Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Jeremiah Gunsmoke

The Daydream – A Concept for Legends

Recommended Posts

When Legends was cancelled, some of us talked about the potential it would have had if it ever was fully released as free to play on Steam. In this post I'd like to describe what the ideal and most promising version of this free to play game would have looked like in my opinion.

 

Disclaimer: I know that Legends is very unlikely to happen in any form. @admin pointed out that they lack the manpower to develop and maintain two games at once and I completely understand this point of view. It's probably the right decision to focus on getting Naval Action out of early access first with all core features finished to a certain extent. Nonetheless I refuse to completely give up hope and if the developers ever want to revisit Legends they'll might get one or two ideas out of this post.

 

Gameplay:

 

Naval Action's combat and sailing model is in a pretty good shape and I don't see a lot of issues to be solved there. (Apart from the boring click.boarding maybe, but even that is at least functional.) In my opinion the battles are the best part of the game and would make for a solid core for an arena game like Legends. Just like in the latest build we had of Legends, hull and crew repairs should be left out to not drag the battles out too long and to make your losses during the battle more meaningful.

 

In case of gamemodes I'd keep it simple for the start. Stick to simple deathmatches that are decided by one side disabling all ships of the other side. Bring back the old circle of death to prevent players from dragging out battles that are already over. Alternatively bring in a large circle in the center of the map that grants points to the side that has ships in it, but stops doing so if at least one ship of the other side is also in there.

 

Further gamemodes could be introduced after some testing and community feedback but I don't think they are really necessary. Just shooting other ships over and over again with no real purpose might sound boring and repetitive on paper, but in the end that's how all those arena games work, right? I've played Mechwarrior Online for quite a long time and while they have several gamemodes (deathmatch, conquest, escort, base defend/attack), all of them are usually decided by one team eliminating the other one since the objectives get ignored in favour of shooting some enemies.

 

Matchmaking:

 

There should be a counter of five minutes maximum. A match starts either when the maximum amount of players is in the queue, or after the countdown has ended with all players that are in the queue at this point. The matchmaker should try to roughly balance the teams based on the ships' BR and maybe some sort of captain's skill rating. (Not sure about this as it doesn't seem to work really well in most multiplayer games I know. Could be a way to balance groups though.)

 

AI ships should only be present if there is a BR gap between the teams that can't be closed by balancing the present player ships. This should guarantee that there are never more than one or maybe two AI ships in one match. If the matchmaking queue ends with only one player waiting for a game, there should be a notification for said player that he can either enter a match against an AI opponent or return to the main menu. If there is for example a 2v2 match with somewhat acceptable balanced teams, bots shouldn't be present at all to artificially boost the match to a 5v5 as we saw it in the latest build we were able to play.

 

I suggest two different queues. One for 7th and 6th rates only and one for 5th rates and above. This way you have one place for the smaller ships to shine and for new players to learn the ropes and another one for the bigger ships and more experienced players. (The tutorial that was made for Naval Action could be offered as an option in the main menu as well, of course.) It might come into consideration to allow 7th and 6th rates in the queue for the bigger ships too if someone really wants to bring one of those to a bigger battle.

 

Battles with mixed rates aren't a problem in my opinion if the balance doesn't rely on bots as much as the „old“ Legends did. At least it's easier to approach a bigger ship with several smaller ones if everyone involved is a player. The whole range of 5th to 1st rates will also provide more variety in the ships you encounter than the latest build of Legends did with its BR restrictions.

 

Besides the two main queues there should be the option for a custom lobby. Those lobbies should have some options for the creator to determine the rules for the match that is created. For example:

 

  • private / public (free for all / join with password or invitation only)

  • rate limits (free for all / ships of one specific rate only / ships of a specific range of rates only)

  • gamemode (Maybe even consider to enable players to turn the circle of death on or off for private lobbies where everyone agrees to a set of rules anyway.)

  • map

  • turn on/off automated matchmaking – While it's switched off the players can organize their teams however they like.

 

No rewards could be gained in custom battles to prevent people from farming them.

 

Rewards:

 

Keep it simple, I'd say. During Sea Trials we had a system that was solely based on damage. You had to deal a certain amount of damage in one ship to unlock the next one. While that system is a bit too basic for a game that is supposed to be more than a test and that is based mostly on progression, the main idea is still good. Reward players for inflicting damage to the enemy by translating the damage they dealt throughout a match into XP and ingame currency. This would also provide a good solution for several ships working together to take down an enemy:

 

  • The enemy has a total of X hitpoints.

  • The players deal Y amount of damage to him in order to sink/board him.

  • Player A is responsible for 50% of Y.

  • Player B is responsible for 30% of Y.

  • Player C is responsible for 20% of Y.

  • V hitpoints are left on the enemy as you don't have to get them to zero in order to win.

 

The amount of damage the players dealt is directly translated to XP and ingame currency at a fixed ratio. This way Player A gets the most out of the fight and Player C the least, which represents their share in the battle. Player A also gets the kill for his statistics but no extra XP and ingame currency reward.

 

The V amount of hitpoints that is left on the enemy after he is out of the fight is also distributed between the three players according to their share. Player A gets 50% of V, Player B 30% and Player C 20%. That's necessary to prevent some options of winning from becoming less rewarding. (If your first shot hits the enemy's magazine and blows up the ship, Y is a very small amount. By also rewarding you for V you get 100% of X nonetheless.)

 

There are some benefits that come with the proposed system. First of all it forces people to fight. You run away? You don't deal damage and don't get any rewards. Secondly it rewards players according to the role they played during the fight. Supporting a larger ship against another larger ship is as viable in terms of rewards as your support is to your ally. But there's more! Since X, the total hitpoints of a target, is different for every ship, larger vessels are encouraged to rather fight similar sized or even larger vessels first. Smaller targets will give less rewards as they have less hitpoints.

 

Last but not least this system prevents players from being discouraged by an unfortunate loss. If you have put up a good fight but lost due to other circumstances, you'd still get decent rewards for your effort. To prevent further frustration a sunk player should be able to immediately join another match and not have to wait for the ongoing battle to end. I'd also leave out repair costs for ships completely to prevent anyone from getting a minus after a match. The only way to get negative rewards should be (extensive) friendly fire and maybe running out of bounds to kill yourself.

 

Progression:

 

I really think the linear system we had in the Legends prototype wasn't the best solution to come up with. My suggestion would be a combination of ship and rate unlocks. The 7th rates are unlocked from the start and you can pick one of them as your starting ship. A description of their stengths and weaknesses would be required for new players so they know what they get before they are stuck with it. Something like:

 

Privateer: fast, nimble, fragile

Pickle: sturdy, less manoeuvrable

Cutter: allrounder

Lynx: hardmode

Yacht: bonus for everyone who owns regular Naval Action

 

Once you've picked your first ship you can hop into battle and earn XP and ingame currency. XP is needed to either unlock new ships or the next rate. For example: You picked the Cutter as your first ship. With the XP you earned you can either unlock one of the other 7th rates or you can save it to unlock the next higher rate of ships, 6th in this case. This doesn't unlock a ship, but the posibility to unlock 6th rates with the XP you earn from now on.

 

If you choose to unlock another 7th rate however, the amount of XP needed to unlock the next rate of ships gets lowered. So you can either focus on one ship you like and save up enough XP to unlock the next set of ships, or you can try out different ships and unlock the next set of ships by unlocking enough ships of your current set.

 

Once you've unlocked a ship, you have to purchase it with ingame currency to get it into your dock and be able to use it. Cannons have to be purchased separately and the bigger they are, the more expensive they get. No XP is needed to unlock bigger cannons but they should be quite expensive. So you can again either choose to earn some more money with your smaller but well equipped vessel, or you field your new larger vessel but without its biggest possible guns until you can afford them.

 

The upgrade system could stay as it was in the prototype. Every ship unlocks up to five upgrade slots at certain thresholds of XP earned while using it. Purchasing a new or changing an already applied upgrade costs ingame currency. The upgrades should provide small bonuses to customise your ships to your likings but not make them overpowered in comparison to non upgraded vessels.

 

Different wood types could be introduced according to regular Naval Action but I'm not sure if this is a good idea. While it would be nice to be able to choose your build when purchasing a ship and to play around with different versions of one ship, I'm pretty sure a lot of builds would be more or less useless in an arena game. In addition different wood types make the balancing between the ships more difficult since you have to keep more than one version of each vessel in mind.

 

Monetisation:

 

A game needs to generate money and I think Legends has a lot of potential to do so without being disrespectful towards players. Some options:

 

Paints:

 

Each paint you purchase is an unlock for the specific ship you purchase it for. Once you've purchased the „Classic White“ paint for your Bellona for example, you can use it on all the Bellonas you'll ever own. Offer single paint purchases and the option of a paint collection that contains all available paints for one ship. Purchasing the collection is a little bit cheaper than purchasing each paint on its own.

 

Additional options are one use paints, that are cheaper than the unlocks but can only be applied once to a single ship, and a premium paint collection that unlocks all paints at once for a high price, that is still cheaper than purchasing every single paint individually.

 

Flags:

 

Those shouldn't be tied to a specific ship but unlocks you buy once and then can use on every ship you want. Again, offer single flag purchases and collections of several flags that are cheaper in total than buying every single flag individually.

 

Sail Decals and Colours:

 

Work the same as flags. Neither decals nor colours for sails are yet announced for or implemented in regular Naval Action, so I don't know if there's something planned at all. They shouldn't be pure fantasy but match the historical setting we have though.

 

Premium Time:

 

Pretty much a standard in free to play games. You pay for a specific amount of premium time that grants you a bonus on XP and ingame currency you earn in battles. Options include different time spans offered for purchase and maybe even a lifetime purchase.The latter could come with a special ingame title and maybe even some other bonuses included (depends on the price).

 

Custom Lobbies:

 

The idea is to tie the right to create a custom lobby to a real money purchase. Everyone should have the ability to join one of those lobbies without having to pay for it, but if you want to create your own one, you'll have to make a small investment. Either as one time unlock or as part of premium time. (As long as you have premium time, you are also allowed to create custom lobbies.) Both options could be offered for those who want only custom battles but no premium time and for not double charging those who already pay for premium time.

 

Dock Space:

 

Another standard. You have a limited amount of dock space (maybe for 5-10 ships). After all your docks are full, you can either sell one of your old ships and replace it with a new one or purchase more dock space with real money. Personally I'm not a fan of this one as it feels too much like a restraint. On the other hand I'd probably be the first one to purchase more dock space, so I guess it's quite effective.

 

Premium Ships:

 

Ships that don't need to be unlocked by XP and ingame currency but are only obtainable through real money instead. They come with a bonus to all XP and ingame currency that is earned while using them. This one is tricky for the obvious pay to win reasons. You'd have to pick ships that have at least one viable alternative that is free for all to prevent a premium ship from becoming a must have.

 

A bad example is something like we currently have with Le Requin as it is the most powerful ship of its rate at the moment. This would be even more problematic in Legends if there were 7th and 6th rates only battles. In this case Le Requin would become the absolute queen of the seas in those matches. As premium ship she would be labeled as pay to win immediately and rightfully.

 

A better example is probably a ship like the Wapen von Hamburg. It's beautiful and quite unique in the game but not too powerful in comparison to the other 4th rates. (Assuming that the Agamemnon, Constitution and Ingermanland remain free for all.) So there would be a reason to buy her but at the same time buying her wouldn't give you an unfair advantage in the fights. I'm pretty sure l'Hermione and Santa Cecilia would sell well as premium ships too while not being overpowered.

 


 

The implementation of all options mentioned here can be done in two ways. Either you put everything as mini DLCs on steam, which would be easier to handle for customers but would also lead to an enormous amount of DLCs that might hurt the game's image. Or you implement a premium currency that has to be purchased with real money and can then be used ingame to unlock all the premium stuff. Small amounts of premium currency might also serve as rewards for special events. This solution is easier to handle in terms of Steam's DLC shop but a little less customer friendly since you might have to purchase more premium currency than you actually need for the one unlock you're interested in.

 

Advertising:

 

I know there's no money for that at all. What you can do however, is hand out codes for premium stuff (one nice premium ship would probably be the best option) to youtubers, streamers and journalists and ask them to cover the game a bit. Of course you'd have to pick some people that are likely to be interested in the game to get a positive effect out of this.

 

Some covered Sea Trials when it was made available so you might want to check their interest in Legends. Others can be suggested by the community. (I'm not the right one for this since I barely watch any Youtube/Twitch/whatever.) If someone decides to cover Legends a lot, there'd be the possibility to hand him some more codes he can then raffle amongst his followers to get more people into the game.

 

Some kind of notification for everyone who bought regular Naval Action would be nice too. There are quite a lot of people that don't play the game because they couldn't get into the open world. Legends could possibly be the game they'd be interested in more. (No offence to everyone who likes the open world here. Just different preferences.)

 

Additional Thoughts:

 

  • The yacht could get a premium ship bonus in terms of XP and ingame currency. This would give a little headstart to those, who bought regular Naval Action, and get them out of 7th rates a little faster.

  • Finishing the tutorial could grant some XP and ingame currency as an incentive to actually do it.

  • Events like the ones we had in the Legends prototype could return. They could be automated leaderboards that reset every week/month and count the 10 best matches every captain has done during this preiod of time. No opt in or opt out required and the top ten get some rewards. (Maybe premium currency.)

  • You could think about special events that are in game for a short time. A checkpoint race with Lynxes maybe or a Mortar Brig competition. Small rewards for winners.

  • Personally I don't really care for them, but a lot of people like Steam achievements. Especially in a game that is based on unlock progression anyway, they'd totally make sense. Just hand out achievements for every unlocked ship, for unlocking all ships of one rate, for matches played, ships sunk and what else you can think of. Some might grind through the whole game just for achievements.

  • You can even think about ingame titles that are shown alongside your name and are rewarded for some of the more special achievements.

 

Pros and Cons:

 

Cons:

  • Legends is a second game that needs to be developed and maintained. Game Labs is a small studio and is probably – if ever – only able to realise Legends after regular Naval Action is somewhat finished.

  • Ship balancing can't be reused in Legends if the different wood types are left out.

  • There is no guarantee for Legends to be able to attract enough players to be sustainable for the developers and fun for the players (empty queues). Only a test with a full free to play release on Steam can show the game's actual potential.

  • The amount of advertising Game Labs can afford might not be enough.

 

Pros:

  • Once regular Naval Action is finished, a lot of assets can be reused for Legends. Ships, combat and sailing model, the tutorial, some UI elements, paints, flags etc.

  • Legends' core already exists. We've played it.

  • The developers can focus on creating a great open world for the people who like it and then deliver a battle arena for the ones who just want the fights.

  • Legends appeals to another group of players than regular Naval Action does. This means that in total more people will be attracted and possibly pay for some DLC stuff.

  • Possibly a higher player retention than a hardcore sandbox open world.

  • Both games would benefit from the profit Legends eventually (hopefully) generates. New ships for example would be developed for both games.

  • Maybe – just maybe – less toxicity in the forums and game chats when two opposed factions of players don't have to play the same game anymore.

 

Concluding Statement:

 

This is a basic concept. It contains blanks and flaws for sure. However I tried to translate a lot of the negative community feedback on the Legends prototype into improved game mechanisms. At the same time I didn't want to go too far away from the basics we already have, knowing that too much effort wouldn't be affordable for Game Labs.

 

I tried to achieve a system that is balanced between fair customer treatment and the business aspect of game development. In my opinion the willingness to pay for little things like paints or flags in order to support the developers comes with satisfaction with the game itself and the fun it provides.

 

I don't know if there's still hope for Legends to ever happen. I don't know if it would be a success either.

 

I don't expect anyone to actually read this but if you did, I'd be impressed. Let me know what you think while you're at it.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jeremiah Gunsmoke

I love your work and will reply properly later.

NA-Legends I look back with fond memories, like that old girlfriend. Forgetting the odd flaw like the FORT map Battles or when she accidentally ran over my mum's dog...

 

Norfolk.

http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/24680-norfolk-nlegend-does-grinder/

My best Guide Title ever...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before Legends were even announced they were meant to fail. The whole forum was begging to work on NA and new content. It was too obvious imho.

Edited by Wind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jeremiah Gunsmoke

 

The Gameplay Yesterday...

Your first point on the sailing and combat model is in pretty good shape. If you remember when we were playing NA-L the Dev’s started to tweak the NA-OW sail model with leeway etc. This one thing is what killed the game before anything else happened.

The reason can be seen many times with [PvE] and [PvP Carribean] and before that with four server universes. Both servers are updated at the same time with all the same features apart from some obvious mechanic controls. Otherwise they are exactly the same universe.

Individual server tweaking will morph quickly into two separate games having higher maintenance costs and HR drains. The Mechanic Controls are the only changes that can happen.

The Ship models originally mapped onto NA-L still needed attention but was rapidly moving away from the NA-OW versions. NA-L pulled more HR into it and away from OW. Ever decreasing circles...

POST NA-OW Launch...

POST Launch NA-OW the lite Universe mapped over now will be more stable in a final state. It should be updated with and in the same way as NA-OW [PvP] & [PvE]. They should not drift apart as this returns to the morphing problem.

Why talk about this History?

This means NA-L needs to look and operate closer to NA-OW to keep in step with it. Otherwise funding, HR and other costs rapidly climb. The Game needs to be a closer representation of OW than probably what we had before (including Boarding)...

 

Copy World of Warships [WoWs] but don’t...

The major complaint with long term players (I’m not one), is the random battles. You can enter them in a division of 3 only. The rest of your team could be Muppets, retards or an Admiral Mahon descendant it’s just Potluck.

This becomes an issue when I add perishable DLC Mods to my ship and a win will give huge reward while a loss a waste of real money. Teamed up with a bunch of morons and I don’t mean newbies is annoying. The Random Battles is the main game and NA-L will be the same.

This to an extent happened in NA-L, however the weekend Events solo trials and Duels saw much better PvP partners. The ability to fight in Random Battles in larger groups makes the game much better than the 3x Division of [WoWs]. We [ARMED] me @JobaSet had a good 8 regular team players. This is NA-L big plus over [WoWs] in Random Battles...

Clans & PORTs...

Copy Copy Copy. Also spin off RANKED and Clan Battles can then be featured. The Clan PORT feature to allow speed multipliers to help the grind ladder. Also, a Campaign [PvE]/[Co-Op] Mission ladders with storylines...

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Campaigns

 

Progression with a Back Story...

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/World_of_Warships

This wiki is very good and should be looked at resources aside. The Wiki you’ll find invaluable not just as a newbie but way up the chain ladder. Let me show you why...

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Leander

This page shows a tier VI Cruiser the Leander. Starts with a brief overview but then looks more like our wiki with the build stats. The right far column at the bottom shows BATTLE level 6, 7, 8. This tells you in Random Battle you’ll meet Tier 6 to 8 ships.

Now look left at “Player Opinion”. This is the key element. It gives a general role the tier VI GB Leander Cruiser is supposed to be doing. It always gives a view of where she sits within her peer group. With the downside featured and finally how the ship best functions within the game.

Pros & Cons Then a research path suggestion for upgrades. Captain skills and Flags.

Go look at a Battleship or Destroyer it’s the same format and with useful information. As much as I love the hard work @OlavDeng2 put into our Wiki it needs a makeover. The [WoWs] Wiki Helps SELL the Game ours doesn’t.

 

The Progression Tree...

Should be both vertical and horizontal in progression. It doesn’t need any more ships at first but could include different Build/Trim factors. However, the ship must correspond to the wiki description as to why what and where the ship is placed in that Peer group...

 

Game Style Differences NA-OW to NA-L

Unlike NA-Open World [NA-OW] which is an MMO with a whole boxed universe set within the Caribbean. NA-L is primary focused on PvP AoS ship combat only. Comparing NA-OW to an EvE Online as an idea, you’d say NA-L compares to a World of Tanks or World of Warships style of play.

This is important to understand as with a NA-L game style any Dev Team will build in some type of progression Grind Hell to pay for the game. This progression grind can somehow be accelerated faster via some form of inward cash investment in the game. A good example of this is the World of Tanks Premium account which accounted for most of the company’s profits year after year.

The NA-L grind was mis-understood believing the PC having to re-learn cannons up the progression chain. This grind idea was about learning to sail the ship before adding big guns and bling. Have a read of my guide and try the Jack & Danny Quiz...

http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/24680-norfolk-nlegend-does-grinder/

Heavy protests about the gun grind was the feedback. This was a mistake with a lack of Back Story or understanding laid out by @admin and the Dev’s. Why are we doing this action this way and for what reason...?

 

 

Finally, Stats more Stats and Charts...

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/community/accounts/554819715-NorfolknChance_UK/!/pvp/overview/

More in-game stats to measure your progress. The Battle Log really worked for me because I could clearly see where I was on the path. Leaderboards again open and worked well on the weekend events feature we did.

http://shipcomrade.com/leaderboard.asp?name=NorfolknChance_UK&G=0&S=100&R=118&B=5&C=0&P=535

 

Realistic look at the Test Period...

The player base comprised of NA-OW players. For me managing the [ELITE] clan and NA-L became just too hard. The Primary MPC was always going to be NA-OW so grind drag or battle scenario failures and teething troubles was always going to hit hard with out anything to lean on.

I made a choice to follow @JobaSet through the tech tree instead of the new sailing model that would take several patches to roll out. Others went back to OW around late 5th rates to the 4th Rate tier. The next test should take this into account.

Closing...

This is just my response to NA-L and @Jeremiah Gunsmoke you’ve put a really good piece together and shows you miss NA-L as much as I.

The one outstanding memory of NA-L was the weekend playing against @jodgi and @Liq and @rediii and other [PvP EU] players. These guys I only got to see through the forums. This opened my Naval Action world completely from just [PvP Global]...

I hope NA-Legends does make a return, but only when NA-OW is launched and rolled out first...

 

Norfolk nLegend

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest, I really want to rip into @admin over the legends debacle, but it serves no purpose.

 

I feel they got it backwards, they should of developed legends first, then after its success started work on OW. In my mind it seems more like the logical progression. Everything I find online about Naval Actions gameplay is about the combat, you don't go on YouTube and find vids on the exciting trading and crafting in the OW.

 It's all about the combat, that was the hook for many players that seen the game in action online. It was exciting, going head to head with ships of old, not having to worry about sea monsters or any of the other fantasy BS that so many AOS games have these days.

So now we have Naval Action OW which many have said has lost its way and are unsure what it is anymore, or games like Skull and Bones or Sea of Thieves. Shame that the latter is the best we can currently hope for these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he @admin launched NA-L test just too soon that's all.

NA-L needs to operate as a mini universe of NA-OW when One model ship is tweaked they're all tweaked other wise it would be impossible to manage with limited resources.

Remember how the Essex in NA-L moved like a Pregnant Sow?  And the Renommee was just awful compared to OW.

Has @admin said they learned a hell of lot from it...

 

Norfolk.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few fairly general reasons why Legends failed, and many small ones.

1. You can't sell a limited product while actively selling an extended one to the same public. Eg. if Porshe created a budget car, it wouldn't be bought by the same people who are buying their cars now. NA has much more than legends - a persistent world, larger level of cooperation, leadership, better sense of purpose. NAL didn't have this, yet was scraped since the NA audience didn't appreciate it.

2. NAL wasn't adjusted well for the involvement of the player in terms of progression. Already first hours felt like grind. It's much more subtly adjusted in all arena games, where players are hooked until the moment when the grind extends. With NAL it was impossible with old players, as they already had a chance to sail all ships. There was no thrill in trying a new one. In the same time, there were no new players.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Before Legends were even announced they were meant to fail. The whole forum was begging to work on NA and new content. It was too obvious imho.

Go back to the shadow. The launch of Legends was followed by a big hype.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great structured write ups everyone. Thank you @Norfolk nChance and @Jeremiah Gunsmoke

The situation is simple. NAL testing was flawed in some regards (old sailing model and cannot progression and AI). But it shown that one product must be finished and before a new one is considered. We thought we could manage it but we could not. 

Of course thanks for feedback. Majority of feedback on this forum (especially if it is done the way you did it ) is taken noted of for future use. But we must release NA first. 

  • Like 14

Share this post


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

Great structured write ups everyone. Thank you @Norfolk nChance and @Jeremiah Gunsmoke

The situation is simple. NAL testing was flawed in some regards (old sailing model and cannot progression and AI). But it shown that one product must be finished and before a new one is considered. We thought we could manage it but we could not. 

Of course thanks for feedback. Majority of feedback on this forum (especially if it is done the way you did it ) is taken noted of for future use. But we must release NA first. 

LIke I said before, "Ledgends is a great concept for a game and I do hope to see it returned, but it was the wrong time and place for it.  Lets get the main game finished first and than we can think of bringing back Legend with a better game plan."  When that comes and should be after release of the main game than I would think about going back and working on it.  The other thing it proved is unless you have the player based, a PvP only game is not going to take off.  You need to get the main game up and running and a bigger player base and than it will do better.  Making a game mode for a few players and than it not being what "THEY" wanted wasn't going to work. 

Glad ya'll see that it's best to wait on it, and I do hope it gets another chance but not until the main game is done.

Share this post


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

LIke I said before, "Ledgends is a great concept for a game and I do hope to see it returned, but it was the wrong time and place for it.  Lets get the main game finished first and than we can think of bringing back Legend with a better game plan."  When that comes and should be after release of the main game than I would think about going back and working on it.  The other thing it proved is unless you have the player based, a PvP only game is not going to take off.  You need to get the main game up and running and a bigger player base and than it will do better.  Making a game mode for a few players and than it not being what "THEY" wanted wasn't going to work. 

Glad ya'll see that it's best to wait on it, and I do hope it gets another chance but not until the main game is done.

Problem is with the DLC being added while in EA it has caused even more negative speculation about the games financial state. Lot of people have been burned by EA titles that have done this before.

There are seemingly more doubts that NA will survive to launch or much longer afterwords. 

Then we lose both games, and it will be a real shame to lose legends over the mess that is OW.

Edited by Justme

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

×