Yogscast just posted a Naval Action Video - New People Coming? UPDATE - (2nd Video on Feb 24th)

[Aetrion]

Someone who just wants to go around the map and get into fun fights suffers immensely from the current state of crafting, because the insistence that players need to suffer constant and severe losses purely so that crafters can sell all the crap they click into existence is the #1 thing that turns the game into a lame gankfest instead of a fun PvP experience, and on top of that punishes PvP players for actually picking fair fights instead of just ganking themselves.

[kumisz]

The "gankfest" would only be avoidable by restricting the battle instances into fix number of players vs fix number of players battles, which is not an option in an open world game. That would be a game like the World of ... games, which are nice, but don't fit well into a game like this. If the player count is not restricted, the gankfest will continue, even if you throw free ships at everyone in infinite numbers, because that's how human nature is.

 

Someone who just wants to go around the map and get into fun fights suffers immensely from the current state of crafting, because the insistence that players need to suffer constant and severe losses purely so that crafters can sell all the crap they click into existence is the #1 thing that turns the game into a lame gankfest instead of a fun PvP experience, and on top of that punishes PvP players for actually picking fair fights instead of just ganking themselves.

[Aetrion]

It would make a difference, because for one there is a huge difference between "Let's stack the odds so we win" and "Let's stack the odds so we take no losses", and secondly, no matter how you slice it in order for someone to win in PvP someone else has to lose, so as long as losing is the absolute worst thing you can do in the game that means every single fight that happens is to someone's detriment, and never something both parties simply enjoy.

 

It's  also not about infinite free ships, it's about not trying to limit everything only by economy, because to many players the economy in this game is pure grind. I mean, I can appreciate diligence as a positive quality in a gamer and that some people enjoy gameplay elements that reward careful and persistent work over taking risks. However, to people who are looking for ways to exercise their acumen or skill above all else having the entire game throttled by a test of diligence isn't exactly a great state of affairs.

 

I think all the different types of players can coexist in the game, if they are willing to be a bit reasonable about when they are infringing too far on someone else's ability to do what they want. If everything in the game was free and crafting were entirely pointless I would be arguing for more systems that make crafters necessary. But right now everything in the game is bottlenecked by crafting to the point where it's choking out the fun of anyone who's looking for a session based PvP experience rather than persistent clan wars.

[kumisz]

I don't know know if we play the same game, but there is incredible overproduction in the most used ship classes. The ones that are rare are rare because the very much RNG based blueprint drops (looking at Trincomalee), which is not the fault of the players, or the entire crafting and economy system, but only a variable that needs to be changed.

 

right now everything in the game is bottlenecked by crafting to the point where it's choking out the fun of anyone who's looking for a session based PvP experience

[maturin]

Someone who just wants to go around the map and get into fun fights suffers immensely from the current state of crafting, because the insistence that players need to suffer constant and severe losses purely so that crafters can sell all the crap they click into existence is the #1 thing that turns the game into a lame gankfest instead of a fun PvP experience, and on top of that punishes PvP players for actually picking fair fights instead of just ganking themselves.

This is such gibberish, it's hilarious.

 

Crafting causes ganks? What? Human nature causes ganks. You could remove crafting and loss from the game entirely and people would still gank. 

 

And again, unless you are sailing around with zero regard for self preservation, AFK half the time, "constant and severe losses" is a ludicrous mischaracterization. Whining and hyperbole are an incredibly unattractive combination.

 

Most people lose a durability like once per month. If you are petrified about your numbers going down, you can manage your risk to the point where it is negligible.

[PL_Harpoon]

It's curious to me why if so many people want fair and evenly matched pvp, pvp "arena" battles are mostly empty?

[Aetrion]

I don't know know if we play the same game, but there is incredible overproduction in the most used ship classes. The ones that are rare are rare because the very much RNG based blueprint drops (looking at Trincomalee), which is not the fault of the players, or the entire crafting and economy system, but only a variable that needs to be changed.

 

The overproduction is the result of ships being essentially built from money not from time and the craft XP grind though. You trade gold for resources, you trade resources for ships, you trade ships for gold. Supply and demand don't work in an economy like that, because since the ships are made from gold they have a minimum profitable value, even if supply exceeds demand. If they were made from time price would go down as supply goes up, in turn increasing sales until they eventually meet in the right place somewhere. Crafters are also heavily incentivised to craft crap that nobody actually needs just to get XP in this game, which means they have no reason to stop flooding the market even if they can't sell anything. 

 

It amuses me that work hours are the one major cooldown system in the game that spares you from having to do repetitive stuff during actual online time to limit output, and instead just gives you a number. People who like fighting on the other hand have to put in all the time to create the gold that leaves the economy by being converted into goods. The irony is that because of that arrangement supply is practically guaranteed to exceed demand. 

 

 

Human nature causes ganks.

 

How come all the most popular games in the world are match based PvP with fair teams then? Sure, when thrown into a game that has extremely unfavorable rules for people who play fair people will adapt, but the vast majority of people simply avoid games that penalize fair play. So no, ganking is not human nature. Human nature is to avoid games that favor ganking.

 

 

It's curious to me why if so many people want fair and evenly matched pvp, pvp "arena" battles are mostly empty?

 

Because the game gives a huge penalty to the losing side, and in a fair fight you have a 50% chance to be on the losing side. Even if that wasn't the case, the match format is unrefined since it lets people just give you the runaround for 30 minutes, rather than letting you capture their base or something to win if they refuse to fight.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Aetrion

[kumisz]

This is basically how money works. You can buy resources for money. You can hire workers to produce something out of the resources for money. You sell the product for money.

 

Just getting the resources takes time. Regaining labor hours takes time. What more time do you need?

 

The overproduction is the result of ships being essentially built from money not from time and the craft XP grind though. You trade gold for resources, you trade resources for ships, you trade ships for gold. Supply and demand don't work in an economy like that, because since the ships are made from gold

[maturin]

 

 

How come all the most popular games in the world are match based PvP with fair teams then? Sure, when thrown into a game that has extremely unfavorable rules for people who play fair people will adapt, but the vast majority of people simply avoid games that penalize fair play. So no, ganking is not human nature. Human nature is to avoid games that favor ganking.

You just made my point for me.

 

Left to their own devices, players will engage in unfair fights. That's why many games enforce fair fights.

 

 

 

 

Human nature is to avoid games that favor ganking.

So why haven't you left?

[Goodblue]

Good thing Duncan likes the combat. He doesn't know a lot of the game but at least he enjoys it. Lewis is too impatient to play this game but it was pretty funny hearing him complain why this battle took so long while they both miss like 90% of their shots. Maybe we should give them some advice so they can at least improve their game.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Henry d'Esterre Darby
Stay on topic and address the points please.

[Aetrion]

Just getting the resources takes time. Regaining labor hours takes time. What more time do you need?

 

It's not about something taking time, it's about people exchanging their time. This game doesn't allow the economy to adjust prices based on what people think their time is worth.

 

In a normal MMO the crafter spends time to get resources, and the fighter spends time to get money. They then exchange the money and the resources, at a rate that represents the relative supply of both. If there is too much money in the game you get fewer items for it. If there are too many items in the game you get less money for them.

 

In Naval action on the other hand the crafter doesn't spend time to get resources, the crafter mostly spends money to get them. Because the exchange rate of money to resources is set by the game there no longer is an organic adjustment of the price of goods. You can't sell them for less than you bought the resources for even if the market is absolutely flooded and by raw supply and demand their value should tank.

 

Left to their own devices, players will engage in unfair fights. That's why many games enforce fair fights.

 

Left to their own devices players will overwhelmingly choose interactive entertainment that values fair play over that which doesn't. 

[AGermanGuy]

I am in fear that because of this *** video even less new people will come to this game because judging from the comments under the video many people seem to think this game is garbage just because yogcast doesnt know what theyre doing there.

 

Another reason why i hate big youtubers.

[Slamz]

This is a pretty good look at how most people are going to view this game. 

 

"Why did you pick this up?" - "Because I like ships" pretty much sums up why a lot of people are going to be disappointed when they find out that the game really doesn't cater to that simple fascination but instead makes ships into a currency you spend in huge clan wars that most people don't even remotely have the time to engage in. It could easily have both without compromising its principles if it tried.

 

Depends on who you're trying to attract.

 

Frankly if you want to attract people who merely like ships then this should be a single player offline roleplaying game in the line of Sea Dogs. The content for getting and keeping "people who like ships" simply is not here and will probably take years to develop -- storylines, quests, epic battles (vaguely tilted in favor of the player to win, of course, as is the nature of roleplaying game combat), that sort of thing. We might also want avatar development and detailed ship interiors in that case.

 

That's not what this game is right now and I hope it's not what it becomes.

 

If you want to attract people who enjoy big ship PvP then we are headed down the right path, and ships must be seen as tools of the war, to be built and lost as needed for the war effort. (If anything, we could probably stand to reduce durability a bit.)

[Aetrion]

Equating PvP with losses is completely absurd, it doesn't in any way resemble the reality of what kinds of game systems produce popular games in the actual market. 

 

It also relies on this notion that the game must be 100% one way and not be inclusive to any other playstyles to work, which is simply false. There is no reason why it can't have the grand scale clan wars with an attrition element and at the same time have enjoyable PvP for people who don't like grinding for stuff all day, spend all their time playing with 30 nerds in their ear, and stay up will 4am to defend harbors. 

 

Also there are more choices than trying please absolutely everyone and trying to please nobody but a tiny minority of people. They don't have to make WoW with ships, but classic UO with ships is not unreasonable to shoot for. 

Edited February 25, 2016 by Aetrion

[Slamz]

Equating PvP with losses is completely absurd, it doesn't in any way resemble the reality of what kinds of game systems produce popular games in the actual market. 

 

Doesn't it?

 

Counterstrike: die and lose your gun. You have to buy a new gun in the next round. Not much, but it's something and you can't always have the best gun.

EVE: 'nuff said.

And a big part of the basis of the RTS and MOBA genres is that the game isn't persistent so effectively you lose everything and start over from scratch each match whether you win or not. Point being people do not need some concept of "persistent rewards" to make a PvP game be fun. Sometimes starting over is a huge part of the game's mechanics, even.

 

Really the idea that PvP is just a flat fight between two players who don't stand to gain or lose anything (or lose very little) is the oddball, and was mostly embraced by a whole lot of PvP environments I think were largely considered to be a failure by the PvP gaming community, e.g., SWTOR, Warhammer Online, GW2, ESO, etc. You play GW2 WvW, you lose nothing when you die and I dunno about you but I think 90% of my guild had quit that game by the end of the second month because with no risk comes very minimal thrill.

 

 

Naval Action is thrilling in a way that a lot of these other games are not.

 

I'm playing Naval Action, fighting the very group that hates me the most, with a bounty on my head, smack talking them in the forums while sailing in a golden Surprise with purple permanent fittings, hitting people in their reinforcement zones in an area I am well known for hunting in. Short of filling my hold with compass wood I don't know how to make my risk get any higher and it's pretty awesome. It's still, frankly, not much risk, but it's a nice little thrill, knowing something is on the line.

 

I think you've talked before about keeping the risk but shifting it to something other than ships, which might work, but putting the risk directly in the ship we are using to fight with seems like an obvious choice.

[Aetrion]

Eve is not one of the most popular games out there by a long shot. It's a niche title that has been in decline in recent years and even in its heyday could never actually account for how many of its subscribers were real people and how many were secondary accounts which they encouraged through all sorts of ingame systems that made multi-accounts highly profitable. 

 

Games that escalate throughout the match like MOBAs or Counterstrike aren't an example of people losing stuff and how it makes games better. It's just an example of escalation mechanics in matches. Unless you want to argue that you should start a fight in a cutter and then gradually over the next half hour turn into a first rate and then lose it again when the fight is over your point there is moot. 

 

SWTOR, GW2 and ESO all have significantly larger PvP communities than this game and plenty of people are happy with them the way they are. Besides, once again, you simply ignore the fact that there is no reason why high stakes clan wars can't exist in the same world as the other stuff. 

 

Putting the risk directly on the ship is the obvious choice, but that doesn't mean it's the best choice. I explained a dozen times that there are plenty of other ways to have loss mechanics and I'm even in favor of significantly harsher losses as long as they run on additional system that people can't just break by grinding more than their opponent.

[Admiral 8Q]

I did some searches on Youtube the last while, there is 99% good or decent videoes compared to this stupid one. 

[Ghroznak]

Putting the risk directly on the ship is the obvious choice, but that doesn't mean it's the best choice. I explained a dozen times that there are plenty of other ways to have loss mechanics and I'm even in favor of significantly harsher losses as long as they run on additional system that people can't just break by grinding more than their opponent.

 

Not that I support this mentality, and I know it's somewhat oversimplified, but I won't deny that it is present for more people than you'd think... 

 

"Where is the fun in sinking someone if they don't even lose their ship?"

 

I've seen this mentality in almost every open world game out there. EVE and Elite are two great examples. You'd think pirates in those games were happy if the victim stopped and just gave them the cargo... but no... 9 times out of 10 it's not about the cargo. It's not even about being better than the enemy, in which case you would simply bring the fight to where he is defeated and has no chance of escape... and then simply let him go.

 

No... 9 times out of 10 it's about blowing up your ship, cargo or no cargo.

 

Because some people just like to watch the world burn I guess.

 

As I said, I don't support that mentality, but IS prevalent in these open world games that have PvP.

[Aetrion]

Yea, and there is honestly nothing inherently wrong with wanting a satisfying and definitive victory. Where it becomes a problem is when people insist that their opponent has to suffer some consequence that reduces their enjoyment of the game, because then the community just starts to cannibalize itself. 

 

The reason why that mentality is prevalent is though isn't because those are the only people who play open world games. It's because open world games are always developed to cater to that extremely loud minority rather than actually offering things to do for other people as well.

 

The exact same discussion I'm having here with people happened a thousand times over in games like Darkfall or Mortal and so many other games that wanted to be open world and are now in maintenance mode or defunct because they bought into the "casuals aren't loyal, don't put anything that interests them in!" bullcrap. The loyalty of the hardcore crowd is just as fickle and there are plenty of dead games to prove it. The only games that ever seem to do well long term are the ones that have both and allow a revolving door between those two worlds.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Aetrion

[jodgi]

Someone who just wants to go around the map and get into fun fights suffers immensely from the current state of crafting, because the insistence that players need to suffer constant and severe losses purely so that crafters can sell all the crap they click into existence is the #1 thing that turns the game into a lame gankfest instead of a fun PvP experience, and on top of that punishes PvP players for actually picking fair fights instead of just ganking themselves.

As a hardcore crafter myself I can confirm. The system penalizes the PVP solo player. He can't get the best ships or upgrades, you absolutely have to be part of a group or know a crafter to have access to the good stuff.

Puchu has done a PVP experiment these last few weeks. He's done a lot of PVP and reports it makes him poor (I asked him to gather his thoughts and data and post here, we'll see). This is not your average player either. He's among the best trained and practiced PVP players on the servers, his only weakness is he likes to fight players and not avoid anything that might turn into a gank all the time. He also has access to whatever stuff he wants at low or no cost through his friends.

I don't worry about Puchu. He will keep at PVP regardless. But what happens to "average" fun loving players when the game tells them PVP comes with a fun-tax?

Like I've said before; I don't know all the answers and I don't want to take away other people's enjoyment.

But I disagree with those that want to keep loss no matter what and dismisses discussion on pros and cons.

#1mintimers!

#lossupfordiscussion

[maturin]

It would kill you to sail in something other than a yellow ship?

 

With the current hold capacities it takes not much time at all to amass crafting notes, so it should really be a question of how often you lose ships. Sometimes you might have to sail something that isn't yellow (the horror!).

[Aetrion]

It's not about wanting to always sail in a yellow ships, it's about not wanting people who cheese harder and DO always have a yellow ship to constantly have an advantage in a fight.

 

It's about not wanting to be shut out of the competitive combat element because you don't have the time to be a competitive grindmonkey.

 

 

I mean they could just get rid of magic ships and make them all the same, that'd be fine. Don't throw MMORPG tropes in a game if you aren't willing to treat them like an MMORPG does. If they want a power progression then make it a real progression people can play through at their own pace. If they want fair combat then don't allow people who grind the hardest to just buy power.

 

Either make it a skill based combat game or make it a progression game. Don't make it some ridiculous frankengame between the two just because the tiny number of people who benefit from that BS love the imbalance it introduces. 

Edited March 1, 2016 by Aetrion

[kumisz]

Not like a non-yellow ship would lock you out of competitive combat. Your maneouvering skill, gunnery and sail handling gives a MUCH bigger advantage than any fancy upgrade that lets you have 5% more armor.

 

It's not about wanting to always sail in a yellow ships, it's about not wanting people who cheese harder and DO always have a yellow ship to constantly have an advantage in a fight.

 

It's about not wanting to be shut out of the competitive combat element because you don't have the time to be a competitive grindmonkey.

[Aetrion]

Not like a non-yellow ship would lock you out of competitive combat. Your maneouvering skill, gunnery and sail handling gives a MUCH bigger advantage than any fancy upgrade that lets you have 5% more armor.

 

Oh right, the old "It's not broken because it doesn't matter" argument.

 

Then why even have it?

 

Just get rid of the magic ships if it doesn't matter anyways. 

[Bleakbeard]

I'm playing Naval Action, fighting the very group that hates me the most, with a bounty on my head, smack talking them in the forums while sailing in a golden Surprise with purple permanent fittings, hitting people in their reinforcement zones in an area I am well known for hunting in. Short of filling my hold with compass wood I don't know how to make my risk get any higher and it's pretty awesome. It's still, frankly, not much risk, but it's a nice little thrill, knowing something is on the line.

 

Try sailing that ship solo in hostile waters without calling in 6 clan members and 5 or more in national chat.