Talk:Navy Field

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea. Community:  Discussion - Notice board Guidelines:  Manual of Style - Naming conventions Navigation:  Key topics - Browse - Portal
	Korea-related tasks: purge Create North Korea South Korea Korea North Korean Cities South Korea-India relations Districts of Seoul National Institute of Korean Language Wanghusa Garakgukgi Korea YMCA Ji Cheongcheon Battle at Luozigou Battle at Dadianzi Battle of Bongohdong Battle of Samdunja Sampo Waeran Byeongin Yangyo Goguryeo-Wei War Lelang Conquest Xienpei Campaign Guda-guk Galsa-guk Gaema-guk Hangin-guk Chunchong King Taejong Jeamri Jinju fortress Improve North-South relations Sports Tourism Communications North Korean Missile Test (2006) Law Culture Politics Nat'l Assembly South Korea-U.S. relations Gangpeh Jirisan Joseonsa Pyeonsuhoe Korean architecture Gaya confederacy Samhan Goryeo Namsan (Gyeongju) Nangnang nation Korean royal court cuisine Bangjja Calligraphy Donghak Peasant Revolution Righteous army Korean Liberation Army Independence movement Culture of Korea Korean martial arts Korean swords Korean nationalism Korean knife Korean armour (see also Pages needing attention and Stubs) Images North Korean famine Kim Tschang Yeul Dong-A University Pohang Songguk-ri Japanese General Government Building, Seoul Jirisan Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598) History of Korea Dangun Korean pottery Three Kingdoms of Korea Mongol invasions of Korea Goryeo-Khitan Wars Goguryeo-Sui Wars Military history of Korea List of monarchs of Korea Prehistory of Korea Translate Korean Wikipedia articles: ko:이범석 (1900년) ko:유관순 ko:이봉창 ko:박헌영 ko:김원봉 Japanese Wikipedia articles: 第一次日韓協約 第三次日韓協約 Discuss Portal nominations Votes Complete List (edit)

This article is within the scope of the Massively multiplayer online games WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of massively multiplayer online games. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

	This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: X-Men vs. Street Fighter Expand: New CVG Articles, List of Nintendo trademarks, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: Super Transformation, Turok: Dinosaur Hunter, Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games, Yoshi, Black Isle's Torn, Rise of Nations, Kirby (Nintendo), PlayStation 3, Mega Man Zero 4, Luigi Cleanup: Shiny Entertainment, Age of Mythology, Serious Sam II, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Ted Price, Betrayal at Krondor, Little Fighter 2 Merge: Current Events (Update needed!) / Deletions / Essential articles / Workshop / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

Contents 1 Is Navy Field a MMOPRG? 2 Please, maintain a neutral tone as you write a Wikipedia article 3 About the new server 4 Read the article first! 5 False claims made by SD Enternet 6 We need more structure in the Ships Section 7 Adding ship table 8 Corrected XP given to Free Accounts 9 Harbour Assault 10 BO = Bridge Operator 11 NF Userbox[es] Now Available!

[edit] Is Navy Field a MMOPRG?

In my opinion, NF is more like MMORTS than MMORPG. Can anyone prove that NF IS a MMORPG? I'm confused.

RTS games are usually defined by army-level unit command, resource production and/or base building. Navy Field has none of these. Its combat system is more reminiscent of team deathmatch, instead of a strategic battle. It also has a ship customization and sailor stat system that borrows many features of modern RPGs (accrued EXP affects attack & defense stats, stronger items/weapons are available with increasing level, etc). Tronno 20:58, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

---MMORPG is Massivley Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game MMORTS Is what now? Massivley Multiplayer Online Real Time Strategy? yeah anyways...yes U are totally right it is a MMORTS..it even says it when u start playing...REAL TIME STRATEGY or NAVAL TACTICS GAME... just wanted to point that out. YEP...its really addicting...plaing it.

---Yes, I added it to the list of MMORTS's on the MMOG list.

[edit] Please, maintain a neutral tone as you write a Wikipedia article

Quote from the stub: "Belt Armour: This armour is for direct shots from close range. If you love close range combat is valuable armour for you!!"

Keep in mind that this is not a game manual or a gamer's guide to Navy Field. Keep personal opinion to yourself, and write in a factual tone. Thank you. (AWPerator)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Navy_Field"

[edit] About the new server

The new server Yamato is opened, but was promptly merged with Iowa server due to lack of players to create the Missouri server.

[edit] Read the article first!

To anyone who wishes to edit this article, please READ the WHOLE thing first, so that we don't duplicate statements, such as the fact that NF is now free. Also, the standards of grammar and spelling acceptable on the NF site are definitely not high enough for Wikipedia, which means that sloppy grammar and punctuation will be purged. Thank you. JodoYodo 12:58, August 25, 2006 (UTC)

I added the "game balance" section, like it was added for other games (see city of heroes for example). I think i mantained a NPOV but if you disagree we can talk about it. Sir_Dante

I added Soft Defense under the "Armor and Defense" section, seemed like the most appropriate place to put it. --Lord Kelvin 02:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

New Airplanes section added. --Lord Kelvin 05:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Added Weapons section. --Lord Kelvin 06:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Gave an overhaul to the Sailors/Crew section, and added a chart of abilities. --Lord Kelvin 19:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] False claims made by SD Enternet

Shouldn't we also report the false claims made in the past by SDE about veterans (they couldn't change the veteran system due to a developer leaving the company- while it was changed in retail by charging players for veterans), harbor assault (which was supposed to go out at retail), BB5 (which were announced at 100 in a post by game master which was then deleted)? I think we should do it under the SDE section- they're facts, not POV Sir Dante 10:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Dante, I would definitely call those errors very bad miscommunications rather than lies.. And there is a big difference between the two. As for including them in the Wiki, imho the only purpose of including a section called "False Claims by SDE" would be to serve as a way to criticize SDE and the game itself. And honestly I don't see how anybody can maintain an NPOV while judging or criticizing something or someone. Archer <}- 21:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to point out all the lies, it should be sufficient to show how input is being treated (see the 'Balance' section) to show SD's behaviour from a Neutral POV. Obst & Gemuese 01:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

If you can cite sources, yes. Until you can do that, you're engaging in libel. Rogerborg 12:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

You can't cite sources always, besides they deleted all the sources. But you can't just drop it: they happened, if someone wants to take them off he's free to do it after all.

Sir Dante 14:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

If you can't cite sources, then accusations aren't suitable for Wikipedia. You are free to host them elsewhere. -- Rogerborg 11:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Anyways, i didn't add the section yet, that's why i'm asking here if that should be done. Probably the best thing to do is doing like archer suggested, we should call them "communication problems" and add one line to report them. I don't see why we should't do it after all! Sir Dante 14:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Rogerborg, since there are no books or links related to the matter i don't know how can you cite sources. This is a videogame, not an ancient battle over which there are dozens of sites and books- citing sources is just impossible here. You have to do what de facto happens, talk about how the game works and the community evolves: look at the other wiki pages for videogames (one above all, city of heroes) Sir Dante 10:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

That's unfortunate, as it's the standard that Wikipedia requires. Look, just below the editing window: "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". You can allege what you like elsewhere, but you can't present original allegations here. The thing is, I agree completely with these allegations, and I know that they've been made elsewhere, but this is Wikipedia, and we need to play by Wikipedia rules and to Wikipedia standards, regardless of whether other entries happen to do so at any given point in time. Shall I drop you a hint? You don't have to show that the allegations are true, you just have to present them as allegations, and link to an external reference source where they are made, which may, but doesn't have to be, the Navy Field forums. It could be your own personal web page, for example. -- Rogerborg 15:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The problem here is that you're right, there are no verifiable sources that talk about Navy Field. But doesn't this mean that the whole article is speculation then...? Sir Dante 14:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The biggest thing is that SD is trying to predict things. I still think that they should stop coming out with new things and work on older problems.

[edit] We need more structure in the Ships Section

Currently the list of available ships is way too long, some kind of table should be used instead.

Anyone up for the job?

Obst & Gemuese 01:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it's good as it is, someone should add links for the japanese ships- i did it for german ships but i'm too bored now to start the japanese ones! Sir Dante 14:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Done :) And now, since the whole page looks a bit longer the shiplist doesn't look that bad anymore to me either. Obst & Gemuese 17:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I might be able to start putting the ships of each nation into table format like Obst did with the classes when I get some time...Archer <}- 22:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

You forgot to put all the links for the kuma and remods and in the remodels of mogami ;) Fix my table if you find problems- this is even for you archer Sir Dante 07:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding ship table

I'm making the table for ships and i'll try to do it at my best, so if you can make it look better i will appreciate it. I also found several mistakes in the ships and a few broken link. For example, Mogami CA is listed as CA1 and Myoko CA2, while it's the opposite. PPro1 is listed as CA3, and there is no such class. Spaehkreuzer D40 was listed as DD2, it's a CL1. Sir Dante 07:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, CA1/CA2/CA3/DD2/CL1 aren't definitions used by Navy Field. They are player-created definitions. Cite sources! -- Rogerborg 11:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

They are indirectly used by game masters for clan wars and if you remember they actually called the new ships "BB5" Sir Dante 13:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Corrected XP given to Free Accounts

Hi. Although SDEnternet claims that free accounts get a penalty of 40% on Exp and Credits (like stated on the wiki), it has been tested that the actual implementation of the system give only 40% of the regular XP and Creds to free accounts, (thus, the penalty is not 40% but 60%). On NavyField forums is disccused whether this is a bug, or an intended 'feature' to enforce suscriptions. Anyway, im updating the text accordingly.

Hi. "It has been tested" is not a reference. Hi. I'm changing your "in fact" to a claim. Hi. The substance of your change is preserved. Hi. But if you want to present it as fact, you need to cite an external source. Hi. -- Rogerborg 15:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't believe you need to be immature(constant use of "Hi.") to get your point across to people.

[edit] Harbour Assault

I think someone should write a section on this, and edit the part about Harbour Assault not being released yet. As I haven't participated in one, I don't think this is for me -- JodoYodo

I'll be doing that when I have time, which may or may not come this weekend. --Lord Kelvin 01:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Done, revamped the section and added in the new BBs as well. --Lord Kelvin 01:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BO = Bridge Operator

BO stands for Bridge Operator in the game, not Bridge Officer. Shouldn't this be changed in the article? I understand that calling it a Bridge Officer makes it easier to understand, but everything else is properly named, so why not the BO? --Lord Kelvin 02:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NF Userbox[es] Now Available!

Insert the following code into your wikipedia user profile to show that you support NF!

{{Userbox |border-c = #000 |border-s = 1 |id-c = #fff |id-s = 12 |id-fc = #000 |info-c = #8ce |info-s = 8 |info-fc = #000 |id = [[image:Nflogo.png]] |info = This user plays '''[[Navy_Field|NavyField]]'''. }}

(More userboxes possibly coming soon.. if i feel like it :P )
Archer <}- 04:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, i added it- my first userbox ;) Using your template i made an own one for my old university Sir Dante 09:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)