Forthcoming patch information

[JDMonster]

23 hours ago, Smoothie said:

Also about the changes in woods again while DLC ships won't get them. A bummer for all who did invest hundreds of Euros/Dollars. 

That's a good thing.  DLC ships already have the massive advantage of being replaceable.  Giving them the opportunity to be redeemed will result in people not using them to fight but rather using them to farm rare woods.  We already see that with the DLC's we have in game for seasoned woods where people just redeem once a day and then break the ship.

[Corona Lisa]

To all the whiny zerg suicide "screeners": RvR is more than just the PB, people can still be integrated into stopping hostility if it takes longer.

 

Sound like a great patch, next step less grinding plz

Edited April 11, 2020 by Wuhan bat soup

[Conte D. Catellani]

38 minutes ago, Lars Kjaer said:

But it won't change the fact that you can't force ppl to fight. And we've tried alliances before, I'm not saying I'm completely against them, but let's just say that me, myself and my alts - along with the friends I've got that has alts, will be able to sway an election in any given direction. And it still won't force the rest of the nations playerbase to actually fight.

First off - Why this emphasis on punishing ppl who play the game the way they prefer or with the ppl they prefer?

Secondly - rather than going for an elaborate and exploitable alliancesystem, why not have seasons with rewards? Basically have a rotation of national alliances, perhaps with the impossible nations being outside of them (since they are impossible), and then basically ensure that the server at all times are carved up in 3 blocks + the impossible nations?

And remove the frontline system so ppl can actually fight someone of the same size.

just a thing... what about remove the frontline system ok  but add a system to avoid to recive a massive multiple attack..something like you cant attack more than the 10% of the towns daily ...10% is just an example of what i mean could be 5, 2, 1,5 so you have a sort of malus to be big

[JosephDutch]

• We are no longer satisfied with griefing during screening, and are axing the screening completely. (read russian nation is loosing the upperhand)
• Clans will be able to transport their port battle fleet directly to port battle area using an item (read russian nation have trouble to get in a portbatles)
  • item will work both for attacker and defenders (read russian nation will stay on top)

[Mad Dog Morgan]

Shame about screening, before the Russian zerg, those battles were often more fun than the PB itself. 

[rbnhd76]

Guys I'm really happy you continue to adjust and create Naval Action. That said, the entire thing is too much grind. It's a total slog to do anything. Can't get the permits you want. Which means almost no ships you like. (I like them all) I can't get any of my gamer friends to join NA, because GRIND. Hopefully you continue tweaking and adding things for years to come. I play Peace server specifically because I don't enjoy dramatic political factors affecting my gameplay. I'm honestly good with everything so far, just make ships more available/obtainable and people will use them more. I have a couple ships I refuse to wager against an equal foe, since they are basically unobtainable.

Bit of a rant, bit hopeful for the future of the game. Opinions based on Peace server only. Carry on admin and don't be afraid to try new things but more importantly, don't be afraid to roll things back. 

I can see the game lasting another 20 years, easy. I can see it crashed and empty in short order as well. 

o7 

Fair winds following seas to all you raucous lot

[erelkivtuadrater]

14 minutes ago, rbnhd76 said:

Grindy

many players have pointed it out that its "Grindy", you can call its grindy, but the problems in itself is that time invested doesn't feel as rewarding as it should, getting everything handed to you is actually not what you want aswell, because then whats the point in playing the game? if you get everything handed to you with minimal effort 😕

[Archaos]

The big question I have is how much it will cost to upgrade a ports points? To fully develop a 55 point port already costs a lot of resources, if it also costs a lot of resources to upgrade the port points it may just become too risky to spend so much on a port just to have someone come in and capture it.

[Cathal Brugha]

Easy solution to all this arguing, get rid of rvr and clan power. Solved. The powers clans have are slowly ruining the game, and almost all the arguments revolve around rvr.

[Conte D. Catellani]

1 hour ago, Archaos said:

The big question I have is how much it will cost to upgrade a ports points? To fully develop a 55 point port already costs a lot of resources, if it also costs a lot of resources to upgrade the port points it may just become too risky to spend so much on a port just to have someone come in and capture it

 

Strong nations will have first access to the new potential of ports. More clans plus members plus money

After that, it's enough to engage the other factions in fights to slow down upgrades or stop them not reaching a balance

If I am not mistaken the introduction of seasoned woods has fallen in conjunction with the Christmas truce that gave everyone time to prepare more or less

Wouldn't it be appropriate to think of something to give everyone time to regroup? 

[TacitBlue]

On 4/10/2020 at 6:28 AM, admin said:

Rationale is very simple
Screening is fun until it crosses the line. Then it is just time wasting 
The problem is that the line is too vague and it generates too much friction and unhappiness + nobody is paying the mods extra for PTSD treatment after reading shit in reports and in tribunals.

As a result
Screening is getting axed the **** out.
You will safely get dropped around port battle with invisibility timer from anywhere on the map. Numbers will matter less. Skill will matter more
Nations should stop the attack during hostility.
 

 

While I am relatively new to the game I am not new to PVP oriented MMOs.

It may seem like doing away with screening is the best solution. However this strikes me as using a sledgehammer to drive a nail. I fear the unintended consequence of insta-teleporting to port battles will be that only a small percentage of top players will be allowed to participate, and everybody else might as well just dock up and log off. 

[Koltes]

On 4/10/2020 at 10:33 PM, Cornelis Evertsen de Oude said:

As I understand the point about grieving, the screening is one of the most fun things to do. If the pb fleet is being tagged by a screeningfleet, it was a mistake by the pb fleet. But because in my eyes a small portion of the playerbase like mr.(streaming) Reverse is crying about his gameplay. it's being canceled all the way. At that moment we have to patch this. You should finally start to look at the big picture. And act on more data than one person. You should act on majority of the population. Screening is in something the majority does and it's fun to do. Bit pissed it's gone, cause occasionaly there is grieving. 

Not being able to screen is pretty much the end of this game in my eyes.

This will favor the small nations with a good pb-fleet more than big nations with a lesser experienced fleet. Which will mean more players will have no content.

I don't know what is meant with anti-farming?? Is it farming alts?? 

Very happy about the port change, this is about time..

Keep up the good work,

o7

I beg to differ. You are contradicting yourself. This gives smaller nations a good chances to participate in RvR. A much better than be a constant screening vassal of a larger stronger ally clan/nation.
The argument that screening gives PvP for smaller clans/nations is countered by an argument that now they will be able to fight inside PB.

Also from the commander point of view another positive aspect of this mechanic is that you will be able to bring prepared and balanced fleet. This means that OW PVP remains opportunistic as it should while (finally) RVR is a team vs team fight is a true testament to combination of commanding and teamwork skills.

 

[Admiral Woodpecker]

 

6 hours ago, rbnhd76 said:

I can see the game lasting another 20 years, easy. I can see it crashed and empty in short order as well. 

LOL, some of us will not even live that long. I will be 61 in 20 years.

[King of Crowns]

@admin since we are cracking down of free speech. can we please discuss the fact that you have allowed chistendom to be on the forums? after banning his mian account? or should that be a different post?

Edited April 12, 2020 by King of Crowns

[Guest]

2 hours ago, koltes said:

I beg to differ. You are contradicting yourself. This gives smaller nations a good chances to participate in RvR. A much better than be a constant screening vassal of a larger stronger ally clan/nation.
The argument that screening gives PvP for smaller clans/nations is countered by an argument that now they will be able to fight inside PB.

Also from the commander point of view another positive aspect of this mechanic is that you will be able to bring prepared and balanced fleet. This means that OW PVP remains opportunistic as it should while (finally) RVR is a team vs team fight is a true testament to combination of commanding and teamwork skills.

 

Except for the frontline system. Smaller nations will not be getting more PBs and neither will small clans. You're also forgetting the increasing grind req for host which again will harm small nations and clans more than larger and more populated nations.

[Teutonic]

Currently.

a port battle helps signal a lot of players WHERE to go to to find fights.

besides patrol zones - how are players supposed to know where to go to fight other players?

[Fletch]

3 hours ago, Teutonic said:

Currently.

a port battle helps signal a lot of players WHERE to go to to find fights.

besides patrol zones - how are players supposed to know where to go to fight other players?

Start your own port  fights instead of dicking around with other peoples  perhaps

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

On 4/10/2020 at 11:50 AM, admin said:

Major. Port investments improvements

• Players will be able to invest into increase in port points

 

I suggest a soft coupling of growth with spawning of goods in ports, so the variety of goods increases step by step when certain levels of additional port points have been reached.

For example,  5700 BR port of Great River (Mosquito Coast) is just spawning lemons. Imagine it would become a 10600 BR some day. Should not stay with lemons until then, but add some other items typical for the region, like adjacent ports have them. Like 6700 BR ( + rubber), 7700 BR ( + garlic), 9000 BR ( + olmec stone masks) etc...

--

If there, as advised, would be also a system of shrinking sizes with neglect, number of trading items as well would decrease...

[Sea Archer]

If a small nation manages to succeed in creating hostility, they may have a fair fight, but since hostility will take longer and can be better countered, I doubt that small nation can really benefit from these changes. I would think it is even worse than now, because the surprise of a suddenly completed hostility mission is not on their side anymore.

Sometimes I am not sure, if this RvR is such a good element in the game. 

A good mixture of all nations across the map might give everybody more pvp and pve.

[GrubbyZebra]

On 4/10/2020 at 8:39 AM, admin said:

You are saying this as if it was something unexpected.  We knew exactly what we were doing. Capturable first rates opened a lot of content for an average players. 

People love capturable NPC ships and love DLC ships despite the fact that YOU do not like them. Redoutable was a number 4 top seller on steam world wide!!! it was selling more than red dead redemption 2 for a week! If you were correct this could have never happened. Classic victory will again be a top5 best selling item across ALL steam games.

So its not unexpected. We are removing the pain point because griefing went out of hand. With 1st rate DLC the pain point would increase, so action must be taken before. If screeners were a little bit more accurate it would not happen. But no. They were not. They were enjoying wasting other people time. And paid for it.

 

 

Do you are proceeding with a 1st rate DLC? Do you see how this will be harmful to Port Battles, not just screening? Please do not do this.

[Koltes]

10 hours ago, Lars Kjaer said:

Except for the frontline system. Smaller nations will not be getting more PBs and neither will small clans. You're also forgetting the increasing grind req for host which again will harm small nations and clans more than larger and more populated nations.

Well it simple really. If a clan/nation can pull together PB fleet they should be able to do the grinding also. Of course this will come down to HOW hard the grind will be for hostility.
I dont like the hostility mechanic in the first place. But I guess its working... Its just needs to be twitched a bit rather than make another original "lets make a harder grind idea"... again

[GrubbyZebra]

42 minutes ago, Staunberg99 said:

Won’t hurt screening. It is gone soon. 

I know. Admin stated they needed to axe screening ahead of the 1st rate DLC because the DLC would break it. I am saying it will break more than just screening.

[Oli Garchy]

16 hours ago, King of Crowns said:

@admin since we are cracking down of free speech. can we please discuss the fact that you have allowed chistendom to be on the forums? after banning his mian account? or should that be a different post?

different post  

 

on topic, patch looks alright, i think removing screening would be a big detriment. lobby based PBs to control ports is not the way to go imo

[Guest]

15 hours ago, Fletch said:

Start your own port  fights instead of dicking around with other peoples  perhaps

Not possible due to frontline system and hostility req..

[Mouth of Sauron]

20 hours ago, King of Crowns said:

@admin since we are cracking down of free speech. can we please discuss the fact that you have allowed chistendom to be on the forums? after banning his mian account? or should that be a different post?

Free speech does not apply to privately owned companies and their services FYI.  As for toxicity and recent events, I think you know a thing or two about that.

I would suggest in the future you worry less about forum accounts and more about defending your nation's convenient UStz timers.  Sweden might not have given up if you had.

 - Ciao babe