On the issue of imported ship permits versus ready imported ships.

[admin]

On the issue raised by @HachiRoku @Anolytic and many other captains. 

On 4/8/2019 at 7:54 PM, HachiRoku said:

If I were the devs I would have tested selling single permits first. 3 euro for a permit.  Is not much but players would buy and after sinking they might buy again. From a business standpoint I really think giving players unlimited ships for a one time payment is bad idea anyway. 

There was a proposal on this forum (i think it was @OjK but can be mistaken)

Proposal was this: sell the permit that the player then will craft (unique ship but still participating in the economy).
Initially thought a great idea. 

Evolution of imported (DLC) ships thinking was this.

• Premium ships was announced when we did not even think about the open world (in 2014)
• Premium ships were initially thought as unique status items, a more beautiful alternative. 
• Some ships introduced over time were not crafteable (Wasa, Hermione) to give us the option to add them to premium roster without taking away crafteable ships. 
• First experiments were ran with Hercules and LRQ (it wa good to do it in early access as many things were discovered and learnt as a result)

Now many players say that DLC ships reduce the role of the economy, and that there should be deep and interesting MMO economy. 

But let's get this straight. 

• Crafting was introduced last, and is a least cooked feature, as all focus was always on combat model, rvr and ROE (lately PVE). 
• Hauling was somewhat forced onto players because some time ago we wanted everyone to be the target. 

And here is the main discovery.

• Players do not buy DLC ships for uniqueness.
• They do not buy them because they are stronger or weaker than others (there is always a better crafted ship, sometimes 5/5 crafted ship). Rattvisan is definitely not the best 4th rate. 
   
• They do buy them to support developers (thank you everyone for support)
• And they buy them to avoid participation in the exciting economy (mainly hauling).

Trading goods is rewarding and has both risk AND profit. Hauling goods for crafting is boring, not exciting, is risky but gives you no real rewards (you make a ship that you will soon lose anyway). 

Thats why making permit based DLC ships is not going to achieve anything. Thats not what customers want.
 

Now. 
Here is the rug change that will tie the room together. 

• Port investments will remove hauling requirements for basic resources for all players who play with friends or have friendly clans in the nation.
• Clans (and you can have a small clan and capture a distant port to use it) will invest into
  • production of all basic resources in their port
  • defenses to protect it
  • shipbuilding to improve ships built in this region.
• By doing so - player will get ALL basic resources in one location, completely removing hauling requirements out of the picture. Saving time and getting ships by just spending LH and cooperating together to get rare woods if needed. 

Clan can decide if they want these investments to be available to them only, to friends or to everyone who can build in this port.
 

 

As a result.

• Clans who developed the port will be able to get ships with one click.
• Enemy clans who do not want to spend time developing ports can try to capture the port from the enemies (why build if you can cap). 
• There will be a lot less time wasted on hauling and more fighting. 

[Forbin]

Whatever, it sounds better than the current situation with basics ressources, that's good

[Slim McSauce]

Nice, hauling contributes to a number of wasted hours sailing idly, for little return when pirates end up sinking the resources, empty gameplay. Also makes sense, not all trade is made by sea. Subsequent initiative to take and hold ports. When can we expect to see this? As long as valuable wood hauling is still a thing, the rest can be compartmentalized.

[Sella]

But doesn't that remove a part of the gameplay -raiding? Me and many other clan members prefer that kind of gameplay, probably other people too. Personally I don't want to fight just for the sake of the fight. Raiding was a huge part of the era

[Angus MacDuff]

6 minutes ago, admin said:

Trading goods is rewarding and has both risk AND profit.

I agree for the most part with your entire post, but the point I've quoted here should get more attention.  The big traders are being left out of this because of the ease in which we can make reals with Cargo missions and passenger deliveries.  I love the ease with which I can get money now, but I have to admit, when hunting, I have not seen very many players in LGVs and Indiamen.  There is simply no need.  This hurts the hunters somewhat.  There still need to be a reason to fleet up a group of Indiamen and go out for a big profit. 

 

10 minutes ago, admin said:

and you can have a small clan and capture a distant port to use it)

I don't see this happening.  A small clan who captures a distant port will simply be an easy target.  They know this and wont risk it.  Please consider the small groups and solo players.  A clan owned port should certainly benefit the clan first.  They did the main work.  They should gain the earnings from taxes.  But allow other national players a piece of the pie, without the owners permission.  When you allow one player (a clan leader) to bar another player (someone he hates) from a rare resource, it leads to some very bad feelings.

[van der Clam]

10 minutes ago, admin said:

And here is the main discovery.

• Players do not buy DLC ships for uniqueness,
• they do not buy them because they are stronger or weaker than others (there is always a better crafted ship, sometimes 5/5 crafted ship). Rattvisan is definitely not the best 4th rate. 
   
• They do buy them to support developers (thank you everyone for support)
• And they buy them to avoid participation in the exciting economy (mainly hauling).

Trading goods is rewarding and has both risk AND profit. Hauling goods for crafting is boring, not exciting, is risky but gives you no real rewards (you make a ship that you will soon lose anyway). 

Thats why making permit based DLC ships is not going to achieve anything. Thats not what customers want. 

...............

Clan can decide if they want these investments to be available to them only, to friends or to everyone who can build in this port.
 

 

Your research did not yield any results for customers of the game who are not customers of the DLC? You cannot report the impact of the DLC on DLC-only customers. You should have taken into account the original customers.

......

About port investments, are you talking about resources? So resources produced at a clan's port can be shared with clan only, clan friends, everyone? Does this diminish the amount of resources available to share? Will we be able to set a percentage for each? Like maybe we want 75% for the clan and 25% for clan friends. I'm not certain I'm understanding, "Clan can decide if they want these investments to be available to them only, to friends or to everyone who can build in this port."

[LeBoiteux]

23 minutes ago, admin said:

And here is the main discovery.

• Players do not buy DLC ships for uniqueness.
• They do not buy them because they are stronger or weaker than others (there is always a better crafted ship, sometimes 5/5 crafted ship). Rattvisan is definitely not the best 4th rate. 
   
• They do buy them to support developers (thank you everyone for support)
• And they buy them to avoid participation in the exciting economy (mainly hauling).

+1.

Can we expect one of these days to have some of the in-game ships as DLCs, such as La Renommée or... La Renommée ?

Would a 6th rate DLC be possible ?

[Diceman]

6 minutes ago, Sir John said:

I was always a champion of the nations system, but...

with the way the game is going, are we ready to switch to complete clan system yet?

So what are you saying??? 

One of the reasons I play this game is so I can sail under the American flag... 

Clans already run the political part of it... for better or worse. Nations with weak clans get rolled. Nations with strong clans kick ass. 

I’ll be dammed if I sail under some silly clan flag...

[Socialism]

I think you missed a key reason why DLC ships are so popular.  Convenience.  It’s not that players don’t want to do the Econ side of things and craft, it’s the fact that it’s 15 combat marks for crafting a surprise when you only receive 2 or 3 for sinking one.  It’s also the fact that better woods are now more costly, more scarce and more time consuming to get.  You’ve essentially made DLC ships the only viable option for quick and carefree PVP.  Especially with a looming wipe.

I made a suggestion on Hachi’s thread the other day to achieve the best of both worlds.  

Redeemable DLC ships are locked to one or 2 wood types and base 3/5s. Like oak/oak Players have the OPTION to redeem a permit and craft their ship for a chance at a 5/5 and premium woods.  Both are locked for 24 hours.  I feel this would be a happy medium. 

[Capitalism]

I’m excited for the port control changes as it’s something I and others have been asking for for a long time. But let’s face it, we would have bought cosmetic DLC to support you (consumable paint packs, flag packs, ship models, etc.) at a rate that might have been sustaining, while leaving the pay to win nature of the current DLC out of the mix. With a line ship in elite woods now at daily disposal players with it are simply at a huge advantage over other without it.

And this is particularly true with the RNG, permits and pay walls for woods in place.

If we are basically flushing crafting down the toilet I’d propose a major change that I think would make everyone happy: Enable the capture of all ships, 3rd rate and below and add even the permitted and imported ships to AI fleets. This would even the playing field, create interest for PvE-oriented players while still allowing for ship builders to create the ships with the very best, purpose-built builds, but with a much smaller edge granted to DLC holders that’s focused mainly on convenience.

[Meraun]

@admin i agree with you Post mostly, waht i dont get is why do we have such a high Permitwall on craftable ships? You said players buy DLC to aviod the Eco. Ok, iam fine with that, but why force the Players wich want to be part of the Eco AND the Fighting to get  Permits? 

 

25 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

The problems are trying to get the good woods (teak, live oak, white oak, sabicu, caguairan), the time to grind those doubloons (insane amount) and the risk of hauling those woods to the crafting point.

DLC are a matter of an instant click selecting the woods you desire. Crafting a teak-white oak wappen requires effort and time (now much worse due to the permits wall).

May main Problem is the Permit Wall. Forcin Players and Clans to fight over Rare Woods is a good idea (there are a bit tooo rare right now)!   It will also provide a certain amount of hauling for Hunters.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Meraun

[Meraun]

3 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said:

Would a 6th rate DLC be possible ?

The Le Requin is a 6th

[van Veen]

16 minutes ago, admin said:

And here is the main discovery.

• Players do not buy DLC ships for uniqueness.
• They do not buy them because they are stronger or weaker than others (there is always a better crafted ship, sometimes 5/5 crafted ship). Rattvisan is definitely not the best 4th rate. 
   
• They do buy them to support developers (thank you everyone for support)
• And they buy them to avoid participation in the exciting economy (mainly hauling).

Trading goods is rewarding and has both risk AND profit. Hauling goods for crafting is boring, not exciting, is risky but gives you no real rewards (you make a ship that you will soon lose anyway). 

Thats why making permit based DLC ships is not going to achieve anything. Thats not what customers want.

This logic is ... breathtaking. I don't know what to say. 

Of couse, DLC customers do not want to haul the goods necessary for crafting, because this is not required right now. But it is not the point what a certain group of customers wants, but what is good for a stable and healthy game community. Because this should be your concern in order to have a long lasting positive feedback loop with your game community and long lasting profitability.  

Among all criticism raised, you have addressed only one: removal of the need to haul crafting resources. There have been other suggestions to reduce the pain of hauling resources (player defined NPC fleets suggested multiple times). All other aspects have not been addressed. What about the limitation of permits and woods?

 

Thank you for being so honest and explicit: 

26 minutes ago, admin said:

Hauling was somewhat forced onto players because some time ago we wanted everyone to be the target. 

Now you remove the hauling, but enforce a different behaviour: buy DLC, because permits and woods are simply unobtainable for many players. 

It seems like the need for a self-balancing in-game economy is not understood at all. The economy is not just the icing on the cake it is actually the bottom of it. Breaking the economy quickly creates winners and losers. Losers will just quit the game. Winners will again split up in winners and losers and soon there will be no-one left to fight. 

[Meraun]

@admin Pretty much every single player in Forums as well as in TS and Ingame Chat agrees taht at this Point, Permit Costs and Rare Woods are to expensive. Do you play to do something about taht?

[Vernon Merrill]

48 minutes ago, admin said:

Now. 
Here is the rug change that will tie the room together. 

• Port investments will remove hauling requirements for basic resources for all players who play with friends or have friendly clans in the nation.
• Clans (and you can have a small clan and capture a distant port to use it) will invest into
  • production of all basic resources in their port
  • defenses to protect it
  • shipbuilding to improve ships built in this region.
• By doing so - player will get ALL basic resources in one location, completely removing hauling requirements out of the picture. Saving time and getting ships by just spending LH and cooperating together to get rare woods if needed. 

Clan can decide if they want these investments to be available to them only, to friends or to everyone who can build in this port.
 

 

Ummmmmm.....   Ok.

@admin Can you give a little bit of detail as to how the "port investment" mechanics work?

Do clan member deposit resources into a "port warehouse"?

Do clan members just drop reales and doubloons into the clan warehouse?

 

The first option might be cool....  The second option sounds realllllllllly rather dull and meh.....

Edited April 10, 2019 by Vernon Merrill

[LeBoiteux]

5 minutes ago, Meraun said:

The Le Requin is a 6th

So what ?

There can be several ship DLCs for the same 'Rate', such as the Pandora (9-pder) et L'Hermione (12-pder), both 5th rates.

Le Requin is a 9-pder. There could be a lighter 6th rate DLC carrying 6-pders, such as L'Aurore. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by LeBoiteux

[AeRoTR]

38 minutes ago, admin said:

And here is the main discovery.

• Players do not buy DLC ships for uniqueness.
• They do not buy them because they are stronger or weaker than others (there is always a better crafted ship, sometimes 5/5 crafted ship). Rattvisan is definitely not the best 4th rate. 
   
• They do buy them to support developers (thank you everyone for support)
• And they buy them to avoid participation in the exciting economy (mainly hauling).

Overal very good post admin, thank you. 

What I started to do with my DLC ships, I know I should be doing it already. Keep redeeming them everyday until I get purple or gold ships. Please, please as we buy DLC to support developers, we buy dlc to avoid economy, please let DLC ships only to be 3/5 Blue with may be trim. So give crafted ships a meaning / a reason.

 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Imported ships should not have the option to choose woods, just add a "neutral wood" that doesnt excels at anything.

true, they are for quick fighting right? so whats the point giving a dlc ship live oak | white oak option or teak | white oak, they are there for a quick fight and sink am i right @admin

[Vizzini]

Players play the game for a great many reasons, I hope we don't go down the road of fights only .....

Some play for trading and fighting and RVR

some just want instant fights

some just want to sail about fighting if they feel like it

some just want RVR big port battles , political infighting , nation / clan building or wrecking, spying

some enjoy just the econ and the chance to build their own ships

 

we must try and cater for as many of these types and the ones I have forgotten. If you focus on the fight only mob, I fear it will alienate many

 

DLC are fine by me, not forced onto anybody. They are mostly bought by players to bypass the grind or to save time but no way would I offer financial support ( purchasing dlc ships and stuff )  if the game turns into an arena style game with the OW as a lobby.

 

I'd pay for a forged papers but I firmly believe it takes too much of my time to shift all of my goods and ships about to a neutral port, hours away. Flags yes and paints if the prices were cheaper. The first thing anybody thinks before spending any money... is imho " what is in it for me ? "

 

I do however look forward to release and any changes that happen in the mean time will be tested by me. Break down the permit wall and we're good for now

 

[LeBoiteux]

Stop wanting to nerf the ship DLCs (with common woods...). Just sink the guy in the DLC ship. You'll have pvp and :

• If he's a casual, he'll stop playing till the next day.
• If he has time and wants to keep on playing this very night, he will have to get his next ships by crafting or buying them in game.

Edited April 10, 2019 by LeBoiteux

[Barbarosa]

Bought game multiple times for alt accounts and never complained about it.

I did bought Req DLC ship to support you, the action I immediately regretted. I was ignorant about how it works and thought that it will give me privileges to craft it, as you did with rare ship crafting permits before (Agamemnon ect.)

As soon as I realized how it works, stopped buying anything you have released and will not buy any further DLC's till you properly correct the current state of them. 

 

[Teutonic]

Ahhh *sigh*

Again...I get it, some people don't want to be part of the economy. People don't want to spend time finding woods and crafting ships.

Your solution is to make resources be supported in one port if a clan invests in it. Honestly that's not the complaint here.

I don't think any minds a bit of trading or a bit if hauling - we accept that is how economy works.

This is not how you fix an economy and crafting system....

1. No one knows where the forests in a general sense. Players should know.

2. Permits are garbage. Lineships should ONLY be victory mark costs. 

3. DLCs loop through the economy in more than 1 way.

A player who redeems a DLC doesn't need resources to craft ships AND they don't need doubloons to redeem the clan resources. On top of the fact that I may craft an aggamemnon with rare woods and i may lose the ship - it hurts my economy faarrrrr greater than a DLC ship. When you sink a DLC ship it feels like you did absolutely nothing to the overall economy and it's not fun nor enjoyable....

 

[John Cavanaugh]

There you have it folks, Developer statement that economy is to be swept out piecemeal.

Dont want to deal with the broken rare woods market? buy high rate DLC.

Dont want to risk moving resources from port to port? investments! no more sailing needed.

So trade ships will be carrying only FedEx packages, war ships will be only DLC or inferior Oak/Oak ships. Dont bother trying to commit piracy or privateering, you cant capture most enemy ships since they're imported, and if you catch a trade ship, all you get is a mission item that you could have picked up in port at no cost anyway!

Admin, You have taken a once functional but unpolished sandbox MMO, and turned it an arcade with terrible matchmaking. An RVR game which allows people to entirely opt out of the need to fight for control of rare woods, for control of trade goods, for anything whatsoever, by virtue of being able to buy a DLC which obviates any need for them to do so, is not an RVR game. So your end game content is hollow. Piracy and privateering is pointless when you either cannot keep what you steal. and PvP? all you will have is people bashing their DLC "4th" rates together. We already have a 70 gun "4th" rate, when can we buy a 110 gun "4th" rate? that could probably sell for at least $59.99. You, Admin, have no clue what you're doing, either with a business model, or with running a sandbox MMO. You've bled us of time and money, and I'm done with it. I dont care if you once had a legitimate love and care in what you started, at this point your actions are transparent. Remember that Naval Action Legends you tried once? Go with that, it may be the only way to salvage this mess you've made.

[Slim McSauce]

10 minutes ago, Vizzini said:

DLC are fine by me, not forced onto anybody. They are mostly bought by players to bypass the grind or to save time but no way would I offer financial support ( purchasing dlc ships and stuff )  if the game turns into an arena style game with the OW as a lobby.w

It's forced on regular players. I'm forced to fight DLC ships. I'm forced to NOT be able to capture these ships because they're DLC. I'm forced to deal with the fact that if I sink one DLC, it will respawn the next day, unlike my ships which cost in game money in time. I'm playing at a disadvantage against DLC buyers and that's forced. It's one of the reasons why launch potential is hurt, if you can't beat the lack of economy with economy, then people will be forced to either be really good at making money, or get sent back to 0 by people in DLC ships with no chance of retaliation in the same way. They'll have to buy the DLC in order to compete on the same level, which will drive a lot of potential players away with the pay2win aspect of the whole thing, which will be severely damaging to this game's reception at launch.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Slim McSauce

[Teutonic]

8 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said:

Stop wanting to nerf the ship DLCs (with common woods...). Just sink the guy in the DLC ship. You'll have pvp and :

• If he's a casual, he'll stop playing till the next day.
• If he has time and wants to keep on playing this very night, he will have to get his next ships by crafting or buying them in game.

It's like all some people care about is a battle and because of that you basically trash the rest of the game.

Pvp is the heart of an MMO - but pvp for the sake of just pvp is  an arena game like NAL or WOT or Warthunder.

Lets be serious, it's time for the admin to decide whether Naval Action is supposed to be an Arena game or an MMO.

@HachiRoku is exactly right - this hybrid nonsense is giving us the worst of both genres.