Limit missions

[PG Monkey]

I think we should limit the missions to certain ranks (maybe the first 3) then only new/inexperienced players get to have safe missions. That way every mission in or out of the reinforcement zone could be closed instantly. Everyone else can take their chance in the OW, there's plenty of ai fleets out there if you need to PVE

[Angus MacDuff]

I admit that I rarely use missions anymore and just go out and grab AI's, but aren't you suggesting something that would take away from other players?  Just because I don't have much use for missions, doesn't mean I need to take it away from others.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Oberon74

[Gregory Rainsborough]

I think that's a bad idea. You need more than the first few ranks to get acquainted with the game. Commodore perhaps?

Plus sometimes it is just nice to carebear.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Gregory Rainsborough

[Archer11]

1 hour ago, PG Monkey said:

I think we should limit the missions to certain ranks (maybe the first 3) then only new/inexperienced players get to have safe missions.

I'd say a fresh Commodore/Rear Admiral/Brigadier/Jefe de Escuadra/Devil/Curse whatev' who never sailed a 2nd or 1st-rate before is pretty inexperienced too, as far as these ships are concerned and has again a lot to learn, although he has the advantage of experience, so he's probably learning quicker.

If you want to reduce them, what about missions being tied to the knowledge slots AND ranks? Up to 3rd-rank all safe, from there on for example: "2 (or 3) knowledge-slots on your Bellona? No more missions in this ship for you, Sir. Go out and play."

Edited May 30, 2018 by Archer11
forgot my main point. will take a nap, too tired...

[Vernon Merrill]

There’s a strange truth in the world that says in order for one person to actually “win”, another person has to actually “lose”....  

In my opinion, the goal here should not be to keep people from “losing”. It should be the ability to mitigate loss.  

I can guarantee that most people that hang around in the safe zone have probably 50mil in their warehouse, but are still afraid to sail further than 15 mins.  

No amount of “safe zone” is ever going to give them what they really need. 

[Guest]

If this game is to survive, we have to stop trying to find ways to go after new players, just because ow pvp is lacking. (limiting safe zones, making treasure wrecks seen by all, limiting missions - all of which hammers new players). We have to provide a way to boost experienced pvp play instead.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Guest

[Gregory Rainsborough]

PvE players are the shoulders that carry PvPers. People should stop finding ways to overfish and be a bit more sustainable with their ideas.

[Alvar Fañez de Minaya]

3 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Dont make the game harder. We already have very few guys online.

The glass half-full or half-empty.... The eternal question..... For some, there are still 300 players to kick out of the game....

So that a player stops being a beginner and can be a good player of pvp, first he has to spend a time of learning without despairing on the way and leaving the game ......

Here are people who want 2,000 experienced pvp players to appear from one day to the next ...

With these approaches, this game will never have more than 300 players ....

[PG Monkey]

Nothing to do with pvp vs pve do your pve against ai fleets in the open world..also if you just want an easy game play on the pve server you can even capture 1st rate on there

Edited May 30, 2018 by PG Monkey

[Christendom]

Yea because we need even MORE reasons for people to quit the game.

[Vernon Merrill]

Maybe it’s the constant cess-pool chat of the RVR crowd that’s driving people away.  Seems as plausible as any of the myriad of reason everyone and their brother is blaming.  

[Gregory Rainsborough]

The pop was ever slowly recovering until the patch that nerfed the reinforcements. The RvR crowd are always bitches, player numbers have gone up at times so we can discount that as a reason for the falling pop.

[Teutonic]

2 hours ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

PvE players are the shoulders that carry PvPers. People should stop finding ways to overfish and be a bit more sustainable with their ideas.

apparently 150 players is not low enough for some to be satisfied with others still able to "PvE."

Limiting Missions even more is not going to help at all. People want more varied types of PvE content for all levels and difficulties. Specifically more Varied types of PvE would greatly enhance the players experience of the game as well as keep them in the game longer. More players  = more content for everyone.

[Christendom]

Every time this game does something to make the PVE players lives more difficult to satisfy the safe zone gankers, the overall game pop drops.  Every. Single. Time.  When will folks get it through their heads that games of this type, OW MMO variety, need PVE/Casual/Part Time players for the hardcore guys to hunt.  No sheep.  No wolves.  It seems that even when the pop drops the wolves would rather quit than fight other wolves.  If you make it harder and harder for the sheep to enjoy the game, they'll just move on to greener pastures.  

Limiting missions, nerfing safe zone AI, restricting how many missions you can cancel.......all this does is piss off an ever diminishing crowd of players that eventually decide that the lack of quality of life features found in most games of this type just is no longer worth putting up with.  

To put it very simply, if you don't create a safe environment for players to level up to max rank and do their basic crafting they're gonna fucking quit.  And quit they have.  Stop trying to tailor this game to suit your hunting habits so you can gank and maybe put forth ideas that will encourage PVE players to stick around or even come back. 

Going to the PVE server if they don't like it?  Stupid suggestion.

RVR toxicity caused people to leave this game in droves?  Even more idiotic.  

 

[Liq]

3 hours ago, Intrepido said:

Dont make the game harder. We already have very few guys online.

That argument just doesnt work

On steam release we didnt have any kind of safe zone, no fleet missions either. It also took way more XP to lvl up. Yet we had a full server.

After 100s or 1000s of hours you just get bored and leave (for a while or forever).

I think a big part as to why we had a full servee at first is because Naval Action was on the "bestsellers" list on steam for a day or two (I think even place 1 for a short time), because people who owned sea trials (old NA) got their copy of NA. Personally I wouldnt have seen the game if i had not checked best sellers on that very day.

Conclusion: "advertising" is key for fresh blood and thus more salt and energy which fuels RvR and the game. But that should only happen once UI and tutorial is done

Edited May 30, 2018 by Liq

[Archaos]

57 minutes ago, Liq said:

On steam release we didnt have any kind of safe zone,

That is not entirely correct, you had reinforcement zones around every one of your nations ports where as long as you were within a certain range of your nations port you could call reinforcements that matched what the attacker had. If I remember correctly this was removed due to player complaints about having to fight AI if they attacked someone, but also because it was being abused to generate AI fleets to attack and get loot and xp from. So you could also say that we had a full server when there were more wide spread reinforcement zones in the game.

[Christendom]

Well if the game was released Jan of 2016 to steam (For some reason I thought it was april) and by the time I picked up the game in May of the same year we had gone from 3 full servers + PVE server to a half full PVP1 barely cracking 1000 players and PVP2 being on life support.  I remember launching the game up and starting out very briefly on PVP2 until I saw the population disparity.  So clearly in the span of 5 months the game was hemorrhaging enough to players to shut down a server and already rack up mixed/negative reviews.  Sounds like the golden days of full servers didn't last all that long.  Wonder why. 

Obviously the current course of development with no new content and ever diminishing safe guards for new/casual players doesn't seem to be working.  But year let's continue to suggest screwing with what little content they do have.

 

[Lovec1990]

Problem is Devs and Admin want PvP server be 100% PvP, but instead of using carrot he is using stick to presuade/force player too play like he wants, but in every way they won they got money from us.

limit missions whats next removal of AI ships from OW?

 

[RaimundoJoe]

1 hour ago, Lovec1990 said:

whats next removal of AI ships from OW? 

 

Its the logical move, if the goal is to be 100% pvp

Edited May 30, 2018 by RaimundoJoe

[Slim McSauce]

6 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said:

There’s a strange truth in the world that says in order for one person to actually “win”, another person has to actually “lose”....  

In my opinion, the goal here should not be to keep people from “losing”. It should be the ability to mitigate loss.  

I can guarantee that most people that hang around in the safe zone have probably 50mil in their warehouse, but are still afraid to sail further than 15 mins.  

No amount of “safe zone” is ever going to give them what they really need. 

And go where, exactly? Sail 2 hours to the enemy capital to camp and pillage? That's a game design issue, not a player problem. If you want people to sail the OW, maybe flesh it out a bit more.

[Vernon Merrill]

We find plenty of battles in the OW...  there are people all over the place.   Certain players prefer to sail in large groups of pimped out 3rd rates and then wonder why they can’t find “meaningful PvP”.

Sailing in front of KPR or Mortimer and waiting there for a coast guard fleet to assemble is just lazy gameplay.  

 

[Batman]

People should stop posting suggestions that only aim to improve their personal gameplay experience.

[Christendom]

1 hour ago, JG14_Cuzn said:

Just saw a guy log in this AM after not playing for a year....  look to do missions...saw they were a 1/2 hour sail away...used up his cancels as well.    Logged off in disgust.  

Limiting missions loses the casual gamer.   All day, every day.   

 

1 hour ago, Batman said:

People should stop posting suggestions that only aim to improve their personal gameplay experience.

yup yup

[AeRoTR]

Limiting the cancel was one of the worst moves ever. 

What did it serve? What was the profit? 

Anyway, after UI patch. We are waiting some serious content from the devs. Like to see more coop PVE content, PVP generating content. 

My best memories, when I was new, doing 1st or 5th rate fleet missions with 6-7 guys. We do not really bother anymore as picking missions, a pain the azz.