Forthcoming patch information

[Conte D. Catellani]

1 hour ago, Raekur said:

What exactly would be the point? Do you plan on eliminating the PVE server because the population on the PVP server has dropped again? I doubt that removing the PVE server will gain anything more than players never playing naval action ever again. Every time that a choice has been forced upon the players it has resulted in a net loss not a gain. The PVE server offers a respite from the overwhelming toxic nature that the PVP server has developed into. Remove this option and the only thing that is gained is an unwanted outcome.

what about making a DLC to move from the two servers, like you move from different nations?

[Stilgar]

On 4/16/2020 at 11:27 AM, Aquillas said:

I won’t develop that too much, because it is off topic and I don’t want to be negative against a game on which I spent so much time. Two main reasons:

Ships:

I am a user of small ships. Just have a look in my YouTube channel. Since the release, I used one time a 1st rate (NPC captured), one time Le Redoutable (by obligation, instructions received by the clan, and I got single shot bored about this brick), a few times Rättvisan (in screening), a few time L’Hermione and Hercules, one or two fights with Trincomalee. I have no slot free in any 1st, 2nd and 3rd rates. Two or three slots in Rättvisan, L’Hermione, Hercules. All slots in most 6th and 7th rates, except the bogged gunboat.

But there is no more content in game for small ships. I made, in the last month, a tour of all towns in game (377 towns), with traders Lynx, Lynx, Traders Cutters, Pickles… The last tour resulted in 15 fights, among them 8 were unarmed traders (I let them go, even the Indiaman, not to sustain a boring pseudo-fight), 5 were players trying to counter me in Connies, Redouts, etc. (so stupid!), and 3 fun fights. You have to “visit” 120 towns to get an interesting fight?

CLAN based game:

In real life, I have (ad nauseam) to organize, control, coordinate, build efficient teams, share and teach tools, check action results, etc. I have to report and ask reports, I have to receive and give instructions, I have to do all that things related to IRL jobs.

When I come in a game, my only whish is to get FREEDOM and INDEPENDENCE. Not enslavement by a Clan. Not doing in the game what I have to do all day long in my job. But in Naval Action, you can build efficient ships only if you are in a clan.  

Naval Action is a RVR & CLAN based game. RVR means 1st rates, CLAN means second job. End of the story.

Have to agree with both points. The game needs to be made more friendly for smaller (around 10 people) clans and solo players. As for getting frigates back to sea, I am afraid that train already left, with 4th/3rd DLC ships. They still have their use, but it is indeed much more difficult to find content on frigates.

Hope you'll stick around and find some motivation to play the game, Sir. 

[Farrago]

5 hours ago, Stilgar said:

As for getting frigates back to sea, I am afraid that train already left, with 4th/3rd DLC ships. They still have their use, but it is indeed much more difficult to find content on frigates

There are at least two ways:

Introduce more complex depth modeling in Open Water and especially in Battle Instance. Probably not going to happen in any foreseeable version of the game.

The other could be relatively easily implemented but probably unpopular except with those if use who prefer smaller ships. There are reasons navies use smaller, less advanced ships. One of them is it is insanely expensive to operate those big ships. Unless something is done to simulate that in game, our Naval Action navies will always be top heavy. Right now, other than cost of acquisition, there is relatively little difference in cost of owning a 1st rate vs a 6th rate. 

[Farrago]

7 hours ago, rediii said:

@admin honest question. If hostility takes longer in future what is done so the defending nation can not just join the hostility in requins and shoot sails for 1 hour 30 min until the timer of the port runs out?

Counter their LRQ with your own?

[Takehitsu]

There really is no point in playing this anymore is there?

1st rate dlc and removing screening? If this happens every nation needs a maxed 55 point port for all port bonuses that everyone in nation can use and the nation cannot lose it. Otherwise again there really is no point in playing anymore.

[Kubrat]

9 hours ago, Conte D. Catellani said:

what about making a DLC to move from the two servers, like you move from different nations?

My main objection to this would be that it would permit players to level 'in safety' and then move to the PVP server at high rank without really having earned it.

You could argue than most people level on the PVP server using PVE anyway, and they do, but at least they are in danger while they do it.

I don't think people should be able to move nations either so easily. IMO, if you move nations fine, keep your goods, but you should lose your rank. 

Your rank is a commission you hold from your sovereign, not a personal possession.  If people want to turn their coat, they should start out again, or at least take a substantial rank penalty, which would reflect reality.

[Takehitsu]

35 minutes ago, Kubrat said:

My main objection to this would be that it would permit players to level 'in safety' and then move to the PVP server at high rank without really having earned it.

You could argue than most people level on the PVP server using PVE anyway, and they do, but at least they are in danger while they do it.

I don't think people should be able to move nations either so easily. IMO, if you move nations fine, keep your goods, but you should lose your rank. 

Your rank is a commission you hold from your sovereign, not a personal possession.  If people want to turn their coat, they should start out again, or at least take a substantial rank penalty, which would reflect reality.

PvP grants you more experience and rewards Most of the high level veteran experienced pvp'ers got there through pvp not pve.

As for penalizing people for changing nations that I completely agree with.

[Conte D. Catellani]

1 hour ago, Kubrat said:

My main objection to this would be that it would permit players to level 'in safety' and then move to the PVP server at high rank without really having earned it.

You could argue than most people level on the PVP server using PVE anyway, and they do, but at least they are in danger while they do it.

I don't think people should be able to move nations either so easily. IMO, if you move nations fine, keep your goods, but you should lose your rank. 

Your rank is a commission you hold from your sovereign, not a personal possession.  If people want to turn their coat, they should start out again, or at least take a substantial rank penalty, which would reflect reality.

Correct, but the AI is not like a veteran or pvp captain. look at me i'm Terror and i'm  honest i'm not so good, there are guys in my clan that started after me and are a loong way better than me. So make a lik break on PVE could be good to learn the bases and then come to PVP to compete with good players with a less of fear.

You could argue than most people level on the PVP server using PVE anyway, and they do, but at least they are in danger while they do it. 

I think that is the typical situation that make overreact new players on PVP server: they go to learn and bam, ganked 

[Archaos]

3 hours ago, Kubrat said:

My main objection to this would be that it would permit players to level 'in safety' and then move to the PVP server at high rank without really having earned it.

You could argue than most people level on the PVP server using PVE anyway, and they do, but at least they are in danger while they do it.

I don't think people should be able to move nations either so easily. IMO, if you move nations fine, keep your goods, but you should lose your rank. 

Your rank is a commission you hold from your sovereign, not a personal possession.  If people want to turn their coat, they should start out again, or at least take a substantial rank penalty, which would reflect reality.

I never understand why people object to people ranking up without risk. Surely it means more easy targets sailing bigger ships for you to farm.

The only objection to moving server would be easy farming of gold, doubloons and CM's on PvE server and transferring them to PvP server.

[Raekur]

I really do not see the reason for this level of hatred towards the PVE server. That server gives people a place to play without the complete crap show that is going on with the pvp server. Hell I used to sail with Cuzn and his friend a while back and he seemed like a decent person, until this. No one is forcing anyone to play on the pve server, same as no one is forced to play on the pvp server so why the sarcasm? But forcing those on the pve server onto the pvp server will be about the most unintelligent thing anyone could do at this point. If you can not see why, i suggest you look back at the aftermath of what occurred after the 2 pvp servers were merged and the net loss of population afterwards.

[Sea Archer]

14 hours ago, Farrago said:

There are at least two ways:

Introduce more complex depth modeling in Open Water and especially in Battle Instance. Probably not going to happen in any foreseeable version of the game.

The other could be relatively easily implemented but probably unpopular except with those if use who prefer smaller ships. There are reasons navies use smaller, less advanced ships. One of them is it is insanely expensive to operate those big ships. Unless something is done to simulate that in game, our Naval Action navies will always be top heavy. Right now, other than cost of acquisition, there is relatively little difference in cost of owning a 1st rate vs a 6th rate. 

I think water depth and ships draft are the only way to get smaller ships back in the game. The small and medium frigates are barely seen right now, same as the smaller vessels. They are only usefull for trader hunting. I hope water depth will be implemented one day.

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

3 hours ago, Staunberg99 said:

 When @admin get that and build it in to the Peace server, together with great missions lines, you just wait and see. Peace will be the $$ for NA, it will be able to keep funding the game.

You nailed it.

Things basically changed around nov 2018 when we read words of appreciation by devs in direction of their PvE server community. It marked the moment in time when we were starting to get special treatment and content of our own. And it paid off. Our playerbase multiplied in comparison to autumn of 2018 and is now steady.

Someday, when sobering up from his bloodthirst, even Jagdgruppe14 will wake up and understand we are more useful to him and his little club of sealclubbers if we help finance GameLabs from our own remote "carebear" paradise.

When he is finally grown up, he is welcome to join our ranks...

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

37 minutes ago, Staunberg99 said:

Still lot of PvE to put in to the game, to keep a growing pop on peace server.

But do think the real PvE players have to embrace some kind of PvP to grow, and keep ppl in the game. Could be PZ zone, but also some kind of larger battles ppl could sign up for.

Well I have been proposing "consensual duels" for ages...

(And I'll be happy to offer satisfaction to JG14 once he shows up there, imagine the black smudge on his PvP soul if he gets beaten by a PvE player, lol)

Edited April 18, 2020 by Cetric de Cornusiac

[Genevieve Malfleurs]

i remember the pve-server as a friendly, non-toxic place and hope it still is and will be always like that. No need to spoil it if people are happy there!! playstyles and ship-outfitting - e.g. who cares about being demasted in pve? - are so different they should never be merged. for the game and gamelabs it is good to have both!

[Genevieve Malfleurs]

1 hour ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:

Well I have been proposing "consensual duels" for ages...

(And I'll be happy to offer satisfaction to JG14 once he shows up there, imagine the black smudge on his PvP soul if he gets beaten by a PvE player, lol)

that's ok. but i'd suggest to not underestimate cuzn 😁

[Farrago]

16 hours ago, Archaos said:

I never understand why people object to people ranking up without risk. Surely it means more easy targets sailing bigger ships for you to farm.

I used to have this same opinion. But now I’m not so sure.

”Easy” rank ultimately does little favor for most new players. For example, invariably when I see a newbie asking in chat “what do I do,” he is advised to do the tutorial and exams to get the rank, reals, repairs, etc. And then what happens? He struggles, probably ultimately passes the exams, figures out a way to get a “good” ship with his new rank and money, goes out and gets sunk. Some players may persevere after this, but I believe we lose many players somewhere in this process. The same situation may happen if players bring rank over from the PVE server. They won’t get the play they expect.

[hoarmurath]

On 4/16/2020 at 3:45 PM, JG14_Cuzn said:

Will we finally MERGE the PVE with the PVP server?  

 

I totally agree, both servers should be merged in one big PVE server... Get rid of pvp server, it's never gonna work well enough to attract players anyway.

[BoatyMcBoatFace]

real issue here is some people think that "war server" means anarchy and madness

 

it self destroys

[Kubrat]

2 hours ago, hoarmurath said:

I totally agree, both servers should be merged in one big PVE server... Get rid of pvp server, it's never gonna work well enough to attract players anyway.

This comment surprised me so i logged into peace sever and check out population.

Consensus is it peaks at between 350 and 500 but sites around 200.

So since the War server is running at 1000-1200 peaks I'm not sure what the above comment can be based on

[Raekur]

1 hour ago, Staunberg99 said:

But do think he was joking a bit when he said war should be merged over on peace.

I agree this may have been a counter to the rather callous suggestion of forcing the pve players onto the pvp server. I agree with your comment on the population as I will log into both servers during the day and have noticed that the population on the pve server is growing while there is a slight decline on the war server. 

Regarding putting any kind of pvp on the pve server, NO. If a player wants pvp, then we have a war server for that. Same but reverse to the pvp players who chastised the players that wanted to focus on going after ai on the pvp server. The pvp server has developed into a very toxic environment, do you really think that is something that should infect the pve server so a small number of players can get their pvp fix?

[Fletch]

On 4/17/2020 at 11:34 AM, Stilgar said:

Have to agree with both points. The game needs to be made more friendly for smaller (around 10 people) clans and solo players. As for getting frigates back to sea, I am afraid that train already left, with 4th/3rd DLC ships. They still have their use, but it is indeed much more difficult to find content on frigates.

Hope you'll stick around and find some motivation to play the game, Sir. 

Demasting has killed the frigate, not worth sailing anymore they simply get demasted. The whole demasting and mast sniping needs to be sorted out.

[Macjimm]

If we force PvP onto the Peace server it will cease to be PvE only.  It allows gameplay without toxic competition.

If some players want to change the War server go ahead. Make it into a PvE server with a little PvP, or all PvP with no PvE, but don't ruin the Peace server.

Save the Peace server, just say NO to the toxic merge.

[Borch]

3 hours ago, Staunberg99 said:

Put the right PvP and large battles in, more PvE content, I have no doubt where the potential is.

 

So, I don't agree on that. PvP server got bigger potential simply because of extra content you can develop there. Starting from OW PvP and ending up with PB PvP. Simply you can bring more content on War server with the options of expanded PvP.

Having said that Peace server is much easier to develop since you don't have all the War server balance issues. DLC ship are welcome, nations can be different sizes, players can do whatever they want instead of focusing on multiflips every day. Adding nations, cities, ships lore, chain quests like they planned at some point ( Admin posted one time that Christian will be reward for northern chain quest if I remember correctly), maybe some part of exploration, rewerting the change which doesn't allow other nation player to see other players names. All that would bring steady big - close to big numbers on Peace server and as such money to GL. With that money they could safely improve PvP.

Instead, we are left with PvP that is far from being balanced and PvE that is only a mirror of the War server with extra AI PB's that wasn't good enough for PvP.

 

1 hour ago, Staunberg99 said:

If there should be no PvP on the peace server, why should there then be PvE on war server?

I doubt there will be much toxic players on peace with PvP and large battles. First of all because ppl aren’t forced to do PvP.

Just have 2 PZ each day. One where you in PvE farm CM and one where you do it with PvP. Make battles like Trafalgar ppl can sign up to.

Should there be a few that can’t stay friendly, Well thats what we have chat bans for.

I respect you disagree, but I honnest belive the right PvP will being a life to peace, that also helps the PvE players. But as I wrote before, besides PvP, there need to be more PvE content.

And even with only PvE, there still can be toxic players. I played World of Warcraft for many years. I seen multi times players trash new players ore players making mistakes in Dungeons and raids.

I think, that allowing players 1v1 battles or consensual duels on PvE is going to cause a lot of toxicity which will spread to the whole server. I myself wouldn't go that way. Instead like you said I would go with Large Battles path. Queuing for that the way you can't join one side with your whole team and instead being spawned randomly between teams should do the trick. In Large Battles the glory, the fault, the blame spreads between all the players instead of usual 1v1 you're s**t, coward, f**k you for demasting me, your mother bla bla bla.

 

Anyway all that is only moot talking. GL currently develops a game that looks like described above by all of us. NA won't have any serious developement in the future exactly because of that. Looks like we have to wait for Sea Legends.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Borch

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

1 hour ago, Macjimm said:

If we force PvP onto the Peace server it will cease to be PvE only.  It allows gameplay without toxic competition.

If some players want to change the War server go ahead. Make it into a PvE server with a little PvP, or all PvP with no PvE, but don't ruin the Peace server.

Save the Peace server, just say NO to the toxic merge.

You have to understand a "consensual duel" concept or "trafalgar PvP events" to sign up for is NOT "forcing PvP onto Peace Server".

Who is forced?

The ones who voluntarily sign up for either a duel or whatever PvP events being offered?

I tell you, the whole server would function just like now, nobody is harmed.

You participate in the new content. Or you don't. Period. I see no urge whatsoever.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Cetric de Cornusiac

[ashley]

3 hours ago, Staunberg99 said:

If there should be no PvP on the peace server, why should there then be PvE on war server?

I doubt there will be much toxic players on peace with PvP and large battles. First of all because ppl aren’t forced to do PvP.

Just have 2 PZ each day. One where you in PvE farm CM and one where you do it with PvP. Make battles like Trafalgar ppl can sign up to.

Should there be a few that can’t stay friendly, Well thats what we have chat bans for.

I respect you disagree, but I honnest belive the right PvP will being a life to peace, that also helps the PvE players. But as I wrote before, besides PvP, there need to be more PvE content.

And even with only PvE, there still can be toxic players. I played World of Warcraft for many years. I seen multi times players trash new players ore players making mistakes in Dungeons and raids.

There has to be PvE on the war server otherwise there would be no economy. Getting doubloons would be extremely difficult without PvE on war server, you'd rely entirely on sinking other ships but even if you sink another ship you are not guaranteed its doubloons, someone else can take them.

Where would mods come from if there was no PvE? You can't rely on the PvP hunt missions for mods, it take a lot longer to get one captain chest from those missions than it does spamming silver chests so you'd drastically increase the cost of mods across the board.

 

There is no outcome that improves the life of a PvE player if you bring PvP to the peace server.

Edited April 19, 2020 by ashley