Time Sink Called Naval Action

[Vernon Merrill]

Wrong.   For a good many of us, realism=fun.

 

Again, for SOME OF US, half of the battle takes place in the 20 seconds before the battle instance begins.

 

There will ALWAYS be a line that the devs have to walk between REALISM and GAME PLAY.  Certain things, like ROE and tagging just make this more obvious.

 

Maybe you forgot to read the last line?  Or just couldnt understand it...?

[DeRuyter]

Ok...  Now there are 2 posts...  Realism = fun.

 

So you agree with me that we should make the game ironman only?  Realism = Fun, right?  You die, well, you die, right?

 

We could make it so that we do not have OW sailing at all?  All is done in the same sailing mode as combat.  Takes days irl time to sail from place to another.  Realism = Fun, right?

 

Some people want more realistic than others.  What is a correct amount of realism?  Probably some kind of compromise?

 

 

edit...

 

Oh indeed.  We can probably all agree that realism is not actually fun, right?

 

Well you actually took his post out of context. Let's go back up a few posts in summary:

 

1. Your point: Crew costs are one aspect killing the game for new players and causing them to leave.

2. Counter: IRL ships did not fight to the death they surrendered when battle was hopeless - so in game you save crew and gold.

3. Fox2run: No I want to fight to death and see ships sink

4. Vernon: Some players like more realism, ie; it is fun for them, referring to #2. Devs have fine line to walk.

5. You: As above.

 

Realism does not mean ironman mode. Plenty of mechanics to have elements of realism and fun gameplay like free teleports, OW sailing capabilities, etc.

 

I get your point and yes some people are leaving (including some veterans) because of certain game mechanics, but others leave after playing only a short time, why, because it is not their type of game or not what they thought it would be. So the question becomes how much do the devs change the mechanics because of these players?

 

Should they change much at all or just add features and content? Some people will not be happy with any changes and leave anyway.

 

In general I think you have posted well reasoned arguments and a concern that players are leaving. However some other posters rely on troll type rants like shouting that the game is boring which only serves to inflame the issue. Maybe the game is not for them.

[Bartholomew.E.Dogg]

It seems to me that many of the complaints about the way that the game works revolve around the fact that there are not instantly available fights that the player stands a good chance of winning. It is not a "shoot 'em up" arcade game, and hopefully will never move in that direction. It is the "age of sail" aspect that appeals to a lot of players and in this respect I suppose it will be something of a niche game. As it stands I think that the game strikes a good balance between realism & playability, yes there are irritations from time to time and further tweaks to be done but I'm enjoying every minute of it..  

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Naval Action gives the opportunity to plan a cruise, from your naval base, ingress into enemy held waters, to carry out your self imposed mission or global conquest aims, fight combats and struggle for supremacy with a set piece of rules which are nothing short of the most complex tabletop wargames in real time form, in which each ship is under control of your contacts and friends.

Then we all must regress back to your naval base or find a suitable free port in the area and make port and close for the day.

 

This is Naval Action core game in a nutshell.

 

What is also great is that one can simply select missions, which are fairly close to the naval bases, go in and fight some brainless AI, but also there's the option to go into arena mode and face players or AI.

 

While some of the complexity of the real world is simply impossible ( or too harsh on our home computers ) to model into the game - such as rig lines and mast tensions, for example - the core of the age of sail combat is there.

 

Deficiencies are easy to spot especially if there are details that leave us uncomfortable with our own particular way of commanding the ships in combat.

 

That doesn't make them MISTAKES. Most tactics used in game can be noted and brought to light by the thousands of naval actions in the timeline covered by the game, from epic boardings to decisive rigging dismantling, from forced surrenders to sudden explosions.

 

The BIG issue is how to make the link between the two levels.

 

I am certain the new BIG roe area will make it. We are either in the operational area and sail in the instance, as big as it may be, or we won't and forfeit participation in the combat.

 

Further and for the fast action captains - Hostility Missions - always open.

 

Good luck and look to the bright side.

[Cmdr RideZ]

Maybe you forgot to read the last line?  Or just couldnt understand it...?

I do not remember which way it was.

 

The point is not that were you right or wrong.  I have been writing my point in series of posts, when I think it should have been clear in the 1st post I made.  I suppose you understand the fact, that what you think is nice amount of realism, may not be the same for all.

 

Current time sink is a very hard thing for many.  They have hard time to play the game in the 1st place, even tho they like the game.

 

 

Forum is full of people that are veterans, and they like how the game is from many aspects.

Most of the guys who left the game, they left it without saying anything.

 

 

 

 

 

So I will have very hard time on this forum to try to "defend" the guys who left the game already.  Mainly because there are so many veteran players here, and probably ~none from the other side.  But I honestly believe that we are turning this a bit too HC for casuals.  I also believe the casuals are the biggest group of players.  I like NA because of many reasons, but I do not want to play on empty servers.  I think we should make a bit more compromises to make room for bigger audience.  The next time someone asks one dura officer, one dura ship, one dura account, stop and think about is that truly good for the game, or is that just what you want.

 

 

Good middle road I think is, that we get at least casual+ players, and some casuals as well.  If we remove casuals, and many casual+ gamers...  Yes, you may love it...  But high change that it wont be good for the game in the end.

 

When we are together on that empty server with our hc rules, it makes you to think that maybe all did not go too well.  Then we start reverting the hc rules and make it easier for casuals to play it.

 

Someone of you has been playing DDO?  The best mmorpg there has ever been.  Enemy casts blindness spell on you, and after that your screen is black, even if you die and spawn again, the screen is black.  Some people loved the game, but did you know that today the game is very different.  Have a guess..  Did they make it more HC or more casual?

 

...

 

Yes, I repeat myself, but as you may have noticed, it has not been very easy for people to understand me at all.  It can be that I articulate in a wrong way, as I am not a native.

[Mrdoomed]

I do not remember which way it was.

The point is not that were you right or wrong. I have been writing my point in series of posts, when I think it should have been clear in the 1st post I made. I suppose you understand the fact, that what you think is nice amount of realism, may not be the same for all.

Current time sink is a very hard thing for many. They have hard time to play the game in the 1st place, even tho they like the game.

Forum is full of people that are veterans, and they like how the game is from many aspects.

Most of the guys who left the game, they left it without saying anything.

So I will have very hard time on this forum to try to "defend" the guys who left the game already. Mainly because there are so many veteran players here, and probably ~none from the other side. But I honestly believe that we are turning this a bit too HC for casuals. I also believe the casuals are the biggest group of players. I like NA because of many reasons, but I do not want to play on empty servers. I think we should make a bit more compromises to make room for bigger audience. The next time someone asks one dura officer, one dura ship, one dura account, stop and think about is that truly good for the game, or is that just what you want.

Good middle road I think is, that we get at least casual+ players, and some casuals as well. If we remove casuals, and many casual+ gamers... Yes, you may love it... But high change that it wont be good for the game in the end.

When we are together on that empty server with our hc rules, it makes you to think that maybe all did not go too well. Then we start reverting the hc rules and make it easier for casuals to play it.

Someone of you has been playing DDO? The best mmorpg there has ever been. Enemy casts blindness spell on you, and after that your screen is black, even if you die and spawn again, the screen is black. Some people loved the game, but did you know that today the game is very different. Have a guess.. Did they make it more HC or more casual?

...

Yes, I repeat myself, but as you may have noticed, it has not been very easy for people to understand me at all. It can be that I articulate in a wrong way, as I am not a native.

I am one of these casual gamers you "think" you are speaking for. Will you PLEASE stop speaking for " me" ?

Perhaps say you are speaking for yourself and what you want instead of telling everyone what i want.

Thank you, from a casual player who can speak for himself.

[Vernon Merrill]

I will be the first to admit that this game, as currently implemented, is not designed for the person who only has a small amount of time to devote to it.

 

However, that being said, I am quite OK with that.  I think where I and some posters differ is that I dont feel the game needs to change to necessarily suit everyone.

 

I would rather play on a server of 1000 people who prefer a tad more realism than a server of 5000 who just want to sail around from open battle to open battle.

 

I'm also fascinated by WWII naval history, but I dont ask WOWS to change their game to suit my playstyle.

 

Just my $.02

[Cmdr RideZ]

I will be the first to admit that this game, as currently implemented, is not designed for the person who only has a small amount of time to devote to it.

 

However, that being said, I am quite OK with that.  I think where I and some posters differ is that I dont feel the game needs to change to necessarily suit everyone.

 

I would rather play on a server of 1000 people who prefer a tad more realism than a server of 5000 who just want to sail around from open battle to open battle.

Actually, the devs are pretty good at listening the community in the end.  There are many changes that mostly follow what people say at the forum.  That is kinda good job from them, but also...  Like I said before in some other thread, democracy is not always the best.

 

Notice the bold text, especially for you devs.

[Mrdoomed]

Actually, the devs are pretty good at listening the community in the end. There are many changes that mostly follow what people say at the forum. That is kinda good job from them, but also... Like I said before in some other thread, democracy is not always the best.

Notice the bold text, especially for you devs.

Not sure what youre driving at here but im with Vern, playing with 1000 dedicated,fun,true gamers than 5000 on again off again try hards who arejust trying to take advantage of loopholes just to get a leg up.

More power to old school gamers ! #goodoledays

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

I like new blood that find interest in spectacular visual rich games based in history and requiring some sort of dedicated mindset for learning the game rules and mechanics without resorting to rushed power gaming.

 

Oh... actualy 50000 that find the game good fun the way it is 

[Jack Jones]

Ok... Now there are 2 posts... Realism = fun.

So you agree with me that we should make the game ironman only? Realism = Fun,

right? You die, well, you die, right?

We could make it so that we do not have OW sailing at all? All is done in the same sailing mode as combat. Takes days irl time to sail from place to another. Realism = Fun, right?

Some people want more realistic than others. What is a correct amount of realism? Probably some kind of compromise?

edit...

Oh indeed. We can probably all agree that realism is not actually fun, right?

SO....that's as clear as mud. Unlike some of the more polite posters who are endeavouring to reason with you I will freely admit I have no idea what your talking about.

And the game that you describe is not the one I play.

I do know that it is not possible to make a game for EVERYONE or there would be just one game.

For ME, I think I have found a small piece of heaven. For you it seems...hell.

I am sorry for your loss. I hope you manage to move on soon and find what you are looking for.

Although I suspect.... you never will.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Blue Tooth

[Jean LaPointe]

This attitude is widespread among a lot of players. Now we have only 1/5 of the previous player base active. Its not good enough. This is a development phase and we need to improve this games outreach. Otherwise there will be no game.

The attitude is not wide spread. The player based is still here. A spike in players is not a base. You are including individuals who were here a short time and have given it as a way to inflate the actual base players of the game. Do not confuse those who battled out the different patches over the past 11 months with those who were here for a short time then left because this game does not fall into what their idea of a MMORPG.

The game is in a constant frame of development. It is not the same game we were playing last December, and I thank God for that. It is better. It continues to open doors to a full and open sand box where only your imagination can take you. You want a fleet to capture a port, cool you have that. You want to fish and craft traders, cool you can have that too. Be a privateer or an admiral or both, you can do this also. What other game allows so many options of play, options in choices where you want to work at. You can be solo, or in a clan. You can work with friends and/or acquainted buddies online.

You have an idea how to play this game, and so do I. The difference is they are different.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Jean LaPointe

[Cmdr RideZ]

I was just reading and found...

 

In the long term we all know that only two servers should remain. After release population will go up first but then will go down and stabilize at around 1000 simultaneous players 6 months after release. So in the long term we only need two servers. PvP (1000 players) and PVE (300-400 players).

 

Game Labs is aiming very low.  I suppose the thread is obsolete.

Edited October 8, 2016 by Cmdr RideZ