Resubmitted with the call for removal of AAW guns from BBs deleted. Please only vote for one of the two submissions (or resubmit your option if different).

Properly balance ships. Remove all mines/torps, AAW guns, sonars etc from BBs - target is to make BBs vulnerable to SS and CV so they depend on escorts to be successful. Similarly other ships (no sonars & launchers on CVs). A few oddballs (Mogami44, I400, Kitakami) are nice and give colour to the game.

• BBs gun only - similar tiers should have similar balance of hull, armour, range, damage, no of guns, reload, secondary guns (with some nations having the edge in one of these - 7 stats, 7 nations). Be careful on broadside weights.
• CAs fast guns with AAW secondary gun option
• DDs fast, CLs powerful ASW and AAW ships
• SSs silent hunters - Give some higher torpedo damage to higher tiers as now A tier BBs are unsinkable by subs
• CVs BB killers at range (supposing BBs are of BB size and speed - No Ammirragrio Di Saint Bon* unless reclassed as CA - with CA stats

Some ships - especially new ones are way out of balance. e.g. the B tier Bretagne and Paris BBs have broadsides of 30000 AND good range AND launchers.

The game is fun as naval tactics. Having a couple of BBs work together and sweep through GBs is not fun.

Link to thread with original suggestion:http://www.navyfieldmobile.com/index.php?/topic/553-france-and-italian-need-their-own-nation/

If only they would ask, the community is ready to deliver any help they may need. But they don't.

I corrected the hulls for:

0 star 5%, 1 star 10%, 2 star 15%, 3 star 20% repair crew hull bonus. Thus base hulls are:

A Progetto UP41 51600

B Queen Elizabeth: 42900

A Vanguard: 44500

B Argo: 20000

On CLs does not seem to work for some reason (I had a snapshot of Duca d'Aosta before built and modified Duca Degli Abruzzi by same %)

Thanks for the great job

For some reason google treats edited file as new. Here is the link

9 hours ago, Flint said:

I need the help from the community.

Here are my new ships added to your list. As guns were upgraded, there is no data for 0 upgrades. Also hulls are best estimation to base hull

https://drive.google.com/open?id=18-p9zWDEIb7aRfBcDyizomRYd7Fw_TvC

Dear developers,

Used to press enter instead of the "send" button to chat I am forced to rewrite my message as the enter no longer works (and I keep forgetting that every. single. message.).

Please deal with this bug after you have fixed the ship balance, killed the lottery scheme, allowed our alt nation captains to join fleets and in general made the game playable and enjoyable again. Otherwise you will only be chatting to yourselves.

Thanks,

Baldrick

5 hours ago, Polina Kitty said:

Because eventually the community is going to leave navy field mobile

Many players have already left and the exodus is going strong.

Make sure you've removed them from both offensive (HA button at battle screen) and Harbour Defence (Ship with shield above round button at main screen).

Then write to developers at [email protected] and message them on the fb page. Do frequent reminders as they lose e-mails quite often.

The whole "patch" is insulting to players who have been grinding the game a year and a half.

My main nation is level 115. Just 5 more level to the Kaiser - a target that had me saving every bit of gold for more than a year. The next day the "patch" came to the game and my level 49 captain got an A tier Progetto UP41 at his 2nd draw of the lottery - a supership that can vaporise the Kaiser that was my holy grail for so long.

In addition, this patch is discriminating players by luck. The draw to get the Progetto was just the second lottery play of that Nation, my main has done about 20 and best that got is a B Graf Zeppelin, C Tourville that might worth building and C Duca Degli Abruzzi that built (also got many other good ships including B tiers, but compared to Europa CV, Stresemann and type XXI don't look very appealing). Now imagine those two being different players - not Nations of the same player - how fair is that? Even for new players it is not fair.

On 10/16/2018 at 1:12 AM, Flint said:

Imagine we try to ask the devs the other extreme: after the patch, ALL players are eligible to get an 100% refund for ALL gold ships.

This exactly what I'm asking for. When I paid 3000 gold for the Stresemann, I paid a good sum of money for a ship that is close to the top ships of the game. when I paid 1500 for Graf Zeppelin II (that will forever sit with green crew in the harbour - premium ships cannot even be scrapped), I paid a good sum of money for one of the best CVs that can do expert WoF.

The "patch" has depreciated these ships to maybe a tenth of their asking price (e.g. for 300 gold I might consider buying a Stresseman instead of relying on the lottery scheme - but 3000?). So yes, I feel robbed - even if I have already played and enjoyed it. With the Graf Zeppelin I feel scammed out - that ship was not even fully outfitted when the "patch" came out.

This is why I feel we should get 100% refund. Because the product we got is not what we paid for - even if used.

If the developers wanted a "fresh start" they should publish a new game (this is not the same game we have been playing so long anyway). To keep their user base they could make a way of migrating from the old to the new game.

When the "patch" drives away Fubar, Helmut, ASTOM from my fleet only (and possibly others that I have not seen for some time - but I'm not sure of the reasons) - good players and nice people that are with the game since the beginnings - only adds insult to injury.

6 hours ago, Helmut la rascasse said:

Bad news never travel alone, despite these nice final raids, it’s my turn to leave, at least until the next update, and definitively if the game doesnt rebalance. 

As Gorsky said, now the seas are bit safer since there is no more Mignardise, you all take care of each other  

« portez-vous bien et à la prochaine » 

No, just no. The game will never be the same...

If we make a "Hall of Fame" Helmut's name will be somewhere at the top (THE top for me).

Even if the game gets reborn from its ashes it will never be the same.

Feel very sad to see you go ASTOM. I hope that if they ever fix it you will consider coming back. Otherwise I hope I'll see you in another game...

Thanks for the good times.

Historically many BBs had torpedoes (including the dreaded type 95 "Long Lance" and British 24,5")  and they also had the most sophisticated and powerful AA guns with dedicated directors and radars. Also most subs only did 6-8 knots submerged and pre-dreadnoughts were obsolete in WWI, nevermind WWII.

Do we want a historically accurate game or one where fun can be had in 10 minute battles?

Sorry for being harsh and critical, I have a huge respect for you Gorskov (and many others), but I'm a firm supporter of keeping the game simple, fast paced and fun.

wow

Sent them an e-mail titled "Game Updates". Please copy, modify and send to the developers as you wish. Below is the full text:

Quote

Dear developers,

 

First of all congratulations for a great game that I have enjoyed playing for a year and a half. During this time the game has changed and developed a lot. There are however many things that can be improved.

One particular drawback is that several times unfinished and not well thought of updates and patches have been included in the game only to be taken back altogether or patched over.

All this can be avoided by better/longer testing of the patches to be implemented (to iron out bugs) and better communication with the players. For the first part (I guess) better instructions should be given to game testers as to what to look for and a direct line for reporting bugs. For the second, a suggestion has been made to use the available means more (facebook page, Official Site forums, discord, line and in-game chat). Suggestions/NF developers and users relations

As for the latest update it is evident that it is quite raw and should not be published yet. To remedy the situation suggestions have been made in the forums as well (FRANCE AND ITALIAN NEED THEIR OWN NATION!) which I also include here:

1. Properly balance ships. Remove all mines/torps, AAW guns, sonars etc from BBs - target is to make BBs vulnerable to SS and CV so they depend on escorts to be successful. Similarly other ships (bombers from subs? really?)

• BBs gun only - similar tiers should have similar balance of hull, armour, range, damage, no of guns, reload, secondary guns (with some nations having the edge in one of these - 7 stats, 7 nations)
• CAs fast guns with AAW option
• DDs/CLs fast ASW and AAW ships
• SSs silent hunters - Give some higher torpedo damage to higher tiers as now A tier BBs are unsinkable by subs
• CVs BB killers at range (supposing BBs are of BB size and speed - No Ammirragrio Di Saint Bon* unless reclassed as CA - with CA stats)

 

2. Italy and France as separate nations. Move all ships that players won in the lottery to new Nations. Tell them you're sorry you had to do that and give out gold (as you're used to do when you push unthought of changes)

3. As Italy and France have actually more ships than "old Nations" only show a similar number - keep the extras hidden.

4. Design some hidden extra ships for other "old" nations (see point 6)

5. Nerf the lottery scheme - no more debris - no blueprints. Give the higher tier ships as an upgrade option to already built ships - either as a refit 10-15 levels after the original build

6. Give out the "hidden ships" as achievements or specials (like you did with Provence) e.g. steam pack bonus or as particularly difficult achievement award or combination of awards, for example BEASTS & MASTER OF STEEL combination.

7. Allow players to join any fleet they wish with any of their Nations. Allow chiefs to see if their players are also active in other fleets - it is then their job to investigate and agree or kick a player

8. If wof between fleets where a player is active in both mark that player as unavailable to join wof to avoid gold farming

9. Fleet ranking gold bonus only from one fleet per player to avoid gold farming

10. Distribute gold bonus from fleet ranking to all wof active players of a fleet (subject to point 9.)

 

Thanks for listening, open for discussion in forums.

Captain Baldrick

38 minutes ago, 1diddy said:

4) I'm not sure what you mean about hidden extras?

That is linked to 6. "Hidden" ships to be handed out on special terms e.g. steam pack bonus or as particularly difficult achievement award or combination of awards, for example BEASTS [1] & MASTER OF STEEL [2] combination.

38 minutes ago, 1diddy said:

9) agreed.... However I do have lower level captains that do participate in wof. If the gold is distributed amongst the top 20 sometimes they would miss the cut. If alts are to be allowed back in then the gold should be distributed equally amongst each account rather than top 20 captain.

You're right but still not good enough. There are players that do not participate in wofs - should they get a cut?

How about: one beginner wof win = 1 share, 1 expert wof win = 2 shares, 1 master = 3 shares? Then divide booty by shares and give each their due. Still a player should get booty from only one fleet, forfeiting his shares in other fleets (tbh I don't like it as it adds complexity)

38 minutes ago, 1diddy said:

1) agreed and well-thought-out. I might only disagree with nerfing the oxygen.

as a proud owner of a XXI I don't like it much either but spending the better part of the battle submerged AND being able to withstand a couple of broadsides (considering someone can hit a manoeuvring sub at 40knots) before critical health is a bit too much. An A or B tier XXI will be even worse

[1] Build 4 Battleships

[2] Sink 500 ships with your battleship

6 minutes ago, 1diddy said:

How are they going to fix that?

By making the BBs vulnerable to SS and CV again - they need to be dependent on escorts to stay alive (point 1. of my post about ship balance)

Letter to developers:

Captains, if you think my previous post here should be made into an e-mail to the developers, please lets discuss the points to mutually agree on something.

Thanks

The problem now is how this can be fixed? Players have already won in the lottery superships and these cannot be taken back.

My suggestion is:

1. Properly balance ships. Remove all mines/torps, AAW guns, sonars etc from BBs. Similarly other ships (bombers from subs? really?)

• BBs gun only - similar tiers should have similar balance of hull, armour, range, damage, no of guns, reload, secondary guns (with some nations having the edge in one of these - 7 stats, 7 nations)
• CAs fast guns with AAW option
• DDs/CLs fast ASW and AAW ships
• SSs silent hunters - nerf some oxygen, give some higher torpedo damage to higher tiers as now A tier BBs are unsinkable by subs
• CVs BB killers at range (supposing BBs are of BB size and speed - No Ammirragrio Di Saint Bon* unless reclassed as CA - with CA stats)

2. Italy and France as separate nations. Move all ships that players won in the lottery to new Nations. Tell them you're sorry you had to do that and give out gold (as you're used to do when you push unthought of changes)

3. As Italy and France have actually more ships than "old Nations" only show a similar number - keep the extras hidden.

4. Design some hidden extras for other "old" nations

5. Nerf the lottery scheme - no more debris - no blueprints. Give the higher tier ships as an upgrade option to already built ships - either as a refit 10-15 levels after the original build or as achievement

6. Give out the "hidden ships" as achievements or specials (like you did with Provence)

7. Allow players to join any fleet they wish with any of their Nations. Allow chiefs to see if their players are also active in other fleets - it is then their job to investigate and agree or kick a player

8. If wof between fleets where a player is active in both mark that player as unavailable to join wof to avoid gold farming

9. Fleet ranking gold bonus only from one fleet per player to avoid gold farming

*for example

It is really frustrating when you sacrifice your ship for the fleet to win and just lose... They really push the game to become a pissing contest between superships instead of fleet action.

AI ships in GB and win conditions:

Well, this happened in a GB. I'm in a CL in the capture zone, an allied DD is roaming about as AI ships do (in the capture zone) and the last enemy BB is racing to enter the capture zone and avoid losing on capture conditions. I embark on a one way mission to stop the BB from entering the zone spamming torpedoes to slow him down. I die but he is dead in the water outside the zone - the counter is running so a certain victory... NOPE, I LOST.

At some point the developers must have put the victory conditions that the last living PLAYER wins.

Right or wrong?

3 hours ago, 愚蠢的人类 said:

My view is that blueprints should not be repeated. As long as we get it, we will permanently unlock the construction rights of this warship. And will not get the blueprint of the ship again. If such a change is made, players will be more hopeful. If you invest enough, you can make up for your lack of luck, and every research will be meaningful, even if you get an EDC.

Another proof that the developers push unfinished and unthought of "features" to the game.

and now my opinion on the patch:

another load of crap. Why give the new players a way to become competitive and then take it away?

why not remodel the beginner/expert/master online battles and WoF on grades instead of levels (where a blueprint B grade Charlemagne can join expert but a Scharnhorst cannot)?

You made a big change in the game, either stick with it or roll back - this mongrel is ugly.

(Self realisation - I sound like a grumpy old man, never satisfied at anything, but it really looks like random "features" are thrown at the game without any planning. Grades are a good and needed addition, Research can work but not in a lottery scheme, higher level/stronger ships were needed to keep the >120level players interested in the game are among the good things of the latest patches)

A copy of NF announcement in facebook

4.3.2 version released!

We updated 4.3.2 version for iOS & Android.

1. Added Captain's requirement level for the construction of blueprints from ship research.

I would have preferred new nations, but Pandora's box is open - there is no going back now.

Next best thing is what you propose, with a twist. You must be able to designate class as well, the reason is that I'd very much like a C tier DD (a shimakaze perhaps?) but I wouldn't want to go through a million useless BB,CV and SS blueprints to get it.

A higher tier blueprint could still become available* without research 10-15 levels above a ship you already have (e.g BB H39 tier C = level 100, H39 B level = 115)

* As suggested in Suggestions > Ship upgrade to higher tier thread

Bosses are in ruins, NFKM trying to survive, Neptunes Inferno not in their (our) best shape ever. How many good players have to leave the game before they realise they are driving their users away?

After erratic and not well thought of patches good players have left the game. When will the developers learn to listen to their users? They have a product that sells and they try to kill it. They only have to look to other projects/games that once they got the community involved they became legendary.

Today NF Developers team had another surprise for the users

Without announcement kicked all alternative nations of players from their fleets, leaving only one alt in a fleet - the one that joined earliest. This outraged (and understandably so) most players.

Suggestion:

The forums are here for persistent discussion.

Game chat, discord and line are chat systems good for announcements

Facebook also offer chat capabilities, has a big userbase and is good for persistent announcements. Also offers another nice tool: Poll.

The developers can very well present a problem to their users (that many players are "spying" in other fleets in this case), propose the solution(s) they found (kick all alts from fleets) and LISTEN to player suggestions.

They can then rank the suggestions and pick one or (even better) use the poll tool and let the users decide the best action.

So it could have been like this:

Day 1 (Announcement in Discord, Line, Facebook, and every 1-2 hours in game chat):

It has come to our attention that many players join fleets with the intention of spying for another fleet. The NF team will take action to stop this behaviour. Please check the "Suggestions" Forum at navyfieldmobile.com for details. Discussion will happen until (3-5 days later), followed by a poll in facebook to reach the best solution from [date] to [date] (2-3 days after thread closure).

Day 1 (Forums)

Opening of thread for discussion under suggestions. Detail problem, moderate conversation and state specific dates for proposals taken and discussed, poll and implementation. Do give feedback in proposals (such as: good idea but will require 150 hours to code, thus cannot be implemented please consider dropping this or that feature - or make alternative suggestion)

Day 4

Opening of poll in facebook

Day 6-7

Announce results of poll and course to be taken - followed by explanation if the solution to be implemented is not the most popular one (it's still your game and we know you are here to make money from the game - we have conflicting interests)

This way you give the community a sense of participation, the community will come up with some ideas (thus giving you back some work hours spent for doing all this) and everyone will be happier. (I think)

Well, same thing seems to have happened to Neptunes Inferno - looks like all alt nations of players are kicked out.

Neptunes Flotilla is headless as my alt "Monty Python" was chief there.

My other alt is also kicked out of the fleet it was in.