Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Jeremiah Gunsmoke

The Daydream – A Concept for Legends

Recommended Posts

Legends has its place. It has its own fans.

Same as OW has them.

Funny thing, both game rulesets have fans in the same individuals.

What those individuals like is totally separated rulesets.

You know, like 40 battles and 40k urban assault, 2 different games, same universe setting.

Same as a storyline game, something like a aces of the deep in the age of sail ;)

Patience is a virtue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

Game-Labs fails miserably at Client interaction

I don't get it. We have, in order of magnitudes, better access to Game-Labs than WoT players have with Wargaming. Wargaming even managed to exile a very large chunk of their best players who made their own community (wotlabs.net). That slow burning scandal even united euro and US players. It must be hard to herd such a large player base, but still.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On February 22, 2019 at 2:51 PM, Hethwill said:

Legends has its place. It has its own fans.

Same as OW has them.

Funny thing, both game rulesets have fans in the same individuals.

What those individuals like is totally separated rulesets.

You know, like 40 battles and 40k urban assault, 2 different games, same universe setting.

Same as a storyline game, something like a aces of the deep in the age of sail ;)

Patience is a virtue.

OW does not seem to have many fans, but what do I know? Numbers don't lie right?

But honesty is a virtue as well.

Legends was never meant to be succesful, that much is obvious.  They knew beforehand they did not have the resources to make it viable, but continued anyways. Now legends is dependent on OW's success. It was a sad attempt to retain players for OW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jokash said:

i want naval action legends

Best post of 2019!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not interested in Legends.

Unless the combat mechanics is changed to first person only with no HUD, I would not even try it, even if the game was free, it sounds intensely boring.  Would be like NA Call of Duty.  It would be fun for a few shits and giggles, but only if the game was re-designed to be realistic.

But ....

I too wish that NA Legends was developed first for the simple reason that so many players want a competitive combat arena game with; endless repetitive fights, no waiting, and NO LONG DISTANCE SAILING.  If Legends was developed first then the combat lovers would have a game tailored for them.  Open World development would not have to cater and appease an impatient crowd that is intent on bending all progress towards combat and eliminating the sailing and economic aspects.  

NA Open World would have a richer appeal if it were not distracted by relentless feedback and endless pleading to pull it towards the E-sport gameplay style.  Players that hate sailing and have no interest in OW, and PvE, would not need to waste their time. If the game was built as a premium realistic age of sail simulation it might rekindle the interest of many players who have left but were attracted by the promise of an immersive game in a beautiful time of history.

 

Edited by Macjimm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2019 at 4:13 PM, Ruthless4u said:

Legends

... has its own time to be released I guess.

Focus energy on 1 project, then shift focus to another. That's how I interpreted the announcement to put it on hold - instead of dividing attention, keep it on rails and then eventually come back to it full force once the OW project is given as settled.

That's my hope.

I have zero problems with a legends game. The more NA players in all its products the better. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Macjimm has a good point. But remember that is how NA started - Sea Trials was the original NA-Legends if you will. Then came the OW - and the answer to why it came when it did was that the "players" requested it. So the development focus shifted at that point, but maybe Sea Trials could have used a longer development period testing more ships and enhancing the arena experience for @jodgi and the WoWs, esports players. 😉

I still have hope they can fully develop the arena style quick battles inside the current NA environment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On February 26, 2019 at 2:10 PM, DeRuyter said:

@Macjimm has a good point. But remember that is how NA started - Sea Trials was the original NA-Legends if you will. Then came the OW - and the answer to why it came when it did was that the "players" requested it. So the development focus shifted at that point, but maybe Sea Trials could have used a longer development period testing more ships and enhancing the arena experience for @jodgi and the WoWs, esports players. 😉

I still have hope they can fully develop the arena style quick battles inside the current NA environment. 

Player requested? Can @adminback that up or we supposed to trust them?

Given the current population I doubt players requested the mess that is OW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Justme said:

Player requested? Can @adminback that up or we supposed to trust them?

Given the current population I doubt players requested the mess that is OW.

I don't remember OW being introduced specifically at the request of players.

I do remember that the population of the arena style Sea Trials dwindled down to almost zero.  Zero is much, much less that the population is now.  I think players were bored with Sea Trials, but I am just guessing.

Share this post


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

Player requested? Can @adminback that up or we supposed to trust them?

Given the current population I doubt players requested the mess that is OW.

Current population is different from that in 2014-15. If you search threads from that time there was a lot of player involvement and admin noted several times players wanted OW vs. arena. Even now there are players that prefer the OW sandbox over the WoWs experience. 

But no matter, my point was that NA started out as an arena combat game and may have helped a standalone Legends type game with more time in that version. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it's interesting how @admin seems so keen on getting maximum amounts of PvP in the OW by introducing arcade-y features like open battle instances (BR limits and 20 minute battle timers) that mess with the basic concepts of an OW "hardcore, realistic, and beautifully detailed naval combat sandbox" (Steam description). It's been tested, discarded, re-tested, etc. again and again; and they simply can't find restrictions that work (imo because there should be hardly any restrictions in an OW sandbox). EDIT: Let me rephrase to clarify my stance. OW mechanics should be realistic without artificial limitations (e.g. BR limits), but it should advocate "what makes sense" - that is, what would realistically be plausible in the setting (what you see is what you get, etc.).

Why does admin want more PvP in his sandbox game? Well, because PvP and ship combat is what makes Naval Action fun and unique. That is also why many of us (at least the ones that check this subforum) simply want a game where we can - yes, you guessed it: do PvP and ship combat. OW Naval Action is a great thing (vision or idea currently, if you like), but you can't have a functioning OW game and more or less arcade-y platform for PvP in the same game, at the same time! They are incompatible. That is why we need to have NA Legends alongside NA OW; they are two different games that can't be merged into one.

Edited by Niels Terkildsen
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Niels Terkildsen said:

To me it's interesting how @admin seems so keen on getting maximum amounts of PvP in the OW by introducing arcade-y features like open battle instances (BR limits and 20 minute battle timers) that mess with the basic concepts of an OW "hardcore, realistic, and beautifully detailed naval combat sandbox" (Steam description). It's been tested, discarded, re-tested, etc. again and again; and they simply can't find restrictions that work (imo because there should be hardly any restrictions in an OW sandbox). EDIT: Let me rephrase to clarify my stance. OW mechanics should be realistic without artificial limitations (e.g. BR limits), but it should advocate "what makes sense" - that is, what would realistically be plausible in the setting (what you see is what you get, etc.).

Why does admin want more PvP in his sandbox game? Well, because PvP and ship combat is what makes Naval Action fun and unique. That is also why many of us (at least the ones that check this subforum) simply want a game where we can - yes, you guessed it: do PvP and ship combat. OW Naval Action is a great thing (vision or idea currently, if you like), but you can't have a functioning OW game and more or less arcade-y platform for PvP in the same game, at the same time! They are incompatible. That is why we need to have NA Legends alongside NA OW; they are two different games that can't be merged into one.

 

On 2/23/2019 at 12:58 PM, Mr. Doran said:

An Untenable Position.

 

    It has been openly said by few but likely is known in the hearts of everyone that OW is just a glorified lobby. So much time has been spent trying to put forth a system that can broker equitable PVP because PVP is, has been, and will only ever be the only content Naval Action has to offer. The amount of time, effort, and discussion spent on trying to produce an ROE system that can provide equitable PVP is an indictment to the fact that OW is just a glorified lobby. OW is fundamentally the worst delivery system that can possibly be imagined in order to deliver that content with any level of efficiency.

    There was a period when there was endless discussion about how to get people to go out and fight on the open-sea; when the irony is a free to play MOBA model that had even the current unbalanced combat model would be more conducive to getting people to the content of Naval Action than OW will ever be able to. People are willing to consume the trash of WOWs and WOTS, and even though Naval Action’s current CM is a far cry to what it used to be in terms of balance, even in its current state infinitely more desirable than the garbage Wargaming has to offer. A 2D map that could range in complexity to some WOTs clan battle map to some ultra-complex system in the vain of Command: Modern Air Naval Operations would provide a better outlet to RVR and Clan battles than OW will ever be able to.

    They can’t be entirely blamed for trying. Even if all I say is true if the life-support plug was pulled it may produce an irreparable blight that will follow them to oblivion; maybe its just sunk cost fallacy (lel). Critics of the arena model cite Legends poor player retention as the smoking gun of the sustainability of the model and that OW should be the only focus. What is simultaneously failed to be mention is NAL was nothing more than a poor effort on part of Game-Labs. NAL was nothing more than a horrific grind test where you were forced to play with and against bots most of the time. Including the fact that it was missing key combat components such as double shot or, the fact that the demasting penetration tables were so out of whack as to make demasting non-existent, or the fact that there was not even a sail repair but a cool-down that could be used as many times as you could pop it in a battle.

    The original arena product provided in Sea Trials was better designed and more well thought out than what we were provided with NAL. In ST the grind was not sadistically unreasonable as there was no cannon grinding. In ST we were never forced to fight bots when queuing for PVP. In ST we even had a duel room, the fleet battle room (Trafalgar), and even a custom battle room. If Game-Labs followed just to start with what they already had done and knew worked NAL would have not been the disaster zone it was. The only thing that can be hoped for is next time they consider knowledge and lessons they had already known five years in the past.

On 5/5/2017 at 12:52 AM, admin said:

Actually it was in reverse.

We started this project as an arena World of tanks style game.
Once we tested the combat and people loved it we started to add ships to finish the game and asked the community what we should do next.
The majority requested the open world.

 

 

WYSIWYG is the most equitable  and reasonable PVP system that is possible to have but still does not make PVP any more likely to happen. People will always gank given the chance to which is pretty much the antithesis of generating PVP. BR limits only serve to try to enforce additional equability which is to encourage more people to PVP.  If the end goal is to get as many people to play PVP as possible anyways then what on God's green Earth is the point of having OW to begin with. Just give us a lobby system back already and let us have as much PVP as we could possibly consume. We run into this circular trap that WYSIWYG is the only reasonable system that we can have but it simultaneously just turns OW into a lobby. It is constantly bickered about how there must be "content" to get people to access the PVP content but what no one wants to admit is the PVP is, has been, only ever will be the only content. 

Thematically appropriate ROE as you mention is one an angle that I feel since the beginning of OW is one that is more often ignored in favor of "I want my 23 friends with me to rape you and I want them here now". WYSIWYG is not only the only realistic practical option but it has always been the one that is more thematically appropriate to the era. The EVE mentality of being apart of some military-industrial complex sent to fight in a death ball of hundreds to thousands of ships just does not feel right in the environment of Naval Action. The ROE does its job with keeping with the theme but it does nothing and will do nothing to getting people to access PVP. And to add insult to injury making all ships one durability probably did not help. People did not PVP when we had three or more durability ships. I do not know who thought people are going to go out and suddenly fight with one durability. 

A personal anecdote. Before going off to play the closed OW test that was started just before the end of the life of Sea Trials I believe if my memory serves me correct that I had the most amount of PVP games out of anyone on the leader-board at the time and I might have had the most amount of PVP games even still by time it was shutdown. It was something in the order of like 1600-1800 matches with about half or over half being duels I think. Why did I accrue so many matches? Of course, the answer is obvious and simple. I played more matches than anyone else because I thought the combat was fun. That’s it. No higher meaning required in building a story, RP, progression. It was just the pure experience of playing the combat. The combat was the content. I believe Game-Labs sit on top of a gold mine but refuse to dig.  

 

I'd wager that there is a sizable population of the existing users and those who have since quit that would be willing to play the pre-2.0 damage model if the Sea Trials server was resurrected for no other reason than the opportunity for instantaneous combat. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think its as black and white as in the opinions expressed. It also folds into the argument of content in OW that is now lacking.

Right now, NA-OW needs to be fully launched. The content issue needs resolving. In the past with more PC numbers the players drove the content. It needs NPC campaigns and mission hurdles to help drive the player content once more.

Once NA-OW is launched, then and only then a NA-L arena style game can be planned. It uses exactly the same models and universe with cycle updates. Otherwise the NA-F (franchise) loses its economy of scale. On the TEST of NA-L this wasn’t the case. All models and updates need to be the same from PvP, PvE to NA-L. The low retention argument for NA-L test is flawed.

The NA-L arena will have a Premium Account grind drive, but will give a potential client a FREE first look into the NA-F.

The only issue I have from my investigations into WoWs, is for this style of game to work and earn revenue it needs Dev PUSH content. This I have not seen in any Game-Labs product so far. WoWs success even with a weaker model comes from Out of game context driving in game content...

Without it the excellent combat and sail models will not sell themselves or keep the client interested over the longer term. This mainly for arena games but applies to open world sandboxes also...

 

Norfolk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Doran said:

Text

I agree with almost everything you write here (one exception being that I've always been positive towards the 1 durability solution). We both love the ship to ship combat of this game, and that's what motivates us to play - just like you say, we need no other motivation than the fun of the combat itself. For us, a functional lobby (with several different variants as you outlined) that would allow us to just get into Naval Action would be perfect. Hey presto, Naval Action Legends is the solution!

There are those, however, I know a few, and I might consider myself a bit of a hybrid in that sense, that want some "meaning" in their game; those are the ones that need some engaging or immersive context around the whole ship to ship combat part: It's all about the thrill of the hunt for some, or the feeling of significance or gain from trading and "clanning" for others. For these people, the main part is not, unlike for you, and for the most part me, the PvP aspect: they don't want the game to be a lobby for PvP, they want it to be a hub for their enjoyment (and, in the case of some PvE and RvR players, they don't care if it comes at the expense of immersion, realism, or even the PvP aspects of the game - as long as it favours them - *conspiracy mode deactivated*).

It would seem like making a lobby for PvP is a rather trivial task, and really, i believe it would be so much easier than balancing the interests of the various species inhabiting the monster that is the OW - which is why, as many here have pointed out, it would have been a much better and easier start to fine tune the PvP lobby part of the game first and then use that (with its more or less perfectly balanced ships and combat model) as the base from which to build the intricate OW (along with, hopefully, a steady stream of income needed for the development of something as big as an OW game).

What is central though, and what I think is one of the biggest mistakes of the developers of Naval Action, is that they try to mix the PvP lobby with the OW sandbox - and sure, dichotomies are always boring, but to me they are simply not compatible. The OW has to make sense, and as you write, the only thing that makes sense is wysiwyg (not hello kittying reinforcements from miles and miles away, homing in to the satellite communications sent out from the poor victims in some gank, joining 15-20 minutes after the battle was initiated - i.e. days in the OW time scale). Yes, there has to be checks and compromises to avoid the abuse that springs from the scale imbalances between OS and instances, but that's just what we get for using that model; nobody has time to sail in the battle instance mode across the whole map (though I would absolutely love that) even if that would solve such an incredible amount of issues and make the game more immersive (that's a + word for me if you hadn't noticed).

My point is, OW is not meant for balanced PvP even though you can get it sometimes, which is awesome; enforced balanced PvP is only viable through a lobby. OW sandbox can't be a lobby; it has to be cruel and unforgiving, and most importantly it has to make sense! When it makes sense, you get immersed, and if you're a sensible individual you won't mind being ganked, because you know it makes sense: you made a mistake somehow, or your enemies outsmarted you (without abusing some broken mechanic) - if it doesn't make sense, you don't intuitively understand why you suddenly lost; and likewise if you won because of some mechanic that doesn't make sense intuitively, it will take away from your accomplishment and enjoyment (unless all you care about is winning).

Balanced PvP is awesome, but you can only expect it regularly through a lobby (give us NA:L back!) - only if you're lucky in an OW game. If we have NA:L our hunger for balanced PvP may be sated, and NA:OW can go on with making a realistic and immersive OW sailing game experience with a robust combat system.

 

2 hours ago, Mr. Doran said:

If the end goal is to get as many people to play PVP as possible anyways then what on God's green Earth is the point of having OW to begin with.

This is spot on.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Niels Terkildsen

 

Look I think both you and @Mr. Doran have made some great points.

 

I myself became bored of WoWs and the RANK Tournaments the only vehicle I wanted to play in. It aims I think at a younger audience than NA. However, they do put an enormous amount of effort in keeping you interested.

The Open-World makes the PvP important. It builds content as to why to you are fighting. This includes the craft and build structure effort put in. EvE did or does the same.

NA-L I loved to bits including the grind path, but even I could see without real content input, the retention rates would suffer.

The whole franchise actually needs BOTH. NA-L to feed NA-OW.

You learn more about PvP combat in NA-L that becomes applicable in OW PvP. This applies to PvE to a smaller degree. WoWs I had over 1,000 PvP battles in months. The same was true with Legends with hundreds within a short space of time. You or I gained much more from the experience.

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/

Look at the dates and external content input. That is what NA-L will need to survive. Not its sail or combat model but its client connectivity.

That’s what a small firm GLs must try to replicate with NA-L at the very least.

 

Norfolk

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one Problem for NA-L was that many already, who liked the Sea Trials and didn't like the OW, already moved away from NA, when NA-L started. I already left and just saw by accident that ist even existed. The severs where already down.

I'm a more casual Player and don't have the time for or real Fun in OW, so i stopped Playing. Tried it at first, but fell behind all others quite quickly. Tried it once more an ran with my starter Ship into a Player who thought ist would be fun to force me into PvP with a much larger ship. Just a waste of time for me.

Maybe i'm the only one, but i ask myself, why does the Game need an OW and an Economy in the first place? For what do you play this game? If i would love to ship around Cargo and build an economical Empire, I would search for a economic simulation, not a game about Sea Battles. I didn't get that with PotbS and i didn't get it here.

The Time the Dev's used for OW would have been better spend to make a good Lobby, refine balance for battles and maybe put in more different ships. I would have loved to see more options to set up a Game, not just join a Battle with no Influence about the ship to sail or who I am playing with.

Maybe I'll come back, if the Dev's restart development of NA-L in the Future, but most likely i will just miss the announcement, having moved on.

Bladerunner

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Maybe I'll come back, if the Dev's restart development of NA-L in the Future, but most likely i will just miss the announcement, having moved on.

I'm going to try to remind you when it happens. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bladerunner

I know how you feel. I check occasionally check back in hopes the devs come to their senses.

Sadly as many others have said legends is luck to be an afterthought at this point.

Its dead, and talking about is a waste of time. Devs made it clear, they don't care.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, @Justme! This is a hopeful feel-good topic. Could I ask you to stop coming back to poop every time someone posts something? Put on the rose tinted glasses and dream with us instead!

Accept the pig cloud into your heart and let the bitterness fade away. 

Share this post


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

Hey, @Justme! This is a hopeful feel-good topic. Could I ask you to stop coming back to poop every time someone posts something? Put on the rose tinted glasses and dream with us instead!

Accept the pig cloud into your heart and let the bitterness fade away. 

 

As onslaught says

The dream is dead. Accept it now, or in 1-2 years if they even bother to admit it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bah, NA-L lives as long as we keep dreaming. And what a sweet dream it is...😪

NA OW/Eco can go hello kitty itself with a main yard.

Edited by Malachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@jodgi positive spin and @Ruthless4u dead in the water views all are valid...

 

A Question I have for all of you, except the Dev’s... @admin

What things are absolutely needed at the bare minimum for a NA-L style game to work?

 

For me, its mostly said in my posts before...

Universe Sync models with NA-OW, all ship models are the same in the Franchises Universe.

An historic detailed Player Character Statistics log. And CLAN construction ability.

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

A Grind path that can be accelerated in time via a PREMUIM ACCOUNT purchase.

EVENTS, include PvE, Campaign, Tournaments and clan events. And fixed opponent selector... I want to fight @Ruthless4u 1v1 or His Clan v My Clan...

Different styles of arena scenario’s on random battles.

High-touch and very regular client contact from the game’s publisher.

 

That’s quite a lot, but not impossible. The small team of GLs will need at least a very dedicated permanent and proactive team just to NA-L.

What do you all think? Doubters also included...

 

Norfolk

 

Edited by Norfolk nChance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

@jodgi positive spin and @Ruthless4u dead in the water views all are valid...

 

A Question I have for all of you, except the Dev’s... @admin

What things are absolutely needed at the bare minimum for a NA-L style game to work?

 

For me, its mostly said in my posts before...

Universe Sync models with NA-OW, all ship models are the same in the Franchises Universe.

An historic detailed Player Character Statistics log. And CLAN construction ability.

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

A Grind path that can be accelerated in time via a PREMUIM ACCOUNT purchase.

EVENTS, include PvE, Campaign, Tournaments and clan events. And fixed opponent selector... I want to fight @Ruthless4u 1v1 or His Clan v My Clan...

Different styles of arena scenario’s on random battles.

High-touch and very regular client contact from the game’s publisher.

 

That’s quite a lot, but not impossible. The small team of GLs will need at least a very dedicated permanent and proactive team just to NA-L.

What do you all think? Doubters also included...

 

Norfolk

 

Despite what many think, I would love to have an optimistic outlook. However, I feel there has been a clear lack of direction for OW for a long time. Lot of times it feels like they are using the sledgehammer approach.That does not inspire much faith in the future of legends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 12:00 AM, Malachi said:

NA OW/Eco can go hello kitty itself with a main yard.

usTnDwM.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...