Can we see the statistical data?

[angriff]

The Admin posted this:

Quote

Hello Captains.
Based on the kill data there is on average 1 death of a player to AI for every 800 AI killed. 
Perhaps the theatrical dramatic statements you make here are somewhat exaggerated. We are very confident that every player can reach this average, by practice and fitting their ships for AI deficiencies.

My question is this a straight statistic of numbers or is there some control used in this presentation?  For example killing an AI when you have a numerical or rating advantage is not statistically relevant to the feel of gameplay.  If this statistic is a generality and not specific to a 1 on 1 even match then I think it is not allowing the devs to see how the game plays for players and becomes drudgery.

I have been in fights where 3 players killed 7 AI of equal values but I have also been in fights of equal value that turned into the Alamo wit the AI sinking 4 players for 1 AI loss and 3 ai with one notch structural left, one out of two masts ,tacking up wind and single shooting through the waves in the gunports at  the last survivor's rudder until his lonely death.  It is not really something that should be easy but then it should also have variation to remain interesting.  If every fight is the same gamey tactic to succeed then it is not a game or tactics but a tactical process to an end.  Spending 1 hour fighting an AI to the bitter end is not 

So instead of making a generalization of 1 for 800 please normalize the data before making that generalization.  If players are giving your this feedback and you find the new players quitting because of it why then standing on the bully pulpit speaking to an empty auditorium? 

Edited February 2, 2019 by angriff

[Lord Gud]

AI are very easy for the average player and it's hard to balance them around every single player when people have good woods/refits/books and some have nothing. The way around this problem is you use bigger ships to fight smaller ones and work your way up. 

[Beeekonda]

I cant comprehend OP, someone translate pls

[jodgi]

6 hours ago, angriff said:

is this a straight statistic of numbers or is there some control used

Straight, no control used.

The point was that very few players die to bots in spite of your experience. Some people think that bots are content so they have to be somewhat challenging. Unless bots are OP and cheating they aren't a challenge at all.

[Sir Max Magic]

7 hours ago, angriff said:

The Admin posted this:

My question is this a straight statistic of numbers or is there some control used in this presentation?  For example killing an AI when you have a numerical or rating advantage is not statistically relevant to the feel of gameplay.  If this statistic is a generality and not specific to a 1 on 1 even match then I think it is not allowing the devs to see how the game plays for players and becomes drudgery.

I have been in fights where 3 players killed 7 AI of equal values but I have also been in fights of equal value that turned into the Alamo wit the AI sinking 4 players for 1 AI loss and 3 ai with one notch structural left, one out of two masts ,tacking up wind and single shooting through the waves in the gunports at  the last survivor's rudder until his lonely death.  It is not really something that should be easy but then it should also have variation to remain interesting.  If every fight is the same gamey tactic to succeed then it is not a game or tactics but a tactical process to an end.  Spending 1 hour fighting an AI to the bitter end is not 

So instead of making a generalization of 1 for 800 please normalize the data before making that generalization.  If players are giving your this feedback and you find the new players quitting because of it why then standing on the bully pulpit speaking to an empty auditorium? 

The ratio of 1 loss to 8oo kills is very easy to explain:

We Vets are farming Fleets of 10 Frigates with a LO/WO 1st Rate for knowledge slots and rare Books...

Ofc, we almost never get in danger to get sunk and accumulate extremly high death - kill ratios !!  

 

The Picture changes completly when you would take the data from newer Players only  

...i mean those who leave the game in frustration after a week

Edited February 2, 2019 by Sir Max Magic

[admin]

8 hours ago, angriff said:

The Admin posted this:

My question is this a straight statistic of numbers or is there some control used in this presentation?  For example killing an AI when you have a numerical or rating advantage is not statistically relevant to the feel of gameplay.  If this statistic is a generality and not specific to a 1 on 1 even match then I think it is not allowing the devs to see how the game plays for players and becomes drudgery.

I have been in fights where 3 players killed 7 AI of equal values but I have also been in fights of equal value that turned into the Alamo wit the AI sinking 4 players for 1 AI loss and 3 ai with one notch structural left, one out of two masts ,tacking up wind and single shooting through the waves in the gunports at  the last survivor's rudder until his lonely death.  It is not really something that should be easy but then it should also have variation to remain interesting.  If every fight is the same gamey tactic to succeed then it is not a game or tactics but a tactical process to an end.  Spending 1 hour fighting an AI to the bitter end is not 

So instead of making a generalization of 1 for 800 please normalize the data before making that generalization.  If players are giving your this feedback and you find the new players quitting because of it why then standing on the bully pulpit speaking to an empty auditorium? 

I agree with you that new players sink disproportionally more. They also die to mobs in all MMOs initially. Once they learn to play they stop sinking. From the Even mission statistics are the same  - people finish 70% of rank 7 and rank 6 kill missions. People finish 100% of rank 1 missions. 

Please propose tunings to bots you think are necessary that will not affect overall experience of those who want challenge. (because no-one like dumbed down games). It is somewhat harder on lower levels due to low profile of early ships and their high base turn rate.

The goal of the bots is to teach player to fit the ships and increase DPS by aiming better and getting closer. I do not know if we should dumb them down. But as i said - it is very hard to fight AI lynxes on your first day - we should do something about it.

 

[admin]

19 hours ago, Sir Max Magic said:

The ratio of 1 loss to 8oo kills is very easy to explain:

We Vets are farming Fleets of 10 Frigates with a LO/WO 1st Rate for knowledge slots and rare Books...

Ofc, we almost never get in danger to get sunk and accumulate extremly high death - kill ratios !!  

 

The Picture changes completly when you would take the data from newer Players only  

...i mean those who leave the game in frustration after a week

New players finish 70% of 7th 6th rate missions already.
Once they learn to play they stop sinking. Those who learn to shoot and upgrage the ships are fine.  

And what do you mean leave in frustration? They cannot build a live oak pickle with reload mods, pumps and 12lb carronades? They leave in frustration because they cannot upgrade their starting ship?

Bots are overrated (i wanted to write about dumbness of bots) but will not badmouth my own game. Its a hard game, until you figure it out. Once you figure it out it turns very easy and you go pvp. Figuring it out part is on the player. 

 

PS caveat. of course i might see it from my experience, and maybe it takes a week to get carronades and reload mods and perks. We will see next data test after patch hits

[Lord Gud]

3 minutes ago, admin said:

I agree with you that new players sink disproportionally more. They also die to mobs in all MMOs initially. Once they learn to play they stop sinking. From the Even mission statistics are the same  - people finish 70% of rank 7 and rank 6 kill missions. People finish 100% of rank 1 missions. 

Please propose tunings to bots you think are necessary that will not affect overall experience of those who want challenge. (because no-one like dumbed down games). It is somewhat harder on lower levels due to low profile of early ships and their high base turn rate.

The goal of the bots is to teach player to fit the ships and increase DPS by aiming better and getting closer. I do not know if we should dumb them down 

 

One of the big issues for newer players is the mission system but thankfully this next PvE update should fix it. AI shouldn't be dumbed down because it will affect people who know how to play well. One thing you could do is when a lower ranking player tags AI the wood is set to something weak and possibly have negative bonuses to thickness/speed/turning/etc. I honestly think when a player joins a basic cutter is just not an enjoyable experience. Would it be possible to replace the basic cutter with something larger such as a brig so new players can get them for free and don't have to feel bad when they work up to 6th rates and lose them? We already make it possible to rank up decently once you complete tutorial so why not make it easier for someone who has trouble completing it? Maybe every time you rank up a player could be rewarded with a ship that fits his crew requirements.

[admin]

2 minutes ago, Lord Gud said:

Maybe every time you rank up a player could be rewarded with a ship that fits his crew requirements.

Maybe ship of the week? ))) 

[OjK]

What is the time period of that statistic?

Cause half a year ago, I was taking my L'Ocean and was sinking 10-12 3rd Rates with ease, or 5 1st Rates.
After changes, it already requires a bit to kill a 3v1

So if the stats are taking into calculation kills before the change, they're worthless

[Lord Gud]

37 minutes ago, admin said:

Maybe ship of the week? ))) 

Definitely because having rewards in any form gives players an incentive to want to play more. I like this idea but I also think it would be nice if you were given a chest that has the possibility of getting a good book or ship. The game should scale a lot better such as by the time you get to max rank you should be near completing most of the books.

 

[Powderhorn]

1 hour ago, Lord Gud said:

Definitely because having rewards in any form gives players an incentive to want to play more. I like this idea but I also think it would be nice if you were given a chest that has the possibility of getting a good book or ship. The game should scale a lot better such as by the time you get to max rank you should be near completing most of the books.

That's an interesting idea.  Some games have login rewards, XP rewards, boosts, etc.  I'm thinking of online CCGs like Gwent, or my very brief foray into World of Warships.  Do MMOs ever do that sort of thing?  I'm not sure, but it might be worth exploring.  Maybe craft XP boosts for the first ship you make of the day to encourage the 2 hour player.  Combat XP boost for the first ship you sink of the day for the 2 hour player.  A chest drop for sinking a ship on three consecutive days, or building a ship on three consecutive days (which would require a "Combat" chest and an "Econ" chest).

Dunno how easy it would be to add in, but if the goal is to get players to make it through their first week or two, it might help quite a bit.  @admin

[Vernon Merrill]

18 hours ago, admin said:

New players finish 70% of 7th 6th rate missions already.
Once they learn to play they stop sinking. Those who learn to shoot and upgrage the ships are fine.  

And what do you mean leave in frustration? They cannot build a live oak pickle with reload mods, pumps and 12lb carronades? They leave in frustration because they cannot upgrade their starting ship?

Bots are overrated (i wanted to write about dumbness of bots) but will not badmouth my own game. Its a hard game, until you figure it out. Once you figure it out it turns very easy and you go pvp. Figuring it out part is on the player. 

This X1000

I'll never understand why people would want a dumbed-down game that they can master and get bored with in a few weeks instead of a challenging game that takes a lot of effort and practice that can keep them occupied for months if not years....   

I'm still of the opinion that its somewhat age-related.  

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

There is a fellow that defeated the first boss of Dark Souls while blindfolded.

There's also fellows that gave up the game and never passed even the first boss.

Former player did persist in learning the game until ridiculous perfection.

Latter didn't understand the challenge proposed by the game. Maybe they wanted interactive fiction, not a game.

Not related, but same mindset thing.

 

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

8 hours ago, admin said:

I agree with you that new players sink disproportionally more. They also die to mobs in all MMOs initially. Once they learn to play they stop sinking. From the Even mission statistics are the same  - people finish 70% of rank 7 and rank 6 kill missions. People finish 100% of rank 1 missions. 

Please propose tunings to bots you think are necessary that will not affect overall experience of those who want challenge. (because no-one like dumbed down games). It is somewhat harder on lower levels due to low profile of early ships and their high base turn rate.

The goal of the bots is to teach player to fit the ships and increase DPS by aiming better and getting closer. I do not know if we should dumb them down. But as i said - it is very hard to fight AI lynxes on your first day - we should do something about it.

 

If I was to change AI one thing I would change is the pull for board.  Make it so AI treats every one as if they have DD perk.  AI can only pull you if they have more crew than you.  Your screwed any way cause of all the boarding mods they have.  This is where most people get killed, they go to loot the ship and get pulled at the last moment while the AI is sinking.  With that why does AI not have all it's crew in survival trying to bail out all the water?  Seems AI stays afloat and continues shooting all broad side like nothing and has 100% prep when pulled for a board.  I get AI needs to be a little tougher than players, but some times it does things that just totally crush a new player that isn't ready and the number one thing is normally the auto pull and board while sinking.

4 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said:

This X1000

I'll never understand why people would want a dumbed-down game that they can master and get bored with in a few weeks instead of a challenging game that takes a lot of effort and practice that can keep them occupied for months if not years....   

I'm still of the opinion that its somewhat age-related.  

I really do n't see folks asking for stuff to be dumbed down, but you have to remember not every one plays the same as you.  Many folks in this game are older and tend to want a more relaxed play of the game than hard core all the time.  That is why casuals want to be able to grind AI without fear of being farmed by so called PvP Elite that refuse to fight each other, but think ganking casuals at capitals is real PvP and fun.   That is the wonderfull thing about open box games like this, it has all types of players in it. 

Well when it has a population.....

1 hour ago, Hethwill said:

There is a fellow that defeated the first boss of Dark Souls while blindfolded.

There's also fellows that gave up the game and never passed even the first boss.

Former player did persist in learning the game until ridiculous perfection.

Latter didn't understand the challenge proposed by the game. Maybe they wanted interactive fiction, not a game.

Not related, but same mindset thing.

 

You will always have your hard core elite players that will do things faster and better than the average player, but you should never balance the normal game towards those players.  The Division did that shortly after it came out and it made it to hard for most of the casuals and most folks stopped playing (that and all the hackers didn't help).   They learned from that mistake, you want to make a game harder for those, you make tiers/levels or add in new bosses that are harder than the others.  We have a group of folks that hate on AI cause they are stupid.  I have come to find most AI aren't any better or worse than the majority of the casual players (this is from fighthing US as a pirate, we had AI give us a better challenge at times.)  I don't get how folks think killing bad players is a challenge either than just killing AI.  It's more the emotional thing of thining I took something away from another player so I'm better.  It's also a dick of a move too only fight crappy players and avoid the good players.  Which sadly most of our PvPers do.  I bring it up all the time.  If they would go attack WO, HAVOC, etc etc in there times or the weekends they will get tons of PvP and play, but they don't want that, they want easy kills.

So folks have to understand there are two types of players (well prob 100 types) the casuals 90% and the Hard core 10%.  You need both to make a game work, but which group is going to fill your servers with the most numbers?

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

You misread me.

What OP thinks as challenging, another player do not.

That's what statistics tell. He will be the one that dies, while the other player will kill 800.

That's 1:1 data.

The Dark Souls example was to illustrate that persons that engage in games, most notably digital media games, search for experiences that this or that game provides.

It doesn't mean that game is especially made for them specifically, but for the average.

And if that one specific is below average ( hence the players that never went beyond the first boss in dark souls ) he is as much representation of the average as the elite guy ( the guy that beat the boss blindfolded ).

Both are not average. Average will be 1 death versus 400.  

Hope that it is clearer. I mean nothing against below average expectations, nor elite representations. Both are a nich of their own. But I rather think most average players strive to be like the elite and not desire to become worse, below average.

 

[Sir Max Magic]

On 2/2/2019 at 12:45 PM, Sir Max Magic said:

The ratio of 1 loss to 8oo kills is very easy to explain:

We Vets are farming Fleets of 10 Frigates with a LO/WO 1st Rate for knowledge slots and rare Books...

Ofc, we almost never get in danger to get sunk and accumulate extremly high death - kill ratios !!  

 

The Picture changes completly when you would take the data from newer Players only  

...i mean those who leave the game in frustration after a week

 

On 2/2/2019 at 1:51 PM, admin said:

New players finish 70% of 7th 6th rate missions already.
Once they learn to play they stop sinking. Those who learn to shoot and upgrage the ships are fine.  

And what do you mean leave in frustration? They cannot build a live oak pickle with reload mods, pumps and 12lb carronades? They leave in frustration because they cannot upgrade their starting ship?

Bots are overrated (i wanted to write about dumbness of bots) but will not badmouth my own game. Its a hard game, until you figure it out. Once you figure it out it turns very easy and you go pvp. Figuring it out part is on the player. 

 

PS caveat. of course i might see it from my experience, and maybe it takes a week to get carronades and reload mods and perks. We will see next data test after patch hits

 

I agree with you that noone, atleast we Vets, wants a dumbed down game, so many of us supports your approach of a hardcore game  

 

...but if you ask me what you can do for new players, i say:

Bring back the old Mission System with REALS as reward for the "Kill" - Missions !!!

Atleast, if you dont like to change it for all ranks, do it for 7th, 6th and 5th rate ones !!!

...because those are the bread and butter ones for new players to gain experience...  

 

When i started in 2016, we had very much fun with those missions because they

1. teached us the basics of the game

2. we could level up in rank

3. we had a decent income of the main game currency

4. succesful missions gave you enough money to support repairs, crew losses AND an occasional ship loss ! And you even had enough money to upgrade your ship from time to time to fit your specific rank

 

 

What is now different with the new Mission system:

- Nowadays, Dubs as Mission rewards are completly unattractive for new Players !

- The either dont understand the contract system in the first place and even if they do, they can only sell them to OTHER PLAYERS competing with very rich and experienced players for the few Reals...  

...and Reals are what they need the most to repair ships and occasionally upgrade to abetter one...

- New Players are forced into Trader Role to accumulate enough Reals for their ships, but lack the Reals on the other hand to buy even the cheapest trading goods...let alone what happens if someone accumulated enough Reals by Mission running to get his first trader,  buy soem trading goods and lose all on their first trading run against a seasoned veteran...  

- and all this, when they should do Missions to gain experience to increase in Rank !! Trading doesnt help here with this...  

 

TL;DR: dont dumb down AI but give new Players REALS !!!

 

Edited February 3, 2019 by Sir Max Magic

[Guest]

On 2/3/2019 at 1:44 AM, admin said:

it is very hard to fight AI lynxes on your first day - we should do something about it.

Suggest quick advancement to 6^th rates, as soon as player gets into a “Snow” (OW-wise) the better off they will be, in battles and "gaming" satisfaction of being in a nice ship.

Same with a “Rattlesnake” (tutorial-wise).

These ships not only look like a warship, they perform too, like against Lynx’s.

Other than that, all 7^th rate star 1-3 missions should maybe be against a (training) Brig.