Awful, awful naval battles......

[Dogfish]

No but the level of tolerance and some ability to appreciate the scope of the project would be nice.

I appreciate and like the game, and still think highly of CA. But some of these issues are facepalmers. I only hope it is the fault of Sega demanding it get out the door, because otherwise I would feel slapped in the face by CA. So I think some level of intolerance is appropriate as well.

So when we're discussing these issues, do we need to include a caveat everytime so that you feel it's more balanced?

"This game is awesome and I love CA, but I beg them to please bless us with a working game. Thank you o mighty CA pleasedonthurtme."

You don't generally accomplish too much in life by simply slating people or organisations off.

Really? Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh don't agree with you. Among many others.

[AussieGiant]

@ Dogfish,

Please don't quote Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh as something of a counter point to my comment.

I said you don't accomplish too much, not nothing...but the consequences of their behaviour are clear for most people to see. Because, even if you do agree with a point they raise, their delivery and behaviour can be so ridiculous that it put most neutrals off to a greater degree.

As to the main point:

I certain don't think we should swing to the opposite position that you quote as an example.

"This game is awesome and I love CA, but I beg them to please bless us with a working game. Thank you o mighty CA pleasedonthurtme." That was certainly not my point.

You're quite right, some things are big face slappers, but as long as CA is acknowledging things and is moving in the direction of addressing the issues, then constructive conversation to highlight and provide meaningful assistance seems like a better contribution.

[Dogfish]

@ Dogfish,

Please don't quote Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh as something of a counter point to my comment.

I said you don't accomplish too much, not nothing...but the consequences of their behaviour are clear for most people to see. Because, even if you do agree with a point they raise, their delivery and behaviour can be so ridiculous that it put most neutrals off to a greater degree.

Sorry about that... I just thought they were two really good examples of people whom are considered successful by doing nothing but panning other people and cultures. But that's really irrelevant to this thread or ETW.

As to the main point:

I certain don't think we should swing to the opposite position that you quote as an example.

"This game is awesome and I love CA, but I beg them to please bless us with a working game. Thank you o mighty CA pleasedonthurtme." That was certainly not my point.

You're quite right, some things are big face slappers, but as long as CA is acknowledging things and is moving in the direction of addressing the issues, then constructive conversation to highlight and provide meaningful assistance seems like a better contribution.

I agree, it is more constructive. To some degree, however, threads like this aren't as much about helping CA move in the right direction (they probably will not read or see this thread) as much as a little bit of venting about a game that many feel is unfinished (with other people having similar frustrations), which is at least a small part of what communities like this are about. Sharing joys, sharing pain, sharing stories.

Anyway, hopefully CA will be able to get the naval battles up to ours, and probably their own, expectations. They are but a little zygote at the moment, and need much development before they are ready for battle.

[Malkut]

I just thought they were two really good examples

I'd consider them more warnings than examples.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Do you find that your Admiral picks up negative traits for withdrawing, even from an unfavorable matchup?

[AussieGiant]

Dogfish,

I agree with you mate. "Stick" (Australian for constructive criticism) needs to be given to CA but at the moment it's tough to read the general level of negativity sometimes.

On occasion I just try to ask for a little more balance as I'm sure CA people do read through these threads. When they do, a good solid level of information and a critique that's well thought out and gets to the meat of the issue will solve "our" issues much better.

Apologies if we got a little side tracked

I'm just hoping they get through their stability patches as fast as possible so they can get their resources focused on the naval topic as a whole. It's the first time they've done it so it's clearly an area they need to focus on.

I just hope we are "careful for what we wish for." Because if they get a patch out that solves most of the naval theatre issues at one time we could all have our hands pretty full.

I can see the following list in my mind from reading all the posts to date:

In-theatre troop distribution
Intra-theatre troop distribution
Trade route issues
Trade region issues
Invasion possibilities
Battle tactics and ship balancing

If all that was handled in one patch we might all wonder if a nuke just hit us.

[Dogfish]

I can see the following list in my mind from reading all the posts to date:

In-theatre troop distribution
Intra-theatre troop distribution
Trade route issues
Trade region issues
Invasion possibilities
Battle tactics and ship balancing

If all that was handled in one patch we might all wonder if a nuke just hit us.

If all that was in one patch I would probably hurt myself with as many celebratory backflips as I would be attempting. Mind you, I've never done a backflip. But that's just how excited I would be.

Good list summary of the major naval issues.

[Maleficus]

Dogfish,
On occasion I just try to ask for a little more balance as I'm sure CA people do read through these threads. When they do, a good solid level of information and a critique that's well thought out and gets to the meat of the issue will solve "our" issues much better.

Well, IMO all they need to do with regards to naval issues is:


1. Adjust certain ships to make them more historically accurate in terms of firepower, speed and maneuverability. (trade ships, mostly).

2. Tweak the combat system to make it actually possible to hit the enemy when you shoot at them.

3. Tweak the ships' crews' abilities so that crews of trade ships skills in melee are inferior to naval personell.

There's also some more cosmetic changes that I would like to see, but as long as they make the three I've listed, I'll be a happy bunny.

[Graphic]

I can see the following list in my mind from reading all the posts to date:

In-theatre troop distribution
Intra-theatre troop distribution
Trade route issues
Trade region issues
Invasion possibilities
Battle tactics and ship balancing

Also boarding/capturing ships is very iffy. 9 times out of 10 they just surrender, but in order to be in the position to board, they already need to be heavily damaged and probably on the brink of surrendering anyway. And if they surrender during the melee, you don't actually capture the ship.

IMO if you board a ship and they give up, you should get the capture. It seems like you have to kill every last man aboard the enemy ship without them surrendering, and that's a little nutty.

[Fisherking]

At Ease! Gentlemen,

No personal arguments please!

It gets emotional when things aren’t going well, I know.

Some of us take the problems with the game a bit harder than others.

CA knows there are issues and there is another patch due next week.

There may be some other things in the works on some things….

Stick to the game discussion and no personal attacks or the thread could be threatened.

Try to envision the problem and what reasonably should be done about it, and give it some thought.

Not…Its broke, fix it!

Now take a deep breath and carry on.

[NagatsukaShumi]

As I have stated before, numerous times, generally CA get stick for things which aren't necessarily CA's fault.

Publishers set deadlines which are expected to be fulfilled, CA have to get a game as playable for that date as is humanly possible, which is probably why so many patches are forthcoming at such short notice.

It is the same on every fansite for every game though in fairness, the publisher normally recieves far less flack than the developer.