Patch 30: General feedback

[Zlatkowar]

26 minutes ago, van Veen said:

The new combat medals are not working imho. The only purpose is to narrow down accessibility of certain things to certain playstyles. Players don't like it and this has a strong negative impact on player retention. It's a game killer.

The old PVP marks worked a lot better, as it did not matter which ship you killed, when and where. Plus you also received some marks for assists. I still think the number of currencies needs to be reduced to max. two, one monetary currency and one for achievements. Merge doubloons and reals. Re-implement PVP/PVE marks system. Merge PVP marks, PVE marks and victory marks with appropriate weighting. This is simple and straightforward. 

This makes so much sense that I don't understand why it even has to come from player feedback.

[jodgi]

1 minute ago, Archaos said:

Devs they respond that people who do PvP should have the best rewards?

Well, ok, but not because we asked. Look at my signature... That dates from well before EA release. They wanted a fighting game, don't blame the fighters who came for that.

[z4ys]

50 minutes ago, jodgi said:

Show me one example of that.

Strange that no-one blamed rover so far.

When first rates and ship notes that have all woods available are accessible by pve then there is no pressure to do rvr/pvp.

[Angus MacDuff]

2 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Strange that no-one blamed rover so far.

Goes without saying...

[van Veen]

1 minute ago, z4ys said:

Strange that no-one blamed rover so far.

When first rates and ship notes that have all woods available are accessible by pve then there is no pressure to do rvr/pvp.

This statement is only true if you assume that limiting accessibility of resources is the only driving force for RVR. 

Sadly, you are right. I could cry. 

[Neads O'Tune]

4 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Strange that no-one blamed rover so far.

 

Or mentioned rover, thought about rover, barely even remembered rover etc

[Archaos]

8 minutes ago, jodgi said:

Well, ok, but not because we asked. Look at my signature... That dates from well before EA release. They wanted a fighting game, don't blame the fighters who came for that.

So how does your signature tie in with the current practices, how does making best ships harder to get for non PvP'ers motivate the fighting? and if that ship is hard to get and tests have shown that people prefer less risk then what is my motivation to risk that hard won ship?

Do they not realize that all this back and forth between hardcore PvP play and easier play styles just upsets both sets. As I mentioned in another thread, I am more of an all round player enjoying all types of play, but more and more recently I feel I am forced into one style of play.

[LeBoiteux]

On 2/28/2019 at 11:50 AM, admin said:

Rattlesnake is now crafteable (with permit)

Plain little Rattlesnake (Light) is back !!!!

Hurrah ! Champagne ! 🙂

Edited March 8, 2019 by LeBoiteux

[Mr. Doran]

2 hours ago, Felix Victor said:

Current data

Ah, yes I see my mistake now. The numbers have changed but do not directly translate for penetration to the max value listed in the sheet to the tables in game. 

 

Thanks.

[Tsesarevitch]

2 hours ago, van Veen said:

But no one will sell them because they are so hard earned. Player based currency exchange does not work. 

Player based currency exchanges have worked and continue to do so, as we know with reals -> dubloons and people buying and selling the (combat and) victory marks, but the demand far exceeds the supply when it comes to the combat medals, and as a result they're so valuable nothing really equates a 'fair trade' to people who would otherwise want to sell them.

[van Veen]

5 minutes ago, Isaac Le Maire said:

Player based currency exchanges have worked and continue to do so,

...

nothing really equates a 'fair trade'... 

So, it doesn't work or it does?

You contradict yourself here. I don't really get your point. 

Anyway, the point is: are 4 different currencies required for the game to work? I think no. 

Do they enrich the game? Hm, not sure. 

Do they harm the game? I think yes. Simply because they were designed only to limit accessibility. Random limitations are a bad motivator. It works, but it hurts. 

Example: I had some good fun in the PVP zone, sank 1 player, got sunk then. All good. Ended up with 18.6k damage, so only 1.4k to the next stage of combat marks reward. I sailed out in a basic cutter just to do 1.4k damage somehow. It was already late and I really didn't want to do it, but did it anyway. Was it fun in the end? No. 

[Archaos]

27 minutes ago, Isaac Le Maire said:

Player based currency exchanges have worked and continue to do so, as we know with reals -> dubloons and people buying and selling the (combat and) victory marks, but the demand far exceeds the supply when it comes to the combat medals, and as a result they're so valuable nothing really equates a 'fair trade' to people who would otherwise want to sell them.

Which is why they become a barrier to PvP entry. They are now needed for majority of the PvP ships but you need to PvP to get them. It like in a race awarding the person who wins better running shoes that make them go faster yet expect others to be able to catch them in the next race. Its just not going to happen unless that person slips up or makes a mistake.

By all means have special rewards for winners of PvP, but at least let those rewards be things like paints or flags, something that they can use to show off their success not something that makes them stronger at something they have already won.

[Raekur]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but there are several ships in the crafting menu that now require permits, but for some there are no permits available. Example - Niagra.

[Raekur]

oh and in case anyone was wondering..out of 42 craftable ships, 20 now require permits.

Why was the LGV refit removed?

[Sir Texas Sir]

9 minutes ago, Raekur said:

oh and in case anyone was wondering..out of 42 craftable ships, 20 now require permits.

Why was the LGV refit removed?

patch notes the other day said removed to rebalance ships or something.

 

[Guest]

so poods got heavily nerfed on both dmg and pen, why not just lock them to the russian ships instead? this would make those ships more viable to use. @admin

[Raekur]

Wasn't clans supposed to receive 100,000 real after the wipe?

The clan I am part of did but a friend's clan did not. She has submitted an F11 twice on it but there has been no reply or resolution. Just wondering if there was some specifics towards only clans of a certain size got it while small clans did not..have no idea at this point why she was excluded.

[Dalai Lama]

49 minutes ago, Raekur said:

Wasn't clans supposed to receive 100,000 real after the wipe?

The clan I am part of did but a friend's clan did not. She has submitted an F11 twice on it but there has been no reply or resolution. Just wondering if there was some specifics towards only clans of a certain size got it while small clans did not..have no idea at this point why she was excluded.

the requirements were: your clan needed to own at least 100.000 reals pre wipe to receive the 100.000.

There were also 99.999 exceptions to this rule... 😉

[Tsesarevitch]

1 hour ago, Raekur said:

Wasn't clans supposed to receive 100,000 real after the wipe?

Nobody received any money as a part of this wipe. The only exclusions to the wipe were based upon what could be kept.
If a clan had more than 100,000 reals in their warehouse, they were reduced to 100,000.
If a player had more than 50,000 reals, they were reduced to 50,000.
People and clans with less than those limits were unaffected.

[Raekur]

ah, ok. I think she misunderstood and had the cash in hand and was unable to put it in the warehouse prior to the wipe

 

[Suppenkelle]

On 3/8/2019 at 12:37 AM, jodgi said:

Ah, but that was my point; In solo duel you can turn and fire, turn and fire until the better player sinks your little ship. You'll be sent to port with three medals.

Anyone playing this game can do damage and then die.

So, in Solo patrol you receive combat medals even if you loose? That was news tome. Thx, Jodgi!

[victor]

19 hours ago, jodgi said:

Well, ok, but not because we asked. Look at my signature... That dates from well before EA release. They wanted a fighting game, don't blame the fighters who came for that.

I guess that people like him (and me) do not blame PVP players for asking for the game features they prefer, rather we blame the devs that could have developed (and, in part, had actually developed until last summer) a game suitable both for fighters and other players (in order to reach let's say a stable game population of 1500 players?) but - I think mainly for the lack of financiary resources - they preferred going down the path of pleasing just 300 fighters, with the consequence of scaring away a lot of potential players.

But I am convinced that this trend will not change, since the "hardcore PVP little community" business model it's the only one that,after the launch, can go on for some time (with paid DLCs) also with a small team and reduced resources.

So, basically, I understand (and do not blame) both PVP players and, to a certain extent, also the Devs. Yet I complain about what this game could actually have been: much more than what it is right now.

Edited March 9, 2019 by victor

[admin]

58 minutes ago, victor said:

I guess that people like him (and me) do not blame PVP players for asking for the game features they prefer, rather we blame the devs that could have developed (and, in part, had actually developed until last summer) a game suitable both for fighters and other players (in order to reach let's say a stable game population of 1500 players?) but - I think mainly for the lack of financiary resources - they preferred going down the path of pleasing just 300 fighters, with the consequence of scaring away a lot of potential players.

Your statement is incorrect and is easily disproved. 
Peace server is for peace loving people. Since descriptions were added Peace server gets more people than PVP server and its online is steadily rising.  In fact in December during the winter sale 2x more people were choosing peace server (2x more new accounts were created from new buyers- unique steam IDs).

We have the game suitable BOTH for fighters and other players including very casual people who can capture everything from the NPC and get all the resources in the admiralty. And players make this choice every day without trying mix oil and water.

If this trend continues there will be 2500 players on the peace server and pvp server will continue to stay at 400 online due to the people like you who instead of promoting and advertising healthy pvp to newcomers constantly complain about mythical creatures like casuals on the WAR server (who all already left to Peace)

 

 - Keep casuals in the game - Give them the way to play safely
Peace server properly advertised and all content is made accessible there, all casuals move to Peace server.
-  NO   NoT like that.

- Give players some motivation to pvp
Best ships moved behind pvp wall and are only accessible through pvp
- No  Not like that

 

[Aldeveron]

On 28 February 2019 at 10:50 AM, admin said:

Please report issues and general thoughts and feedback on the Patch 30

I have had a tremendous immersion from this game, on both servers, in the past. However, some of the recent changes, I flatly dislike. Below are the things I like, and the things I dislike, since Patch 30 - along with some other suggestions. My comments pertain mainly to the PVP server game. Forgive me if one or two comments don't pertain to Patch 30, exclusively.

PROS
1) The delivery missions are a welcome addition.
2) The addition of Mission Chests and Silver Chests is good.
3) Getting the Fleet-1 perk by default is ok.
4) The addition of more NPCs sailing near our ports is very welcome, but I think even more would be better for some ports.

CONS
1) I'm not sure if it was part of patch 30 but I don't like how enemy players now have 20 minutes to muscle in on fights we pick with NPCs.
2) I dislike the way other ships are drawn into a battle automatically, when they happen to be nearby, when the battle is started.
3) I very much dislike how it is now so hard to obtain rare woods, for all but the lucky few. Likewise, Cartagena, Copper Ingots Greenheart Logs, etc.
4) I greatly preferred it when I could buy PVP rewards and ship notes with Doubloons. Many of us don't want to be pressured to attack other players in order to acquire the new Combat Medals.  I don't mind fighting off enemy players occasionally when necessary. But I don't want to have to constantly attack other players so that I can acquire ship notes and essential upgrades.
5) I really didn't like the idea of renaming the Connie the 'United States'; the new name sounds far too nation-specific to me, and will induce much confusion within chat and other comms. There were other Connie-class ships that it could have been named after, if a name-change was really necessary.
6) I don't understand why the NA Connie was upgraded to 3rd rate. (4th rate seemed right to me.)
7) I don't know why it was necessary to nerf the cutter.

I suggest that there are other shortcomings to the game that need sorting out, which should take priority over tweaking stuff that already worked quite well. For example:
1) Fix the chat facility so that semicolons and apostrophe keys don't sometimes behave like the 'enter' key. And stop the mail icon from blinking after we relog-in, if there is no new mail to read. Enable blinking of the private-message tab (as per the other chat channels) when the recipient replies.
2) Give the whole Caribbean a climate that is like the Caribbean and less remeniscient of the Far North. In other words, give it much shorter rainstorms, lighter, bluer seas, more blue skies and pretty sunsets and sunrises. Lightening flashes, during occasional thunderstorms would be a great addition too.
3) Fix the issue where the first attempt to switch to bow chasers with the right mouse key, doesn't work, and swings the view-direction wildly, one way or another.
4) Fix the NPC ships sailing through land issue.
5) Make it easy to determine which gunnery upgrades work with carronades and which ones don't (maybe by renaming them).
6) Keep the Wiki page up to date - especially regarding ships and their specifications - or create your own official page that has up-to-date ship list and ship specs.
7) Repaint the Santisima's garish vermillion stripes and masts with something more convincing, and paint her stern, with gold detail and suchlike. And paint the Victory's and L'Ocean's sterns likewise.
8] Scrap the annoying and inappropriate 'raindrops on glass' effect.
9) There could be more generosity with the frequency of sealed bottles and other surprise finds.
10) Stop selling the Requin DLC, and perhaps replace it with a western-style ship that doesn't have such an unfair and excessive advantage against other smaller ships. I don't object to DLC ships, if they have a slight tactical advantage over similar ships - but I do object to ones that have an overwhelming advantage (like Le Requin). 

OTHER COMMENTS
I still enjoy the game, but nowhere near as much as before the recent changes. I'm wondering if the devs are basing their tinkerings mainly on the wishes of a few seasoned players with their own set of opinions, when they should be thinking more about the interests of casual players, newcomers and lower-rankers. I know they wish to make the game ever more realistic, but sometimes making it more realistic makes it more disheartening, more arduous, more brutal, and less fun. We need to remember that this is a game at the end of the day, and if it ceases to be fun, it is doomed. The increased proportion of negative feedbacks on Steam (now 'mostly negative', as I type this) should be heeded. I don't envisage this situation improving unless the devs modify their approach to the game's development. In particular, be more generous, don't force us to do attack players, and make rare woods and upgrade-crafting materials more easily available. Provide some better protection against ganking (by scrapping the Requin, ideally.)

Edited March 11, 2019 by Aldeveron

[Sir Texas Sir]

29 minutes ago, admin said:

Your statement is incorrect and is easily disproved. 
Peace server is for peace loving people. Since descriptions were added Peace server gets more people than PVP server and its online is steadily rising.  In fact in December during the winter sale 2x more people were choosing peace server (2x more new accounts were created from new buyers- unique steam IDs).

We have the game suitable BOTH for fighters and other players including very casual people who can capture everything from the NPC and get all the resources in the admiralty. And players make this choice every day without trying mix oil and water.

If this trend continues there will be 2500 players on the peace server and pvp server will continue to stay at 400 online due to the people like you who instead of promoting and advertising healthy pvp to newcomers constantly complain about mythical creatures like casuals on the WAR server (who all already left to Peace)

 

 - Keep casuals in the game - Give them the way to play safely
Peace server properly advertised and all content is made accessible there, all casuals move to Peace server.
-  NO   NoT like that.

- Give players some motivation to pvp
Best ships moved behind pvp wall and are only accessible through pvp
- No  Not like that

 

But the problem is your going to both sides of the extreme.  Peace server is there for any one that wants ZERO PVP.   War server is a PvE/PvP server for those that want both...it is not a PvP only server.  So you should still allow areas for folks to level up and casually play the game and than the majority of the map is for those that want to live the life of a risk.   The reason numbers are going up on the peace server is folks are getting tired of the stupid trend to push for a hard core game and force folks to play that style.  YOur never going to have big numbers when you force folks to do things.  How you get them to do those things is by having low risk low reward sections (the Green Gank Zones which should be full safe zones) and by having HIGH Risk, High Rewards (your OW PvP areas).  Capital zones should not be the PvP hunting grounds for vets.  If some RA casuals wants to grind in peace they should be able to, just give him crappy loot tables is all so he can't get any of the very good books/rewards to drop. If he wants those than he has to go out of the safe zones.  

I'll be honest if Peace server had better contnet like say we cant flip neutral ports and own them for a short time, but map reset every three months. You would get more players interested in the game on that server cause it gives clans a puprose and goal instead of just killing AI.   Hell I would prob get active over there, but the thing is even those casuals and new players on War that like PvE a lot, like to WAR too, but they want to do it on there terms when they have more time to do it and not forced to do it.  Just like the PvP gankers like to only fight on there terms and with easy targets around capitals instead of fighting each other.  How about forcing those PvP gankers to fight each other intested of forcing the casual PvE guys to fight on the PvP gankers terms?   I also don't know why some folks have so much hate against PvE/RPers and such....it's not like they are effecting your game. It's like if you take away there happeniess than the PvP ganker is happer....or more like the bully that gets pleasure out of beating up the school nerd or drama actor.   So is it a good thing to encourge bullies style of game play?  

Oh and I bet you more mythical casuals left the game as a whole, instead of just going to peace servers. I know a lot of guys that love trade and crafting that have left the game instead of moving servers.  Mainly cause they do like the war part of the game too, just don't like being forced to play the game for a few dozen guys that refuse to fight each other.