My Christmas-wishlist for Naval Action

[IndianaGeoff]

Disagree on the safe zones.  Make some of them smaller, but even experienced players like some low stress AI bashing.

Most of the other stuff I agree with.

I do like the idea of chain shot being limited.  But there should be a limit to all ammo and powder.  You should be able to shoot double and charge all you want, until you run out.

Fire as you bear would be very nice.  Create some negatives, but it would be useful.

Port battles are much improved, but there could be some tweaks.  It also seems like defense is a bit too strong.  Between screening that only stops the attacker, forts and the position advantage the defenders have, it has tipped a bit too much towards the defender.

Raids.  Something fun you can do in one night with a couple buds that hurts an enemy and provides you some loot.  Maybe raids that weaken towers for port battles?  Or steal goods, maybe reducing resource acquisition for a time.

Tows are public.  You want to sneak into a port, then sail.  But if you Tow, it is announced in combat news.  And neutral/free ports should have a mechanism to see who has ships in the port.

[Capn Rocko]

All I want for Christmas is the LGV Refit to get buffed.... and everything @Liq said  

[Niels Terkildsen]

On 2/12/2017 at 5:27 PM, Liq said:

• Leave the safezone's size untouched BUT make it so only players up to and including Flag Captain (650 Crew rank) get to enjoy it - IMHO a more experienced player should not experience a safezone in a pvp mmo game - That way a player can still try out a ship of the line, 3rd rate or bellona, while being completely safe

Just to reinforce this point, my friends and I will probably not bother to go out (read: play the game at all) until the safe zones are somehow changed. It's near impossible for us to hunt effectively currently, both in a group or solo, which is the only thing we find worth while, when e.g. Gustavia's safe zone covers far beyond actual sight of Gustavia, as I've pointed out in another thread. I'm sure the Swedes feel similarly about the Christiansted safe zone.

And honestly, it's not like higher level players don't have every opportunity to sail with an NPC or a friend that will deter any attack (especially from people such as us that prefer to go out in smaller ships).

If people want to stay safe and simply do boring missions within the safe zone, make it so that you can choose to get missions within the (very much smaller) safe zone at the trade off that it'll give significantly less reward compared to doing it outside of safe zones.

[IndianaGeoff]

I think raids that are similar to the old flag system would help on nightly PvP.

[victor]

My first wish?

TUTORIAL FOR NOOBS

[victor]

14 hours ago, Niels Terkildsen said:

Just to reinforce this point, my friends and I will probably not bother to go out (read: play the game at all) until the safe zones are somehow changed. It's near impossible for us to hunt effectively currently, both in a group or solo, which is the only thing we find worth while, when e.g. Gustavia's safe zone covers far beyond actual sight of Gustavia, as I've pointed out in another thread. I'm sure the Swedes feel similarly about the Christiansted safe zone.

And honestly, it's not like higher level players don't have every opportunity to sail with an NPC or a friend that will deter any attack (especially from people such as us that prefer to go out in smaller ships).

If people want to stay safe and simply do boring missions within the safe zone, make it so that you can choose to get missions within the (very much smaller) safe zone at the trade off that it'll give significantly less reward compared to doing it outside of safe zones.

You (and all the ones that push for limiting safe zones) are missing one very important point. Safe zones for "easy" factions (USA, Spain, Britain), cover all the ports that produce basics materials that allow the creation a basic self sustained economy without the risk being harrassed by other factions. This was made clear by the fact that, when they introduced safe zones, they revamped resources location in order to let ALL the basic resoruces (let alone exotic woods that you have to buy in specific regions) to be found in ports included in the protected zones of the "easy"  factions.

Until you do not realize that this is one of the reasons because Devs created safe zones, you will never understand the reason why all the request for shrinking/limiting level of the safe zones will hardly be satisfied by the devs.

Summarizing: safe zones are there mostly to protect "easy" factions (allowing them to be actually "easy") not to protect players or newbies. And this is the reason why basically, after a first reduction of their extension (you seem to forget that they had been already shrinked once of a 30%), they are now working as intended.

Edited December 5, 2017 by victor

[Fallenangels]

Perhaps should be reward
Players can create a reward in the port
Payment: 5000K to kill: A
Just like the purchase contract

[Slim McSauce]

1 hour ago, victor said:

You (and all the ones that push for limiting safe zones) are missing one very important point. Safe zones for "easy" factions (USA, Spain, Britain), cover all the ports that produce basics materials that allow the creation a basic self sustained economy without the risk being harrassed by other factions. This was made clear by the fact that, when they introduced safe zones, they revamped resources location in order to let ALL the basic resoruces (let alone exotic woods that you have to buy in specific regions) to be found in ports included in the protected zones of the "easy"  factions.

Until you do not realize that this is one of the reasons because Devs created safe zones, you will never understand the reason why all the request for shrinking/limiting level of the safe zones will hardly be satisfied by the devs.

Summarizing: safe zones are there mostly to protect "easy" factions (allowing them to be actually "easy") not to protect players or newbies. And this is the reason why basically, after a first reduction of their extension (you seem to forget that they had been already shrinked once of a 30%), they are now working as intended.

No one asked for EZ mode nations, especially the biggest ones, as much as no one asked for random obscure nations to be hardcore. We wanted new player to not get ganked over the side of their heads while PVP and RVR was going on, not completely get rid of PVP and RVR in vast swaths of what use to be fun nations to play as.

So what, now we're suppose to go to france/dutch/dane if we want to have fun? What kind of load is that. These nations were already EZ because they attracted the most players, not because they were protected by the almighty omnipotent sea gods 

Edited December 5, 2017 by Slim Jimmerson

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Like someone said the other day, in PvP the road from Midshipmap to Admiral of the Fleet "should be challenging, a continuous fight against a world of enemies, should cost as much as an eye and an arm and get shot through the spine in the end while commanding the ultimate fleet in battle", figuratively speaking but you get the meaning.

 

 

[z4ys]

I want depth. Sailing is going to be the first kind of in depth game mechanic. Wish we had more depth in conquest, crafting, player actions, etc

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Player actions with depth...

... let's see...

Player made choices leading to results. Results being neither positive/negative in any player point of view, but part of the age of sail west indies naval life and war experience ?

You mean "to put all eggs in one basket" type of depth and then negatively point that there's no safety anywhere in a pvp world ?

[Malachy]

On 12/3/2017 at 10:52 AM, Quineloe said:

What's the issue with chain shot? You can't really wear someone below 55% with it, and it is far less accurate than round shot?

You can take people down to 35 percent with it, you just gotta aim it right.

[Malachy]

On 12/2/2017 at 10:27 AM, Liq said:

Christmas is near.. so I've been working on a little wishlist regarding changes / features I'd like to see in Naval Action..

Just a little brainstorm - I've stolen some suggestions I liked  Feel free to discuss

Dear Santa

I have tried to be a good boy this year and sank as many pira... emm... BANDITS as possible =) In return I would like to present you my wishlist for this years christmas

• Buy-Contracts for ships, pretty much self-explaining
• Nerf or remove current PvP reward modules, add paints instead (even if they are only 1 dura; I'm sure it would be a much appreciated feature - I know for a fact there have been some 1 dura paints given out for "testing")
• Leave the safezone's size untouched BUT make it so only players up to and including Flag Captain (650 Crew rank) get to enjoy it - IMHO a more experienced player should not experience a safezone in a pvp mmo game - That way a player can still try out a ship of the line, 3rd rate or bellona, while being completely safe
• Allow clans to "hire" up to a certain amount (e.g. 5) of players from different nations and invite them to battle groups, and join their Port Battles 
• ... Nerf the Wasa
• "Disguised Perk" which hides your name for enemy nations until you are in battle - Players of your nation can still see your name though
• Remove most of the speed modules - Before the big wipe we only had Copper Plating and Speed Trim (-10% HP), and it worked out perfectly fine. Let wood be the deciding factor.
• Introduce an exponential reward curve for PvP - a 10v1 should not be nearly as rewarding as a 1v1 - Limit it to 200% rewards (maybe for 1v3) to avoid exploits
• Slightly buff Carronades
• Limit chain shot
• Introduce Control Perk as a default mechanic for every battle
• Make the santa cecilia more accessible  
• Let players vote for a Commander at the beginning of a battle - The commander can then draw stuff on the map (M), e.g. the general direction, focussed target, or whatever - Useful for bigger battles (especially port battles)

  Hide contents

 

I agree with most of this, I have one thing to add and one I don't agree with. 

Demasting needs addressed. Badly. Mast thickness especially at top and mids needs buffed and hitpoints need about 10000more points if you leave cannons at pinpoint accuracy. 

Pvp rewards: leave them alone. I don't want lame paints. I care only for the performance of my ship, not what color it is. As far as I am concerned ships should come with whatever paint scheme your nation used and that's that. If you don't want good pvp rewards like we have now, completely remove the whole concept. Lame ass paints are an insult and not worth my time. 

[Quineloe]

11 minutes ago, Malachy said:

You can take people down to 35 percent with it, you just gotta aim it right.

I'll wait to see that myself. I've never seen someone down to less than 50% in a real battle . With Round shot you can take someone down to 0%. so again, what's the issue with chain shot?

[Malachy]

13 minutes ago, Quineloe said:

I'll wait to see that myself. I've never seen someone down to less than 50% in a real battle . With Round shot you can take someone down to 0%. so again, what's the issue with chain shot?

Chain does disproportionate damage per shot fired. Its a lot like having unlimited charged shot. I think round ball should do a little more sail damage and chain be limited to 3 or 4 shots per gun. It's way too easy to cripple someone with chain or demasting. Both need addressed. You should have an equal chance of winning if you focus the hull as someone who focuses the rigging. Right now, that is hardly the case. Both sail and mast damage need an overhaul, badly.

you can't cripple an equal ship in two to three broadsides to the hull, you shouldn't be able to do it with two or three to the sails. You can now. 

Edited December 10, 2017 by Malachy

[Guest]

On 3/12/2017 at 5:52 PM, Quineloe said:

What's the issue with chain shot? You can't really wear someone below 55% with it, and it is far less accurate than round shot?

Yeah much easier and faster just to demast someone.. Chainshots ain't the problem..

[Malachy]

10 hours ago, Bearwall said:

Yeah much easier and faster just to demast someone.. Chainshots ain't the problem..

Correction, they are part of the problem. The rest of it is easy dismasting. And you can chain someone to 50 percent in 3 or 4 broadsides. That's a whole lot of damage when you can't get hull to that point inside the same number of broadsides.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Malachy

[Barbancourt]

On 12/2/2017 at 6:39 AM, Landsman said:

The purpose of the safezone's should be to give new and less experienced players some space to get into the game and not turn the alleged PvP server into another PvE server.

The purpose of the reinforcement zone is to prevent smaller nations from being camped to death.  It doesn't matter what your rank is if you're always outnumbered right outside your capital port.  People stop logging in....stop playing...nations die...game dies.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Barbancourt (rownd)

[Landsman]

4 hours ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

The purpose of the reinforcement zone is to prevent smaller nations from being camped to death.  It doesn't matter what your rank is if you're always outnumbered right outside your capital port.  People stop logging in....stop playing...nations die...game dies.

This would be true if the map was super small but it isn't... you have neutral ports, free ports and can capture enemy and neutral ones, so if your capital is camped then just go elsewhere... I think the fact that your capital and ports around it can not be capped and that you can basically throw a endless supply of ships with repairs at the "campers" is good enough. Also one thing that completely destroys your argument is the fact that we have new nations without the zones and how they are doing just fine.... if those nations are dead, why do they hold so many ports? Maybe they should reduce the safezones just a bit BUT only give one per capital for GB, Spain and France... those should be the easymode major players. The fact that we only have 3 nations without zones and all others easymode is a bit silly anyways... So if people want to play with easymode zones they have to choose one of the historically accurate big players but they only keep their capital zones...

[Barbancourt]

I was there when we were capital-camped out of the game before the reinforcement zones patch.  I don't have an "endless supply of ships and repairs" to throw away.  I'm not sure where you're getting that nonsense from. 

[Slim McSauce]

I was also there, and it was tons of fun getting hours of PVP every day. Safezones don't need to take up an entire coast. A single capital region safezone would achieve new player safety without cutting into the PVP/RVR sandbox.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

No trade wars with the zones.

Alas the situation pushes more to the navy vs navy combat.

Does it escalate the number of pvp encounters ? No idea, we don't have the data but I do not notice a single difference.

 

[Valentine Karrde]

On 12/14/2017 at 4:32 AM, Hethwill said:

No trade wars with the zones.

Alas the situation pushes more to the navy vs navy combat.

Does it escalate the number of pvp encounters ? No idea, we don't have the data but I do not notice a single difference.

 

I have noticed a huge difference. There were many more encounters without the safe zone. People would gather fleets to fight you before, now, very rarely does that happen, especially if you defeat them once or twice when they do. Safe zones encourage cowardice and have negatively affected pvp. That one mechanic has been in my opinion, the worst thing that has ever happened to this game.

[Valentine Karrde]

31 minutes ago, rediii said:

My wish is that NA focuses on new mechanics and killing of exploits aswell as making ports matter right after UI and tutorial.

Making ports matter brings back OW pvp which is a important thing in NA

Only if rvr is directly linked to pvp like the flag system was. If it continues to be dependent on pve, rvr will never be relevant to pvp. 

[Vintorius]

I've wanted to see an interactive map for a while now. And not just for PB. But I think having a feature where clan members or a Battle group can be able to draw, add waypoints, issue orders on the map screen would be an interesting and useful tool for the game. Not necessary but it would be a nice touch and help bring the clans/battle groups even closer together.