the real world between a lightly armed trade ship and a raider.

I've discussed these elsewhere and I'll not belabor them here.  After five months I've concluded the economy is nearly unplayable.  Which is why I am sitting out until after the rework.

But I haven't seen anything in developer announcements to give me any particular optimism.  Most of what I see appears cosmetic and doesn't address the structural problems.

On your 1st point, we are encouraged to move shipbuilding away from Capitol regions with a promise that the likelihood of more premium ships.  I have moved my base to a capturable port and can state that of the 3 5th rates that I have built there, 2 were 4/5's and one of those was purple.  on your 3rd point, of course the structure is hostile to traders.  That's the commerce raiding function of warfare.  Merchant vessels are the natural and appropriate targets of the raider.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The safe zones concentrate players in one area which is actually good for raiders.  You want major trade hubs that all the crafters are hauling their stuff to.  Having said that there doesn't need to be a safe zone for it to be a trade hub. 

The problem is it takes too long to sail anywhere.   As a crafter I can tell you I'm not going to risk sailing for over an hour just to get ganked.  I don't really care about losing my white oak.   If it took half as long I would be making trade runs more often and I wouldn't wait till its nice and quiet to move stuff either. 

Edited by beagleplease

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Oberon74 said:

On your 1st point, we are encouraged to move shipbuilding away from Capitol regions with a promise that the likelihood of more premium ships.  I have moved my base to a capturable port and can state that of the 3 5th rates that I have built there, 2 were 4/5's and one of those was purple. 

Are you able to get both buy and sell contracts for a variety of resources filled in those locations?

I've seen some activity in free ports but there are very wide swaths of the map where a contract will not be filled at any price.  Or for that matter where it is possible to sell a ship.  This is what I'm getting at when I am talking about structural problems.  Contracts get placed and ships get listed where they will likely be sold.  Which funnels that activity back into capital region ports.  I suspect a server-side heat map of player-to-player  buy/sell activity might yield some very interesting images.

 

4 hours ago, Oberon74 said:

  on your 3rd point, of course the structure is hostile to traders.  That's the commerce raiding function of warfare.  Merchant vessels are the natural and appropriate targets of the raider.

This is not what I am talking about.  Commerce raiders had to do something with the ship and cargo afterwards.  If sinking, salvage what you could.  If not sinking put aboard a prize crew and assume the risks of getting it to port.  To fund your prize money your prize agent must have a prize.  And even once it was in port that process was not risk-free.

In this game the raider pockets magic rewards, slaps on repairs, and moves on to the next target.  No reduction in crew strength.  And no further risk.  The merchant eats the entire cost of that interaction. 

There is no upside to combat for a merchant.  And apparently zero downside for a raider when attacking one.

Edited by Marcus Corvus
typos
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×