An Opinion of New Feature Proposals

[Macjimm]

I think that this format for providing suggestions works very well.

It is refeshing to see improvement ideas without threats from players that they will quit, or predictions of doom and the death of NA.   Feedback in this manner is much more positive and helpful.

I'm surprised to see; that some of the ideas that I love voted down, and other suggestions (that seem negative to me) have many votes of approval.  But it is very helpful to see the overall desires of the community.

Way to go Admin.  Your broadside was on target.

[Holm Hansen]

I am unfortunately very sceptical about the voting system

i fear that only suggestions will be accepted which are useful for the player group that is most represented here in the forum

for example:

Suggestion A is a suggestion that would make life a lot easier on the PVE server, without any side effects and only there, PVP server would not even be affected

Suggestion B would be equal to the importance of a new paint for one ship (no criticism to the paints, i just haven't found quickly another example 😃), but also the player group which is very active here in the forum would benefit from it ... even if it's just a little bit...

which suggestion do you think will win ... and maybe considered?

Edited April 23, 2020 by Holm Hansen

[Farrago]

Everyone should make sure they are following @admin instructions on those threads:

One post, one proposal.

It’s a shame that some captains are spending a lot of time making complicated, multipart proposals which may have good elements but also may have some unpopular elements. The complicated proposals seem to earn down votes.

Also, it’s not clear if “likes” or “thanks” clicks do anything to help. Vote.

[Cathal Brugha]

3 hours ago, Holm Hansen said:

I am unfortunately very sceptical about the voting system

i fear that only suggestions will be accepted which are useful for the player group that is most represented here in the forum

for example:

Suggestion A is a suggestion that would make life a lot easier on the PVE server, without any side effects and only there, PVP server would not even be affected

Suggestion B would be equal to the importance of a new paint for one ship (no criticism to the paints, i just haven't found quickly another example 😃), but also the player group which is very active here in the forum would benefit from it ... even if it's just a little bit...

which suggestion do you think will win ... and maybe considered?

Or, too many pvp players will downvote the pve content, just because it is not pvp, even if it does not affect them.

[Holm Hansen]

exactly

that's what I meant. its only need one suggestion to compete with this PVE suggestion, on which PVP players will see a sign of an enrichment for their game, and the PVE suggestion will have no chance here

[admin]

41 minutes ago, Cathal Brugha said:

Or, too many pvp players will downvote the pve content, just because it is not pvp, even if it does not affect them.

but you can ask @Cetric de Cornusiac to bring ALL pve server here and make sure their voice is heard like it was heard with Loki

[HachiRoku]

5 hours ago, Macjimm said:

'm surprised to see; that some of the ideas that I love voted down, and other suggestions (that seem negative to me) have many votes of approval.  But it is very helpful to see the overall desires of the community

Just because your ideas get alot of downvotes does not make it a bad idea or vice versa.  Take the most up voted idea in the rvr section is civil war for example. It will not help balance the game for starters because so called zerg nations are an alliance of clans that used forged papers anyway. Its basically a proposal to bully clans that are not getting along with the ruling clans out of the nation. Some ideas sound great if you do not consider the downsides. If I had the option to do civil war in gb back in the day I would have made the nation the most toxic environment possible. Expect assholes like me with ideas like that. Civil war is a great idea on paper but in practice it's horrible imo. 

[Slim McSauce]

37 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

Just because your ideas get alot of downvotes does not make it a bad idea or vice versa.  Take the most up voted idea in the rvr section is civil war for example. It will not help balance the game for starters because so called zerg nations are an alliance of clans that used forged papers anyway. Its basically a proposal to bully clans that are not getting along with the ruling clans out of the nation. Some ideas sound great if you do not consider the downsides. If I had the option to do civil war in gb back in the day I would have made the nation the most toxic environment possible. Expect assholes like me with ideas like that. Civil war is a great idea on paper but in practice it's horrible imo. 

What's toxic is NOT having the option to ally and befoe any other clan. You can't steam frustrations or disputes over discord ALL the time. At some point allies need to be made cross-nation to face bigger threats, and clans who want to be the zeitgeist for their nation need to nut up against other movements. Would you rather dispute over comms with your local zergfit or band together a bunch of smaller clans and eat the zergfits lunch up? That's politics too yet some people disagree it's effect matters otherwise they would beg for it.

 

[Borch]

3 hours ago, Holm Hansen said:

exactly

that's what I meant. its only need one suggestion to compete with this PVE suggestion, on which PVP players will see a sign of an enrichment for their game, and the PVE suggestion will have no chance here

I agree, PvE is going to have a hard time to get any changes soon but then again, nothing changed in that regard.

[Cathal Brugha]

4 hours ago, admin said:

like it was heard with Loki

???

and useless Loki is still in PvE server, many times as the only loot. So you are saying PvE opinions are doomed?

[King of Crowns]

I would like to see a bounty system. Player driven. I know it would be extremely hard to implement in a non exploitable way but i have faith in our glorious russian devs. 

[Kubrat]

13 hours ago, Holm Hansen said:

which suggestion do you think will win ... and maybe considered?

You have pointed out e issue with democracy. Only people who give a damn are taken into account.

If you want support, perhaps get your 'inactive' group to support you?

[HachiRoku]

9 hours ago, Slim McSauce said:

What's toxic is NOT having the option to ally and befoe any other clan. You can't steam frustrations or disputes over discord ALL the time. At some point allies need to be made cross-nation to face bigger threats, and clans who want to be the zeitgeist for their nation need to nut up against other movements. Would you rather dispute over comms with your local zergfit or band together a bunch of smaller clans and eat the zergfits lunch up? That's politics too yet some people disagree it's effect matters otherwise they would beg for it.

 

It has some great things but to many ways to abuse it. I can't see the difference between a civil war mechanic and a clan warfare or whatever its called

[Stilgar]

I agree new format gives it a better structure, but there is a chance for good ideas to be down-voted or ignored. 

@admin some popular requests are clearly win-win for all and can be implemented w/o additional discussions (e.g., cannon looting), but a bit more far reaching or expensive to implement popular changes might require additional discussion in a dedicated thread. We all know democratic decision is not always the best one

Edited April 24, 2020 by Stilgar

[HachiRoku]

9 hours ago, Borch said:

I agree, PvE is going to have a hard time to get any changes soon but then again, nothing changed in that regard.

The entire game is designed around pvp from day one. It's impossible to design a game for 2 audiences that want 2 totally separate games. 

[Jan van Santen]

13 hours ago, admin said:

but you can ask @Cetric de Cornusiac to bring ALL pve server here and make sure their voice is heard like it was heard with Loki

Lots of us had posted before Loki was introduced that we would never accept any form of  involuntary PvP as this would not fit PvE server.

It was therefore wellknown to be  inacceptble on PvE server. 

Ingoring the wellknown majority of PvE players was what raised the strong reaction you talked about.  And will do so again, if such fundamental breaks of the "peace" theme arise.

As to Holm Hansens post above: I am also sceptical about the new proposal system. Add to the reasons he posted: The voting up/down is anonymous. 

The imho still best way to judge new ideas was called "testbed"

Edited April 24, 2020 by Jan van Santen

[Holm Hansen]

what has been created here is tavern-democracy.

i'd like to know how many good suggestions in the combat sector have been downvoted, just because some wanted to get their guns quickly. these downvotes still burden this suggetions

6 hours ago, Kubrat said:

...

If you want support, perhaps get your 'inactive' group to support you?

it is not up to everyone to vote down proposals that they actually find good, or don´t affect them, or even without reading them, just because they want to get others passed quickly. those suggestion that appeal to the target group that are most capable of doing so, will probably always be the winners

addition: ... the problem is quite simply that the suggestions compete directly with each other ... even if they only have the time of their creation in common

Edited April 24, 2020 by Holm Hansen
addition

[HachiRoku]

2 hours ago, Jan van Santen said:

Lots of us had posted before Loki was introduced that we would never accept any form of  involuntary PvP as this would not fit PvE server.

It was therefore wellknown to be  inacceptble on PvE server. 

Ingoring the wellknown majority of PvE players was what raised the strong reaction you talked about.  And will do so again, if such fundamental breaks of the "peace" theme arise.

As to Holm Hansens post above: I am also sceptical about the new proposal system. Add to the reasons he posted: The voting up/down is anonymous. 

The imho still best way to judge new ideas was called "testbed"

I would not blame them for giving it a shot. Sometimes people have no idea what they want until they try it. 

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

21 hours ago, Farrago said:

It’s a shame that some captains are spending a lot of time making complicated, multipart proposals which may have good elements but also may have some unpopular elements. The complicated proposals seem to earn down votes.

Indeed. I honestly think it's a shame that proposal about exploration of the map and hidden content you have to discover got massively downvoted.

What are the motives of voters? Not always what is good for the game, but what is something they personally expect to profit the most from.

[Farrago]

2 hours ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:

Indeed. I honestly think it's a shame that proposal about exploration of the map and hidden content you have to discover got massively downvoted.

What are the motives of voters? Not always what is good for the game, but what is something they personally expect to profit the most from.

I can’t find the suggestion you mention right now but the number of downvotes might be a reflection of the fact that admin  has stressed the limited development resources he currently has and basically (or explicitly) implied that entirely new game modes are not going to happen in the current environment. Simple tweaks and changes are more likely to get votes and effort from the development team.

But that doesn’t change the fact that this new method of input to the @admin and the Dev team does have its limitations. It is not easy to see and keep track of new posts. Also, some good suggestions seem to languish in the middle with just a couple + or - votes.

You proposed that owning clan should get taxes from repair done at the port. This just makes sense and I would think easily accepted and implemented. Still, you might consider editing your proposal because in the same post, you mentioned random port bonuses be granted from that repair. That suggestion is perhaps more controversial.

[Mormegil]

22 hours ago, admin said:

but you can ask @Cetric de Cornusiac to bring ALL pve server here and make sure their voice is heard like it was heard with Loki

@admin I'm not really playing on PvE Server much, but could you not make a 6th question thread "PvE Server" where PvE-Server-only suggestions can be made?
E.g. I saw a proposal for allowing inter-nation-chat again on PvE Server which would probably be good for the PvE Server community as a whole.

That way PvE Server can profit from the new proposal system (which really is a very good idea!) without too much interference from hardcore-PvP players (even if the interference is only the production of more popular ideas and not active down-voting).

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

3 hours ago, Farrago said:

I can’t find the suggestion you mention right now

I digged it up for you. It's a variation of an earlier suggestion made in the former collection of 'suggestions', suppose by somebody else.

DLC section:

https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/35588-new-feature-proposals-dlc/?do=findComment&comment=721769

 

[Macjimm]

On 4/23/2020 at 2:07 PM, HachiRoku said:

Just because your ideas get alot of downvotes does not make it a bad idea or vice versa

I doubt that any reasonable person would argue to the contrary.  I'm sure that there are are lots of great ideas that have been completely ignored here.  To expect more is naive.

In the past there were lots of members of the forum that talked about interesting ideas for trading, exploration, discovery, realism, etc. But now most of those players are not in the community anymore.  Most of the population is interested in a casual style with lots of fighting.  The game evolved.

Naval action is primarily about combat and beautiful ships, everything else is pretty much secondary.

It's interesting to read about ideas in this forum. I think this new format for suggestions is much more positive, and it allows for less degeneration into complaining, whining, and moaning.

It seems that whatever decision Admin and the Devs make will offend and disappoint some players.  With this system of voting it allows the  active contributors to this forum to have a little influence on the direction the game.   I find it fascinating to see the values presented here.  Much of what the current culture likes is not intuitive.  I would never have guessed that paints for a ship would be popular, but obviously they are.

I have doubts that those who read these suggestions represent the player's in game.  Today I saw that there were 600 players on the war server and 450 players on the Peace server, yet the most popular suggestion had only 53 votes.  With thousands of players a great suggestion could easily have 700-1000 votes.  I suspect that most players are content to play the game and don't pay much attention to the posts here.

It's a good game.

[Holm Hansen]

All in all you are right with your post. This format is really an improvement .... except for the voting system.

But that's exactly what you also noted in your post. If the devs have also recognized this weakness, which i think they have, and also pay attention to the other suggestions, it would be a win for the game.

Everything depends on it, to what degree even lower rated suggestions get attention by the Devs.

[Sir Texas Sir]

On 4/23/2020 at 1:55 PM, Cathal Brugha said:

Or, too many pvp players will downvote the pve content, just because it is not pvp, even if it does not affect them.

You must think all we want is PvP?   There are a lot of players that play both sides the PvE and the PVP of the game and remains on the war server cause to be honest.  PvE only and the way the server is set up is pretty freaking boring.

What features you have over on the PvE server have actually been suggestions that us PvP players have made to give more PvE content to both servers.   As much as some of the guys over there hate me I do make a lot of suggestions that would help ya'lls servers out.