Why I believe this game would be better as an Arena MMO

[Theuerdank]

I don't stay on any 'arena' development in gaming industries. Also for WT, i read something about 'worldwarmode' and its still not implemented. So i don't play it any more for a long time, matches with the ground forces tanks can firing 2 miles on maps smaller than the fire action radius of those vehicles, its only ridiculous. Sure, very nice 'models' so the grafic-folks do their work well but the game(play) is nearly stupid. Only collecting virtual vehicle models and some grind for it is terrible for my taste.

Tastes are tastes, but clear i don't play games i cannot like, like those who don't like game'worlds'. But only because some models are nice is for me no reason to play. Gameplay it is. And if there are 1000 different models and gameplay is boring to me then i like more a game with 'only' 30 different models but i can 'play' a game with those and not only some matches for ..... the collection as only goal.

Ok there could be now the next collection game development, but would be nothing for me. As i read here the gameplay will be a great huge game and not only common playing with virtual RC models on a landscape-carpet it was clear for me the so called 'sea-trial' is only a rudimentary test for a coming game, nothing more. Sea trials i never called and will call a game because it was and is only a smallsmall step in development. And 'i' have no difficulty to find a battle in OW, i must not be lead on the hand and nothing must be presented on a tray for me. So called 'balanced' team matches are exactly that.

And what about the surely many coming traders? Also only trading in arenes?

My hopes are really the game will be finally a real game and not only that small part of testing called sea-trials.

Edited July 19, 2015 by Theuerdank

[TommyShelby]

Maybe it's possible to make fun PVP happen in OW? It seems that is what the devs are aiming for. I don't think they want all the fun-loving players to bugger off to the skirmish room.

 

I believe you OW/eco guys need to kill some of your babies to make room for the PVP player.

I've had loads of fun pvp in OW already. It's just about finding it! 

- I think you need to stop thinking of the community as if it is split in two. I'm no more of an OW lover than i'm an Arena lover. But i would hate to see the two mixed into one...

- - OW should be OW, sure anti-griefing systems should be put in place. But for heavens sake. Being heavily outnumbered is part of the game and should be so in the future as well. (I remember being swarmed by Laik, Doran and a bunch of other raker's once - Why did it happen? Because i was stupid enough to not be on the lookout since i thought i was in friendly waters. I made a mistake. I haven't been ganked since because of that and i often travel on my own since most of TDA is US based and i'm not. And i'm actively seeking PvP when i'm online.) 

- - - Another thing is that ganking won't that big of a problem with enough players online (So long as PvP is rewarded) since you will be able to sail in Friendly waters per se - Eg. On several occasions we (TDA) have sent a couple of ships back to Brunswick to protect them against players from other nations. That's just one example, i'm sure other nations/fleets do the same. 

- - - - To me this "1 to 1.5" Rules of Engagement would ruin some of the player  action which is what i enjoy the most. That said, i will test it and then give feedback on it when i have actually tried it out. An idea could be to give the Offender the option of choosing to follow the RoE, or to oppose the RoE and gank the Defender. It would give us the choice of evening the odds (Some would choose to even the odds and some would gank instead). 

 

On another note. You don't seem to want an OW game at all so why not; 

 

wait for them to open up the skirmish room..

Since it's what you really want? 

- I don't see why someone who doesn't want the OW part should be participating in a discussion about the Open world part of the game...

 

Edit; http://www.mmogames.com/gamearticles/versus-battlegrounds-vs-open-world-pvp/

Highlight 1; 

Because death was treated with much higher regard in these games it was inherently more exciting to venture into difficult content or areas where fellow players might be lurking. Being able to loot dead enemies, or steal from living players, added another dynamic element to games that rewarded high risk gameplay. Moreover, this style of play could also be avoided as only players looking for a fight were the ones who would find it. No one feels bad for the person who walks into the Wilderness, or chooses to play on Felucca, wearing full Rune and gets slain. The difference in both the consequences for death and the linear vs non-linear gameplay paths have an important impact on how PvP is shaped. In the past open-world player combat provided a unique experience, but in theme park style MMORPGs it mostly acts as interference.

 

 

Highlight 2;

There’s nothing quite like the feeling of bringing down a battleship with a squad of Rifters or winning a battle of attrition in a 200 Drake fleet fight. It’s hard to deny that open-world PvP can definitely give an adrenaline rush, which isn’t quite the same when players are herded into compact battlegrounds. Not knowing whether you’re going to stumble upon an easy target or run into a trap is a bit of a gamble, but that’s what makes it exciting. In most MMORPG battlegrounds it’s pretty obvious in the first few minutes who’s going to win, whether it’s due to better coordination or more powerful equipment.

The problem, however, is that there’s no guarantee that anything’s actually going to happen. I’ve spent hours in hunting parties in EVE Online and never saw a single ship. It can become tedious after a while if there’s no reward and even more so if a journey ends in defeat after hours of looking for a good fight. The same can be said for pretty much every game with hardcore PvP because there’s always someone with better gear, more powerful ships, and larger amounts of disposable income. Worse yet, solo adventures more often than not end after running into a large roaming party. This is where battlegrounds have a slight advantage. They might not be as exciting, but they deliver a more consistent experience. 

 

 

Highlight 3;

I know a lot of dedicated pvpers who have said that battlegrounds are the reason that world PvP is dead. I’ve even been known to curse all of the casuals queued up for instanced PvP after being unable to find a worthy challenge after hours of looking. The truth is, however, that I don’t actually believe battlegrounds had that much of an impact on the death of world PvP. More likely, the lack of reward for world PvP is what’s diminished it. In Ultima Online you can loot the corpse of any player you happen to kill, but in World of Warcraft the best thing you can do is humiliate them. There’s generally no thrill for either the killer or the killed; the only reward is bragging rights and the punishment is a mere annoyance. This is simply due to the constraints of games created today and how they’re marketed to a much broader, and usually more casual, group of players instead of simply the most hardcore.

This is where battlegrounds fill gap and provide a reward for playing successfully. Providing gear for PvP was a great implementation, but allowing for branching tiers between PvE and PvP gear is relatively ingenious. By providing a set of gear that gives an advantage in PvP, but is relatively weaker in PvE content, developers found a way to nearly double the grind by throwing together a few arenas and battlegrounds. This satisfies the entitled nature of most players by providing an incentive to keep progressing instead of simply enjoying the game. Instead of ruining PvP, it’s more likely that battlegrounds have preserved a semblance of it, instead of letting it completely slip away.

 

Highlight 4;

If a game focuses on one main aspect it tends to do that one thing better than if it tries to be multifaceted. The disappearance of world PvP can possibly be attributed to better alternatives for competitive pvpers due to the inherent issues that arise in MMORPG PvP. Besides being fairly uninteresting to watch, MMORPG content is usually impossible to properly balance when dealing with scaling gear and two different environments. Even World of Warcraft, which used to have a very respectable following for its Arena, has fallen out of the competitive scene. There are now many alternatives that take the aspects of MMORPGs that players love such as leveling, customizable skills/ loadouts and general character progression and then focus entirely on PvP. There’s such a large variety of competitive PvP genres out there (MOBAs, RTS, FPS, hybrids) that interest in MMORPG PvP has been waning for some time.

WildStar is a great example of a game with exciting world PvP that still managed to die out after a few months.

So if there are so many better choices out there, why are players still choosing to play MMORPG battlegrounds? The reasons obviously vary depending on the type of player. Some actually like, or are just used to, the combat and for others it’s simply convenient because they already happen to enjoy the PvE content. Additionally, there are still players that just enjoy ganking, griefing or just asserting dominance over other players by acquiring the best gear in the game. There will probably always be a decent player base for PvP combat in MMORPGs, which is why battlegrounds have proven so successful, but there has definitely been a shift towards more casual content. One example of an MMORPG attempting to implement hardcore PvP was WildStar with its Warplots that almost no one in the entire game saw because of the difficult requirements, merely getting 40 people together was near impossible, and lack of rewards. If players require an incentive to play PvP content, it’s probably not that great.d entirely on the game, and good PvP does not necessarily make a successful game.tead of letting it completely slip away.

 

Highlight 5;

In the end there really isn’t a winner between battlegrounds and open-world PvP. Each style caters to a completely different audience and it’s not my place to say which one is more righteous. While I might love the thrill of open-world PvP, it feels watered down when all of the risk is removed. On the other hand, battlegrounds provide a quick fix for third-person combat, but they generally don’t deliver as good of content as games that are dedicated to PvP. Furthermore, there are varying degrees of quality in similar types of content. In Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn, the Wolves’ Den is definitely not the pinnacle of arena-based combat, but Heroes Ascent in Guild Wars was some of the most exhilarating content I’ve ever experience. Whether one type of PvP is good or not can depend entirely on the game, and good PvP does not necessarily make a successful game.

 

Please take your time to read the above. It's my thoughts but explained in a perfect way in proper english.

- There is a reason as to why i suggest that they don't try and mix up OW/Arena style but instead keep it as two separate games so to speak. I'm not some "OW/Eco guy". I'm a person who likes Naval Action very much and would hate to see it ruined because of some "Arena guy"  I'd much rather see the game become one of the most popular games out there and personally i think the way to do is to keep Arena and OW apart. Don't mix it up. Nobody really wants that... The people who doesn't like risk and would like to play OW can easily roll Neutral and have a peaceful trip around the carribean (Mind the pirates ofcourse).

[TommyShelby]

 

admin, on 19 Jul 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

Current goal is to find OW problems and fix them.

I would like to remind you all how skirmish started.

When skirmish tests opened at the end of November the choice of the team was in player hands.

But instead of arranging equal battles with friends against friends, players were joining one side to sealclub new players who just joined on another side.

Players were ganking in skirmish, can you imagine?

That forced us to implement autobalancer

Then players started to run from skirmish battles (with NO losses, no costs, no durabilities and free repairs) wasting other team's time. That was solved by battle circle.

Skirmish became fun after harsh measures were implemented that were completely unhistorical (like magical battle circle).

We have not implemented paywalls, heavy grind and other elements other companies use. Average time to unlock next ship was approximately 20 battles based on average damage.

In WOT you need at least 400 battles to unlock Jagdtiger from the Ferdinand. And it is only for unlock, then you need another 100-200 battles to earn cash for it. And another 500 battles to fully open all upgrades for Jagdtiger (numbers are approximate).

Once everyone got Victory people stopped playing and started to ask for the OW. Now we have OW and post captains and commodores of the world have started to ask for the skirmish 

Perhaps you all just secretly want a hardcore lineage 1/2 grind, where you will need 1500 pvp battles to open a Surprise Class? And people who sail a 3rd rate will be a rare sight because no average player can achieve 2000 victories while keeping 70% win rate because it is the only way to get a line ship from the admiralty.

ps. what we learned from all this by the way is that we should ignore immersion if immersion breaking features can improve the gameplay.

- Would it hurt to have both? Let the Dedicated PvP players have the OW with great risk and reward and let the more casual pvp'ers have the Arena. (Dedicated pvp'ers referring to the people who like risk and reward as described in my quoting of the article, in my latest comment.) 

 

I'll throw in another quote, this time by Crankey; 

 

Crankey, on 19 Jul 2015 - 1:38 PM, said:

The players who enjoy OW will still play OW regardless of the skirmish room being active. You max out the testing potential of the games mechanics in this case by re-introducing the skirmish rooms.

- Not only would you max out the testing potential but you would also be able to attract an even bigger crowd of people. People who loves arena play (Casual PvP'ers) where there is no risk would be playing skirmish most of the time and might enjoy a trip around the carribbean once in a while. People who loves great risk and reward (Dedicated PvP'ers) would be spending most of their time in OW and might enjoy a 100% fair battle once in a while without having to worry about his valuable ship and modules. People who loves both things (I have no term) would be spending 50% of their time in OW and 50% in skrimish mode. I'd think that would attract a bigger crowd? 

[Taito Magatsu]

Thx TommyShelby that is exactly what it will be if the Naval Action drifting away from his central Idee. Great exposing. This are the word I wound say.

1+

[LeBoiteux]

Let the Dedicated PvP players have the OW with great risk and reward and let the more casual players have the Arena. (Dedicated pvp'ers referring to the people who like risk and reward as described in my quoting of the article, in my latest comment.) 

No thanks.

Btw PVP players and casual aren't antonym. That's PVP vs PVE or casual vs hardcore gamers. No reason to give OW to PVP or hardcore gamers and Arena to PVE or casual gamers.

You can be a casual PVP player who likes both Arena and OW or a hardcore gamer who likes Arena...

And OW is also perfect for PVE...

And right now, it is OW that is under development, not an arena mode.

Edited July 19, 2015 by LeBoiteux

[TommyShelby]

No thanks.

Btw PVP players and casual aren't antonym. That's PVP vs PVE or casual vs hardcore gamers. No reason to give OW to PVP or hardcore gamers and Arena to PVE or casual gamers.

You can be a casual PVP player who likes both Arena and OW or a hardcore gamer who likes Arena...

And OW is also perfect for PVE...

Read both of my comments again please..

[LeBoiteux]

Time is not to attract crowd but to test OW : travel speed and combat mechanics such as RoE.

[jodgi]

 ...But i would hate to see the two mixed into one...

To me it seems the developers are trying to do just that. 

 

I don't hate the idea of OW, but there are a few issues where openness seems to be in conflict with quality and fun PVP. I don't have the answers but I take the liberty of poking at everyone who writes as if they have all the answers.

 

If (good/quality/fun) PVP was so easy to find why do others and myself complain? You can't just jedi-mindtrick us into seeing the world through your eyes.

 

[edit]

 

Remember I'm just a disruptive PVP monkey, you can't expect me to have the attention span to read that wall of text.

Edited July 19, 2015 by jodgi

[TommyShelby]

Time is not to attract crowd but to test OW : travel speed and combat mechanics such as RoE.

We are discussing that as we speak. Read the wall of text.. 

[BungeeLemming]

[...]

 

[edit]

 

Remember I'm just a disruptive PVP monkey, you can't expect me to have the attention span to read that wall of text.

The idea behind a discussion is that everyone posting here does know whats beeing said. And that there is something to be added to the discussion. As such we do expect you to read bevore posting a reply.

 

Please. If you dont have time reading yourself into the topic, dont post at all. Its offending the users who are engaged with the issue and want to be constructive.

[jodgi]

The idea behind a discussion is that everyone posting here does know whats beeing said. And that there is something to be added to the discussion. As such we do expect you to read bevore posting a reply.

 

Please. If you dont have time reading yourself into the topic, dont post at all. Its offending the users who are engaged with the issue and want to be constructive.

Why so serious?

 

It was a tongue-in-cheek way of letting him know to condense his thoughts instead of brute forcing with text saturation.

 

[edit]

Since we're in this thread and to avoid confusion: I do not wish for NA to become an arena MMO.

Edited July 19, 2015 by jodgi

[Styles]

First and foremost I'd like to say this post may come across as pessimistic but please bare with me and consider the points I am about to make.

 

I had high hopes....

I really tried to bare with you, but i had a hard time from there on.

Loosing hopes at this stage of developement is just...wrong?

 

Maybe my post here isn´t very polite and certainly not constructive, i apologise Madoc. And to a certain degree i can see where you are coming from (...again) - i enjoyed ST more than OW myself.

But man...21st century-attention-spans really give me the creeps.

[Principe]

No, I'd quit the game and so will others. Arena-deathmatch every single day would bore me to death.

[Principe]

I honestly believe that the height of this game was in sea trials. We all sit around with 100 or so ppl in ow thinking "where are the people?". "Maybe the problem is the admin needs to open this game up on steam?" I honestly at this point believe (IN MY POINT OF VIEW) its just not worth it to spend many hours getting a bigger ship and spend more countless hours leveling up for a bigger ship for that rare pvp experience in the ow.  ITS JUST NOT WORTH THE EFFORT. Maybe we got spoiled in sea trials but the reality is WE ALL JUST WANT TO FIGHT! I have never seen more than 150 in ow but ive seen way more in sea trials.The ganking, unfair battles, loss of durabilities, boarding combat problems, etc.,etc.did not happen in sea trials. And now that we are trying to figure out how to have fair fights and no ganking we are basically reducing ourselves back to sea trials. I know ppl wont like my sentiments here, thats understandable. But in my honest opinion...maybe the open world can be an abstract idea part of some long campaign. Rather than spend long hours of looking for pvp that just doesnt exist. I talked 9 friends into buying this game and only 3 of them play it at all anymore. The admin wants to talk about those ppl that only play for 10 minutes of OW, I'll tell you why. They are bored, they already feel they have put there time in getting bigger ships, the juice isnt worth the squeeze. So really this is a major turning point. Can the devs make this game fun and attractive to everyone that had purchased (or will purchase), will we be stuck with 150 regular players in the OW, or can we turn this game into fun action that anyone can spend an hour a night on and still be at an even keel with others. I know it hurts-but this is the truth

 

You're not really thinking in general view-point. Did you see the effect of ST anyways? It gets boring too fast; heck the thought of it bores me. 

I honestly believe that you need to look at this issue in the long run; not just for yourself but for the player-base as a whole.

[Sir Madoc]

No, I'd quit the game and so will others. Arena-deathmatch every single day would bore me to death.

 

That's under the assumption that Arena-deathmatch would be the only game mode included if this was to be an Arena MMO.

 

You're not really thinking in general view-point. Did you see the effect of ST anyways? It gets boring too fast; heck the thought of it bores me.

I honestly believe that you need to look at this issue in the long run; not just for yourself but for the player-base as a whole.

The main effect of ST that I saw was that everyone was having a whole load of fun. People only stopped playing it when they announced the OW was almost ready for release right after they added the new ships. ST was just one game-mode (or two if you count the battle of Trafalgar) and would still have needed a lot of work to become a fully fledged Arena game..

Edited July 20, 2015 by Madoc

[Principe]

No, you're completely blinded to a factor. 

 

Let me just say it right now.

 

 

Gamer in this generation have very short-attention span thus by taking this game and scraping the whole idea of OW into a full Arena MMO (By the way, you can't really call it MMO when its really all lobby...) you will see the game decline in a matter of months. The only reason why LoL & DOTA 2 are still alive despite their arena-estique is simply because they're one of the first one to hype it and it's competitive and fast-paced. 

 

Moreover, like what admin said before, they want to try to make a game that is on their vision unlike others; so scraping the OW idea to be a mere 1000th copy of Arena is not just a simply stupid but also very costly. 

 

TLDR: People will grind till Santi and will therefore quit afterwards leaving only a few behind leaving the game obsolete of activity.

 

You have your opinions but don't try to force your ideals onto us; this is alpha. Unlike you, we can wait till it develop into something greater. If you have that low of a confidence then I think we'll need another tester to fill up the spot. That and there's other games for you. 

 

 

And lastly, Arena MMO, do you even know what you're saying now? Arena MMO, that's only deatmatch mode... (Thinking that Trafalgar is another mode is stupid, it's another deatmatch albeit scripted)

 

 

Make a poll as well, you should know the result already by the amount of users rejecting your idea. 

Edited July 20, 2015 by Principe

[Principe]

1000th arena game in age of sail? 

Ppl, most of them anyways dont really have the time for ow. This isnt about the worth of 40$. I know Ive already gotten that from the game. In my honest opinion at this point-were not going to get big numbers in OW! Im sorry to say this but its the truth. If I was making this game-Id focus on combat mechanics, new ships, and an abstract campaign that would last a month or so. Its not the fault of the dev team in any way. OW was manufactured magnificently! The problem is that in games ppl want action, in OW that action may not happen for several days.

 

And wow, really. This staff is being so pessimistic in the development for this game. Did I just read this right? Lol

 

A staff should always be optimistic for the game with some basic worries but this guy completely said "We're not gonna make it". 

 

You're really understimating the PC gamers, once this game gets to Early Access, you're gonna have to worry about gankings everywhere cause there will be a lot of players, trust me. 

[mad_blind_eric]

@Principe

Hey. I wonder if with a lot of players, you wouldn't have to worry about a lot more Ganking as it could be entirely possible that there would be more help at hand available too. With a low player base its possible that a 3 vs 1 would be the only players in the vicinity, with a higher population there could be more people around who could come over to help. Just a thought.

[Hugh Latham]

Not sure this thread has any purpose. I doubt the devs are going to give up their goals for a shallow arena game. I don't know if anyone noticed how the player number decreased before OW testing began.

[Sir Madoc]

No, you're completely blinded to a factor. 

 

Let me just say it right now.

 

 

Gamer in this generation have very short-attention span thus by taking this game and scraping the whole idea of OW into a full Arena MMO (By the way, you can't really call it MMO when its really all lobby...) you will see the game decline in a matter of months. The only reason why LoL & DOTA 2 are still alive despite their arena-estique is simply because they're one of the first one to hype it and it's competitive and fast-paced. 

 

Moreover, like what admin said before, they want to try to make a game that is on their vision unlike others; so scraping the OW idea to be a mere 1000th copy of Arena is not just a simply stupid but also very costly.

 

Curious as to the logic behind mentioning LoL and Dota when they are completely different games? World of Warships and Robocraft are far better examples, but I beg to differ that the game would decline if it was Arena based combat MMO. Oh and talking about being first, Naval Action would be the first one to do it for the Age of Sail genre if Game-Labs decided to go that route. As TommyShelby pointed out earlier, there has not been an Arena based Age of Sail MMO game yet so it would not be an "1000th copy" and I also fail to see how it would be anymore costly than its current development model.

 

TLDR: People will grind till Santi and will therefore quit afterwards leaving only a few behind leaving the game obsolete of activity.

 

If you think that then obviously you haven't played an Arena game before. From my experience they are quite good at keeping players interested. "Grind to santi" doesn't really make sense because if this was to become an Arena MMO (which it currently is not) then there would need to be lots more ships, new game-modes and features added. You are painting a picture that it would be exactly just like the original Sea Trials which is not a fair comparison since Sea Trials was not a complete game.

 

You have your opinions but don't try to force your ideals onto us; this is alpha. Unlike you, we can wait till it develop into something greater. If you have that low of a confidence then I think we'll need another tester to fill up the spot. That and there's other games for you.

Please don't bring your rudeness to this thread. The discussion has managed to be civil so far and I would like to keep it that way.

I don't think I've forced my ideals, I simply shared my opinion which is formed from my long experience in the gaming world and speculated a little.

 

 

And lastly, Arena MMO, do you even know what you're saying now? Arena MMO, that's only deatmatch mode... (Thinking that Trafalgar is another mode is stupid, it's another deatmatch albeit scripted)

Yes, but I don't think you do. Arena MMO's can be much more than "only deathmatch mode" (I only mentioned Trafalgar as an example btw).

 

 

Make a poll as well, you should know the result already by the amount of users rejecting your idea.

Funny you should say that. I remember the original poll for the Open World and I was one of the people who voted for it. But I actually think less people would be in favor for it now compared to last time due to the initial disappointment many people have expressed.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Madoc

[Sir Madoc]

Not sure this thread has any purpose. I doubt the devs are going to give up their goals for a shallow arena game. I don't know if anyone noticed how the player number decreased before OW testing began.

 

The thread is a discussion about the current development model.

 

I didn't make it with an expectation that anything would come of it, but I think it's been interesting seeing peoples opinions on the pro's and cons of both models.

 

I remember the end of Sea Trials clearly and the reason for the decline was because they added 4 new ships and forced people to unlock them all before being able to play with their original ship and also because people were waiting for the Open world, and (if i remember correctly) the Devs introduced ship loss or something.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Madoc

[akd]

No, some of us were just bored with Sea Trials in general.  I had some fun battles, but they started to feel repetitive.  But I am not particularly motivated to play arena style games, which to me are devoid of meaningful cooperative gameplay and almost always end up preying on people with gratification delay problems.  Only in an open world sandbox can a loss be a win (due to accomplishing some larger goal).

[Johny Reb]

Its clear to me that Madoc just likes arena style games and thats ok. NA originally talked about having an arena game followed by an OW if the players wanted it. In the end the vast majority wanted the OW so they switched gears to that. I imagine Madoc is just disappointed that his arena game is not around right now. I think thats the jist of it. All his arguments are there to simply say he wants an arena game.

 

Its not worth the time trying to convince him of OW merits or even to speak toward his arguments. Your not gonna change his mind even if you show his arguments to be weak because its not about the arguments. Those are just there for rationalization. He simply wants an arena game. He is probably a casual player that doesn't want to immerse himself in a game. He probably wants to just log on and play a few rounds and call it a night or switch to another game. Open World MMO's are much more time consuming, they encourage dedication to a cause(at least an age of sail game does), requires that you build relationships with others to survive and thrive, etc. Madok probably doesn't want to be that involved with a game so he wants arena and thats OK.

[admin]

 Open World MMO's are much more time consuming, they encourage dedication to a cause(at least an age of sail game does), requires that you build relationships with others to survive and thrive, etc. Madok probably doesn't want to be that involved with a game so he wants arena and thats OK.

 

 

I don't know if it really is so time consuming in its current state. 

I leveled a character to Post captain in just a week by just joining PvE or PvP battles of other players around La Mona, Macao and MT. 

It also seems that there is even a faster route: Being neutral in the lower Antilles sailing between oranjestad and fort de france joining other people battles.

[Sir Madoc]

Its clear to me that Madoc just likes arena style games and thats ok. NA originally talked about having an arena game followed by an OW if the players wanted it. In the end the vast majority wanted the OW so they switched gears to that. I imagine Madoc is just disappointed that his arena game is not around right now. I think thats the jist of it. All his arguments are there to simply say he wants an arena game.

 

Its not worth the time trying to convince him of OW merits or even to speak toward his arguments. Your not gonna change his mind even if you show his arguments to be weak because its not about the arguments. Those are just there for rationalization. He simply wants an arena game. He is probably a casual player that doesn't want to immerse himself in a game. He probably wants to just log on and play a few rounds and call it a night or switch to another game. Open World MMO's are much more time consuming, they encourage dedication to a cause(at least an age of sail game does), requires that you build relationships with others to survive and thrive, etc. Madok probably doesn't want to be that involved with a game so he wants arena and thats OK.

 

That's a LOT of assumptions you have just made. Just because I currently believe that Naval Action would do better as an Arena MMO does not mean I prefer them in general. From reading your post it doesn't seem like you read much of the topic before you decided to interject with those remarks...

 

Nobody has demonstrated my arguments to be weak. If they have feel free to highlight some of them as all I've seen so far on this thread is blind optimism and that's OK because I want the game to be good just as much as they do. It also appears that 6 people have liked my OP and this thread has had 1000+ views and 75+ posts so what I have said must have resonated with some people...

 

P.S: I know what Open World games are about, I've probably even played more than you. But it makes no sense to play one that is not enjoyable. I am definitely not the only one that felt the OW was an anticlimax compared to sea trials. When the game becomes fun again my views on the current game model may change.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Madoc