Testbed: Content patch - 9.98 deployed

[Powderhorn]

47 minutes ago, Wraith said:

Could you articulate what problems this solves?  Surely alt-farming is not that big of a problem that you would absolutely destroy a new player's ability to get rewards from PvP? As LV correctly points out, it would make PvP essentially meaningless for levelling and it would serve to increase the grind for players trying to reach max rank substantially. Basically, you're forcing players to go out and grind PvE for rewards as opposed to sail around for already too long, looking for a PvP fight that most likely will not result in any xp or gold gain.

This seems like one more mechanism that forces people to grind PvE rather than to engage in PvP, especially at low to mid ranks where you should be enticing them with everything you can to PvP?

Not sure if this was already answered, just kinda working through the thread.  I think you might be misreading this:  If you get sank, you don't give any more rewards.  Not that you don't get anymore rewards.  So if someone sinks me once, they get a reward.  If anyone sinks me again within the next hour, no reward is given.  Not sure how often I see anyone sunk more than once in an hour when it's not a farming situation.

[Yar Matey]

3 hours ago, Christendom said:

I get Devs intentions I suppose, but none of these things really address the current issues plaguing the game.  I expect numbers will continue to dwindle after this patch.

This is what I would call a zero content negative post.  Yeah, we get it, player numbers are dwindling, you basically wasted 2 whole strokes of my scroll down wheel of admin quoted content, to provide a zero content comment.  Thanks for wasting my scrolls.  

Let me ask you a simple question:  WHY do you expect to see the player pop continue to dwindle, and what can be done to resolve it?  

Answer that question and then you would have a constructive post instead of a shit post.  

Edited February 18, 2017 by Yar Matey

[Lord Vicious]

7 minutes ago, admin said:

in fact since the first OW voting in 2014 all features were proposed by players. If we did not use open development with all the risks and negatives (for example doing silly things from time to time) we would be a released session based age of sail MOBA (massive online battle arena)

 

You did well from 2015 to april 2016 then you went for your own direction, You did a lot of features and patches that not where requested by the community, while the community was very vocal about other problems see  pirates we ask and you promised pirate features since summer 2015. (more important then superarmor patch or fishing )

But when i see that you care more about a 10h casual then players who have not 2k, but 5k+h in your game and produced dozens of  well supported suggestions by  the community ,bug reports, lot of constructive  criticism i really dont know how to tell you that i really dont know what you talking about anymore.

 

The players that are on now are all veterans, so when you ask us our opinion for then shut it down when it not goes the way you want, you are spitting in the face of your most loyal friends who still care about the game and are tryng to tell you that this changes are bad.  As we have told you for the armor patch, the patch that killed pop 3-4 months ago.  So many of us proofed to be right about our perception of the game over and over, yet   even now that the community is loudly telling you otherwise. You  say you gonna do it anyway.

 

For once listen the community, read this 3 pages , 90% are telling you the same thing.   so are we all Wolfes?        

[Christendom]

Just now, Yar Matey said:

This is what I would call a zero content negative post.  Yeah, we get it, player numbers are dwindling, you basically wasted 2 whole strokes of my scroll down wheel of admin quoted content, to provide a zero content comment.  Thanks for wasting my scrolls.  

Let me as you a simple question:  WHY do you expect to see the player pop continue to dwindle, and what can be done to resolve it?  

Answer that question and then you would have a constructive post instead of a shit post.  

did you not read my bold comments in the quoted text?

[Yar Matey]

2 minutes ago, Christendom said:

did you not read my bold comments in the quoted text?

yes I did, but your last comment is pointless.  

Answer the question of why the player base will continue to dwindle and what you think is a good idea to resolve it.  

Edited February 18, 2017 by Yar Matey

[snowy2]

Have you considered how 3 durability 1st rates are going to affect port battles?  3 duras = no risk of losing your gold marines = boarding festival?

[Christendom]

6 minutes ago, Yar Matey said:

yes I did, but your last comment is pointless.  

Answer the question of why the player base will continue to dwindle and what you think is a good idea to resolve it.  

Because the players are continually disappointed with the patch content.  Devs don't fix the serious problems with the game, but fix minor ones like 3 dura first rates.  If you look after EVERY single content patch the player bases spikes higher and then loses more and more steam.

How to fix the issue?  Fix the problems with OW.  huge circles.  player AI fleets.  OW AI fleets.  BR rules no one seems to understand.  Merge the servers.  

Edited February 18, 2017 by Christendom

[Cmdr RideZ]

5 minutes ago, Lord Vicious said:

But when i see that you care more about a 10h casual then players who have not 2k, but 5k+h in your game and produced dozens of  well supported suggestions by  the community ,bug reports, lot of constructive  criticism i really dont know how to tell you that i really dont know what you talking about anymore.

We need a bigger playerbase, and thats it.

[Lord Vicious]

17 minutes ago, Yar Matey said:

yes I did, but your last comment is pointless.  

Answer the question of why the player base will continue to dwindle and what you think is a good idea to resolve it.  

We made dozens of very well constructed thread with suggestions wildly supported by the community, devs got indicated what we want and what to fix, but they keep going for other stuff.  After sayng the same thing 10 times ppl give up.

we even made videos, that talk about discussions like Jeheil quoted some threads in his letter to the king

 

an example

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by Lord Vicious

[Cmdr RideZ]

1 hour ago, Yar Matey said:

While, I am happy to hear that you are trying to look out for what is in the best interest of the casual...

Yar has a good start here.  It is not just 1 dura ships to 3 dura ships that is the only possible fix here.  Multiple options.

I like to think casuals, because we need more people..  Still, it can be that 1dura 1st rates are ok.  Gold upgrades are far more expansive anyway, than the ship itself.  Also if you have gold marines in your 1st rates, that is like pretty damn expensive right there.

You could also simply have 1 dura 1st rates etc. AND just make it so that in port battles you can have max X amount of 1st rates and Y amount of 2nd rates...

+ possibly some BR limit.

So casuals then?  We have the limits so they can always join with their 3rd rates.

 

Not saying that this is the best option, just agreeing with Yar, that there are a lot of options.  Now, just figure out which one is the best.  I kinda like 1 dura 1st rates to be honest.

 

Regions..  Before we had capitals that were like hubs for fights.  This was good and bad.  Good because you knew where people were, bad because the rest of the map was dead.  Also, ports did not mean that much.

So with regionals -> People are spread everywhere, hard to find a fight.  Bad because crafting ships, LH slavery, etc. features are now pretty dead.

Yes, we were fixing and breaking things.  Just saying that Yars cases are a bit more complicated than he says there.  But he has good points for sure.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ

[Lord Vicious]

40 minutes ago, admin said:

They are already everywhere. Also we see no difference between 10000 resource 1 dura ship and 30000 resource 3 dura ship

 

There is, fact you dont see it  tells a lot  about how low you think about   how changes like that will impact the game.

 

3 dur Firstrates while you force us to fight in pb around a circle so a restricted area, where 50 firstrates barely fits  will transform every battle into a boarding festival since ppl will use gold boarding modules with impunity. I bet you didnt think about that. 

Another influence you didnt think is the market,  now with 1 dur first     you created a money sink feature, you lose the ship you lose the modules, ppl commerce, craft, sell modules,   make the market going and not get inflactioned, but with 3 dur nobody gonna lose a module anymore, once the ship go 1 dur they remove the modules.  this will devaluate the value of silver, and notes as well the strategic value of  silver generating port.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Lord Vicious

[Lord Vicious]

5 minutes ago, Donnerschock said:

Damn, you are wrong on so many points, it breaks my heart to believe, that you are the developer of this game!

The answer for your observated problem is not "buff the forts", it's more "nerf the thickness of ships".

That will fix also the  Agamennon problem, 4th rates with firstrate armor wich make 4th rate battles endless since sinking is super hard, thats why ppl go for boarding.  I saw 4th rate battle where in 1h we just sink 2-3 ship for side sometimes less.

Overall ships armor wich is a thing even the tester area is asking  need to be tuned down for all ships in general. since it got boosted in various patch  in terms of hp regional bonus etc.  while cannon dmg/pen remain the same.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Lord Vicious

[Stilgar]

I would strongly recommend considering the option of allowing choice of nr of dura's when crafting a ship. The amount of materials required should decrease accordingly. That will open the possibility for more casual players to craft a ship sooner rather than later (even if with fewer dura's) and would make it easier to experiment with various builds.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Stilgar

[Yar Matey]

@admin   1 durability matters and it matters not because of how much the ship costs to build or cost to buy.  It matters for a whole bunch of reasons.  Let me explain:

1) one durability matters because it makes winning or losing a battle more meaningful.  If you are in a battle and you lose your ship it matters, if you capture a ship it is more rewarding.  Even if the ships are dirt cheap and the modules are dirt cheap to craft.  New players shouldn't be punished obviously for losing their ship and that is why ships need to be way less expencive to make and purchase.  

2)  Since the outcome of battles matter more, it makes battles more exhilarating.  Instead of getting the "mehh it's only 1 durability" feeling, suddenly it's "oh crap!  I don't want to lose my ship!"  And suddenly battles become more of an adrenaline rush.  Even if ships and modules are dirt cheep to craft.  It makes the battle more exciting.  This will effect both new and experienced players.  The battles will feel more real and fulfilling.

3). While I feel that modules should be way less costly to produce, 1 durability helps even the playing field of the experienced battle hardened player vs the new player.  If you lose your modules, especially rare uncraftable ones, it would make running all exceptional boarding modules rare.

4). The new player has a lot less to lose than the player with 2000 hours logged.  Think about it, new player is not running exceptional boarding parties, marines, carpenter teams, stay/studding sails, etc... thus if the experienced player loses the battle and his ship the loss will hit the experienced player way more than the new player.

5) 1 durability matters because it acts as a economic stabilizer.  If ships had 1 durability, then you need a new ship.  So you need to buy one or make a new one, thus we create an outflow of recourses.  Recoursed are collected, ship is sunk, new recourses are needed to craft a ship.  1 durability adds a drain for money and recourses, which we all know money and recourses are abundant with no good outflow.  This goes for modules as well.  

Edited February 18, 2017 by Yar Matey

[Neptune]

Still no demasting? Why is their still no demasting after so many have been asking to bring it back? I Like the new armour/structure but I just don't understand why demasting still hasn't been put back in the game. Combat was perfectly fine, but now that demasting has been removed it's like the combat system has been dumbed down. All that's left is chain and hull mash.

I Would also like to see more ways to get more even BR fights, hopefully 6v6 makes the live server. This gank and gank more is getting real boring...

Pirate VS Pirate FFA is awesome but I do not think fights should be open the whole time, that is just going to create a whole other world of problems.

Towers were buffed? Isn't the AI already doing enough for the defenders?

Edited February 18, 2017 by Neptune

[Lord Vicious]

1 hour ago, admin said:

Assuming something without facts about others is a bad quality and devalues your posts

Regarding the game we watch how players play and play ourselves. We see how medium frigates can destroy a player santisima even if santisima is protected by a large fort. In recent ponce port battle american agamenmon was able to sail close to danish ship, board him and change ship and sail away under fire from the large fort. Forts shoot peanuts now and must be buffed. 

We dont like forts like that and we are changing that. You can disagree as much as you want and comment on that of course. It wont help sorry

Fix overall tickness of ships (like test area also request since 2 months? )

not buff forts

 

and dont watch only russians,  there is much better players out there.   So now we get forts boosted becouse a bad russian player got boarded by an  usa player who manage to run from the fort?

 

About santy getting killed by frigs under a fort, maybe becouse the fort was shooting the santi? tryng to shoot the frigs?  they do a lot of friendly fire tbh.        Otherwise there is no way for 2 frig to kill a santi under a fort unless the santi dc get stern raked, boarded and then they run from the fort.    I mean you cant change entire gameplay features based on a one time event.

 

[Neptune]

Just now, Donnerschock said:

I played the game today and was able to demast frigates with 12 and 18 pounders, last week i demasted a buc with my buc. what exactly is your problem?

Trinc masts are 108 thickness and long 18s are 109 at 50m, 97 at 100.. Why is it demasting for ships like trinc vs trinc you have to be on top of eachother to demast but you can have super accurate chain shot and unlimited amounts from 1000m. I don't get why they changed demasting. Apparently it "slowed down gameplay", but chain shot doesn't? Lmao #Logic.

[Corona Lisa]

4 hours ago, admin said:

• Admiralty store has been added for testing.

Tested it in a PvP FFA. I got an assist and sunk afterwards. Is it intended that I dont get any marks for assists?

4 hours ago, admin said:

• Forts and towers were significantly buffed (large fort will destroy a ship in approximately 5 minutes under constant fire). We hope this feature will help players to vary their fleets a bit and bring mortar vessels to battles (who can destroy a fort in 10 mins. If this damage is too big we will lower it, but we were not really satisfied with the forts uselessness in battles. 

Dont like it, I feel towers were strong already vs 4th rates at least and a lot of players who direspected forts sunk to them in PBs. A general thickness nerf would be better imo.

 

Can you give some more information about the structure changes? I tried shooting someone in the stern from a bad angle (see pic), but I did no damage to the structure even tho I hit 16 shots. How does that work? Is the hitbox of the structure located in the center of the ship?

 

FFA is great btw

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by JonSnowLetsGo

[z4ys]

4 hours ago, admin said:

 

• Recently killed tracker added to game. Players who recently lost the battle (sank or surrendered) no longer give rewards for 1 hour. This solves huge number of problems for a minor price.

Does that mean if persons x lost to person y that person y can't get an other kill for person x in the next hour. Or does it mean if player x sunk nobody is able to get a kill for him in the next hour.

I really hope it's the first one. The 2ND  would just again a punishment for OW pvp. 

If it's because of the event. Then make the 2ND a rule when you sink in a pvp zone to avoid alt abuse. 

 

 

[JeanJacques de Montpellier]

1 hour ago, admin said:

We don't need to listen to wolves to find out what sheep want. 

We know 1 durability system is better - but it must work for all ships.
And if you like this - you - YOU PERSONALLY - must help to shut down all comments about too many first rates. Because its just a game and because if you want pvp you want ships to be affordable?

Before you do it you will accept 3 duras because its what it was before and worked. 

 

One Durability for all ships. It seems that many players have asked this.

[PIerrick de Badas]

I remembered to have sail all ship with one dura. Best system ever

[PIerrick de Badas]

 

Define useless Fort and Fortress pz?

[Fargo]

2 hours ago, admin said:

They are already everywhere. Also we see no difference between 10000 resource 1 dura ship and 30000 resource 3 dura ship

 

There is no real difference, but thats not how you did it in the game. The material cost from 7th to 1st rate increases linear. That would be reasonable if all ships had one dura, but with 2 to 5 dura all ships beside 1st rates are 2 to 5 times too cheap (for the main server that is).

We shouldnt care too much about one or 3 dura, if the cost is set accordingly. And the cost should depend on player income and ships sinking. When i have to do missions for two hours to buy a ship that on average lasts 20 days, thats really bad.

The difference would be that one dura seems more realistic, a one dura ship would be faster to buy, and capped ships are as valuable as crafted ships.

[Guest sruPL]

Quote

 We see how medium frigates can destroy a player santisima even if santisima is protected by a large fort.

Are you talking about a bot Santissima or Midshipman sailing Santissima with 40 crew? Because in Santissima next to friendly fort I would destroy the hello kitty out of medium frigates.

@admin

Edited February 18, 2017 by sruPL

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 hours ago, admin said:

LV is wrong just like you. 

A lot of veterans want us to solve problems of those who played 2000 hours - or maybe even add 1000 of additional things to do. 
Our goal right now is to help the player who left after 10 hours to stay for a 100. If they can stay for a hundred the result will be more pvp for everyone. 

Starting with the first comment

He is against providing the challenge ship for pve challenges. With that he just lacks understanding of what the normal average player needs. For example he does not understand that the normal player does not have enough slots or outposts to even participate in a challenge because he only has 5 spaces for ships due to server example. If the challenge is for unpopular ship the player cannot do it just because he does not want to sell his current ship just to do a challenge.

 

Speakign of which I tried the demaset missions since it was the Essex.  I used the gifted one which we have no clue what it's made of.  It was given 12 lb Carros?   WHAT THE HELL WHO WOULD PUT THOSE ON IT?  32 lb Carros maybe but 12 lbs?  Than to make it even worse I get put against two Trincs.  So once again I'm being out gun and out BR and I'm suppose to demast the two ships?  I didn't even get one stern rake by time they had my armor stripped and my structure gone.  Though oddly seems they where shooting faster than me and dead accurate since they didn't have Carros.   There is no way the casual or average player would win this missions.  If you demast them by stern camping you got the other eating you up, if you try to demast it by mast shots you can't hit crap with the Carros.  Who though of combo of putting a single ship against two ships a BR level higher than it?  I rememeber when it was a snow it put it against two Rattlers and same resutls.   That missions should be prob like the Kill one.  Where you go 1 vs 1 and demast it you win and a new ship spawns.