It's a game!

[Prater]

 

For me: combat mechanics is most important. to me the game could look like 3 colour tetris and i would still like it. I want to be able to aim properly and i want to be able to be better than others by playing better. If the gun dispersion is so random, that you cant aim anyways, that frustrates me. If i dont know where my shots are going, so i dont know what im hitting and how effective it was, i get frustrated. It doesnt matter to me how historically accurate both those things are. 

 

 

It isn't random.  You aren't aiming if your shots go all over, you are going into gunnery mode and firing, maybe you are pointing your mouse up or down to try and gauge the range of the ship, but you are not aiming.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

I'm sorry if the topic drifted a bit, that wasn't my intent (either to cause drift or allow it to do so).

 

So let's address your recent post.  These weren't rifled cannon that had telescopic sights.  The Captain at the time did not have the ability to aim each individual gun to make sure they were all pointing in the exact same spot, with the same exact powder charge, perfectly shaped and weighted shot, etc.  The game simulates an individually aimed ranging shot with the space bar.  Admin has said the next version of Open World will have an improved "aiming" shot sight that will make it "easier" to know where that shot is going.  I'm skeptical, but looking forward to seeing what it looks like and critiquing it.

 

In DM 4/OW, they have increased dispersion from Sea Trials.  This was important because of high-lee kiting and ships happily engaging each other for extended periods at maximum range.  From my observations, DM 4/OW made the firing cone even more important than it was before, and also lengthened the time it took to "settle down" after you've moved your point of aim.  This meant it was even more important to make sure it was fully zoomed before firing.  This also means that ranging shots are even more "accurate" than they were before - a series of space-bar shots was definitely far more on target and accurate than a requested broadside.  You trade the immediate output of metal for accuracy.  Ships at the time didn't put a full broadside in an even line across a vessel, some were high, some low, some balls spun off funkily due to rust accumulation or a manufacturing defect, some gunnery crews just didn't care about accuracy and slammed balls out as fast as they could get a new one down the tube.  I think the new model is far more accurate in reflecting this reality.  Yes, it adds an element of the dreaded RNG to shooting, but for a full broadside, I think that's ok.  Your skill in getting your aimpoint just right will help to alleviate that.  In short, you can aim individual shots, you just can't perfectly aim a broadside.  The days of putting the red bar right at the waterline and clicking fire for effect are gone (with the currently released version), but I think that adds a realistic "flavor" that reflects the reality of the time.  It also allows for slightly more small-ship survivability at range, which is also a good thing for gameplay.

 

With regards to "It's a game!".  Yes, it is.  But it also is a game that has a heavy basis on a very real and visceral time in our history.  As such, it should contain as many nods to the actual physics and realities of that period, while still being a lot of fun for a certain type of gamer - those that want skill based complexity with an emphasis on the tactics of the period, and not a fast/easy/"cheap" CoD style knockoff.

[Jack Freedom]

OP asked to always pick balance over historical accuracy but I beg to differ. I think there is more fun in historical accuracy than people give it credit for. If everything was balanced and fair we would all be using the same ship with the same components, fighting in completely flat water.

[Ryan21]

I think the lynx is a brilliant starting vessel, if you are heeling too much for your shot trajectory reduce sail.  It was rare that ships went into action with full sail set, they had to moderate heel in real life as well.  Ships usually went into battle under topsails and headsails + spanker, and then could set or douse any combination of the others as needed.  This also made the line handling less complicated because they were dealing with less gear, and therefore they could pull off manuever's much quicker, I fully rigged ship of this era has alot of rig.  As for the smoke, this isn't modern propellant, this was a problem they simply had to deal with.  I would say add a bunch of tips for newbies as to how to sail and fire effectively.  The Lynx is the perfect starter because she sails well and you can outrun most larger vessels to windward, and you have enough firepower to deal with the small ones.

[Jetcutter]

Sorry if I am missing the proverbial boat, or posting in wrong area

Just gained access today, I am hands down, blown away!

Nice work folks!!

[akd]

The core problem is clearly that the game is not communicating some basic principles to players. This is not surprising for an Alpha, and players should stop expecting hand-holding while testing an Alpha.

1. Get close and reduce sail. No doubt everyone's first instinct is to go as fast as possible and fire from as far away from the dangerous things as possible, but that is the worst possible way to handle small ships.

2. Pick an angle and bearing for your cannons and let the aim stabilize (as visually confirmed by the narrowing of the arc extending from the side of your ship across the sea), then use rudder to adjust bearing. These are big, heavy pieces of metal that could not be moved about with ease. The game is extremely forgiving in allowing you to swing cannons back and forth and up and down, but does require you to wait a moment for the aim to settle. If you don't wait, you will see crazy dispersion.

However, the game mechanics are also failing players in a few areas that needlessly make aiming harder:

1. Different viewing heights relative to guns for different positions (e.g. broadside versus bow chaser).

2. Firing one deck with another locked forces the locked deck to reset aim just as if the whole broadside had fired.

3. Holding ALT no longer works to look around while aiming without upsetting your aim.

4. No control over sequence of firing ranging shots (i.e. always left-to-right rather than being able to chose forward-aft or aft-forward).

5. As already mentioned, spyglass should offer a view from higher up in the fighting tops or at the masthead.

[SueMyChin]

As expected, this topic also has the same fight going on as allways. What i really try to say is:

 

We need to accept that it is a game, and therefore realism will be sacrificed for gameplay and fun. That's the way of things. The question is, to what degree will realism be sacrificed. To me, gameplay is more important than realism, but i know that I'm in the minority on these forums.

 

I don't think it is really. Rather than talking about realism vs gameplay (because they aren't mutually exclusive) posts have for the most part addressed the issues you highlighted (The Lynx, the smoke) as obstructing your fun.

 

This thread is not called: "is the lynx a good starting ship for new players?" or "What do you think about the OW-Smoke?"  Those were two examples, to clarify what i mean by "to me, gameplay is more important than realism" 

 

I just wish there were more people recognizing, that this is a game which is supposed to be fun for many people.

 

Ok, there are different definitions to "good" and "fun" and "enjoyment" we all know that. And you cannot please everyone with the decisions you make in game design.

 

Where I think you're going wrong here is by not understanding the appeal of this game to a lot of other players.

 

The current community like the game specifically because it's realistic, if they wanted a more 'arcadey' sailing game they would all be playing POTBS, Black Flag or Windward. You may prefer to dumb it down a little but it would seem that's contrary to the general opinion. You have your own tastes and that's obviously fine.

 

For example, I'm specifically excited about it because of the realism and the potential immersion, If it becomes too realistic or if you're struggling with the learning curve you have a choice to make about whether you want to keep playing. As will I should the game ever become too 'arcadey' and unrealistic.

 

The fact is, this game is going to have a steep learning curve, however the devs design it. The posted suggestions in this thread are ways to either assist the newcomer or reasons why we need not worry about them too much just yet.

 

Combat mechanics is most important. I want to be able to aim properly and i want to be able to be better than others by playing better. If the gun dispersion is so random, that you cant aim anyways, that frustrates me. If i dont know where my shots are going, so i dont know what im hitting and how effective it was, i get frustrated.

 

This is a combination of the learning curve and the fact that it's still early in development. You'll have to give it time on both counts here. The game will become clearer in it's instruction and more user friendly with development.

 

... to me the game could look like 3 colour tetris and i would still like it.... ....It doesnt matter to me how historically accurate both those things are..

 

This is your opinion, which again you're perfectly entitled to but I get the impression that no amount of time is going to turn this into the general consensus.

[Doschichis]

for the sake of everything, stop your thought of this is just a game for everyone, like SueMyChin said, people or the community like this game because of the realistic of it. If the devs reduce the learning curve so everyone can play it without learning then please, go back and play other game that suit you better.

 

I will take an example of the game I play the most: Dota 2: i spent about 1k6 hours in the game over the last 3 years and countless hours in the original Dota. Do I expect to know everything at the beginning? hell no. That game has a super leaning curve, and I still learn new things every time I play that game.

 

So what is the story here? people want easy thing, they want to be good without learning about the game. Stop that train of thought right now right here. If you find the game is hard for you, stop and learn, no one will ever blame you for that. If you dont want to learn or spend too much time to learn, you can go PVE server like Admin said, its for you and for people who just want to enjoy the game in easy mode. Its fine, different people have different taste.

 

For the smoke, in the lynx do you actually sail and shot that the same time? did you ever try to use manual sail to increase your heel or decrease it? did you ever try to know when you push the first space bar, what canon shot first? did you every try to remember the order your gun will shot? If you say no for some of those questions, log in the game and try it yourself. you still have time to learn.

 

More complex game play. Try to look at dota2, that game is much harder than this game and new people still get into it.

Less complex but still a hard game try: Exanima. this game is using a new physic engine and i spent 2 hours learning how to swing a freaking sword and when I know it, I feel super happy. It feels when you have a hard math problem and you sit for days and finally solve it. I believe that is the joy of learning that a lot of people in this community want.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Doschichis

[Ruthless4u]

Realism? Immersion?

How about go a different direction and make even the shortest of trips several RL days, or weeks, or even months. Make sure that all that we are doing is sailing, not seeing other ships every few minutes as well. I mean realism matters above all else right? To try and say other wise would make you "realistic" advocates come off as hypocrites.

[MikedaBike]

Having just started today i think the balance between realism and game play is pretty good and likely to get better with positive and constructive feed back. Lynx was a great starter ship for the very few games i needed to get the next ship, taught me how to counter the rolling sea and to drop sails to be able to raise my aim or indeed change tack so aim was heightened by the lean. But in todays world their seems to be more and more dumb it down make it easy and let me pay so i don't have to play the game i bought to play... Game play is totally important, but without depth and struggle to improve, really what is the point??

Good job on the game so far, personally i trust the developers to stay true to the passion they have that started this project in the first place   Good work.

[Brandonchat]

I also think people are way to much focused on realism and immersion. I mean how realistic do you want it to be. Isnt it already realistic enough that they even implemented smoke..

 

Do you want immersion then yes, they should put in the smoke that the use in Open World. Do you want a realistic view and still have good gameplay, then put in the smoke of the Sea Trials (there is smoke wich looks cool but still its playable (F the immersion).

 

Also some people said that we have to lose the durability of our ships. In my oppinion not a good idea. Will it add immersion .. yes.. but my god.. If you die, you lose your ship.. you want immersion? then the game also has to delete all your friends from your friends list (because you died).. what? actually it should have a program where it also deletes all your naval action friends from your skype and teamspeak and other communication tools (because you died)... better yet.. you want immersion.. at registering you have to submit the city and street you live so the game can call the nearest morgue to tell them that you are on your way there,...... because you died .......in a game.... i mean.. its a game.

 

If u want immersion then buy 5 big ass widescreen TV's that u can put all around you, and call some gamecontrolers company and ask them if they can make a Age of Sails steeringwheel for you.... go to a carnaval shop and get a captainsoutfit.....get virtual reality goggles!!! TOP immersion, Maybe when you die and ur ship sinks, your wife/girlfriend can come in and show a bucket of cold water over ur head.... but the game play wont change.

 

The AI will still shoot cannonballs asif they are laser guided, shot from a ship that turns like a SeaShadow. You will still get attacked by all AI's that are miles away from you and you still will get ganked in battlefields by every player that gets off on ganking. The wind still will change counter clockwide every 30 seconds.

 

I would say to the Dev's... build the game, we will addapt to what you make of it.

 

Ps. i have seen a lot of ppl announcing in chat that they r so happy with their new Brig, Surprise, Cerberus or what kind of ship it may be so probably it isnt that hard to level up.

[akd]

Saying smoke is not fun is like saying that walls in a FPS shooter are not fun because they get in your way.   Smoke is a tactical element.  Anticipate it.  Use it to your advantage when you can.  Then it becomes fun.

 

Also, there should be a special Latin term for the logical fallacy that realism means you must kill yourself if you die in game, etc..  It is so tired and childish.

 

-Lasers are fun, but not realistic.

-Realistic means that your account should be deleted if you die in game.

-Therefore lasers should be in an Age of Sail game.

 

I win!

 

As others have stated, it is not about fun vs. realism, but finding the right balance between concessions to gameplay and realistic constraints such that combat develops in a way that captures the spirit and tactics of the era.

[Sir. Cunningham]

Saying smoke is not fun is like saying that walls in a FPS shooter are not fun because they get in your way.   Smoke is a tactical element.  Anticipate it.  Use it to your advantage when you can.  Then it becomes fun.

 

Also, there should be a special Latin term for the logical fallacy that realism means you must kill yourself if you die in game, etc..  It is so tired and childish.

 

-Lasers are fun, but not realistic.

-Realistic means that your account should be deleted if you die in game.

-Therefore lasers should be in an Age of Sail game.

 

I win!

 

As others have stated, it is not about fun vs. realism, but finding the right balance between concessions to gameplay and realistic constraints such that combat develops in a way that captures the spirit and tactics of the era.

 

 Sorry but I couldn't help but laugh when I read this +1 

[Jack Freedom]

Realism? Immersion?

How about go a different direction and make even the shortest of trips several RL days, or weeks, or even months. Make sure that all that we are doing is sailing, not seeing other ships every few minutes as well. I mean realism matters above all else right? To try and say other wise would make you "realistic" advocates come off as hypocrites.

 

Hey look it's the guy who tried to make a point by making up an exaggeration. Yeah sure we're gonna take your comment seriously.

 

uh uh found another one!

 

 

If u want immersion then buy 5 big ass widescreen TV's that u can put all around you, and call some gamecontrolers company and ask them if they can make a Age of Sails steeringwheel for you.... go to a carnaval shop and get a captainsoutfit.....get virtual reality goggles!!! TOP immersion, Maybe when you die and ur ship sinks, your wife/girlfriend can come in and show a bucket of cold water over ur head.... but the game play wont change.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Jack Freedom

[Brandonchat]

Hey look it's the guy who tried to make a point by making up an exaggeration. Yeah sure we're gonna take your comment seriously.

 

uh uh found another one!

 

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/5177-sweedish-ships-in-a-nutshell/#entry99030

 

do we have to take ur topics seriously?

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

I mean realism matters above all else right? To try and say other wise would make you "realistic" advocates come off as hypocrites.

No, we're not hypocrites. We simply have an affinity for the Age of Sail, and so do the devs. They want to make a realistic Age of Sail experience. Seriously, has anyone even read the Naval Action webpage? It is literally a description of how much realism and accuracy is in Naval Action. Please go read it, so you can understand the dev's goals. This game won't be dumbed down for the masses, its being developed for a niche community.

Here, take a look:http://www.navalaction.com/#ageofsail

[Ruthless4u]

No, we're not hypocrites. We simply have an affinity for the Age of Sail, and so do the devs. They want to make a realistic Age of Sail experience. Seriously, has anyone even read the Naval Action webpage? It is literally a description of how much realism and accuracy is in Naval Action. Please go read it, so you can understand the dev's goals. This game won't be dumbed down for the masses, its being developed for a niche community.

Here, take a look:http://www.navalaction.com/#ageofsail

Dumbed down? I may not be the brightest bulb in the box, but I can assure you I'm no fool as well. I have read it, and it seems they are failing in the realism department you seem to hold so dear.

My knowledge of sailing ships is a tad rusty so I beg your pardon if I'm incorrect.

I know of no sailing ship of any period that could travel the entire span of the Caribbean in a few hours, a let alone in 2-3 days.

Mast that can replaced in minutes once destroyed, or any major repair really. Please point out in history where that happened.

Ship captains could communicate by merely tapping on a few letters on a strange board. Or speak into a tiny device attached to said captains head. I know such things are possible in the modern era, but did not know they had such "magic" in the 1700's.

Captains of the era could stop at any point do something else and come back to the exact moment they left. Their ship would not move from its location, and be invisible to the rest of the world, free of any harm.

Shall I continue?

That seems to be more your speed, I mean why play an age of sail game that is not true to these and other aspects of what would of been RL? I mean why make concessions for playability to anyone other than the niche community you seem to be a proud part of?

To claim you would want such concessions over realism would make you a hypocrite would it not? Especially when in your attempt at a counterpoint to me is so heavily dependent on the "realism" you hold so dear.

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

snip

Firstly, stop saying that myself, and others, "hold realism so dearly." I don't understand your purpose in repeating that theme, but quite frankly, it is irrelevant. As for the rest of your post, which is a rambling mess of purposeless examples, your point is very unclear. If you are so opposed to "realism," why do you include a lengthy list of non-realistic game aspects?

I do not understand why you think that we are obsessed with realism over all things. As you showed in your post, there are an abundance of non-realistic game mechanics, which I fully support. If NA was all about realism, or any game for that matter, it would be unplayable. The point you are attempting to prove seems to be that we are hypocrites because we support a realistic Age of Sail game that has unrealistic features. It has to have unrealistic features! As the OP said, it's a game.

Anyway, I won't be continuing to engage in a meaningless debate with your obscured manner of thinking. Stop calling everyone hypocrites without reason, and get back on topic.

[GrapeShot]

I think the point is that NA is far more of a game than a simulation. Far, far more.

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

I understand that, and anyone who thinks of it as an actual sim clearly hasn't played it. Yet because I support both realism and a fun, playable game, I am called a hypocrite.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Jeremiah O'Brien

[Ruthless4u]

I understand that, and anyone who thinks of it as an actual sim clearly hasn't played it. Yet because I support both realism and a fun, playable game, I am called a hypocrite.

Your right, not played it yet but am looking forward to it. All I want to see is a game that has no magical properties, no sea monsters(ugh) that has a reasonable amount of realism but is still accesible to a playerbase that is competent. While maintaining a large enough player base to actually be around more than a year because the ultra "realistic niche " players killed it.

You say dumbed down, I say keep it playable to people who have been waiting for a game like this for 20+ years and had life, work, family, arthritis, etc happen in the meantime.

Suggestions are made, get shot down because they are not realistic enough. Yet it's suggested it be more realistic then it's to much. Seems hypocritical to an extent to me is all.

[kang]

Seems hypocritical to an extent to me is all.

 

There are as many valid opinions on the realism vs gameplay debate as there are players in the game.  Respect everyone else's and yours in turn may be treated similarly.

[Prater]

Your right, not played it yet but am looking forward to it. All I want to see is a game that has no magical properties, no sea monsters(ugh) that has a reasonable amount of realism but is still accesible to a playerbase that is competent. While maintaining a large enough player base to actually be around more than a year because the ultra "realistic niche " players killed it.

You say dumbed down, I say keep it playable to people who have been waiting for a game like this for 20+ years and had life, work, family, arthritis, etc happen in the meantime.

Suggestions are made, get shot down because they are not realistic enough. Yet it's suggested it be more realistic then it's to much. Seems hypocritical to an extent to me is all.

 

You haven't played it yet.  It isn't ultra realistic.  Wait till you play it before you start talking about what needs to happen.

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

Your right, not played it yet but am looking forward to it. All I want to see is a game that has no magical properties, no sea monsters(ugh) that has a reasonable amount of realism but is still accesible to a playerbase that is competent. While maintaining a large enough player base to actually be around more than a year because the ultra "realistic niche " players killed it.

You say dumbed down, I say keep it playable to people who have been waiting for a game like this for 20+ years and had life, work, family, arthritis, etc happen in the meantime.

Suggestions are made, get shot down because they are not realistic enough. Yet it's suggested it be more realistic then it's to much. Seems hypocritical to an extent to me is all.

There are no magical properties (obviously putting up a whole new mast, etc. during battle isn't possible, but it's for the sake of gameplay). Sea monsters definitely aren't happening. There's a few threads around here about them, but let's just say they weren't well met. So, that should take care of two of your concerns.

I think the balance of realism and playability is very good right now. Travel times in the open world might seem long at first, but they're necessary. You don't need to travel very far to have some good battles. Once you get to play, I think you'll definitely appreciate it.

Also, take a look at this post:

Thank you for support Captains..

We stopped sales to be able to control the inflow of new players to the community. Pro-Active forum members who want to be excellent to each other and do really want to support the product and be active in testing might be able to buy the game earlier. Bring your case to info (at) game-labs email and you might find the way in.

hope it does not sound cheesy or something..

if you want to get in the game sooner and help testing. Shoot them an email, that's how I purchased the game. It's a very enjoyable experience, and definitely worth getting now rather then waiting for the release.

Sorry if I came off as rude previously, I just don't appreciate being lumped into a group and called "hypocritical." So many ideas are suggested and shot down, as you said, because it's difficult to get the perfect balance between realism and playability.

(Edited for SP)

Edited May 16, 2015 by Jeremiah O'Brien

[Ruthless4u]

Both myself and my son are waiting on computer upgrades before we can get into the actual game. My apologies for being rude as well. Just hate to see a potentially great game go south because it's too realistic. Especially for my old joints lol.