Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, van Veen said:

 

Now you made me curious. Please continue...

Let us indulge in your wishful thinking :D 

Immersion and simulation :) 

1st person on deck only. Career based mode, 1 ship, 1 captain. Not a fleet. You know, that kind of thing.

Lots of fluff immersion with crutch simulation. Earning of ranks, not winning of ranks, pair with visceral simulation as being in command of a vessel in the age of sail.

Alas... must sandbox my own game to fit :) and endure what we are offered. Which is extremely good or else i wouldn't play it. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Immersion and simulation :) 

1st person on deck only. Career based mode, 1 ship, 1 captain. Not a fleet. You know, that kind of thing.

Lots of fluff immersion with crutch simulation. Earning of ranks, not winning of ranks, pair with visceral simulation as being in command of a vessel in the age of sail.

Alas... must sandbox my own game to fit :) and endure what we are offered. Which is extremely good or else i wouldn't play it. 

I know other NA posters/testers who would also be fond of an Age of sail simulation game, including myself. Looking at you, L'Hermione's sailor. Nothing prevents you or another one from creating a thread in the Tavern that may gather ideas about it... It could also serves as a suggestion for a future game by GL. 😉

Edited by LeBoiteux
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@van Veen With both of your extensive lists, have you added to the database the positive to negative player reactions? I'm just curious to know how many of these content ideas were desired or not by players in the comments. Same with the admin plans. I know there have been many debates on here over nearly every little addition to this game. I couldn't imagine this happening in any other major game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, van der Decken said:

@van Veen With both of your extensive lists, have you added to the database the positive to negative player reactions? I'm just curious to know how many of these content ideas were desired or not by players in the comments. Same with the admin plans. I know there have been many debates on here over nearly every little addition to this game. I couldn't imagine this happening in any other major game.

Number of likes could be an indicator, but which likes should be included? Only likes on the opening post? Then you might omit an important refinement made further down in the discussion. But simply summing up all likes in one thread including all funny reaction does not give good value either. No idea how to evaluate this with reasonable effort. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Number of likes could be an indicator, but which likes should be included? Only likes on the opening post? Then you might omit an important refinement made further down in the discussion. But simply summing up all likes in one thread including all funny reaction does not give good value either. No idea how to evaluate this with reasonable effort. 

True indeed. The only way is to read each comment and mark it as a like, or dislike. Sadly, human behavior shows rarely that ppl will click/respond with dislike and rather just leave it be. And many ppl who like something seem to be absent on clicking the like button and forgetting to rate the topic with stars.

Might I propose to everyone from now on when making a new post in the Suggestion thread do so with a poll? Polls seem to get a good response....except those created with the intent of forcing only the response they desire, i.e. Like, Love, Want, and never providing an opposite reaction...lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Content is not the pieces or the board. Nor is it the characters, nor the clans, nor the affiliations, nor anything they do. Content, is the myriad of moves that can be made by the pieces on the board. Chess for instance has more content than checkers. Chess pieces have great depth and verity of option, within the context of their game. Content,... good content, should be foisted upon the player. The player should always be torn between options and interesting choices. In Naval Action the players first choice inevitable revolves around sailing time.

 

Shall I sail out and hope that some form of content (NPC or opponent) appears? I've personally sailed for twenty minutes, countless times and found none. Shall I group up and sail out to find content? Again we've sailed for twenty minutes and found none. Port battles and raising contention are similar, if not more time consuming. Does one wish to trade? Well set sail and turn on the T.V. because you can watch a movie in the time it takes to cross one quarter of the map. This is not content, this is the definition of its lack.

 

Some may enjoy barren seas and the wind in their sails. I would hope that they do not conflate this with content. Seeing the land is not content. Being able to venture onto it, that would be content. Having options the moment you leave port (whether you except them or not) that is content. Picking a direction to sail in the hope of something presenting itself, that is not content. Content at its best, is a Christmas tree with so many presents under it, that you don't know which to open first. At its worst, content is like rummaging through the garbage to find a lost cufflink. Unfortunately, Naval action leans heavily toward the latter. 

 

The bottom line is this...I, the player, am not in charge of creating content. A game succeeds because it does not bore its player. While I am sure that their are players who still find Tick Tack Toe immersive. I am also sure that their are billions that no longer have any wish to play again. The beauty of this game is unquestionable. The ship to ship battles are the best I have seen. They are intense and exciting. I will never tire of what the developers have accomplished in this recreation of the 'Wooden ships and Iron men' era. Sadly, short of these two triumphs, this game is content free. 

  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 2/23/2019 at 3:20 PM, HachiRoku said:

Not one of the people said OMG look how cool this trade route is. This game at its very core is combat. Its limited marketing focuses on combat and not trading. Shit, I was sold a lobby based game with no trading at all. 

Yeah because only your wants and needs matter here... You're in a minority.

People want more than combat and you legends folks should of realized this after the failure it was.

Share this post


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

 

Yeah because only your wants and needs matter here... You're in a minority.

People want more than combat and you legends folks should of realized this after the failure it was.

Your definition of failure seems to be highly subjective. There are many who did not find it a failure, myself included. The fact is, that limited resources, no advertising and a player pool that came from only this game alone hobbled it from the start, seems lost on you. I found it to be a much more rounded game, because of its limited focus. In my opinion that "failure" will be the game that remains standing.

Share this post


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

Your definition of failure seems to be highly subjective. There are many who did not find it a failure, myself included. The fact is, that limited resources, no advertising and a player pool that came from only this game alone hobbled it from the start, seems lost on you. I found it to be a much more rounded game, because of its limited focus. In my opinion that "failure" will be the game that remains standing.

It no longer exists. More people preferred Naval Action over it. It failed. There's nothing subjective about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Admin Lied said:

It no longer exists. More people preferred Naval Action over it. It failed. There's nothing subjective about that.

It never did exist. Legends never was a thing 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

It never did exist. Legends never was a thing 

Tested it quite a bit. Had some great features. ( the prototype of the proper bathymetry system for example )

But... maybe.... the combat was too balanced equal to be appreciated by most... ?

😲

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Tested it quite a bit. Had some great features. ( the prototype of the proper bathymetry system for example )

But... maybe.... the combat was too balanced equal to be appreciated by most... ?

😲

I personally enjoyed Legends as well, aside from the horrible Wargaming/Warthunder esc grind wall. But I also feel it was a massive waste of time and resources for gamelabs to try and develop yet ANOTHER game on top of the what, four games that they're currently making?

 

And yes, from what I've been able to figure out, they're currently "developing" 4 different games. Two in the ultimate generals RTS style, and that "This Land is My Land" game or whatever its called.

 

They keep saying they're a small company, and thats why Naval Action is taking too long, but then you realize just HOW MANY GAMES they're working on...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Tested it quite a bit. Had some great features. ( the prototype of the proper bathymetry system for example )

But... maybe.... the combat was too balanced equal to be appreciated by most... ?

😲

Oh come on. It was player vs ai simulator with a completely broken matchmaking system. A group of us joined the game once and searched for battles. We were split up and fought ai. The devs never bothered about it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Oh come on. It was player vs ai simulator with a completely broken matchmaking system. A group of us joined the game once and searched for battles. We were split up and fought ai. The devs never bothered about it. 

This matches my experience. I never saw another player in anything but a cutter or brig, matches rarely had more than two or three players any time of day, the "cap the circles" game mode was horribly imbalanced compared to what existed in 2014-2015 "sea trials," etc.

It never stood a chance. I've always been on board for the open world, but I wanted Legends to work for the same reason that I enjoy winding down with World of Warships after a Port Battle. Sometimes you just wand mindless, low-stakes PvP.

Legends should have simply recreated experiences like these:

 

  • Like 2

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...