unofficial Naval Action Broken Announcement

[Taurus454]

I apologize but I am unable to find the announcement that Naval Action (NA) is officially broke.  The recent change to minimize port battles is not only absurd but neuters the game.

1)  23 hours playable.  We need to recognize the fact that the game is playable 23 hours per day minus roughly one hour for server maintenance.  On top of that, port battles can only be set during 18 hours per day because of the five hour non-settable port battle times.  Basically, it is immaterial where you live, work hours, and any other excuse, and make no mistake they are excuses, for why you cannot play.  The bottom line is the game is playable with or without you 23 hours per day and port battles can be set during only 18 of those hours, period!

2)  Port Battle Times.  To many complaints are being made about when port battles should occur.  Basically, the complainers want it at times for when it is convenient for them to play and offers them a distinct time zone advantage over other players.  No other reason exists for why someone would want port battles to be set at certain times.  The truth is war, and its simulation, is waged at a time which is inconvenient for the enemy.  Only a fool would launch an attack that is inconvenient for them and convenient for the enemy.  You don't like a port battle time, too bad, suck it up and employ some strategy to counter what the enemy is doing.

3)  Missions.  Complaints even exist regarding the aggression that is attainable from missions.  The changes made to accommodate these whiners is ridiculous.  Admiral missions have been neutered to the point that fleet missions have three enemy ships that range between three 3rd rates to two 1st rates plus a 3rd rate.  Successful completion of this type of fleet mission not only lacks a challenge, is boring, but only offers about 4% hostility.  Once again, the complainers are looking for an advantage over smaller nations because it takes us much longer to gain a port battle.

BOTTOM LINE:  These recent changes feed into the perception that the MODS/DEVS favor certain nations.  The recent changes, much as the nerfing of war supplies, only harms small nations by making it difficult for them to compete with larger nations.  The MODS/DEVS need to become harder and stop catering to the vocal minority.  The game is a great game, please continue to develop your vision, and stop making changes to accommodate those looking to gain an advantage by changing the game.  Please note that these people do not complain until things do not go their way within the game.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Title changed accordingly.

[BusterGut]

Couldn't agree more.

[Sir Texas Sir]

I hate to say this I'm actually agreeing with something Taurus has posted.  Though a little correction

1&2) It's actually only 17 hours to do port battles.  You can scheduled the last one at 8pm CST (using my time zone cause it's easier for me but that is 2am UTC) and can have the first one after maintenance at 3am CST (9am UTC).   The other problem is updates run from 2am to 4am though normally server is back up 1.5 hours not 2, but that means a late time port battle after maintenance will all ready started and will be a good 20-30 mins all ready into it by time any one logs in.   We found this out when the land in port battle came out as we had Cap Fran port battle and it was all ready 20-30 mins into the PB before any one was able to log in.  The new attackers can't join for 30 mins will mean that these port battles can't be joined for 30 mins or you have to sale from a port when the server goes up.  PB should never be able to be scheduled during maintenance/update times.   The 8pm CST locks out most of the US Prime time players from doing port battles and this been broken since OCT last year and still has yet to be fixed.

3)  Missions are about PvP hostility grinding and we can't even do that cause they are no longer open for 15 mins but close 5 mins after start.   So by time you find one and try to join it it's closed.  This was made cause I assumed PvErs complained.  Why is every thing made to make it easier for the PvErs on a PvP server?   Stop making things easy for them.  If they don't want PvP or RvR than they can go to the PvE server. 

[Teutonic]

Are missions affected by the signal perk? Otherwise I agree with texas, the fact that missions close so quickly now makes it nearly impossible to do anything but other missions to grind or counter grind. Where's the previous search for missioms to find pvp?

Although I do get about 8-12% per "650 crew" fleet mission per 30-40 minute battle. I'm sure it's more with bigger fleet missions. I found it's more important to avoid losing friendly ai ships then it is to try and blitz the missions.

Edited March 9, 2017 by Teutonic

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Missions are always open for a time. 5 minutes I think ?

Signaling works in OW attacks, versus AI or other players, both for attacker and defender side it doesn't matter who has the perk.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Was 30 minutes. Majority request was to shorten it !?

Do we know what we want at all ?! We asked to be open due to hostility, then asked to be closed due to ganking, etc.

[Corona Lisa]

40 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Was 30 minutes. Majority request was to shorten it !?

Do we know what we want at all ?! We asked to be open due to hostility, then asked to be closed due to ganking, etc.

Its a community man, you always get different opinons and its impossible to please them all.

But blaming everything on "the community wanted it" is just lame and so easy.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Hence it isn't 30 minutes but less. Is not lame nor easy.

 

[Taurus454]

19 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Was 30 minutes. Majority request was to shorten it !?

Do we know what we want at all ?! We asked to be open due to hostility, then asked to be closed due to ganking, etc.

1)  Majority request.  I sincerely doubt it was a majority request and more like a vocal minority request.  The only way it could be considered a "majority request" if all paying members of each server were asked and 51% of the paying members responded in favor of a change.  You missed my point entirely which is that there are a select number of posters who are vocal.  

2)  What We Want.  What we want is for the MODS/DEVS to get harder with respect to the vocal minority and simply develop their vision for the game.  Unless you can guarantee a "majority request" (51% of paying members on each server which I doubt will ever happen) were made then the MODS/DEVS should offer no comment regarding the complaint by a vocal minority and continue on with their vision for the game.  As for me, I am happy with whatever the MODS/DEVS think is appropriate for the game.  Quite frankly, I was happy with the 30 minute rule and am disappointed with the 5 minute rule as it eliminated an important tactic in the game small nations employed successfully.  I only wish the vocal minority would simply enjoy what they were given and stop scheming and manipulating the MODS/DEVS into making changes that offer advantages to a vocal minority.

Edited March 10, 2017 by Taurus454

[Koltes]

13 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Was 30 minutes. Majority request was to shorten it !?

Do we know what we want at all ?! We asked to be open due to hostility, then asked to be closed due to ganking, etc.

I must have gone blind. Can you please show me where this "majority" expressed their voice and that it was actually a majority at all?
As a player who is busy playing the game I for one have not seen this discussion at all. All I remember is that devs told us there will be 30 mins timers on hostility missions and next thing we know boom its gone. I dont think there was hardly any survey done at all as usual so to speak.
And yes I DO know what I want. I do know that for 100% beyond any doubt. Cheers

Edited March 10, 2017 by koltes

[Sir Texas Sir]

13 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Missions are always open for a time. 5 minutes I think ?

Signaling works in OW attacks, versus AI or other players, both for attacker and defender side it doesn't matter who has the perk.

I'm fine with signaling being the way it is, it's the 5 min window that needs changed.

13 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Was 30 minutes. Majority request was to shorten it !?

Do we know what we want at all ?! We asked to be open due to hostility, then asked to be closed due to ganking, etc.

It was only 30 mins before the patch.  When the patch came out it was only open for 15 mins which I thought was a pretty decent number as 30 mins was kinda to long.  Though some how and we didn't even see this in a patch notes cause I'll be honest I'm a dang forum whore and I'm on all the time.  We keep wondering why we couldn't find these missions any more (when US was trying to flip Kidds on PvP2) so I did some searching and found they dropped it from 15 to 5 mins.  They went way to extreme with this one in my book.  They should make it around 10 mins to test cause 5 mins is way to short.  Though we can kill a fleet in 15 mins so if your taking longer than that and some one join your prob not doing to well in the first place.

Now the other thing I like they changed was the tags circle was way to long of a count down.  For how small that circle 20 secs was way to long. If I'm close enough to tag you we should be in battle.  I give the fact that some time needs to maybe escape and glad they dropped it, but I think it should been 10 secs not 15 secs, but lets test this out for a bit before it gets moved.  Again they went in favor of the PvE guys with the 15 secs and not the 10 most wanted.  I'm sorry if we are that close you r not getting away.  All you can do is screw up the tag and wind for folks which you shouldn't be able to control if your being tagged. It should be tagged and into fight over with with how small the tag circle is.  Hopefully the 15 secs will work out better than the 20 and maybe even get them to drop it down to 10 secs, but I highly dought they will do that.  PvErs will cry to much.,

[Guest]

On 9/3/2017 at 11:34 AM, Taurus454 said:

I apologize but I am unable to find the announcement that Naval Action (NA) is officially broke.  The recent change to minimize port battles is not only absurd but neuters the game.

1)  23 hours playable.  We need to recognize the fact that the game is playable 23 hours per day minus roughly one hour for server maintenance.  On top of that, port battles can only be set during 18 hours per day because of the five hour non-settable port battle times.  Basically, it is immaterial where you live, work hours, and any other excuse, and make no mistake they are excuses, for why you cannot play.  The bottom line is the game is playable with or without you 23 hours per day and port battles can be set during only 18 of those hours, period!

2)  Port Battle Times.  To many complaints are being made about when port battles should occur.  Basically, the complainers want it at times for when it is convenient for them to play and offers them a distinct time zone advantage over other players.  No other reason exists for why someone would want port battles to be set at certain times.  The truth is war, and its simulation, is waged at a time which is inconvenient for the enemy.  Only a fool would launch an attack that is inconvenient for them and convenient for the enemy.  You don't like a port battle time, too bad, suck it up and employ some strategy to counter what the enemy is doing. This is not a war. And it is not a simulator game. It is a MMO game and plenty of MMOs has different servers for different timers and/or better ping/service. Only a fool think that a game reflects wartime situations. The purpose for a war is to achieve a victory - there can be no victory in a sandbox game. The purpose for a sandbox MMO is to have fun - if a gamemechanic doesn't allow this it's broken.

3)  Missions.  Complaints even exist regarding the aggression that is attainable from missions.  The changes made to accommodate these whiners is ridiculous There were valid complaints from new players that they started in a basic cutter against a brig or a snow - an impossible rookie mission for any newcomer, if the nerf has affected 200xp PvE missions it's obviously done incorrectly but to say the newcomers are "whiners" is to not only be an impolite jackass it's also being uninformed.  Admiral missions have been neutered to the point that fleet missions have three enemy ships that range between three 3rd rates to two 1st rates plus a 3rd rate.  Successful completion of this type of fleet mission not only lacks a challenge, is boring, but only offers about 4% hostility.  Once again, the complainers are looking for an advantage over smaller nations because it takes us much longer to gain a port battle.

BOTTOM LINE:  These recent changes feed into the perception that the MODS/DEVS favor certain nations.  The recent changes, much as the nerfing of war supplies, only harms small nations by making it difficult for them to compete with larger nations.  The MODS/DEVS need to become harder and stop catering to the vocal minority.  The game is a great game, please continue to develop your vision, and stop making changes to accommodate those looking to gain an advantage by changing the game.  Please note that these people do not complain until things do not go their way within the game.

 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Not discussing the merits of the mechanic Texas. Just stating how balance was reached. It is not even a novelty in NA to extend a lot, then retract a lot, then finding the sweet spot.

I do also ceased to counter the hostility with pvp and can't swallow missions.

Looking forward to everything being search/hunt/chase and happening in the open world, not matter if player or if AI the RoE being the same all over the place.

[Sir Texas Sir]

14 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Not discussing the merits of the mechanic Texas. Just stating how balance was reached. It is not even a novelty in NA to extend a lot, then retract a lot, then finding the sweet spot.

I do also ceased to counter the hostility with pvp and can't swallow missions.

Looking forward to everything being search/hunt/chase and happening in the open world, not matter if player or if AI the RoE being the same all over the place.

There needs to be a means to get hostility.  I'm sorry the missions while they sucked to grind was a means to get agro on a region when folks hid and you couldn't get PvP.   To me a true raid mechanic would fix this.  12 vs 12 flag system raids that put on 25% agro if you win the raid or take it off.  If there is no means to get agro than we won't flip ports if folks just hide to prevent it.  So not sure if taking the missions completely out of the game and how the hell will folks level up?  I'm all for more things to get folks out , but a lot of the means they try don't work (the PvP events that no one uses on PvP2).   Though they need to look at the things that do work to get folks out to fight.  That and stop talking to the PvE guys about things that they want on a PvP server.   

To be honest known of us really know what they plan for any new agro system just yet.  I'm sure we will find out some time around summer or fall though....maybe next year.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

I would hope the system to be reverted. Nation should show interest in a region and work Stability, as I posted in suggestions ( and has all activities involved, not only combat).

That would transfer responsibility of conquest and maintenance of "empire" rather than simple lawn mowing without concerns.

But yes, we don't know exactly what is coming but if one spends enough time connecting all the hints and announcements and posts from the GL folks I bet it is big, game changing big.