Spitfire83 Posted December 20, 2018 Share Posted December 20, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, HachiRoku said: Let them join pbs but make them craftable. TBH its not a bad idea Make them craftable not exclusive to wallet warriors. that way all the wallet warriors are paying for is the convenience of not costing time & resources & lets be honest they are Very good ships in there rating groups so make them expensive to craft so include a doubloon cost or a 5 star mission that drops a permit for them Make the permit to craft hard to obtain but obtainable to all... Either that or buff a existing ship or bring new ships available to all with similar characteristics... as the Trollquin & Trollules... Edited December 20, 2018 by Spitfire83 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latron Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 It's been a while since I've played, but aren't the dlc ships still shallow? Shouldn't we be comparing them to the ships of their same class instead of the class above it? Yes I know the herc was moved up to 5th rates, but I don't think that matters if it can still enter the shallows. Whether they can enter PBs or not is an important aspect but it is only one aspect. Many more PvP battles occur besides the ones for RvR. Every PvP battles I've had since those ships were added had at least one or the other in it. One on one they were a pain to deal with and they are one of the main reasons why I stopped playing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HachiRoku Posted December 21, 2018 Author Share Posted December 21, 2018 9 hours ago, Spitfire83 said: TBH its not a bad idea Make them craftable not exclusive to wallet warriors. that way all the wallet warriors are paying for is the convenience of not costing time & resources & lets be honest they are Very good ships in there rating groups so make them expensive to craft so include a doubloon cost or a 5 star mission that drops a permit for them Make the permit to craft hard to obtain but obtainable to all... Either that or buff a existing ship or bring new ships available to all with similar characteristics... as the Trollquin & Trollules... By craftable I still think they should remain DLC. DLC is something the devs need to have to continue to maintain servers and make a living 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) Exactly. No matter which way you cut it DLC ships in their redeemable state have created pay2win in NA, by technical and practical definition. Gamelabs have committed a developer sin by doing DLC ships like that, the reasons for more pvp are selfish and I shouldn't have to say why. You're sacrificing the sanctity of OW pvp AND pbs for an extra buck, that's not by any means a light thing to do, it's actually a premature mark of death for most games and I can assure you if this game does die, people will look back and see the DLC redeemable ships as the start of the end for Naval Action. Cosmetics have been PROVEN to work better anyway, there's really no reason to shoot yourself in the foot with anything pay2win nowadays. THANKFULLY I think the devs have caught on to this and heavily regret putting the DLC ships out in that manner saying if anymore DLC ships are added, they will be redeemed as permits and crafted by players. Which is good, they'll be craftable, tradeable, capturable, and you won't have to limit it to 5th rates and below. but that begs the question what do we do with LRQ and Hercules? They obviously cannot stay a 24 hour free redeemable, that's just not fair to people who put a lot into this game every day, working their ass off in game to able to buy a nice ship or two, just to be sunk by a band magical ships paid for with a credit card. Edited December 21, 2018 by Slim McSauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 6 hours ago, Latron said: It's been a while since I've played, but aren't the dlc ships still shallow? Shouldn't we be comparing them to the ships of their same class instead of the class above it? Yes I know the herc was moved up to 5th rates, but I don't think that matters if it can still enter the shallows. Whether they can enter PBs or not is an important aspect but it is only one aspect. Many more PvP battles occur besides the ones for RvR. Every PvP battles I've had since those ships were added had at least one or the other in it. One on one they were a pain to deal with and they are one of the main reasons why I stopped playing. Cruise frigates are now shallow waters navigators as well - Surprise, La Renommee, Cerberus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 4 hours ago, Slim McSauce said: but that begs the question what do we do with LRQ and Hercules? They obviously cannot stay a 24 hour free redeemable, that's just not fair to people who put a lot into this game every day, working their ass off in game to able to buy a nice ship or two, just to be sunk by a band magical ships paid for with a credit card. Sure they can. It is your opinion that they can not. But just to stop ppl from over and over again to have to read about players cry about P2W. Think they should remove all Dlc thats not 100% cosmetic. all that can stay is Flags, name change and paint. You want to change nation, you have to start all over again. Why you ask? Simply because you for money have bought acces to change to a winning nation/clan. No admiralty connection so you can have extra buildings. My guess no Dlc ships will just kill more ppl off. But all Dlc “Nay sayers” tell us it will be great. So lets them have there day of glory. Lets us see a raising population again. Not sure the cosmetic Dlc can finance the server. But that won’t be nessesary either. All the new players buying the game will be enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 1 minute ago, staun said: Not sure the cosmetic Dlc can finance the server. But that won’t be nessesary either. All the new players buying the game will be enough. yes it can, it does it better without any game changing stigmas either. Hence games like Fortnite and Counter Strike Global Offensive's cosmetic-only models are intensely favored. Just about every gamer will tell you pay2win in ANY game is bad, but no one will tell you Cosmetic only DLC's are bad because one is objectively better than the other and there's no argument about it. Selling normal gameplay elements in any sort of way is universally frowned upon. Doesn't matter what is is, people don't like it so don't do it and instead, sell things people actually want to buy that don't ruin countless titles. Edited December 21, 2018 by Slim McSauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 5 hours ago, Slim McSauce said: Cosmetics have been PROVEN to work better anyway, there's really no reason to shoot yourself in the foot with anything pay2win nowadays. THANKFULLY I think the devs have caught on to this and heavily regret putting the DLC ships out in that manner saying if anymore DLC ships are added, they will be redeemed as permits and crafted by players. Which is good, they'll be craftable, tradeable, capturable, and you won't have to limit it to 5th rates and below. Say what, Thougt you was against dlc. Can I not buy permits for 3-1 rate for dubloons? Ore you just ment to say that 4 rate is the limit. Because to buy permits for real money, that in game cost dubloons. Is P2W. You might aswell ask for a Dubloon dlc, if it not is limited to ships that dont have a permit that cost dubloons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said: yes it can, it does it better without any game changing stigmas either. Hence games like Fortnite and Counter Strike Global Offensive's cosmetic-only models are intensely favored. Just about every gamer will tell you pay2win in ANY game is bad, but no one will tell you Cosmetic only DLC's are bad because one is objectively better than the other and there's no argument about it. Selling normal gameplay elements in any sort of way is universally frowned upon. Doesn't matter what is is, people don't like it so don't do it and instead, sell things people actually want to buy that don't ruin countless titles. Guess I just than is a wirdo. I have and will never pay for something that only is cosmetic. What it the value in that? To look pretty. Dont realy care about that. So you also support to drop all the other dlc I mentioned? ore you dont think they are P2W. Edited December 21, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Just now, staun said: Say what, Thougt you was against dlc. Can I not buy permits for 3-1 rate for dubloons? Ore you just ment to say that 4 rate is the limit. Because to buy permits for real money, that in game cost dubloons. Is P2W. You might aswell ask for a Dubloon dlc, if it not is limited to ships that dont have a permit that cost dubloons. Permits promote the gameplay redeemable DLC ships claim to. A person who buys the permit hauls the mats, builds the ship, may trade it, sell it, or sail it. Enemy players can capture the ship and do the same. All this without breaking the structure of the game, which is why I would support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said: Permits promote the gameplay redeemable DLC ships claim to. But I still save dubloons, Ore does you idea only count for ships that dosent need a permit. So 4 rate and belove. If not. Isen't that P2W that I can get a ship where I dont have to grind for Dbl's as a guy that dosent have paid for the DLC permit. A person who buys the permit hauls the mats, builds the ship, may trade it, sell it, or sail it. Enemy players can capture the ship and do the same. Isen't that P2W? I mean, I buy something for real money and then use it as a currency in game. Ore you think it would be sold/traded to a lesser value because it is made from a Dlc permit? All this without breaking the structure of the game, which is why I would support it. Guess if that by your definition not is P2W, then your are proberbly right? How about the other DLC. P2W ore not? what is your idea on that? Edited December 21, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, staun said: How about the other DLC. P2W ore not? what is your idea on that? Yes it's pay2win. No reason to ever sell game functionality for a cost, when the game isn't even complete and mechanics not set in stone (outposts and forger DLC) Both bad ideas, why would I buy either when 1. I can remake my character already without paying 2. I can buy more outposts slots through tax? neither of these require real life intervention as they are already settled in game. As for your other points on permit DLC, you can consider it very minor Pay2Win but the benefit to the game is obvious. More crafting, More trading, More hauling, and premium rare ships that make money for everyone. 20x better than redeemable ship DLC which has infested pvp with ships hardly anyone wants to fight against because they're very specialized, fast, and powerful, more so than any ships in their class that they destroyed shallows for people without the DLC for a good amount of time. They can't even be captured, which is very lame. Edited December 21, 2018 by Slim McSauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said: Yes it's pay2win. No reason to ever sell game functionality for a cost, when the game isn't even complete and mechanics not set in stone (outposts and forger DLC) Both bad ideas, why would I buy either when 1. I can remake my character already without paying 2. I can buy more outposts slots through tax? neither of these require real life intervention as they are already settled in game. How about the nation change without not have to start over? A guy that haven't bought the dlc has to start all over. Ore can you change nation without to start over? To me that sounds like you can pay to get to a winning nation. As for your other points on permit DLC, you can consider it very minor Pay2Win but the benefit to the game is obvious. More crafting, More trading, More hauling, and premium rare ships that make money for everyone. So you support P2W as long it inside a perameter that you find acceptable. Got it. I just was a bit confused as it to me sounded like P2W was a bad thing. And lot of the idea's I heard ppl suggest was to my opinion also P2W. If they make money for any one. If the DLC ship was captuable and tradebely, would they then not also make money for every one`? I just woundrede about the other Dlc, since nobody complained about them. From the definitions they also sounded like P2W, but for some reason ppl only focused on the ships. But I got wiser, thanks to your help. The right P2W is ok. But the argument for accetting P2W can not be that ppl like them ore that they make the game to easy. Well actually I still don't get it. When is P2W ok and when is it not? Edited December 21, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 15 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said: As for your other points on permit DLC, you can consider it very minor Pay2Win but the benefit to the game is obvious. More crafting, More trading, More hauling, and premium rare ships that make money for everyone. How do you actually get to this argument. Just because it is a dlc permit. That make absolutly no sence. I want to craft a just say 5 rate. I can either build one that is a dlc ore one craftebly ingame. I still need to get mats for either of them and also I either need to crafter one of them. You suggest because I use a Dlc, I would craft more ships. That only makes sence if the DLC ship either cost less labor hours ore mats than a in game crafteble ship. But would that not be P2W? Ore is that in the area you would call acceptable P2W. Well this mama's boy is still confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Just now, staun said: How do you actually get to this argument. Just because it is a dlc permit. That make absolutly no sence. I want to craft a just say 5 rate. I can either build one that is a dlc ore one craftebly ingame. I still need to get mats for either of them and also I either need to crafter one of them. You suggest because I use a Dlc, I would craft more ships. That only makes sence if the DLC ship either cost less labor hours ore mats than a in game crafteble ship. But would that not be P2W? Ore is that in the area you would call acceptable P2W. Well this mama's boy is still confused. Compared to the current DLC ships, which require no crafting at all, there would be more crafting. Not everyone is a crafter either so you can take the permit an give it to someone else, or sell it to them to craft a ship for you. There's so much more to it but to be clear, no P2W is okay. It's just the fact that we have it now and the goal it minimize it or turn some of the negatives into positives since it's here and we're kind of stuck with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeBoiteux Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 As Le Requin and Hercules are not in top 15 by survivability (out of about 40 in-game warships), they should be called P2L : pay to lose. And I will be the one who will dare to ask the unique truly controversial question : should P2Ls be allowed in a game like NA ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said: Compared to the current DLC ships, which require no crafting at all, there would be more crafting. Not everyone is a crafter either so you can take the permit an give it to someone else, or sell it to them to craft a ship for you. You are right there will be more. The question is if it is 1 to 1 ore much less. My guess much less. PPl now take those ships to Nassau patrole and get some fight, because they don't worry about lose the ship. We might get a significant drop in the patrolezone. Less players going up there. But guess that is a fair price to pay for getting the Dlc ships out of the game. You would not concider to give/sell a permit bought for real money to a guy, to make you a ship P2W? There's so much more to it but to be clear, no P2W is okay. It's just the fact that we have it now and the goal it minimize it or turn some of the negatives into positives since it's here and we're kind of stuck with it. If it is not ok. why do you then promote accept an idea, that is P2W? If you allow there to be a grey zone, isent it then not just a question about how grey. Btw if I got it right. There is some posetive things to dlc ships. So if it can be turned in to some positiv P2W can be acceptable. But that PPl get easy acces and go out and fight a bit, is not that positive effect we wish for? Well I soon will not know north from south. Edited December 21, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said: As Le Requin and Hercules are not in top 15 by survivability (out of about 40 in-game warships), they should be called P2L : pay to lose. And I will be the one who will dare to ask the unique truly controversial question : should P2Ls be allowed in a game like NA ? Well actually a good question. We all paid for the game right? Would that not mean those that have a negativ kill death ratio is P2L. I do think if we keep kicking players out of the game, with a negative K/D ratio we would end up with only 1 player thats play. Edited December 21, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said: As Le Requin and Hercules are not in top 15 by survivability (out of about 40 in-game warships), they should be called P2L : pay to lose. And I will be the one who will dare to ask the unique truly controversial question : should P2Ls be allowed in a game like NA ? When you can redeem a free ship every day, you can afford to lose. People sail these ships like a basic cutter, they do not care about the outcome of the battle nearly as much which is meh. I don't like fighting these ships, they don't try and are a waste of time, even though the ships are very good. I'm a fan of doubloons but doubloons don't matter to me if every battle is shit. Edited December 21, 2018 by Slim McSauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodgi Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 1 minute ago, Slim McSauce said: People sail these ships like a basic cutter, they do not care about the outcome of the battle nearly as much which is ...GREAT! Exactly what I knew would happen and why I asked for prem ships more than two years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Just now, jodgi said: ...GREAT! Exactly what I knew would happen and why I asked for prem ships more than two years ago. On the same token you would complain if every other ship you fought was a basic cutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, jodgi said: ...GREAT! Exactly what I knew would happen and why I asked for prem ships more than two years ago. But you forget only good PvP, is if ppl are hearthbroken by there loss. Rather have them stay in habor and spend hours looking for a fight, so when you eventually get a fight and win, You know he paid the price. Don't come with silly idea that fight is fun without pain. Whats wrong with you boy? Edited December 21, 2018 by staun 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) Just now, staun said: But you forget only good PvP, is if ppl are hearthbroken by there loss. Rather have them stay in habor and spend hours looking for a fight, so when you eventually get a fight and win, You now he paid the price. Don't come with silly idea that fight is fun without pain. Whats wrong with you boy? Naval Action without fear of loss is no longer Naval Action, it's something else not clearly defined. What you want is some people not to feel loss, the people who pay a few bucks. That's a short term solution that only lasts until the only people left in game are people who'd really rather be in Naval Action:Legends. For that you sacrifice what the game is, for something it is not. Edited December 21, 2018 by Slim McSauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 6 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said: On the same token you would complain if every other ship you fought was a basic cutter. Do ppl in general still complaint about them after we dropped PvP marks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim McSauce Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) Just now, staun said: Do ppl in general still complaint about them after we dropped PvP marks? Yes, they're very annoying to fight against as they do not follow the same rules as regular ships. They're above the rules, above meta-game, which is why people don't want BC in pvp. Of course the people sailing the BC will say it's okay, because they benefit from being above the law in that sense. That person is pvping for free while making tons of money, or how reviewers would say, pay2win Edited December 21, 2018 by Slim McSauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now