Dear veterans of POTBS:

[Maryart]

Originally Posted by SytzeSjoerd Anyway, have fun with this new pve MMORPG iam already downloading EVE online inferno :P

[/quote]

Sytze Sjoerd is one of the names that is unbreakably tied in my mind with the magical three letters CMC. Sytze Sjoerd and CMC for sale. Sytze Sjoerd and skirm up with CMC. Sytze Sjoerd and PvPing with CMC. I do not know more about Sytze cuz I don't know you personally. I can tell more about my relations with CMC though.

This was the ship that cost 7 mill when I found out it existed. This was the ship that cost 4.5 mill when I started to measure my wealth in CMCs I could buy. This was the ship that cost 3.5 mill when I bought two of them to resist my temptation to spend money on a Trinity. And this is the ship Ive not yet found the perfect moment to bring out of docks.

Now Sytze Sjoerd is gone. Ok, we still have Susana Marina and CMC looking for fleet, and a TB port battle calling for CMCs. The magics of CMC is having its last days though. Is the dream of a new FT War Galleon with correct count of gun slots just a mirage? What's gonna be the new wet dream of Eco Carebears? What's gonna be the new PB ship of choice for those FTs who can? And who's gonna be having names most closely associated with the most expensive a FT can have?

[ozziefudd]

Maryart's original post is absolutely correct -- the experienced players who pushed the game system to the limits ARE to BLAME for breaking the game. BLAME = immediate cause.

However some of the other comments that ascribe FAULT to the developers of the game for having an insufficient, let alone imperfect, grasp of the game and its mechanics are also absolutely correct.

A game like this is like any other piece of complex software -- it will have bugs and combinations of things the developers didn't explicitly envision or test for. When pushed to the limits of the design, things will happen that were unexpected. And, in this case, PotBS had a bunch of developers who were too in love with their own game idea to recognize or even be open to being shown the flaws.

The most experienced and expert players who figured out how to "game" the flaws (exploit is another word) have consistently been among the critics who naysay any change. This self-interest is understandable if not laudable. But "Rusty" and his cronies who first exercised such sway over the game didn't have the fortitude (or deep pockets) required to bite the bullet and put enough balance into the game to make it commercially successful.

The best part may be the PvP action, but time and again the PvP population has proven that they prefer the game to fail rather than grow or to change in any way that interferes with their PvP system. And, they won't pay for the game -- they want the other 95% to pay for THEM to have their PvP fun. Unfortunately, THEIR PvP fun = everyone else having NO fun. Want proof, check the population.

Maybe if some of the current developer changes are made, PotBS will not be as good a game as it once was, for PvP players. On the other hand, maybe more players will stick around longer and be inclined to play the new version. If they don't, well, the game will go the way it was going anyway.

But one thing IS "fer shure", the developers need a strategic vision for a playable, enjoyable game for ALL players, not just a few. And they need tight, well-thought-out rules that can be programmed for self-enforcement. Because otherwise, it will be the same old same old, and that will benefit nobody.

[Abe1861]

LOL!

If a player has exploited a system, then the PROGRAMMERS are the ones who have left the door open. They should be embaressed and ashamed of some of the gaping holes they left in the code.

On top of that, the game designer's have consistently shifted stats so that one or two favorite boats were OP. This, and they allowed certain regular contributors to convince them that these statistics were "Okay" for years while it was obvious to most players that certain objects had overpowering stats.

On top of this, I wish I still had access to the closed beta forums. I would link posts and say, "I told you so." until I was blue in the face.

To blame players for using the systems that were given and open to them to use, well, that's just foolishness. Players have to play by the code given to them.

People are human, some will use any and all pathways open to them to get ahead. Such is the laissez-faire world.

[Abe1861]

Originally Posted by ozziefudd A game like this is like any other piece of complex software -- it will have bugs and combinations of things the developers didn't explicitly envision or test for. When pushed to the limits of the design, things will happen that were unexpected. And, in this case, PotBS had a bunch of developers who were too in love with their own game idea to recognize or even be open to being shown the flaws.

Ummm. No. This is revisionist.

If there is one thing I'll credit isildur and Taelorn with it is the fact that they took a piece of vaporware and deployed a saleable piece of software within a time limit.

After that, when certain issues arose FLS was just slow to react. They let the fervor die down. They investigated. They documented. They rolled a few heads. Or, sometimes, they changed stats and released a patch.

But they did it in their own time.

[inkjet]

Originally Posted by AbeLincoln1861 Ummm. No. This is revisionist. If there is one thing I'll credit isildur and Taelorn with it is the fact that they took a piece of vaporware and deployed a saleable piece of software within a time limit. After that, when certain issues arose FLS was just slow to react. They let the fervor die down. They investigated. They documented. They rolled a few heads. Or, sometimes, they changed stats and released a patch. But they did it in their own time.

This game was never intended to be the sole source of butter for FLS bread.

Other projects were intended to be more lucrative.

Also, as we have recently seen, even games that should remain vaporware can be sold to the masses with the right advertising budget and hype.

Gamers are all to willing to plop down $50 or $60 for CRAP, and developers are all too willing to oblige them.

Heck, some gamers will even plop down $160 for the "Collector's Edition" of CRAP.

[rodhathal]

I wish the same amount of profit for POTBS what actiblizzard got out from the release of the way over-hyped dumbfest Diablo3.
That would make a change in this game im pretty sure...

[scrubinator5]

Originally Posted by Grutte Pier broken mechanics was our fault? not enforcing rules was our fault? lack of motivation to play fair, when ganking six v 1 pays so much more thanks to mission/reward system that favors ganks what can happen, will happen, this has ofcourse nothing to do with not enforcing rules.... and how is the patch gonna change that? any ideas? of the vets you see on the forum every day, i think about 1 or 2 sail an arcadia, the rest is all against it who let us have 10 f2p accounts without restrictions again? how hard was it to forsee this happen? our fault? fls provides a game with rules and boundaries(that is a game:"A game is a system in which players engage in an artificial conflict, defined by rules, that results in a quantifiable outcome.) me to i remember all my old socmates quiting for the shipcom, and not for repetitive gameplay, broken rvr, strange invite system dailies grind and so on, but i do think that the game will cater to some people, and maybe it will go on, as hello kitty on the burning sea no harm intended, if you like that, go for it, but that is not for me you would make sense if we intentionally try to do harm to the game for reasons outside of the games intention.... however we all just playing with the abilities given by fls

troll post

[Grutte Pier]

Originally Posted by Bob Murray troll post

Yours? Or mine?

[OranjeBeered]

I would like to point out that the point of this thread was to encourage people to take some responsibility for their role in the declining population. Not every player is guilty, of course, but when I originally posted so many people were screaming blame at the Developers for players leaving, all the while many were participating in behaviours that were far worse than FLS putting a new build on the test server.
People are going to come and go from the game, and we have to trust FLS to do their part to encourage new players and retain existing players. We, as the experienced sailors in the game, also have an opportunity to help or hurt the population.

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.

[The Dragonfly]

Originally Posted by Grutte Pier Yours? Or mine?

His!!!

Originally Posted by OranjeBeered I would like to point out that the point of this thread was to encourage people to take some responsibility for their role in the declining population. Not every player is guilty, of course, but when I originally posted so many people were screaming blame at the Developers for players leaving, all the while many were participating in behaviours that were far worse than FLS putting a new build on the test server. People are going to come and go from the game, and we have to trust FLS to do their part to encourage new players and retain existing players. We, as the experienced sailors in the game, also have an opportunity to help or hurt the population. God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference.

Sorry, but you're still off the point. FLS (or the game designers) make the rules. If they don't take the time to think it through and don't fix it, once the "abuse" is highlighted, then you cannot fault ANY player to use/abuse the rules. In fact, some games might actually attract (paying) players for those "loose" rules, although that doesn't seem to be the case for POTBS.

What can you change - nothing, you only can highlight, what isn't working and hope that FLS does listen. Plenty players did, some still do, but evidence of being heard is rather sparse, unfortunately.