We can speak of cards. But "items to play" (Peoples, functions, actions) is sufficient.

 

Exemple :

 

-----------

Roberto de Nirow

Deckhand

 

Main passive : Cannons damage + 4

Secondary passive : Hull integrity +2

 

Special effect if played (Once per encounter) : Counter the wind by 20 % during 3 rounds

----------

 

ETC. ETC.

It is not a card, but... there is something more interresting to play ? No ?^^

Edited February 5, 20187 yr by theBalthazar

I think playing specific characters' functions (whether visualized as a card or not) is an odd fit for naval combat, which tends to de-emphasize individual heroics. That doesn't mean you couldn't make a fun system out it. And there are obvious advantages to sailors having unique traits. Finding and recruiting them becomes a pleasure rather than the rote task of pulling the next person off the menu and training him/her up. But I think the benefits  you see in a card-like system (quick but tactical; dynamic; makes individual crew members more interesting) are achievable within the current framework, with some adjustments.

But I think the benefits  you see in a card-like system (quick but tactical; dynamic; makes individual crew members more interesting) are achievable within the current framework, with some adjustments.

 

 

I think too.

Eh, I much prefer a game that somewhat somehow resembles actual sailing to "shove yet another card based minigame in for no reason." If they're going to have a mini-gwent I'd prefer it be a tavern game not a ship combat simulation. 

Don't stuck on card games. Or on Gwent. Gwent is an exemple, open your mind.

 

You can use "Items of play", like I said before. When you have no direct 3D representation, it is not necessarly a card ...

 

It is more a function of each elements with numerical values/specials fonctions to use. And yes I prefer that, more that a infinite turn-turn-turn. +100m -100m turn, +50m, turn. = not fun.

 

With my system you have a crew where all the members add a value :

 

- Against wind.

Or

- Cannons damage.

Or

- Speed of navigation.

Or

- Integrity of the hull

ETC ETC. (So much ideas to implements to dynamize...)

 

Plus, a special fonction per encounter for each member, for dynamize the confrontation.

 

Nothing of "based for no reason". All is logical. AND THAT brings a lot to the general tactics.

 

If you don't do that, finally you have what ? A sentences showing +100meters... This is all... The pageantry of a simple description is not a gameplay, dear doctor.

 

You cannot say this is less interresting than actual system... No I can't accept that : p

Edited February 5, 20187 yr by theBalthazar

You cannot say this is less interresting than actual system... No I can't accept that : p

I can't say that because I have trouble visulizing what you are suggesting. Do you play sailors in turns? You raise hull number by using a sailor? Is it supposed to fit within existing system? If not building entirly new engine and gameplay two months before release seems like a bonkers idea.

 

What would core gameplay revolve around? Deckbuilding? Resource management? Do you equip ship with cards and than it playout by itself?

 

I would rather stick to traditional naval gameplay, and improve its representation in turnbased minigame, as it is now. 

Ok well, I can see what you mean Balthazar. [i'm not strictly rejecting it, more like trying to figure it out.  ]

Let's forget all that Gwent stuff, but now I'm also wondering the same questions Wormerine asks.

How would it work, without having to re-build the entire thing...

 

I think we should give the current system a chance, as it is a pretty damn good start for now, and wait to see how it evolves.

On the Side of a "Mechanical" standpoint, I can see the Wind Direction become a reality fairly soon, and on the "Interest It Can Provide", a bigger emphasis on

the Narrative Strentgh & Consolidation is the way to go. 

 

Roughly Resumed : Narrative > Mechanics.

[Where both are important]

 

I put Narrative first as it could provide more uniqueness to each Individual Encounters, & pull the player's will to dive into this System.

It should have something different to tell everytime, in order to draw us in... Everytime.

["Tell", in the sense of "Storytelling"]

 

--------------------------------------------------------

 

Basically, what I'm saying is that we must remain reasonable on what we ask from them. Asking more, more & more isn't fair.

 

That's why I suggested, in previous posts, few more Scripted Style Drawing &, as I imagine, quite a lot of Brainstorming on the "Short Stories" to be told.

But still, definitely more feasible, as opposed to adding a brand new system they'd have to come up with & create from the start.

Maybe closer to what the Core of a Scripted Interaction is, in the end. [The Derelict Ship is good way to see this, & to dig further into it]

Edited February 5, 20187 yr by DexGames

Put me down as "fine" with the ship to ship combat. I used it a few times now and after the second attempt I got it. Was even able to quickly ditch combat when things were not going well.

 

It's not riveting. but it's a nice level of detail to a complicated world the story tellers are building.

 

Now ship moral.. that's driving me nuts.

I can't say that because I have trouble visulizing what you are suggesting. Do you play sailors in turns?

 

 

- Obviously turns based mini game. If the sailor comes forward for the group, it is only to do a special action for 1 round. The rest of the time he is still there, with his passives.

 

If you think it's not RP, you're wrong :

Watcher : Roberto de Nirow! hoist the mainsail !

(Here he asks to ONE Sailor to do it, not everyone ! = RP)

 

You raise hull number by using a sailor?

 

 

Sailors have a general ranking. You can recruit it, gain it with quests.

 

If he increase the hull number, it is because it would be an engineer who improves his integrity by his knowledge.

 

First, they brings their skill by reinforcing the ship in a passive way. With for example (I say anything) two passives. Which add to you general ship statistics.

 

In addition, they have an active ability that they can use once per fight. Conditional if you want a minimal realism. Like :

 

Wind Adaptation - This sailor allows the ship to be better windward for 3 turns (RP reason : better use of the sail?). This results in an inflection of 20% of the penetration of the air. (Wind -20% = more speed facing the wind)

 

Why not too, an active ability (stronger) for the watcher. 

 

With that, we already have a lot more stuff, and it is more fun is the ennemy can use special abilities him too. To beat him makes it possible to obtain its special capacity of "pirate leader". (Like the ability of our leader, the watcher)

 

Is it supposed to fit within existing system? If not building entirly new engine and gameplay two months before release seems like a bonkers idea.

 

 

To me, actual visual is enough. It remains only to then integrate the list of abilities in the text.

 

[...]

- Jibe!

- Report!

- [use ability]

- [use Watcher ability]

 

In the submenu, "use ability" :

 

- Wind adaptation :  Description.

 

etc etc ^^

 

What would core gameplay revolve around? Deckbuilding? Resource management? Do you equip ship with cards and than it playout by itself?

 

 

With a good synergy, all of theses : Ressource management + Game of position + Tactical abilities. Logical and not impossible. Far from that. It is not card. Look at the "repport!" screen. We can consider there are real characters on a... tactical board. Not necessarly "cards".

 

I would rather stick to traditional naval gameplay, and improve its representation in turnbased minigame, as it is now. 

 

 

Totally stay in the spirit of battleship, if your abilities are RP and logical. Stay turnbased, and to me, much more interresting.

Edited February 6, 20187 yr by theBalthazar

Several things about this system are quite unclear. Specifically, I am unsure when and when I am not able to move and I am also unsure as to what affects my chance to hit with my cannons. So, overall, clarity is really my only complaint. Otherwise, I found playing around with this to actually be very enjoyable. It could use some more flair though, and a wind indicator (assuming that's even an actual mechanic, which the game makes it seem like but personally I am unsure).

Several things about this system are quite unclear. Specifically, I am unsure when and when I am not able to move and I am also unsure as to what affects my chance to hit with my cannons. So, overall, clarity is really my only complaint. Otherwise, I found playing around with this to actually be very enjoyable. It could use some more flair though, and a wind indicator (assuming that's even an actual mechanic, which the game makes it seem like but personally I am unsure).

It was confirmed that there is no wind mechanic. There is something called “advantage” - one of the players gets “advantage” for the round: they move first + get +20m movement - how it gets decided who gets advantage - no idea.

 

Aim is certainly tied to distance (default cannons have effective range of 200-400m), you can boost aim by doing a “stop” move before firing. If other factors are at play - dunno. Tooltips seem to not work properly.

 

You can do one fullsail mover or two half sail moves per round. Josh said they will probably erase the limitation.

One thing could be interresting :

 

There are 3 cannons.

 

Actually the option of select each cannons is already possible. (Check / Uncheck)

 

If this doesn't already exist : perhaps increase accuracy for each cannon not used.

 

Like :

 

45 % Check

 

45 % Check

 

45 % Check

 

VS

 

75 % Check

 

/ % Uncheck (Give 15 % of stability)

 

/ % Uncheck (Give 15 % of stability)

Edited February 6, 20187 yr by theBalthazar

My 2 cents about ship combat:

 

It was the most boring part of the beta.

Move forward, turn right, turn left every turn until you are in firing range.

When in cannon range shoot right, jibee, shoot left, repeat and pray to the god of random numbers for hits.

When the enemy ship had 2 hull left it attempted to flee.

Chasing it took forever (move forward, turn left, turn right) and when I finally was in firing range I sunk them.

The battle took more than 30 rounds and you always repeated the same options.

 

So I agree with you. We need:

- try to board or flee option at the beginning, trying to board will damage ship and both options may fail.

- A move forward option. It felt bad that I had to use straight, left, right when I just wanted to get closer.

 

At the moment I would avoid ship combat if I can. In PoE1 stronghold management was one of the worst parts of the game. Spend lots of money and time to build things that give you a random item every turn and being forced to return every now and then because if you let your crew handle the enemies you spend more money and time for repairs and replacing crew. Some of your crew will die anyway even if you return and fight yourself.

 

NwN2 had one of the best strongholds in an RPG. While having a ship as base can be interesting, an epic battle to defend it looks more interesting in a fortress than on a ship.

I hope it will be interesting how you get your first ship (or later ships). I hope it not just the intro saying: Eothas destroyed your castle and walked away. You gathered your companions, sold everything that was left of your old strpnghold, bought a ship and set sail.

 

Some people compared the ship to the soul eater mechanic of MotB. While MotB had a very good story, I did not like this mechanics much. On the pro side, it made you really involved in the story, so you really felt the need to find out more about your condition and to solve it ( unlike the watcher thing in PoE1, no sense of urgency to find Thaos and not get insane). On the con side it forced me to be a good char and suppress it as much as possible, because I play very slowly and I have no idea how to survive if the clock is ticking faster.

Actually, everything of this mini-game must be absolutely optional, otherwise it will ruining the adventure.

Edited February 12, 20187 yr by theBalthazar