Blackjack Morgan Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Before, you always started at a good distance from the enemy. After patch, you can start within a biscuit toss of the enemy. I believe the loading of guns gives everyone a moment to get sails up and start maneuvers. You gained at least one rank. They lowered the XP requirements for each rank so your existing rank increased. Well before I got within a biscuit toss I sure as hell would have told my gunners to load the damn cannons.....this is just plain stupid and makes no sense at all. This patch overall is a step backwards in what otherwise has been a very positive process. My suggestion, along with what seems to be more than a few, would be to revert back to post patch and refine things a bit more before pushing it out. Furthermore....settle on the damn battle mechanics already these things have been tested and refined enough as is....plenty of us have over 2000 hours in this game giving feedback and critical analysis of the combat systems. I don't see a need to further tweak a system that the vast majority of testers really liked and gave glowing reviews of.
Blood Eagle Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 I might start playing again now that they got rid of the stupid grind.... good move
Quineloe Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Fail to see how it's a cheap shot. I believe the pve server exists for a reason and my opinion is just as valid as theirs. However, I am a pvp player. If you only want certain types of pvp then perhaps a completely open pvp server isn't the best option for you. well maybe you should play POBS if you want unrestricted ganking warfare. Maybe this game isn't for you. That's why it's a cheap shot.
Gordon MacBeth Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) "Leaks - Completely out of hand. needs a hotfix asap. To quote Admiral Jellico at Jutland...... "There seems to be something wrong with our ships today" Edited April 14, 2016 by Gordon MacBeth 1
Rigel Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Can we please stop with these "Play on a PVE Server" cheap shots already? There's many people who like most kinds of PVP, but not the 10vs1 gank. Their opinion is as valid as yours. It seems ridiculous to have one option without the other… If it's supposed to be a realistic open world environment and require you to weigh the pros and cons of your decisions and punish you for not paying attention (not being new or low level), then why would you put restrictions on it. It makes no sense... I only want to fight, but only if it's a fair fight. That's not how things work. 1
Quineloe Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 It seems ridiculous to have one option without the other… If it's supposed to be a realistic open world environment and require you to weigh the pros and cons of your decisions and punish you for not paying attention (not being new or low level), then why would you put restrictions on it. It makes no sense... I only want to fight, but only if it's a fair fight. That's not how things work. Since it is not obvious enough, I am not talking about the matter at hand but the incredibly toxic non-argument "this game is not for you, play something else" . It can be used in any situation, since it doesn't require any real argument to be brought in. It's basically some sort of gaming Godwin. And straw man arguments are not exactly appropriate here either.
Inkompetent Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Scale is very important for the tactical battles. The tactical battles were the real deal and looked and felt realistic. The open world was always abstract but good enough for travel and other functions. However the new land patch now brings that sense of compression, scale abstraction and general lack of immersion into the tactical battles. It's strange to sail across an entire bay in a tactical battle in 5 seconds. It feels like I am in a small bay sailing a lazer rather than actually sailing in an ocean. Some have pointed out the problems with entire headlands being only a few ship lengths across and 7km wide in real life. This is how I feel right now in tactical battles. A giant ship looking at minature land and sea features. A model boat that is large against the pond it is sailing in. I feel like gulliver would have felt. A giant ship. Agreed. I'd like the actual battle to scale the map up 10-20x or something. Not sure how feasible that would be to do with any reasonable detail or accuracy the way the game world is designed, but it'd be much more immersive.
Rigel Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Since it is not obvious enough, I am not talking about the matter at hand but the incredibly toxic non-argument "this game is not for you, play something else" . It can be used in any situation, since it doesn't require any real argument to be brought in. It's basically some sort of gaming Godwin. And straw man arguments are not exactly appropriate here either. Fair enough. I believe I have legitimate reasoning behind my arguments but as you have pointed out, you are more concerned with the posts that are simply, "this game is not for you" or simply "go to a pve server" without any type of logical debate with why that would be a solution.
surfimp Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Guys, just got my first land-in battle, and it was awesome. The rest of this stuff - ramming, leaking, etc etc etc - I am confident will get sorted out in time. But the land in battles are totally awesome and hugely welcomed. I had high hopes and they exceed them. STOKED! 2
Red Jack Walker Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 I'm not sure I'm on board with the new cannon penetration values or perhaps it was an adjustment to armor values? Not sure exactly which one but it does seem like our ships are a lot more flimsy then they were before the patch. The problem being is that there has been a long, long history of continually tweaking various ship values and performance....whether that be gun penetration, armor values, leaks, mast strength, gun loadouts, turning performance etc. Some of this has been good and some bad but that is what testing is for so no complaints. However, have we not tested the heck out of all this mostly in sea trials leading up to Early Access? Were there still complaints about how the combat mechanics felt? It seemed to me we had achieved a happy place regarding it so why keep messing with it? Work on other stuff There are good things in this patch but I really wish we would have just left the combat dynamics/performance part alone. I totally agree with this post. Combat gameplay was really good before patch and had a good balance in my opinion. I'm really sorry to say this, but game is less funny and balanced now . However give Devs some credit: I'm sure they will address all those issues as soon as possible . 4
surfimp Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 I totally agree with this post. Combat gameplay was really good before patch and had a good balance in my opinion. I'm really sorry to say this, but game is less funny and balanced now . However give Devs some credit: I'm sure they will address all those issues as soon as possible all those capped-from-AI 3rd rates are sunk . FTFY 2
Naughty Nancy O'Malley Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 The XP for the next level went up - ///// Sorry, this is getting tiresome - i'll be playing more IL2
Naughty Nancy O'Malley Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 how about dropping everyone a gold 3rd rate.................
Quineloe Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 The XP for the next level went up - ///// Sorry, this is getting tiresome - i'll be playing more IL2 No it went down.
Alado Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) anyone know when new update or fix will be released ? Edited April 14, 2016 by Alado
Vernon Merrill Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 anyone know when new update or fix will be released ? Update or fix for what?! Devs have said everything is as intended. Enjoy your testing!
Woody051 Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Yeah the leak system is a hot topic all over the Reddit too https://www.reddit.com/r/NavalAction/
snackbar Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) Since it is not obvious enough, I am not talking about the matter at hand but the incredibly toxic non-argument "this game is not for you, play something else" . It can be used in any situation, since it doesn't require any real argument to be brought in. It's basically some sort of gaming Godwin. And straw man arguments are not exactly appropriate here either. Well i hope this doesn't descend into some stupid finger pointing argument but anyways. You literally just said to me "this game is not for you, play something else" when you said "go play potbs is you want unrestricted warfare" whereas I never said this to you. That's pretty hypocritical and in all honesty not what this thread is for. I merely said there is a server type for the type of gameplay you desire and explained why ganking was a core part of the server I play on. If you don't like it that's fine but don't come trying to ruin my gameplay when there's a clear server type for what you want. Don't vilify ganking when it has legitimate uses in an OW pvp game. On another note, I initially thought that removing capped ships was a bad idea but I am finding it to be quite a nice change. Edited April 14, 2016 by snackbar 1
Bobert Sauce Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 As an active player, I feel that I should give feedback on this new patch. Like most here, the leaks are insane. If we crew a ship and it sinks in 20 seconds, how do we utilize repairs. As for ramming, there is no reason a small merc should be able to sink a third rate with one hit. As for the battles, the fleet missions are great, but with out being able to cap at least a third rate to use the loss of one large ship is hard to stomach. Could we consider paying an insurance fee for the 1 or 2 durability ships like the victory? I would not like to pay for materials to see her sank on first voyage because an AI runs into me. And a good addition might be the mailing of ships. I would pay to ship a ship in the same way that deliveries work. For the gamer who doesn't have 12 hours a day to play, or the money to purchase multiple accounts I can not possible have ships everywhere.
Quineloe Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 I used this as an example to show why it's bad form to argue like this. And apparently it worked, you didn't like it. Learn from that.
Fletch Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 My thoughts. Love the land. I like the new damage and leak system its ended the days of pumping 1000s of shots into a boat with no armor left and its still floating. Now if one of your sides is getting badly hit you have to pull out the line before its too late. Ships also repair a lot more damage in battle than before to compensate. Leaks are dangerous as they should be. I am not a fan of the new BR system, I understand the point of it but I think it creates more negative situations than it fixes. I heard stories of big ships being rammed to death by cutters, I tried ramming a third rate in a pickle myself and I bounced off and sunk.,Its good that big ships can now run over and sink smaller ships again. Worry seems to be that 3rd rates will be ramming 1st rates in port battles so will be interesting to see what happens.
snackbar Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) I used this as an example to show why it's bad form to argue like this. And apparently it worked, you didn't like it. Learn from that. I'm sorry you're upset people disagree with you but I provided reasons so your commentary was really uncalled for and I'm not going to "learn" anything because I voiced an unpopular opinion with reasons. I mean, did you even read what I said??? Anyways, not going to hijack this thread or continue arguing about this since this thread is supposed to be about feedback not attacking people who disagree with you. Edited April 14, 2016 by snackbar 3
Sir Richard Bolitho Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 Patch try # 2....If at first.................... 1
MasterChief Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 in theory u should still cap and take warships, use a team (yourself in a "old" throwaway ship like boarding npc reno) grape the ship down, board it, take command and send ur "old" ship to admiralty, sail the captured 3rds or bigger home. not tested in praxis , but will after DT
snackbar Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) in theory u should still cap and take warships, use a team (yourself in a "old" throwaway ship like boarding npc reno) grape the ship down, board it, take command and send ur "old" ship to admiralty, sail the captured 3rds or bigger home. not tested in praxis , but will after DT Oh I misread. Pretty sure this is accounted for since they said you can still cap and use the ships in battle. Edited April 14, 2016 by snackbar
Recommended Posts