My reasons why this Game will never Succeed....

[Fargo]

4 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

See, this is the great thing about exchange of opinions, I see you aspire to a more complex simulation of the age of sail. I know others aspire to a more complex combat simulation without a care for the OW stuff. 

Everyone has to care about the OW stuff, because years ago the decision for this was made, and everyone should respect that. 

6 minutes ago, Le Raf Boom said:

Click sail, attack, have fun, yup, that definitely works for me. Not interested in contract wars, hauling imaginary resources or any of that other stuff. Combat and OW unpredictability is all I need, personally. Does me sinking a trader ship really impede a nation's ability to wage war, nope. Is an established player really taking a big loss if his/her ship is sunk? Again, no.

But do you understand that there only are traders you can hunt if trading makes any sense for other people to do it? Do you understand that people would give you a good fight when they had meaningful traders to defend?

Assume loosing would matter somehow for you, say there is a kill/death ratio providing rewards at season end. Why should people not run from any unfavourable fight? 

Not caring about anything but PvP is extremely short minded, while whole PvP basically relies on everything else.

You cant just add PvP to this OW. You have to make it work somehow. And the lazy route of just forcing the gameplay you want with conquest or trading marks does the opposite.

[victor]

1 hour ago, Hethwill said:

 

We are all here, hoping that our own "what works for me" comes to play.

 

Difference is that you are getting (some little pills) of what you like, we are getting (not only nothing new, but also) patches that make our experience each time worse. The final outcome is quite clear.

Edited July 9, 2018 by victor

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Just now, victor said:

Difference is that you are getting (some) of what you like, we are getting (not only nothing new, but also) patches that makes our experience each time worse. The final outcome is quite clear.

I get the same since Sea Trials. Best age of sail combat.

OW tries to give a purpose to the combat in the grand scheme of things. 

PvP, not PvE, give the Caribbean a sense of danger, daring and heroic deeds.

[Wind]

3 hours ago, Hethwill said:

I get the same since Sea Trials. Best age of sail combat.

OW tries to give a purpose to the combat in the grand scheme of things. 

PvP, not PvE, give the Caribbean a sense of danger, daring and heroic deeds.

Danger in NA is so great that even vets are afraid to go pvp and loose ships after hours of sailing. We did not move anywhere from this reality. First what comes to mind is s*it, they are going to fight us and we are going to loose ships, instead of let's give them a fight! If Devs somehow manage to fix this then we could call it a victory. There are no daring and heroic deeds, there are ganks left and right. More numbers win. 

Edited July 9, 2018 by Wind

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

19 minutes ago, Wind said:

there are ganks left and right. More numbers win. 

Same in any multiplayer combat game i know of, on the air, in space, on land, in water, and on parallel universes, even with equal numbers at start, local superiority of numbers might crumble the overall plan, except when it doesn't and one guy kills four and turn the tables, same as it happens in NA. Do we even play combat games ? I mean, you will always bring local superiority in quality or numbers, be it a 'toonish moba or a full fledge milsim. 

Overcome loss feeling. It is a game. Someone will lose a combat.

[Sunleader]

21 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Hey OP, I like the game! that's what's missing from your rant.

 

Successes can also be measure by “Likes”! not necessary always measured by volumes.

 

 

Your Free to Like it. But if not even 10% of the Players who buy the Game actually stick to it. Then your Unfortunately Part of a very small Minority which Likes the Game.

Fact is. 90% of the Players who Buy apparently dont like it. And thus Discard it.

If you consider your Product a Success when 90% of the People buying it stop using it after a Short while and your Sales Drop rapidly within just 1 or 2 years. Then well. Better dont Join any Companys that Sell Physical Goods cause for these People this kind of happening would not just be a Failure it would likely Destroy their Company lol.

 

9 hours ago, Hethwill said:

100 hours of NA being an average...

That's fairly more than many put in Fallout 4, Elite Dangerous, EFTarkov, etc.

If you check data, a very little %% of players in any game will go over 100 - 250 hours.

Let alone 4000 ! 5000 ! 8000 !!!!!!!! 

 

Comparing Content Based Games where you got a Preset Story and mostly Play alone.  With an Open World Multiplayer Game that has barely any Story or Content and is Played almost entirely in Open Multiplayer... 

The Only Halfwat Acceptable Comparisson is Elite Dangerous.

 

But Elite Dangerous is just as Bad as Naval Action in this Problem.

The Difference in Elite Dangerous and the Reason why Elite Dangerous, while having the same Failure of an Open World Multiplayer as Naval Action, still has 10 Times the amount of Players that NA has. Is because Elite Dangerous Offers to just Opt out of this Multiplayer almost entirely. Thus Appealing to an FAAAAR Larger Playerbase than NA Does.

 

And Mate.

Having a Few Hardcore Nuts which Spend their Life in the Game is not exactly something I would consider Successful

 

10 Hour Long Game which I leave Satisfied and Happy. Is better than 200 Hour Long Game which I grinded hoping to find the Big Gold Pot and then got Dissappointed.

 

 

Well not that it matters.

The Thing I stay with entirely is my First Statement.

This Game needs to Decide if it wants to be an Open World PvP Arena. Then it needs to get Rid of the Absurd Grind and Level System which results in Ganking and Boredom for anyone who is not an Older Player with Fully Established Supply Chains.

Or if it wants to be an Open World MMO. Then it can keep the Grind. But it needs to Cater to the Type of Players which are actually willing to run this Grind. Thus they need to Remove Open World PvP and Create PvP Zones instead. So that the Large Grind Economy is Run by PvE Players and the PvPers can have Fun Fighting each other in Concentrated Areas where they actually find Fights.

Add some High Reward Transport Missions which lead through or into these Combat Zones and you also Cater to Piracy as you will get People which want this High Reward.

 

[Guest]

On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 7:05 AM, Sunleader said:

Then it needs to get Rid of the Absurd Grind

Or everyone gets to keep their ship if they loose!

The last PvP game I’ve played was setup exactly the same, 50 hours to build a T3 base only to have it destroyed by another player in a matter of seconds.

The developers never understood the gameplay of gathering resources to build something, accomplishment, and then the "total failure" of losing it all (empathy) , they stuck with their game design (good for them). However the game was successful at release, sold over million copy’s but it hasn't sustained great PvP volumes online thereafter. Most players moved on to PvE and the rest just quit.

In WOWS you get to keep your ship and it’s a very successful game, because "losers" can keep playing again and again, and that’s all that needs to happen here. Keeping the losers on board is the key, not looking after the winners!

“Keep your ship and the grind is worth it“.

Edited July 10, 2018 by Guest

[Guest]

On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 7:05 AM, Sunleader said:

If you consider your Product a Success when 90% of the People buying it stop using

That happens for every early access/alpha game that doesn’t already have a fan base, not really a stat to judge success or to predict success.

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Or everyone gets to keep their ship if they loose!

The last PvP game I’ve played was setup exactly the same, 50 hours to build a T3 base only to have it destroyed by another player in a matter of seconds.

The developers never understood the gameplay of gathering resources to build something, accomplishment, and then the "total failure" of losing it all (empathy) , they stuck with their game design (good for them). However the game was successful at release, sold over million copy’s but it hasn't sustained great PvP volumes online thereafter. Most players moved on to PvE and the rest just quit.

In WOWS you get to keep your ship and it’s a very successful game, because "losers" can keep playing again and again, and that’s all that needs to happen here. Keeping the losers on board is the key, not looking after the winners!

“Keep your ship and the grind is worth it“.

Well this would in a Sense get rid of the Grind. Because most if the Grind for PvPers is about stockpiling Equipment.

So yes. This would work as well.

 

1 hour ago, BuckleUpBones said:

That happens for every early access/alpha game that doesn’t already have a fan base, not really a stat to judge success or to predict success.

 

Actually nope.

It happens for the Countless Early Access Titles which Failed.

It doesnt happen for the ones that Succeeded.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Sunleader said:

Countless Early Access Titles which Failed

I’ve only played a few hours but there’s real potential in the battle gameplay,  if they dolly-up the port UI, get rid of the shop contract system, and like everyone has mention give new players (losers) a fair go, move the game from alpha to beta soon (advertisement), then the game will have a good future, me thinks.   

[Wind]

This game already succeeded.

300 000 sales x $40 = 12mil

 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Wind said:

This game already succeeded.

300 000 sales x $40 = 12mil

 

It doesnt feel like a game that has such revenue..expenses probably eat a lot of that.

[RaimundoJoe]

13 hours ago, Wind said:

This game already succeeded.

300 000 sales x $40 = 12mil

admin be like...

"when i finnish counting ill deploy the rest of the UI"

[Norfolk nChance]

@Wind

 

$12million total income at $40

On average Valve takes a 30% cut of STEAM sales leaving publishers and developers with 70%

$3.6mil STEAMs cut = $8.4 million

Small dev team over 4 years and running costs $3 to $5mil

 

This excludes tax. Yeah I’ll stick with Banking...

 

Norfolk.

 

 

[Sunleader]

19 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

I’ve only played a few hours but there’s real potential in the battle gameplay,  if they dolly-up the port UI, get rid of the shop contract system, and like everyone has mention give new players (losers) a fair go, move the game from alpha to beta soon (advertisement), then the game will have a good future, me thinks.   

 

 

The Last Point is the Critical thing.

There is no real Protection left. Thanks to the Update you can now even Gank Players in the Capital Reinforcement Zones.

So New Players come in. Get Raped and then leave saying yeah Screw you, I am out. Leaving a Negative Review making a Negative Review and if Possible Return the Game.

But a Fair Go is Impossible right now. The Entire Game System is laid out so that you are absolutely useless in a Fight unless you already got High Grade Ships to Farm for Equipment and Upgrades of PvP Ships.

New Players right now dont even get to the Point where they would actually have a Chance to Learn something from a Fight. Because they just get Bashed by Ships 3 times as Strong and 3 times as Fast with Armor that they cant even Hurt when Sterncamping....

But thats not all. The main Problem remains.

Because the PvPers HATE the Constant Grind for new Upgrades and Stuff.

And the PvEers dont want to be Constantly Fighting.

This Game cannot possibly get anywhere unless it decides on One Group and Adjusts the Gameplay Accordingly.

 

16 hours ago, Wind said:

This game already succeeded.

300 000 sales x $40 = 12mil

 

 

Actually there is only 100-200 Thousand Owners Listed. Not 300...

Pls note that not all of these were Full Price Purchases. There is Events and Sales in this as well.

By now the Game only Costs 37 Euros. I think it was about 50 at Start.

But hey lets assume 50.

That would be 10 Million.

Take off Steam Shares and your down to 7 Million.

Take off Development cost like Salary for the Devs and Equipment to Start as well as Rent and Building Maintenance and Servers etc etc and your likely down to less than 2 Million.

And here is the Catch.

The Game is still Costing Money. If the Servers and Maintenance would cost less than 10.000 per Month I would be Really Surprised. And the Dev Team needs to be Equipped and Fed as well. Meaning that you can likely assume at least 30-40k per Month on just keeping the Lights on.

This means the 2 Million of actual Profit they made is being Eaten away at a good Pace. And the Main Sales are done. The Sales will likely only Drop from now on.

Needless to say less Money per Sold Copy comes in due to Price Drops.

 

Long Story Short.

Not even 2 Years after the Game is out. They are likely at a Point where each Month their Stockpile of Money is Dropping rather than Rising.

Now gladly the Devs are not just Stubborn on their Game when its about how they make it. They are just as Stubborn about making it.

Meaning that they will likely keep the Lights and Servers on till the Bitter End.

But at this Rate right now. This Bitter End might come in 3-4 Years. And unless they change something Tremendously this might be faster than the Game leaves Early Access

 

Now who knows.

Maybe they got an Ace up their Sleeves and will Suddenly bring out a Super Big Update that will actually change the Game.

They said in the Past that they were Planning to Add much more PvE Content for the Players to Play with.

Which would Run the Game more into PvE Direction by Providing actual Content and thus might give some new Momentum.

But so far unfortunately little to nothing happens.

 

 

 

 

 

[Voltaire1512]

Returned to NA after at least 1.5 years of absence and I have to agree with the OP. The game seems to be in hiatus and waiting for the bitter end. Maybe the Devs should just pull the plug. It was a noble effort, but it did not work out good.

Edited July 15, 2018 by Voltaire1512

[Justme]

On July 15, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Voltaire1512 said:

Returned to NA after at least 1.5 years of absence and I have to agree with the OP. The game seems to be in hiatus and waiting for the bitter end. Maybe the Devs should just pull the plug. It was a noble effort, but it did not work out good.

They should sell Legends to Wargaming or gaijn. They might even let it resemble what it was supposed to be. 

Either way it's obvious, despite the devs best effort they are simply over their heads on this one. It seems like they don't have the staff needed to pull Naval Action in any way shape or form off.

[Aaron702]

The future of the game basically boils down to new player retention. The people that are invested in the game with lots of ships and big clans are the ones that will always be here. It's the new player who load up in their cutter, get annihilated and log out that we have to worry about. I've found it extremely difficult to get friends into this game, when you need to invest lots into the game to get anywhere, only to lose all your progress when you get ganked by some wallet warrior in a Requin.

Not to mention that this game is not for the solo player, the nature of the RvR requires you to be part of a clan, and for that clan to be an active participant in nation politics. It's good in theory, but unless you're max rank with a clan supporting you with a constant supply of LO/WO 1st rates, you're limited in your enjoyment of the game.

[John Jacob Astor]

1 hour ago, Aaron702 said:

Not to mention that this game is not for the solo player, the nature of the RvR requires you to be part of a clan, and for that clan to be an active participant in nation politics. It's good in theory, but unless you're max rank with a clan supporting you with a constant supply of LO/WO 1st rates, you're limited in your enjoyment of the game.

And... clan #2 in my first six months is now a bust.

The whole clan thing IS a nice theory, though.  Not real wild about signing up for #3.

[Justme]

1 hour ago, Wraith said:

Clan turnover is a thing and something we all deal with. But you should probably look at the clans involved with the people who've been around the longest on the forum and that would be a good place to start. I don't know what nation you play in but just ask around, look at the clans of people whose name's you recognize and hit them up in game.  They should be able to integrate you into their ship line production and get you going in steady activities.  

Yay, being a resource mule for higher up clan members is always what I wanted in a game.

[Bluetooth]

Much more pve NOT PvP is the way to save this game.

A small minority of players have the time to become good enough and rich enough to excel at PvP. 

Pve is a foundation that ensures more mainstream players keep intrested.

Everyone should be able to reach the top via different routes.

More PVE content will provide casual players with game satisfaction.

Not all fish are predators but they shout the loudest.

 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

3 hours ago, Crow said:

Much more pve NOT PvP is the way to save this game.

A small minority of players have the time to become good enough and rich enough to excel at PvP. 

Pve is a foundation that ensures more mainstream players keep intrested.

Everyone should be able to reach the top via different routes.

More PVE content will provide casual players with game satisfaction.

Not all fish are predators but they shout the loudest.

 

I hope you are right ( for a pve server that is )...

... but hearing a ton of players saying that fighting 1 to 2 odds against NPC is too difficult ( final exam )  I come to wonder what type of pve do we want... always a boring steamroll the NPCs ?...

... and I still wonder why players chose PvP server...

... be honest.

 

[Jean Ribault]

2 hours ago, Hethwill said:

I hope you are right ( for a pve server that is )...

... but hearing a ton of players saying that fighting 1 to 2 odds against NPC is too difficult ( final exam )  I come to wonder what type of pve do we want... always a boring steamroll the NPCs ?...

... and I still wonder why players chose PvP server...

... be honest.

 

 

My opinion is that he is right.  Most of us say that majority of NA problems would go away with significantly higher player numbers.  And that's the only way to do it.  You aren't going to get significantly higher player numbers on this path of less than 100 super uber elite pvp fighters with OP ship fitouts and OP DLC's.  Not going to happen, ever.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

7 minutes ago, Jean Ribault said:

 

My opinion is that he is right.  Most of us say that majority of NA problems would go away with significantly higher player numbers.  And that's the only way to do it.  You aren't going to get significantly higher player numbers on this path of less than 100 super uber elite pvp fighters with OP ship fitouts and OP DLC's.  Not going to happen, ever.

??? Subject was more PvE activity... why is there PvP in the mix other than personal choice of playing in PvP server... *sigh* ?

[John Jacob Astor]

3 hours ago, Hethwill said:

I hope you are right ( for a pve server that is )...

... but hearing a ton of players saying that fighting 1 to 2 odds against NPC is too difficult ( final exam )  I come to wonder what type of pve do we want... always a boring steamroll the NPCs ?...

... and I still wonder why players chose PvP server...

... be honest.

 

Because once you get outside of the capital zones the PvE server is a player desert.

And one of the reasons is the inability to see contract activity without visiting a port.  It stovepipes the player econ inside capital region ports.  Which means no players in the open world, so nothing but AI to interact with.  Might as well be a non-multiplayer game that happens to be mostly devoid of content.

Would YOU play that game?  The same structural problem is present on PvP but it is masked by the larger player base and the player dispersion from the PvP activity.

I get the distinct impression that very few of the posters in these forums have any interest in how the player economy actually works. 

Or fails to work.  If the player economy doesn't function on PvE, it really doesn't function at all.  It is merely propped up by other game factors and the whole thing probably ought to go over the side and be done with it.

My discussion on the matter from EXACTLY this question from @admin

 

I am flabbergasted this keeps getting asked.

If this game is going to have a player economy, get it working on PvE.  That will benefit both servers.

Or don't have one at all.

 

Edited July 17, 2018 by Marcus Corvus
correction