Devs: what do you want the game will be?

[CeltiberoCaesar]

I think this is the main problem We (I) are having understanding the new features and changes.

As a tester, we need objectives, we need somewhere to aim and say "ok, you are achieving it" or the opposite. So....

-Do you want to be a grinding game or a casual instant battle game?

-Do you want the game requires hours and hours from the players to go to the "active" areas or do you want to give the player the capability to reach that area as soon as they log in?

- Do you want reallistic battles or arcade one?

-Do you want a balanced game or will you let the playerbase size decide it?

-Do you want the players do NOT need to be all day in an area PvEing or in a matter of hours a bunch of player should be able to generate the 100%?

-Do you want to encourage the PvP or is more important keep the solo player entretained?

-Do you want the the player need to go to every corner of the map looking for the materials for a ship or every nation should have the basic ones near their capitals?

-Do you want most of the battles will be with 4th and 5th or just 1st?

-Do you want player NEED to participate in tournaments to get the OP ship or it should be taken by the crafting path?

And so on... Because we are not getting what it is needed to give a proper feedback.

[Chimera]

Not sure if this is what you intended but this reads like a long whine wrepped in sugar coat.

For most of the questions I think it is pretty clear what is intended. E.g. If it would be intended that every nation had all mats around the corner of their capital they still would have them there, wouldn't they?

Edited October 26, 2016 by Chimera

[CeltiberoCaesar]

Indeed, but I want direct answers to what they want from their game.

We also were told some things that then were quite the opposite what was told, like the "we want to have fronts where most of the PvP will take place" and then Boom! You can take hostility missions in the other corner of the map spreading out all the PvP.

We can "guess" stuff, but without a "we want X and Y" I cant tell if the game have it or not. We need objective criterias to say if the game is successfully being developed or not. Otherwise we only can say "i think", "i like" or "i hate"... All biased oppinions of what the game should be by our own criteria.

Once we get that, some players might realise this is or is not the game they want to play.

For instance, if they tell me this is going to be a grinding game where I need 200h to gather all the materials to craft a Fragate... Well... I might rather play other game.

Edited October 26, 2016 by CeltiberoCaesar

[victor]

Useful thread

 

Knowing which is the actual "big picture" Devs pursue for the future development of the game - at this stage (the game has become even more time demanding with the new features) - would be important for a lot of people.

 

Fact is that - even if Devs do not answer - also this will be an answer.

Edited October 26, 2016 by victor

[Chimera]

you are going to counter with: "we dont care what you think and want to know what devs think" but here is what i think are the rather obvious ones

so while there are some interesting questions in there i maintain that most of them unfortunately seem to be intended as a complaint rather than a real question here.

I think this is the main problem We (I) are having understanding the new features and changes.
As a tester, we need objectives, we need somewhere to aim and say "ok, you are achieving it" or the opposite. So....
-Do you want to be a grinding game or a casual instant battle game? - The game is not supposed to be an instant battle game. if it was supposed to be that we wouldnt have an expanding open world mechanic
-Do you want the game requires hours and hours from the players to go to the "active" areas or do you want to give the player the capability to reach that area as soon as they log in? - see the above. you have to sail to regions if this wasnt intended we wouldnt need outposts that have to be setup in a region by sailing there
- Do you want reallistic battles or arcade one? - as stated by the devs on a multitude of occasions and shown via the implementation of battle mechanics. the game strives to achieve as much realism as possible without diminishing the playability
-Do you want a balanced game or will you let the playerbase size decide it? - they are obviously working on a balance thus limiting the large nations to two PBs at any giving time and allowing alliances to act as if they were one large nation
-Do you want the players do NOT need to be all day in an area PvEing or in a matter of hours a bunch of player should be able to generate the 100%? - interesting question for once. right now it can be done in a matter of hours. i too wonder if this is intended
-Do you want to encourage the PvP or is more important keep the solo player entretained? - PVP is obviously encouraged by making it the only way to conquer a region (plus giving you bonuses in hostility generation rate) while the single mission runner and trader is encouraged to participate with PVE Missions and trading missions. any answer that isnt going to be rather balanced would surprise me
-Do you want the the player need to go to every corner of the map looking for the materials for a ship or every nation should have the basic ones near their capitals? - some ressources are very scarce and no nation has all the materials just around the corner anymore after the patch making RVR and ports finally meaningfull. the implementation shows the intend quite clear, doesnt it?
-Do you want most of the battles will be with 4th and 5th or just 1st? - interetsing question. recent implementation hints towards a balanced approach where large ships and high quality ships will become rather rare. before the patch you could have simply sacked the concept of different qualities since all ships were gold
-Do you want player NEED to participate in tournaments to get the OP ship or it should be taken by the crafting path? interetsing question. dont think there has been a statement on that. BPs are rare for every nation though and every alliance currently has crafters capable of doing them as far as i know.

And so on... Because we are not getting what it is needed to give a proper feedback.

Edited October 26, 2016 by Chimera

[jodgi]

Not sure if this is what you intended but this reads like a long whine wrepped in sugar coat.

<giggle>

 

 

<snip>

You're basically saying that the devs should answer to you, then the next guy and in a few weeks another one.

We don't get that level of entitlement even if this is an open development game.

Look at the post above this (Chimera) and see that a normal player paying attention knows the answers to your rigged questions without being told directly by the devs.

Don't mean to be overly grumpy, but your post came across as a big "Have you stopped beating your wife?" question.

[CeltiberoCaesar]

You're basically saying that the devs should answer to you, then the next guy and in a few weeks another one.

Thats exactly the opposite that I pursuit. You should learn to read beyond what is written.

A normal player, using your own words, DO NOT know the answer to those questions. I do know some of them because I read admin answers and I GUESS some other from the mechanics and other clues they give us in the patches.

The only purpose of my thread is to SUGGEST the devs create a thread to state clear what they want, what the dont want and dont expect normal players, using your own words, dive in the forum to get an idea about them... And just an idea, because most of the times you can just guess and not actually know the answers.

Indeed some of those topics has been already answered but they were in a forgotten thread, anwers from the admin in the middle a long thread..etc

IMO, having those kind of anwers (mine were just some examples) in a sticky closed thread will help everyone get what is being pursuited.

I have had to explain most of those topics to my fellows because I DO read the forum.

Edited October 26, 2016 by CeltiberoCaesar

[Todbringer]

For instance, if they tell me this is going to be a grinding game where I need 200h to gather all the materials to craft a Fragate... Well... I might rather play other game.

 

+1

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

It is a game about liberty that gives all the options to plan whatever you wish to do.

 

What you do with your time is your choice alone.

 

Want to craft !? Help traders buy buying their stuff. Instead of 200h you only need a dozen clicks.

 

---- trade fuels crafting fuels war fuels trade fuels crafting fuels war ----

 

Turning your back to the whole cooperative gameplay, proudly alone... is your choice.

[Vernon Merrill]

I think this is the main problem We (I) are having understanding the new features and changes.

As a tester, we need objectives, we need somewhere to aim and say "ok, you are achieving it" or the opposite. So....

-Do you want to be a grinding game or a casual instant battle game?

-Do you want the game requires hours and hours from the players to go to the "active" areas or do you want to give the player the capability to reach that area as soon as they log in?

- Do you want reallistic battles or arcade one?

-Do you want a balanced game or will you let the playerbase size decide it?

-Do you want the players do NOT need to be all day in an area PvEing or in a matter of hours a bunch of player should be able to generate the 100%?

-Do you want to encourage the PvP or is more important keep the solo player entretained?

-Do you want the the player need to go to every corner of the map looking for the materials for a ship or every nation should have the basic ones near their capitals?

-Do you want most of the battles will be with 4th and 5th or just 1st?

-Do you want player NEED to participate in tournaments to get the OP ship or it should be taken by the crafting path?

And so on... Because we are not getting what it is needed to give a proper feedback.

 

 

The fact that you listed so many ideas of what this game possibly is to players means that its working....