Arcade or Simulation, the poll

[Brigand]

It is funny, you can see the balance of the votes swing to the either the arcade or the simulation side with each influx of group of new enthousiasts. It probably has to do with what website's link they follow. Is it possible for us mere mortals to see the incomming link statistics?

~Brigand

[Reki]

omg... historical battles? Historical Simulation? No-no-no! Don't make this game boring... But looks like i forgot something: there was time, when FLS was listening all this "west" community, and where is it now? 

[maturin]

The big problem with the poll is that it seemed to define realism as preparation, and preparation is really here nor there. No one goes into a naval battle with a detailed plan, and the crew can reach full readiness in a matter of minutes. If you've got ammo, you're good to go.

 

Naval combat has never been done well in a game (pure arcade) aside, and it's because of too little realism (in this case realism is synonymous with detail in damage models, tactical possibilities, and general immersion), not too much.

 

The only real hangup in terms of realism vs gameplay is the speed and maneuverability of sailing vessels, and the difficulty of tacking and beating upwind. Do the ships move at 10 knots or twenty? There's the rub.

 

As for the learning curve, I think we should ask players to LEARN. I have learned an absurd amount by playing ArmA and participating in its community. Strategy games tend to end up teaching a lot of history, etc.

[aristogato]

I'd like a realistic open world (whole real world, full PvP, loss-based, complex economy and player diplomacy), and naval combat features based on realism (sailing physics, weather, crew management), but taking distance from it anytime when needed to provide an interesting and tactical gameplay - without throwing immersion over board.

+1 to this! That would be so epic and inmersive

[Chustler]

omg... historical battles? Historical Simulation? No-no-no! Don't make this game boring... But looks like i forgot something: there was time, when FLS was listening all this "west" community, and where is it now? 

 

To me arcade type fights are boring, to you realistic sailing mechanics are boring....I would much rather the ships move in  realistic way.  The tension you feel as you slowly try to swing your broadside around in a key moment is way more fun than any fight I ever had in sid's pirates! type combat.  But maybe that's just me

[Reki]

To me arcade type fights are boring, to you realistic sailing mechanics are boring....I would much rather the ships move in  realistic way.  The tension you feel as you slowly try to swing your broadside around in a key moment is way more fun than any fight I ever had in sid's pirates! type combat.  But maybe that's just me

And maybe you just can't read. I said about Hystorycal part. For example, Hystorical part means almost no pirates. And no frigates, no laneships for them. Also it means that heavy ships should be rare. Really rare. So before all those guys who vote that, should turn on they brains and think what it provides.

Almost all there want realysctic ship movement, but damn turning can be done with 1-5 clicks or buttons and with 40 clicks with realystic sailing mechanic. I choose less difficult way to handle ship and mass gamer population, im sure, won't play hc simulator.  

[Brigand]

Please be a bit nice to each other,

 

Misreading or misinterpreting forum posts just happens, let's assume best intentions on all sides and continue to be gentlemen.

 

~ Brigand

[Chustler]

Ya that got harsh really fast. I was polite I thought... It sounds like we mostly agree with each other anyway.

[William the Drake]

The problem is that if you have a game that is too arcade in style, it becomes a game geared to a more casual gaming crowd, and therefore one that may or may not be truly invested into the game. You run the risk of the game turning into PotCO or Wind of Luck, as far as content goes.

 

Naval Action, just at a glance, is far more detailed and history oriented. I will agree that it should not be a rigid History Simulator, but it should be comprised of realistic maneuvers, skills, and tools. No magic skills, no super ships, etc. 

 

In this case, realistic gameplay is superb, without making it 100% "real", but Arcade-style battles would not be ideal. My vote: The game should pay attention to detail, combat should allow for reenacting historical battles, without too much logistical and time consuming preparation.

[Reki]

Ya that got harsh really fast. I was polite I thought... It sounds like we mostly agree with each other anyway.

I was polite too . We just have Revolution here. AGRHRHRH!!

[Johny Reb]

 I said about Hystorycal part. For example, Hystorical part means almost no pirates. And no frigates, no laneships for them. Also it means that heavy ships should be rare. Really rare. So before all those guys who vote that, should turn on they brains and think what it provides.

Almost all there want realysctic ship movement, but damn turning can be done with 1-5 clicks or buttons and with 40 clicks with realystic sailing mechanic. I choose less difficult way to handle ship and mass gamer population, im sure, won't play hc simulator.  

Ive read every post published on the English forums. I don't really get the sense that anyone is really wanting or expecting a game that takes 40 clicks to turn a ship. Sure there are a couple that wouldn't mind an option to sail it more "sim" like but even these guys don't expect that to dominate the game. 

 

The "historical" part of the poll, I have always thought was poor wording. It has been misinterpreted many times I think. I think it basically means a game based on a Historical foundation. No limiting of how many pirates there are nor what ships they can capture. The historical part would be is it worth it for a pirate to capture a lineship? The Devs have already stated their intention to follow a historical pattern with pirates. No pirate nation and pirates go to jail when captured. So us discussing that much is meaningless.

 

And I don't think PotBS has gone downhill because they listened to us westerners but because FLS and now Portalus hasn't listened to anyone! Its amazing how many people in these threads have generalized the history of Potbs, just to try and make a point with a foundation of sand.

[Reki]

Ive read every post published on the English forums. I don't really get the sense that anyone is really wanting or expecting a game that takes 40 clicks to turn a ship. Sure there are a couple that wouldn't mind an option to sail it more "sim" like but even these guys don't expect that to dominate the game. 

 

The "historical" part of the poll, I have always thought was poor wording. It has been misinterpreted many times I think. I think it basically means a game based on a Historical foundation. No limiting of how many pirates there are nor what ships they can capture. The historical part would be is it worth it for a pirate to capture a lineship? The Devs have already stated their intention to follow a historical pattern with pirates. No pirate nation and pirates go to jail when captured. So us discussing that much is meaningless.

 

And I don't think PotBS has gone downhill because they listened to us westerners but because FLS and now Portalus hasn't listened to anyone! Its amazing how many people in these threads have generalized the history of Potbs, just to try and make a point with a foundation of sand.

Oh, you can read, but can't see, otherwise you should notice that last variant vote is "sailing simulator all the way" and it got almost 25% votes here. So maybe its not just "couple"?

 

To that part with pirates i can say, that in our forums (russian part), they didn't say that pirates will go to jail. Moreover some part of community forces there idea to make pirates HC style branch of players with no nation, but unique gameplay. Could be great if they will listen, so that question about pirates etc is somehow still open. Making game better usually means that you give more, but not cut details and options.

 

I can remember users like Brown there and some others popular vocalysts. When they cry about gank each day, finnally we all got patch with new OS rules. That was beginning of End.

[BungeeLemming]

I voted for full simulation because in the end the poll will state a profile of all.

I mean it radical to make the result gear more onto the historical/ simulational aspect.

 

TBH I dont think its wrong to make the player think BEVORE he goes into action..

potbs: youve got to gear up and fit/specc good to be sucssful.

NA should be somewhat similar. what ship you use and how you arm it.. its all pretty importand and helps develop playstyles.

[Johny Reb]

Oh, you can read, but can't see, otherwise you should notice that last variant vote is "sailing simulator all the way" and it got almost 25% votes here. So maybe its not just "couple"?

 

To that part with pirates i can say, that in our forums (russian part), they didn't say that pirates will go to jail. Moreover some part of community forces there idea to make pirates HC style branch of players with no nation, but unique gameplay. Could be great if they will listen, so that question about pirates etc is somehow still open. Making game better usually means that you give more, but not cut details and options.

 

I can remember users like Brown there and some others popular vocalysts. When they cry about gank each day, finnally we all got patch with new OS rules. That was beginning of End.

Im referring to those that make an effort to comment on these threads not so much the poll. Anyway, whats up with insults? Is that necessary?

 

Granted, many ideas are yet to be said about the implementation of pirates. I like NA's take on the issue so far. If you want to play pirate than go ahead but it will be a very risky route to go. I hope that means that they will usually be in smaller ships, usually going after merchants, they can't just run around capturing NPC ships and have an endless supply of boats.

 

You come across as someone that loves to play rat. It almost sounds as if you sit at your computer wearing an eye patch, you like that class so much. But, wouldn't you rather play a pirate like a real pirate and not some made up fantasy pirate that you read about in kid's books?

 

It sounds like you are saying that once a patch came out that made it more difficult for you to play your chosen class then the game went down hill. I think that is a very simplistic explanation of PotBS fall from grace. Do I misinterpret you?

[Chustler]

I totally agree about pirates.  If pirating is highly risky and hard to do, I may just have to go pirate for a change.  I think the challenge of that would be great fun.  If it is easy and silly like potbs then I'll be steering clear of it.

[Reki]

I totally agree about pirates.  If pirating is highly risky and hard to do, I may just have to go pirate for a change.  I think the challenge of that would be great fun.  If it is easy and silly like potbs then I'll be steering clear of it.

something around it. If you think that you play great "like pro", it could be nice option to bored players, who want something more difficult. But still this is just one idea for now.

[Reki]

Im referring to those that make an effort to comment on these threads not so much the poll. Anyway, whats up with insults? Is that necessary?

 

Granted, many ideas are yet to be said about the implementation of pirates. I like NA's take on the issue so far. If you want to play pirate than go ahead but it will be a very risky route to go. I hope that means that they will usually be in smaller ships, usually going after merchants, they can't just run around capturing NPC ships and have an endless supply of boats.

 

You come across as someone that loves to play rat. It almost sounds as if you sit at your computer wearing an eye patch, you like that class so much. But, wouldn't you rather play a pirate like a real pirate and not some made up fantasy pirate that you read about in kid's books?

 

It sounds like you are saying that once a patch came out that made it more difficult for you to play your chosen class then the game went down hill. I think that is a very simplistic explanation of PotBS fall from grace. Do I misinterpret you?

Yes, you misinterpret me. For long time I play as privateer. On my cut i was doing something around professional gank. I even got legendary pirate title. But with priv I got pretty same results with group fighting. That crush with FLS starts (for me, I know that many players feel that it starts with introducing f2p model) with gank removing. There is few reason why i have this in mind. First off all it was broken OS rules epic saga, which was started that time to prevent gank. Second part about gank that one large layer of gameplay was removed. Some players, and I know really a lot of that kind, just leave the game with this. All my mates actually. So I sit on my cerberus, sunk five 4-th rates in dueal and choose to make Priv next morning. It will be wrong to tell that Cut my favorite class. I actully love privateer with mazohyst-passion, but that patch destroys all my previous fun"game" with all that sweet caravan robbery. As you can see it wasn't more difficult to play Cut from that thime. Just other way. I guess that with all of those changes till now, it is easier to play Cut and harder to play Priv, btw.

 I continued to play, but its just me. It wasn't realistyc changes. Cruelity must flow like it was in real. It mades motivation and unity. "Shark always should be somwhere around".

 

p.s. its really bad logic to think that if you play with pirate you should defend they gameplay. Its like if you say that game doesn't need Spanish nation just because you didn't play for Spain. All of community should think about better game with large circle of possibilities, despite what Nation they play early and what they think about how easily or harder it was.

[Johny Reb]

Yes, you misinterpret me. For long time I play as privateer. On my cut i was doing something around professional gank. I even got legendary pirate title. But with priv I got pretty same results with group fighting. That crush with FLS starts (for me, I know that many players feel that it starts with introducing f2p model) with gank removing. There is few reason why i have this in mind. First off all it was broken OS rules epic saga, which was started that time to prevent gank. Second part about gank that one large layer of gameplay was removed. Some players, and I know really a lot of that kind, just leave the game with this. All my mates actually. So I sit on my cerberus, sunk five 4-th rates in dueal and choose to make Priv next morning. It will be wrong to tell that Cut my favorite class. I actully love privateer with mazohyst-passion, but that patch destroys all my previous fun"game" with all that sweet caravan robbery. As you can see it wasn't more difficult to play Cut from that thime. Just other way. I guess that with all of those changes till now, it is easier to play Cut and harder to play Priv, btw.

 I continued to play, but its just me. I wasn't realistyc change. Cruelity must flow like it was in real. It mades motivation and unity. "Shark always should be somwhere around".

Language barrier is difficult here but if I understand you correctly, then I agree about ganking. Ganking should be allowed. The nations complain about it all the time but there is nothing stopping them from doing it to the pirates as well. I think Cut is still overpowered but more because of the mechanics of the game: fights spawn within range of each other, Crew can be reduced to zero way to easy, somehow a cut can repair his sails with a single skill yet an NO can't, and sail damage isn't based off any realistic mechanic so it happens way to fast. A rat doesnt have to actually ship fight anyone. They just charge in and demast without any threat of it actually being sunk before it happens.

 

You started Potbs way before me. I've been playing for 3 1/2 years now. The game is not headed in a good direction and I'm glad. The chumps at Portalus... I have no respect for.

[Reki]

 

You started Potbs way before me. I've been playing for 3 1/2 years now. 

About 2 or 3 years actually O_o, but if i remember correct. My start was on Caribbean server, and soon, wnen i get 50 lvl, it was closed. Spring 2011 (google) :\ I was young and full of Inspiration.

[tater]

The big problem with the poll is that it seemed to define realism as preparation, and preparation is really here nor there. No one goes into a naval battle with a detailed plan, and the crew can reach full readiness in a matter of minutes. If you've got ammo, you're good to go.

 

Naval combat has never been done well in a game (pure arcade) aside, and it's because of too little realism (in this case realism is synonymous with detail in damage models, tactical possibilities, and general immersion), not too much.

 

The only real hangup in terms of realism vs gameplay is the speed and maneuverability of sailing vessels, and the difficulty of tacking and beating upwind. Do the ships move at 10 knots or twenty? There's the rub.

 

As for the learning curve, I think we should ask players to LEARN. I have learned an absurd amount by playing ArmA and participating in its community. Strategy games tend to end up teaching a lot of history, etc.

 

It's always better to build the game realistically*. You can always dumb it down for the arcade crowd, going the other way is impossible.

 

Note my *, realistic means realistic OUTCOMES. A board or miniatures game can be very realistic, without requiring the player to micromanage anything at all, for example. Make the UI easy to use, but have the physics of the way the ships react as realistic as possible.

[1megatron123]

sim is better..

[maturin]

 

 

Note my *, realistic means realistic OUTCOMES. A board or miniatures game can be very realistic, without requiring the player to micromanage anything at all, for example. Make the UI easy to use, but have the physics of the way the ships react as realistic as possible.

Outcome realism is very important and often overlooked...

 

...but when it comes to combat, that way often leads to madness. Because when it comes to war, Tolstoy had it right. 95% of everything relies on ineffable and unpredictable human factors. In a game, 95% of everything is quantifiable capabilities of weapons and machines. So only a hardcore RPG can hope to model war, and this game is not going to be an RPG.

[FLGibsonJr]

I voted for Simulation.  I played a lot of Age of Sail II and the thing I always wished for was more realism.  The squadron formation, strategy and interaction with your fellow officers in regard to the wind, weather, and seas as you approached the enemy squadron I found very interesting and led to more suspense and anticipation as close quarter combat became more imminent.

 

Also, my interest is centered around the tactical battles themselves, and strategizing with my fellow officers in my own squadron regarding tactics to be used in battles.  Not much interest at all regarding in-game society and such.

[Chunx]

I voted for a balanced game myself because I believed that is what would draw in the most people when the "let's play" videos go out on youtube.

 

Personally I like the realism

[Chilly Willy]

not a real big fan of gankin however in the real wold, the sides were seldom evenly matched. 

some historic battles would be nice. but i think the more realistic the better.  If you dont like the slow reload, train you gunners

it seem unrealistic for a 10 second reload for a broadside, if it takes 80 seconds it takes 80 seconds

a balance would be ok but i think prep and strategy are important factors