Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction at the Margins

[Bull Hull]

On ‎1‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 4:42 PM, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

I am all about marginal effect, Formula 1 marginal. 0,001% marginal

That's probably the RNG for a Exceptional build.

What is your marginal number of possibility that a shipyard builds a sister ship from the same plans and measurements and woods and she comes out better for some reason  ?

 

Nice try with the lame line drawing fallacy that tries to avoid the real point.  Besides, I have already given an answer to this.  A random and hidden regional refit in addition to the choice we make can be an easy way to provide a marginal difference.  Getting another mod box is more than a marginal difference.  So, I guess that is your answer - mod boxes are more than a marginal difference, trims are a marginal difference.  There, you insisted that I draw a line, so I drew a line.

[Bull Hull]

3 hours ago, Palatinose said:

@Bull Hull, your proposal has been seen in this game. At the time I didn't sail and didn't see any friend or enemy sail a non-golden (superior) ship. Dispite your rational argumantation chains, human nature is not rational at all. Greed is what drives players. Greed for the best gear/ships aka an advantage over the enemy. To satisfy this greed a player will bow to any bearable grind. Imo you drastically underestimate how much effort the average player will put in anything to achieve the best. Remeber it is - as someone said before - a game where money (or reals/doubloons/vic marks/ressources) is only limited by the time you put into the game or in other words: how much $ you're willing to pay for alts aka reducing even this one limiting factor. 

To transfer this to crafting: RNG provides this NA world with a random amount of golden ships, which is very low and imo drastically lower than with any grindable crafting system. Yes - rich (not necessarily good) players have a higher amount of better ships. The opposite would be everyone (but absolute beginners) sails golden ships. In that case, why not just have basic ships to spare the grind? Well to satisfy what players want (even if it's only in their mind as everybody has it): advantages. 

Without doubt there are exceptions to my assumption of greedy or "golden ship only" players. I'm convinced though by experience in this game, that the majority will behave like explained above. Therefore I think of the RNG crafting system as the best, because fairest system for non-hardcore players.

Then you were sailing with different people than the ones I was sailing with back then because the vast majority of the people I knew were NOT always sailing in 5/5 gold ships.  Did most people have at least one?  Sure.  Was that the only thing they were sailing?  Not even close.  And I was one of those people who routinely sailed in something other than the 5/5 gold ships I had in SOME of the classes I sailed in.

I have ZERO problem with people who are willing to bear any grind to EARN the privilege to have a 5/5 gold ship or even a few 5/5 gold ships.  Such people who bear the grind DESERVE the reward because they put in the necessary work to afford their Precious.  I am not underestimating anyone.  Indeed, my comments have pretty said exactly the opposite.  Maybe you didn't read all of my comments to fully understand my position.  My issue is making that privilege purely a function of dumb luck.  EVERYONE should have to endure the same grind to earn the same privilege.  If someone is willing to put in the work then fine, I solute such people.  I reject your variation on a perfect solution fallacy because it is impossible to have a system that some people will not exploit in some way.  So, rather than throw in the towel to such people I say ignore them because REGARDLESS of what the system is the same people will figure out some way, some loophole, that will permit them to game the system to collect a horde of whatever it is they covet.  So, if they covet docks full of many 5/5 gold ships then well, that is what they have by any means necessary.  Keeping a stupid RNG system because of those outliers is not the best approach to take.

EXACTLY how is pure dumb luck fair?  That is a sad way to define fair.  There is nothing fair about valuing pure dumb luck over a willingness to put in the necessary effort to EARN a specific privilege.

Finally, the insistence that the only way to provide higher quality ships is through the whims of the benevolent RNG crafting gods is a lame false dilemma because that is not the only way and it is far from the best way.  If people love the RNG chance of getting a better ship then fine, make that possible through some means OTHER than crafting.  You like to talk about fair, okay, let's talk about fair.  How is it fair for a player who has no interest in crafting and so he or she can never receive the benevolence of the RNG crafting gods who decide to bestow the gift of a better ship?  Players who don't craft are thus locked out from the chance of getting a gold ship UNLESS they can afford the inflated price that a greedy crafter might charge, or UNLESS they happen to have a friend or clanmate who is willing to share for a fair price.  So, what about solo players who have no interest in belonging to a clan?  EVERY player should know up front EXACTLY what they will have to do at a minimum to get the ship they want.  If I want to build my own and pay a hefty certification fee/tax to the Admiralty of 1M or 3M or 5M or 10M reals plus thousands of daubloons to get the ship I want then THAT is perfectly fair to everyone who wants to craft their own.  And if everyone knows what that certification fee/tax the crafter paid is, and if they can figure out what it cost for a crafter to crafter to craft the ship a player prefers to buy instead of craft, then THAT is perfectly fair because then everyone can determine if the sellers price is a fair reflection of the production cost.

So, how about this as a fair compromise:

- Eliminate RNG for ship quality - period.  EVERY ship players build should/will have exactly however many boxes the player chooses to build into it, and the cost to for the Admiralty to certify ships of superior quality can reflect the quality of the ship.

- Eliminate RNG for getting a regional trim.  EVERY crafter should be able to craft a ship according to the availability (i.e. cost) of the necessary skills, materials, and blueprints.  The farther away the source of necessary skills and materials and blueprints are the more expensive they are - period.  Perfectly fair/equal for everyone.

- Keep RNG for a 2nd and unknown regional trim as icing on the cake the crafter bakes.  This can and should satisfy those who adore RNG.

- Make superior quality ships available as a blueprint drop or redeemable drop for the same class ship whenever a player sinks a ship at EXACTLY the same chance that crafters have to craft a ship.  Why are crafters the only people with a shot at superior quality ships?  In other words, if the RNG gods currently deem that I have a 1:50 chance of crafting a purple ship when I craft a ship, or 1:200 chance of crafting a gold ship, then EVERY player - i.e. not only crafters - should have a 1:50 chance of getting a blueprint or redeemable for a purple when I sink or capture an NPC ship. Now, if the data shows that people sink ships in OW 10X faster or 50X faster than crafters craft ships then change the drop rate to 1:500, or 1:2,500, or 1:5,000, or whatever frequency the developers deem appropriate.  Ditto for a 1:2,000 or 1:10,000 or 1:25,000 chance of getting a gold ship.  This can and should satisfy those who adore RNG.  And we know who will not find this approach satisfactory, right?  Those who don't want anyone else to have the Precious they covet, and those who want only crafters to be the source for each Precious.

Edited January 7, 2019 by Bull Hull
New ideas/thoughts

[Palatinose]

14 hours ago, Bull Hull said:

Then you were sailing with different people than the ones I was sailing with back then because the vast majority of the people I knew were NOT always sailing in 5/5 gold ships.  Did most people have at least one?  Sure.  Was that the only thing they were sailing?  Not even close.  And I was one of those people who routinely sailed in something other than the 5/5 gold ships I had in SOME of the classes I sailed in.

It were 3/5 ships and the regional trim could be built in in 5 quality classes. If I'm not mistaken one needed bronze, silver and gold coins to build small, medium and large carriages (might be something different than carriages, really I'm uncertain) for unrated vessels, frigates and SOLs respectively. As the resources were easy to get (they were mineable) it was not hard to build golden ships, that's why everybody sailed them. 

14 hours ago, Bull Hull said:

EXACTLY how is pure dumb luck fair?  That is a sad way to define fair.  There is nothing fair about valuing pure dumb luck over a willingness to put in the necessary effort to EARN a specific privilege.

The basic advantage of the RNG crafting system is, that everybody who grinded the crafting XP to the degree necessary for a certain ship is able to build an exceptional vessel (permanent slot and trim wise - woods are always players choice). In that regard, people earned this aswell by getting up their crafting level. In NA the "gear gap" is a prejudice - only partly true. This feeling is presumably easiest countered by serving some delicous sweets to everybody - only dependant to luck. Everyone has an equal chance, therefore it's "fair". 

I perfectly understand your approach, that someone should "work" for something to achieve things. I share it to certain degree. And I also share the opinion of RNG being an easy way to invent for crafting. It's a rudimentary system or as  @admin called it after removing intermediate materials: "streamlined". And no, I don't know many people who actually like to be dependant on luck. BUT as @Suppenkelle said, the developers won't prioritize this system to be overhauled anytime soon, if ever, which is something we need to live with (I don't even have a problem with it, but carfting is not my personal priority in this game either).

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Palatinose said:

It were 3/5 ships and the regional trim could be built in in 5 quality classes. If I'm not mistaken one needed bronze, silver and gold coins to build small, medium and large carriages (might be something different than carriages, really I'm uncertain) for unrated vessels, frigates and SOLs respectively. As the resources were easy to get (they were mineable) it was not hard to build golden ships, that's why everybody sailed them. 

The basic advantage of the RNG crafting system is, that everybody who grinded the crafting XP to the degree necessary for a certain ship is able to build an exceptional vessel (permanent slot and trim wise - woods are always players choice). In that regard, people earned this aswell by getting up their crafting level. In NA the "gear gap" is a prejudice - only partly true. This feeling is presumably easiest countered by serving some delicous sweets to everybody - only dependant to luck. Everyone has an equal chance, therefore it's "fair". 

Gold ships, gold marines, fine woods, it's never worked as intended. Everyone ends up sailing to gold ship making the whole system redundant. You're only making it harder for new players to compete and giving veterans a combat advantage that they already do not need.
RNG should stay in lootboxes and minor activities, like navigation or sealed bottles.
RNG in combat is outdated, and irresponsible.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[Palatinose]

2 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

..

Would you mind explaining what your post is supposed to actaully mean? You condemn both systems being duscussed here and don't propose an alternative. Thanks for your participation.

[Slim McSauce]

8 minutes ago, Palatinose said:

Would you mind explaining what your post is supposed to actaully mean? You condemn both systems being duscussed here and don't propose an alternative. Thanks for your participation.

The alternative is, just like gold marines and fine woods, remove it.
Make every crafted ship 5 slots standard. The RNG may stay but as the refit (strong rig, etc.) Something that's not so gameplay-altering. A minor bonus not a make or break for a quality ship. On top of that bring back regional bonuses so the best ship has both. But no more gold/purple ships, just variants of blue.
No ship should be considered golden, as in it does everything better.
That's not how you make people more willing to fight with/against each other.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[Hethwill]

Just now, Slim McSauce said:

Make every crafted ship 5 slots standard.

Why not 3 ? Same as the NPC shop ships.

Why does it has to be five ?

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

Why not 3 ? Same as the NPC shop ships.

Why does it has to be five ?

Good question, for that I refer back, why do all ships have 5, but only 3 are unlocked while the other 2 are greyed out and locked?
I suspect because 5 mods and 5 books was thought to be standard loadout at one time, and it makes sense.

5 mod slots each for

1.Crew
2.Guns
3.Masts
4.Sails
5.Hull.

So 5 common slots for the 5 common categories of upgrades.

[Hethwill]

I understand you want it all. That was clear

But why ? Why not play with having to make choices ?

Just a personal option, or a generic game design preference ?

 

[Angus MacDuff]

It wouldn't matter, were it 3/5, 4/5, or 5/5, as long as it was standard.  I would personally be happy with 5/5, but you have to unlock all slots, not just knowledge.  Maybe make it difficult to unlock the mod slots and it is not a "class" unlock but limited to an individual ship. 

[Slim McSauce]

11 minutes ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

I understand you want it all. That was clear

But why ? Why not play with having to make choices ?

Just a personal option, or a generic game design preference ?

RNG isn't much of a choice... If you're going to do RNG for crafting, keep the bonus a minor one.
As for number of mod slots, there's still a choice of what tier of mod you put on, british rig v elite british rig for example.
Personally 5/5 slot standard is perfect for me, I think there's actually more than 5 upgrade categories, but you can get enough of them to completely personalize your ship with 5/5, without having to arbitrarily choose between whether you want something for your guns or something for your sails when those don't really coincide, meaning just because you'd have one doesn't mean you couldn't do the other, if the ship was standard.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[Hethwill]

I am a player. Not a developer of NA. Just a player.

And 3 module slots and 5 book slots are okay. RNG not needed really.

I must equip the ships for tasks, some with better handling, others with better gunnery. Some for raiding, others for engagements. Not a single equal model ship is suited for all in that format. Meaning I have to configure some Constitutions, same type of ship 3/5, for different tasks.

Personal preference. Nothing else.

 

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

I am a player. Not a developer of NA. Just a player.

And 3 module slots and 5 book slots are okay.

I must equip the ships for tasks, some with better handling, others with better gunnery.

Personal preference.

 

If you have to choose between the two, when in reality a ship that wasn't horribly disfigured could do both, then it's not really standard is it?
Guns and sails do not relate, choosing between one or the other assumes they do and they bar each other from being on the same ship.
You already choose for the task between british rig, and french rig or pirate rig, cannon reload and cannon penetration, hull thickness or hull speed. Sail strength or sail raise speed.

If there are around 5 or different aspects that make ship, each with their own choices and direction
why limit the so called standard ship to only 3? Again, sails and gunnery do not coincide, limiting your choice between one or the other is arbitrary and game-y.
There are deeper choices beyond that you keep from being made doing that.

 

Edited January 8, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[Hethwill]

Because a Victory wouldn't be deployed to harass enemy trade, but a Essex would.

Yet, we can configure our ships to do things they weren't supposed to do with the woods and 5/5 

That's my mindset. I dislike the rng, but i dislike modules and books more, hence limiting them is a plus for me.

3/5 is acceptable.

[Angus MacDuff]

1 minute ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

That's my mindset. I dislike the rng, but i dislike modules and books more, hence limiting them is a plus for me.

Aye, there's the rub.  My mindset is for a level playing field so that the main difference in two players is their skill.  The fact that some players have all the best books and mods and others do not, goes against this wish of mine.  After a year of playing, I am still nowhere near the Book of 5 Rings or Gunnery Encyclopaedia.  If we want everyone to have a 5/5, then everyone should have easier access to all the books and mods.  Money is fairly easy, so lets make it all available for purchase. 

[Slim McSauce]

Three fifths of a whole is not acceptable. If 5/5 is too much as standard then it surely is too much as a rng bonus.
Mods need a rebalance for 5/5.

[Hethwill]

Yeah... suggested somewhere for everything to be accessible in the Admiralty via doubloons.

[Farrago]

5 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

It wouldn't matter, were it 3/5, 4/5, or 5/5, as long as it was standard.  I would personally be happy with 5/5, but you have to unlock all slots, not just knowledge.  Maybe make it difficult to unlock the mod slots and it is not a "class" unlock but limited to an individual ship. 

Yes. Keep knowledge slots as is, earned on a specific ship model and make all ships potentially 5 upgrade slots but the last two unlock with XP earned on that exact ship, those exact pixels. You’d simulate more, reward risking the good ship you’re “working” on. It’s extra value is to the captain developing its potential, but does not become a rarity that skews the market price for ships.

[Bull Hull]

6 hours ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

Why not 3 ? Same as the NPC shop ships.

Why does it has to be five ?

Because the benchmark the Admiralty's shipbuilders are building to is the ceiling rather than floor because that is the most efficient and economical way for the Admiralty to produce ships for the government's navy. Because master shipbuilders who don't want to work for the Admiralty can build a better product than the ordinary shipbuilders who work for the Admiralty.  Basic economics and how the science of Economics accurately describes human behavior.

[Bull Hull]

23 minutes ago, Farrago said:

Yes. Keep knowledge slots as is, earned on a specific ship model and make all ships potentially 5 upgrade slots but the last two unlock with XP earned on that exact ship, those exact pixels. You’d simulate more, reward risking the good ship you’re “working” on. It’s extra value is to the captain developing its potential, but does not become a rarity that skews the market price for ships.

This is a fascinating variation on several ideas, which I don't think I have seen before, and it seems mostly reasonable and so it might be a reasonable compromise.  My issues with this approach is that the permanent modifications the boxes represent and take are more about how the ship is built or modified than it is about the skill and experience of the skipper.  Consequently, for those of us who strongly prefer realism when it is possible to do realism in a reasonable way, how about an experienced skipper having to also have to pay a hefty tax to for a permit/license/blueprint that represents the time and cost of putting the ship into a drydock for a major overhaul that changes the physical capabilities of the ship.  I mean, it isn't like the skipper wakes up one morning after crossing an XP threshold and the ship magically has new and different masts, or a few inches of new armor.  But yeah, your way of simply unlocking another box is the easy but less immersive way to do the same thing.

[Bull Hull]

5 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

Three fifths of a whole is not acceptable. If 5/5 is too much as standard then it surely is too much as a rng bonus.
Mods need a rebalance for 5/5.

While I agree in principle, crafters and players should still have the choice to build significantly less capable and thus less expensive ships if they want when something less expensive is sufficient.  For example, why waste money and resources on a top of the line 5/5 quality ship that we fleet when all mods except for speed mods magically stop working when we fleet a ship?  I prefer more choices rather than fewer choices, but your suggestion is better than the current stupid way of having to rely solely upon the benevolent whims of the RNG gods.

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Bull Hull said:

While I agree in principle, crafters and players should still have the choice to build significantly less capable and thus less expensive ships if they want when something less expensive is sufficient.  For example, why waste money and resources on a top of the line 5/5 quality ship that we fleet when all mods except for speed mods magically stop working when we fleet a ship?  I prefer more choices rather than fewer choices, but your suggestion is better than the current stupid way of having to rely solely upon the benevolent whims of the RNG gods.

you're not wasting resources, it's still the same crafting recipee for every ship. If you want a non-standard less expensive ship capture it, that can have 3/5.

[Bull Hull]

6 hours ago, Hethwill the Red Duke said:

Because a Victory wouldn't be deployed to harass enemy trade, but a Essex would.

Yet, we can configure our ships to do things they weren't supposed to do with the woods and 5/5 

That's my mindset. I dislike the rng, but i dislike modules and books more, hence limiting them is a plus for me.

3/5 is acceptable.

If you dislike modules and books so much then how would you effectively and reasonably simulate the fact that ships can be taken into a shipyard for modifications, and so those mod boxes simply simulate the necessary yard time for an overhaul that modifies the ship?  How would you simulate the fact that a skipper doesn't sail a ship alone who skill books are an effective and easy way to simulate and represent the experience of the crew and the officers who lead that crew? Without a great core of great Officers and Petty Officers leading great crew a great skipper would only be average or mediocre.  I wish we could have elite officers and legendary officers like is possible in Starfleet Battles and many of the other table top and PC tactical war games I have played.

 I have no doubt that I am in the minority on this because many players obviously prefer shooters to be as arcadey and unrealistic as possible, but I have zero interest in playing a tactical and strategic simulation that totally ignores the Officers, Petty Officers, and crew that make a great skipper and great ship possible.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Bull Hull

[Angus MacDuff]

3 minutes ago, Bull Hull said:

I have no doubt that I am in the minority

Not even close.  Many of us would love to see some form of experience bonus to our crews and the loss that that represents when a ship sinks.  It's been discussed a lot.  I wont do the search, but you'll find many opinions on this subject.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Angus MacDuff

[Bull Hull]

5 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

you're not wasting resources, it's still the same crafting recipee for every ship. If you want a non-standard less expensive ship capture it, that can have 3/5.

Good grief, don't be so literal to fabricate a red herring.  The chance of capping a ship that was built the way I want it build are slim.  That is just a different and harder way to do RNG, which is just go out and keep capping ships until I get lucky enough to cap the one I really want.  The TIME I would waste doing that is a resource I am wasting to get the ship I really want but can't craft.

I know some of you people hate reality and any mention of reality, but in the real world that functions according to the realities of human behavior human beings - including players - tend to prefer more choices rather than being manipulated into fewer choices.  In the real world and real economics of building things something built with less quality than is less expensive than the same something built with better quality.  Again, some of us prefer to play Naval Action - a tactical and strategic war game simulation - instead of playing Fantasy Naval Action.