Endurance and Final exams - How to pass them (in new damage model)

[jodgi]

2 hours ago, HachiRoku said:

Ganking is not a reason players quit.

Maybe not? Maybe not because of ganking itself but because of the way it happens?

I've been in a large map and persistent world flightsim MMO where there are no instances and 750 players sharing the same time and space, so to speak. There was tons of ganking there in the form of base capture raids and any size of player groups flying together. Because of the shared time and space anyone would almost always be able to choose if they want to engage or disengage based on what they see around them. You certainly could find yourself in a gank but then you have made a conscious decision not to avoid it, again based on what your can see around you.

We can't share time and space in NA. One thing is the potential million billion cannonballs the server has to be able to crunch, another thing is the distances of our map combined with the speed of our ships. Technology may allow us to deal with everyone with their cannonballs sharing the same "room" eventually but then there's the time factor. Even if we shrunk our world dramatically the map would be enormous if we shared one instance.

It would take some time to plan and execute port captures if this was our shared time and space world, eh? How would we deal with production, hauling and crafting in a 1:1 world with possibly only character teleports?

So we have the tactically and strategically ideal 1:1 world that would make all unfair war tactics make sense.

Then we have our current situation with OW vs. instance that is absolutely necessary to make a big map work. Many of us accept ganks as natural in a wargame, but very few enjoy being tagged by a small and fast craft which can have friends hours, if not days, away but they're still able to teleport on top of us due to lenient RoE. Nevermind playing it smart or roleplaying, you may be tackled by a ship that was there and minutes later killed by a big ship that was just outside visual range and thus 4 hours away. That is purely frustrating and I'd bet substantial money we've lost players to such frustration.

Almost nobody wants to eliminate ganking, it's not about that. Please don't strawman us.

It's about an OW that still tries to find the optimal and most sensible wargame and asymmetric warfare concessions to the OW vs instance conflict. We did it in 2016 and now we have to do it again. It's weird for me, an outspoken arena/Legends fan, to fight for true OW when OW fans want to make OW into a shitty lobby all the while touting that they wouldn't want to play a sucky arena game. I'm quite sure the contradiction in terms is lost on many posters.

Oh, dear! All of this clearly wasn't directed at you, Hachi. @rediii , you're no fool, maybe we can move on forward from "ganks are part of a wargame, jodgi, git gud!"? Pretty , please!

[Hethwill]

4 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

All the people who bought the game in early 2016 bought it with the expection that it was going to be an arena based 

Very improbable given the open world was already going under very heavy development in closed testing.

How the hell do you come up with such stuff ?... 🙄

[Slim McSauce]

1 minute ago, Hethwill said:

Very improbable given the open world was already going under very heavy development in closed testing.

How the hell do you come up with such stuff ?... 🙄

because like I said all those videos I watched 4 years back of sidestrafe that got me into the game were sea trials and those videos are still the some of top page with half a million views when you search NA.

[Teutonic]

well hopefully I don't have to play your version of a dream NA jodgi :P.

I play other games for that, I play NA for what it currently is.

[HachiRoku]

12 hours ago, jodgi said:

Maybe not? Maybe not because of ganking itself but because of the way it happens?

I've been in a large map and persistent world flightsim MMO where there are no instances and 750 players sharing the same time and space, so to speak. There was tons of ganking there in the form of base capture raids and any size of player groups flying together. Because of the shared time and space anyone would almost always be able to choose if they want to engage or disengage based on what they see around them. You certainly could find yourself in a gank but then you have made a conscious decision not to avoid it, again based on what your can see around you.

We can't share time and space in NA. One thing is the potential million billion cannonballs the server has to be able to crunch, another thing is the distances of our map combined with the speed of our ships. Technology may allow us to deal with everyone with their cannonballs sharing the same "room" eventually but then there's the time factor. Even if we shrunk our world dramatically the map would be enormous if we shared one instance.

It would take some time to plan and execute port captures if this was our shared time and space world, eh? How would we deal with production, hauling and crafting in a 1:1 world with possibly only character teleports?

So we have the tactically and strategically ideal 1:1 world that would make all unfair war tactics make sense.

Then we have our current situation with OW vs. instance that is absolutely necessary to make a big map work. Many of us accept ganks as natural in a wargame, but very few enjoy being tagged by a small and fast craft which can have friends hours, if not days, away but they're still able to teleport on top of us due to lenient RoE. Nevermind playing it smart or roleplaying, you may be tackled by a ship that was there and minutes later killed by a big ship that was just outside visual range and thus 4 hours away. That is purely frustrating and I'd bet substantial money we've lost players to such frustration.

Almost nobody wants to eliminate ganking, it's not about that. Please don't strawman us.

It's about an OW that still tries to find the optimal and most sensible wargame and asymmetric warfare concessions to the OW vs instance conflict. We did it in 2016 and now we have to do it again. It's weird for me, an outspoken arena/Legends fan, to fight for true OW when OW fans want to make OW into a shitty lobby all the while touting that they wouldn't want to play a sucky arena game. I'm quite sure the contradiction in terms is lost on many posters.

Oh, dear! All of this clearly wasn't directed at you, Hachi. @rediii , you're no fool, maybe we can move on forward from "ganks are part of a wargame, jodgi, git gud!"? Pretty , please!

You're right and the only issue I see is revenge ganking. That's the problem with time compression. The higher the open sea speed gets the easier it is. Its the instant messaging that is more of an issue because a ship could arguably leave port at full sail and catch up to a battle. Battles took hours to days so with good wind a revenge gank could work irl. It's the coms more of an issue. I could live with higher speed and longer invisibility timers to make up for that. That been said I hate the current roe more than anything we have had so far. If I attack 2 noobs with higher br I want to be left alone. I already hate that players from other nations can join my side uninvited and really wish I would be allowed to green on green them. I'm not even 100% sure how the roe works but since br is completely broken it doesn't work anyway. 

[Angus MacDuff]

13 hours ago, jodgi said:

Then we have our current situation with OW vs. instance that is absolutely necessary to make a big map work. Many of us accept ganks as natural in a wargame, but very few enjoy being tagged by a small and fast craft which can have friends hours, if not days, away but they're still able to teleport on top of us due to lenient RoE. Nevermind playing it smart or roleplaying, you may be tackled by a ship that was there and minutes later killed by a big ship that was just outside visual range and thus 4 hours away. That is purely frustrating and I'd bet substantial money we've lost players to such frustration.

This.  A lot of players have a real problem with this and many solutions have been proposed.  Mine is always "If you can't see the swords when the battle starts, you can't join".  This seems fundamental to me in an OW that uses instances and time compression.  I hate the 20 min timer, of course.

[Aerospace]

1 hour ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Mine is always "If you can't see the swords when the battle starts, you can't join".  This seems fundamental to me in an OW that uses instances and time compression.  I hate the 20 min timer, of course.

And I say, yes you can join, BUT you spawn like 10 kilometers far away according to when you joined. I love it when gankers spawn just in front of me or next to me

[admin]

On 3/14/2019 at 1:02 AM, Slim McSauce said:

because like I said all those videos I watched 4 years back of sidestrafe that got me into the game were sea trials and those videos are still the some of top page with half a million views when you search NA.

You can just search age of sail in google and i think his video comes up sometimes.
Its funny that SStrafe wanted open world so much but later realised that that dream should have stayed unfulfilled.  

[admin]

On 3/14/2019 at 12:54 AM, Hethwill said:

Very improbable given the open world was already going under very heavy development in closed testing.

indeed
open world was voted as the main expected feature in 2014, by may 2015 people were sailing the open world without ports and insta teleports that got used to so quickly

[admin]

On 3/13/2019 at 7:37 PM, Slim McSauce said:

maybe, just maybe it's because legends never launched out of closed alpha. Actually the game was it's biggest during sea trials right? so yeah, point proven.

no. what the **** really are you talking about
max online in sea trials was 415 concurrent users.
And it dropped to 0 1.5 months later so you favorite SideStrafe had to fight bots in his last NA video from sea trials (Cringing video really)

Open world has the keeping power. Legends and moba does not. We tried twice
Reason is simple there is no slow combat PVP sandboxes with no cheaters, but there are tons of mobas.  

Have you turned into a hater suddenly? We prefer if you do not try to spread false information (It’s a sin to lee on the diel)

[LIONOFWALES]

I didn't join in on the sea trials.... I was interested in the open world feature this game has to offer. As the game is now.... with a couple small tweaks perhaps, is exactly what I was looking for in an age of sail game.

I have seen this game come so far, I look forward to seeing the final and finished product.

Three cheers for the frigates and their galante Captains.

[Mr. Doran]

34 minutes ago, admin said:

Open world has the keeping power. Legends and moba does not. We tried twice
 

In Sea Trials you had people being actively siphoned off to OW once that became an option and I am sure portions of the population outright quitting once it was definitely confirmed there would be an OW. Simultaneously its not fair to compare numbers to a game you had to pay for on pay-pal that was not even on steam until late January if my memory serves me right; along with the fact users were being siphoned to OW prior to that point along with my latter point. NAL, in your own words, was largely a grind test to see how long the grind would take. Including the fact that we were forced to fight bots is it any surprise to you that your PVP game did not have a strong retention rate? How many players did you think would find it fun to be grind slaves for the sake of data collection? Worst crime of all was the combat-model was imbalanced and not being attended to at all during the duration of NAL. The imbalanced funky one that existed on the OW build was better than what we got on NAL. The farming and battle imbalance was absolutely horrific with the cannon grinding. You could have a 12lb Constitution fighting a 24lb one.

 

What could have gone wrong, right?

 

I loved my Sea-Trials experience. So much so I had the most amount of duels and at some point if not by the very end the most amount of PVP battles. 

I absolutely hated my NAL experience to the core. Not because I was spoiled rotten by OW. But because NAL did not even come close to ST in its ability to provide PVP. The exact polar reactions should say a lot about the quality of experience between the two products. 

Edited March 15, 2019 by Mr. Doran

[Slim McSauce]

53 minutes ago, admin said:

Have you turned into a hater suddenly? We ban for false information (It’s a sin to lee on the diel)

plz no, i have too much time on my hands as it is.
No but really, devils advocate going hard, I love the OW, it's a very ambitious task to take on a genre that does not yet exist.
It would just be nice if we had a clear vision, and knew your intentions behind some changes like eco and crafting, and would address the dissenters because some of us have valid arguments and bring up good questions that even if are not quite based on the mark are questions that will likely be asked until they're answered, otherwise we have no idea what you're trying to do with some parts of the game being the way they are.

For a bit of an example, what are you trying to achieve with patrol zones? They're currently being placed near freeports in areas that were previously already quite populated for PVP. I don't mind them being in these spots but I don't  feel as if you're using the PZ to it's full potential. There's a lot not going on in a large area of the map and if you empoyed PZ more as a tool to facilitate pvp in more variety of areas (my idea, you probably saw was to put one zone at every 100% hostility port, that way people in each nations see it and flock over to the port for general carnage.

Edited March 15, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[admin]

29 minutes ago, Mr. Doran said:

 

I loved my Sea-Trials experience. So much so I had the most amount of duels and at some point if not by the very end the most amount of PVP battles. 

 

everyone loved it.. but everyone wanted more. (also we were all a lot younger then)

[Slim McSauce]

5 minutes ago, admin said:

 (also we were all a lot younger then)

hey, so was she, but I can't keep her. I've got my own principles to uphold.  

Edited March 15, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[Mr. Doran]

3 minutes ago, admin said:

everyone loved it.. but everyone wanted more. (also we were all a lot younger then)

Yes but you decided not to quote me saying that I hated NAL and why I hated it. 

[Zlatkowar]

On 3/11/2019 at 6:53 PM, z4ys said:

Player assumption. Maybe the structure of tutorial and Exam (book) can be improved.

 Exam and Tutorial can both be accessed by pressing "ESC" in port and clicking "Tutorial"

This exactly. By the way those hints should be present somewhere ingame, maybe not immediately to let each person be creative and try on their own with their own methods... But maybe they should show up after I don't know... 3 failed attempts or something. At this stage of the game it is not shocking to have to come on forum to find that kind of info, but once the game has been released it should definitely be IG.

I find the exam to be just annoyingly difficult, I just can find no fun in it, it's not enjoyable content, so I skipped it for now. Might give it a try at some point if I get bored.

[jodgi]

6 hours ago, admin said:

Open world has the keeping power. Legends and moba does not. We tried twice

I'm inclined to believe that Open World has keeping power over certain players. I've never gone near OW games so I can't bring a bunch of examples and numbers to the table but everyone and their granny knows how long EVE has been running.

You know intimately well what the keeping power of WoT has been since 2011. I assume you know how much income WoT has managed to extract from whales like myself. We only make up a guesstimated 2% of the pop but we're very much a factor in paying the bills.

I often bring up Aces High as an example not only because I know it very well, but also because I find it a lot like NA in soul.

They've done OW without eco and crafting all those years as a subscription service. They were doing supremely well up until, yes, F2P MOBAS stole a large part of their subscribers. They still get by, but that is on American subscribers only and it's nowhere near what it was. Fun fact: They're trying to get a F2P pure MOBA on it's feet.

You risk jumping to the wrong conclusion when you say NA MOBA does not have keeping power. 

The Legends keeping power test was done off the then remaining OW fans (plus supporters like me, Doran, MG, balticsailor and the list goes on). You risk concluding on the basis of poisoned data.

I want to make a bet.

I bet 100€ that a proper F2P release of Legends would do better in terms of net income and player numbers (retention) than OW. I want to do this publicly with receipts for all to see. My terms are simple: If OW ends up with more net income and more players than Legends after two years of F2P Legends, you keep the money. If Legends end up with better net income and more players than OW I get the game I actually wanted and you get to keep the money. On top of that I would buy premium ships that aren't better than what we can grind at the same rate you would be able to release them, so the bet isn't even the biggest bet, so to speak. Look at me! I'm dead serious.

I have plenty of time, go ahead and finish OW, take a vacation, read a book and let motivation grow. I'll still be here.

[HachiRoku]

On 3/13/2019 at 11:54 PM, Hethwill said:

Very improbable given the open world was already going under very heavy development in closed testing.

How the hell do you come up with such stuff ?.

what? 2016 was already steam released. Open sea was way out of closed beta at this time. I know its besides your point but still  

[Hethwill]

52 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

what? 2016 was already steam released. Open sea was way out of closed beta at this time. I know its besides your point but still  

Exactly. When EA steam release OW was a reality already and tested during closed ( before ea release ) . 

[z4ys]

In NAL players only had to fight bots when there were not enough players. 

You cannot claim it failed because of bots and pve. Bots are just there when there are not enough humans. It failed because NA player Grp that like this slow paced moba is to small.

[HachiRoku]

24 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Exactly. When EA steam release OW was a reality already and tested during closed ( before ea release ) . 

Ill be honest. The reason I want legends to become free to play and a success has nothing to do with me hating the open sea. Ive just done everything there is to do. I have played 4000 hours of the game, explored and hunted on every coast and done rvr against every nation in every corner in the map. I am happy with what I got for my money. Now I just hope for a lobby game I join into and have a fast competitive battle. There is nothing more that can be done content wise that will change that. Even if RVR is fixed its just same shit different mechanics  

[HachiRoku]

1 minute ago, z4ys said:

In NAL players only had to fight bots when there were not enough players. 

You cannot claim it failed because of bots and pve. Bots are just there when there are not enough humans. It failed because NA player Grp that like this slow paced moba is to small.

something that never was cannot fail. 

[Mr. Doran]

3 minutes ago, z4ys said:

In NAL players only had to fight bots when there were not enough players. 

You cannot claim it failed because of bots and pve. Bots are just there when there are not enough humans. It failed because NA player Grp that like this slow paced moba is to small.

 

Are you sure it wasn't this:

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

    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.

Or this:

 

10 hours ago, Mr. Doran said:

NAL, in your own words, was largely a grind test to see how long the grind would take. Including the fact that we were forced to fight bots is it any surprise to you that your PVP game did not have a strong retention rate? How many players did you think would find it fun to be grind slaves for the sake of data collection?

Are sure it was an insufficient amount of PVPers rather than an insufficient amount of people willing to be grind slaves to time test the heinous grind that was set forth for every single ship. 

[jodgi]

1 hour ago, z4ys said:

because NA player Grp that like this slow paced moba is to small.

Agreed, we wouldn't even want to steal OW guys from OW. My eyes are on those that tried OW out after EA but quickly left. Then there's those that would trickle in when the paywall is taken down. I alone will finance a ton of freeloaders.

I don't mind the resistance, I understand why people are afraid of Legends.

Heh, I would finance a bunch of cheap-ass OW guys too, but they don't want me to buy premium ships.