PvP Rewards - feedback needed

[Kronans]

by surrender you give up to the attacker so it need have some ransom and I think 10% of the players cash. and 40% of the crew chose to stay with the winning team

[Prater]

Why would you surrender then and why would your crew stay with an enemy nation?

[Captain Lord Cochrane]

by surrender you give up to the attacker so it need have some ransom and I think 10% of the players cash. and 40% of the crew chose to stay with the winning team

 

No, because if they were to implement this historically then the British would suffer the worst to desertions and the Americans would gain the most.

[Æthlstan]

Surrender should never be blocked, but it should be linked to crew morale. If you are getting bombasted on all sides by enemy ships, there is no way your crew would be able to continue to function as a single ship surrounded by enemies. A surrender counts as a kill to the one who did the most damage, and assists to all others involved. The ship is given to the one who did the most damage.

 

If there are several friendly ships in the same combat instance, the surrounded ship gets a slight reduction to morale loss rate. If those friendly ships are engaging the enemy surrounding the single ship, the surrounded ship gets a significant reduction in morale loss rate.

 

Balanced fights and 1 on 1 fights also have morale involved. Morale is based on damage to ship, damage to crew, damage to enemy ship, damage to enemy crew. If a captain makes a bad move that results in a devastating stern rake, for example. morale on his ship drops significantly.

 

Disabling surrender will discourage fights, will discourage PvP, and will have the exact opposite effect that you intend.

 

Historically, it was much more profitable to have a ship surrender than to sink a ship, and this game should reflect that rather than attempting to put PvP-killing features like that suggested in the game. 

 

People also have real lives, and surrender should always be available if something comes up and they need to leave the game. There should be some way a captain who has to stop a fight to not get severely penalized for it....some of our captains have kids who cause chaos at inopportune times. (not myself, bachelor here). 

 

I can see these recommended "fixes" further encouraging toxic gameplay

 

Dont take away durability. If you do, you will have to increase the labor hour cap, and increase labor hour regeneration linearly per level. We fight way more often in this game than they did in real life, and our shipyards are already straining to provide everyone with the ships they need

 

 

A reward of some sort needs to be given to players who do fight to the end and end up sinking if you want to encourage that kind of behavior. Right now, the penalties aren't worth it which is why most people surrender

Edited July 17, 2016 by Æthlstan

[Vernon Merrill]

At some point the money faucet needs to be turned off because it's getting to the point now where it's influencing people's play style... In everything I've ever read about age of sail first person accounts, the PRIZE was more valuable than the kill. A CAPTURED ship should be bigger event than it is, in my opinion. Instead, you can make ~1.5 mil on one trade run, which renders ship rewards kinda just as an afterthought to battle.

Again, just my $.02

[Æthlstan]

Trading WAS more profitable than taking a prize. Its hard enough to make money trading as it is, unless youre simply selling to AI. 

[Hethwill]

Trading WAS more profitable than taking a prize. Its hard enough to make money trading as it is, unless youre simply selling to AI. 

 

This is correct.

 

Still there is no transfer from the relationship between Navy and Merchant in the game. Every captain is "the world" and can do whatever making the

" war on trade and trade to finance war" an empty premise.

 

Warships were commissioned whereas in game they are sold like cheap jeans.

 

How to move towards a better age of sail economy and war simulation regarding ships commissioned ?

( especially now that everyone has everything everywhere anytime )

[The Spud]

I think you should be able to surrender whenever you want, I think in the age of sail, any captain would have accepted the surrender at any time of his opponent as it would prevent further damage/death of his own ship/crew, becaus we can click repair and replenish crew right after battle, but back in the age of sail any damage was a weakness in a next battle or was going to cost them valuable hours of sailing time to repair it.

 

From some reading I also assume that there was a bit of an honor code amongst sailors, therefore I don't think they would let any sailor drown after their ship was sunk unless it would endanger his own ship/crew. Just like they (tried) not to bomb hospitals and shoot doctors on the battle field in both world wars. Upon blowing up or sinking I would apply a penalty of losing a random percentage of crew between 25 - 75%, the rest is supposidly "saved" from drowning.

 

I would like for another option, maybe only possible when being attacked by pirates. When getting attacked, instead of surrender being the only option, have another option, demand to negotiate with the pirates over a price in return for safe passage (this can be gold, or anything you are keeping in your hold). So you could escape the battle instantly and have a two minute safe mode, maybe accompanied with some invisibility. The pirate can always deny this and just board/sink the guy with the chance of losing allot of crew and maybe even the battle.

[Qwolf]

Historically, not many ships "fought to the death."  A frigate even approaching a poorly armed merchantman would cause the merchantman to quickly surrender.  Why?  Because who wants to sink or die in the middle of the ocean when the battle is already lost? Captured seamen and officers were treated reasonably well to encourage ships to consider surrendering when appropriate. 

 

I think the easy solution is consider a surrender a kill or capture for XP purposes..  Its the honorable thing to do on the loser's side, saves the victor dead crew from a bloody battle, gives the victor a prize (captured ship), and saves the defender crew from needless death.   Indeed, historically, a quick surrender or a surrender at all was PREFERED over a sinking or bloody capture, because you got a prize without a bloody battle.  And frankly, in my view, there is a certain honor to saying "you got me, I surrender." Increase the rewards for a surrender to kill/capture levels and everyone will be happy. 

 

Closer battles will get fought until a winner is obvious.  At that point the loser can go down in an expensive blaze of glory or surrender.  The winner won't gripe if he is getting fully kill/capture XP.  Indeed he'll be happy to save crew and time.

 

Also, prevent sinking ships from surrendering.  That's too late in my view.  Captains will have to balance when to surrender versus possibly sinking, like real life.

[Taranis]

I would be in favor of blocking from surrendering when on fire or sinking.

 

I would also advocate:

• We should have option to scuttle the ship too (as some sinking actions take quite a while).
• Surrendering a ship should come at a cost in gold (call it ransom money in addition to the loss of cargo), to complement the fact that losing a battle should come at a cost in men (officer life and crew) - but paying that ransom should prevent the loss of 1 dura.
• If one's ship is sinking and beyond a certain threshold - they should no longer be able to make use of their guns (ie: crew would be busy jumping off ship / launching row boats to save themselves).
• I really like Bach's proposal on a different thread that trying to escape using the coward trait should come at the cost of losing one's canons - but just as guns slow a ship down - offloading them should give the ship a speed boost.
• If we move to a 1 dura for all ships mode, I would favor that one gets to keep their upgrades if/when they lose their ship (unless the upgrade system is also revised).
• I like all of what is listed above under "Step 2".  Perhaps there should also be an infamy reputation measure (eg: someone that likes to sink/capture British players should have an certain infamy level in that community).  The sinking of said infamous players could be the subject of missions and/or extra pvp rewards.  BTW, the reputation should be tied to the player's steam account (to avoid people just deleting their accounts and rerolling a new character to absolve themselves of their prior misdeeds).  On the same note, perhaps a player could be offered the chance to pay reparations to diminish their infamy levels....  a lot can be done here.

Edited July 18, 2016 by TaranisPrime

[Hethwill]

2. Lock surrender for side, who have more as 30% BR advantage in fight after 5 minutes.

Salute for Kingstone

 

Little sense on this.

 

We had a frigate surrender to our two schooners. He would not be able to surrender and only prolong the agony

[Hethwill]

Every fight is different.  And no, it is not a "disadvantaged side" option.

 

If anyone wants to surrender so be it. Surrender mechanic is finally useful.

 

It saves lives of crew and officer and that is the focus point of it. Nothing else matters let alone BR.

 

BR advantage/disadvantage must be visible in the rewards. From a high ratio to a almost zero ratio.

[admin]

Surrenders should be a powerfull buff to pumps, and prevent further damage. If you STILL sink, you lose crew and officers.

 

 

Unfortunately it will be confusing for a lot of players. You will have to wait in battle more and see if you sank or not.

Also it could be griefed. You surrendered knowing that you are safe now - then enemy will sink you ship and you lose crew.

[akd]

You surrendered knowing that you are safe now - then enemy will sink you ship and you lose crew.

Why not just turn damage off on surrendered ships? No one should be firing on ships that have struck anyways.

[Hethwill]

Why not just turn damage off on surrendered ships? No one should be firing on ships that have struck anyways.

 

Make it count as friendly damage. Make it harsh.

[Vernon Merrill]

Agreed.  Firing on a ship that has struck would have had serious repercussions to any captains honor...Just turn off or severely penalize it.

[sveno]

If these are the only options, i would select this option:

 

- "Block surrender ability if you are sinking or on fire"

 

Like this, if they surrender before their ship starts to sink, you at least get the ship as prize.

 

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

 

But - I'm still preferring to get kills & assists at the time of the surrender rather than the presented options.

A surrender is a classical and historic correct defeat and as such, should be prized to those making that captain to surrender.

I go even further, i think a surrender should give the attacker MORE gold and XP than a death - survival of your crew comes with the cost that the enemy gets a greater gain.

 

Kinda stubborn on this issue.

Edited July 19, 2016 by sveno

[Tyrdael]

1 and 2 for sure + a separate mechanic. Surrendering means handing over your ship to the victor, so you admit defeat without being sinking. 

 

3...not so much, because if the victor shoots you into the sink, it is his own fault. Stopping you into your tracks if he wants the ship he should not benefit from destroying his prize.

 

The aforementioned mechanic may be: "Abandon ship"

 

You floor it in slups and small boats whom where installed, on bigger ships at least. Or the crew drifts away on the planks that fell in the water after being shot at (or not). You will save a portion of your crew and the officers live (maybe), but you will be punished if additional status changes like fire or taking on water are active on the ship. A sinking ship will most likely pull people with it due to hydrodynamics, even a wooden one.

[admin]

Why not just turn damage off on surrendered ships? No one should be firing on ships that have struck anyways.

 

i don't see the point.. 

why not just save his crew and let him exit

[Qwolf]

i don't see the point.. 

why not just save his crew and let him exit

 

 

Agree with this. And the point that ships that strike their colors are EXACTLY what an opposing captain would want.  They don't want the ship to sink.  They want the prize with little damage to the prize and their own ship.  XP should thus be awarded accordingly, just as high for sinking the ship.  You force a ship to strike their colors by proving you are going to win, by speed, force, skill, etc, and you've achieved the ultimate goal of any ship captain. 

 

This will also mean no hurt feelings by ships striking their colors and "depriving" opposing captains of XP.  The ultimate goal should be a ship striking their colors, not sinking it. 

 

Of course, captains should feel free to take their crew, officers, and ship to the bottom if they prefer to sink instead of strike.  But honorable and sensible captains strike their colors when the battle is obviously lost.

[Skully]

Agree with this. And the point that ships that strike their colors are EXACTLY what an opposing captain would want. They don't want the ship to sink. They want the prize with little damage to the prize and their own ship. XP should thus be awarded accordingly, just as high for sinking the ship. You force a ship to strike their colors by proving you are going to win, by speed, force, skill, etc, and you've achieved the ultimate goal of any ship captain.

This will also mean no hurt feelings by ships striking their colors and "depriving" opposing captains of XP. The ultimate goal should be a ship striking their colors, not sinking it.

Of course, captains should feel free to take their crew, officers, and ship to the bottom if they prefer to sink instead of strike. But honorable and sensible captains strike their colors when the battle is obviously lost.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/15239-exploit-i-surrerender-free-xpgold-for-everyone/

You get the ship, that is your reward. If you want gold, sell it.

If you want XP, board or kill it.

Whether the officer or crew gets out after a surrender/abandon/scuttle is unrelated to the rewards.

Sinking a ship, get the kill/assist.

Have a ship strike it's colors, you get a ship.

Do this via boarding, you might get both.

Risk/reward would be in balance.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Skully

[Quineloe]

PvP rewards needs change again. Sinking a lot of players is unprofitable again after crew introduction. 

This problem is alleviated by ability to surrender any time.

 

The changes will be done in 2 steps

 

Step 1 - next patch and hot-fixes

1) Changes to surrender inlcuding no money and xp if you surrendered + changes to when the surrender option is available

 

 

I do not understand why you insist so much on punishing players harder and harder for defeat in PVP.

This forces losers to grind PVE to recover their losses more and more. Until they don't want to grind NPC anymore, then they quit.  This in turn turns some of the winners into the new losers, who will eventually quit themselves, and the game will bleed more players than you have new players joining.

 

This is EXACTLY why POTBS was a dead game after a year. All the losers had quit, only the winners remained, there was no one left to fight

 

Why can there be no room in your game for anyone but the best players?

[Quineloe]

1 AND 2

 

Block Surrender: I prefer to let the attacker decide to accept the surrender. That means:

A player is sinking, on fire or the 5 minutes are passed, then the attacker should get a dialog to decide, if he accept the surrender.

In my opinion, the player who has done most  damage to the enemy should get those a dialog.

 

just my 2 cents

 

Might as well remove surrender from the game then, because players will always reject surrender, especially with the current mechanics where killing the entire crew hurts so much.  Why let someone get away with 80% of the crew if you can hurt him for another 200k in crew buygback?

 

And one more thing: we need a way to exit a battle after five minutes, lest we end up demasted and griefed for a full 90 minutes just to keep us in the battle

Edited July 20, 2016 by Quineloe

[Cpt Blackthorne]

All I know is that I better get XP even if I sink or surrender. If, I've put in an hour + of fighting w multiple kills yet get no XP because the last shi sank me or I had to surrender, I will cry, and most likely curl in a fetal position in the corner.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Cpt Blackthorne

[Quineloe]

You should still get rewards if you surrender.

 

Otherwise for sinking:

 

If the fire gets out of control and is huge, your ship automatically surrenders and all crew attempt to put the fire out.

 

I've said this months ago. Survival should not be a toggle. You can't keep your crew from fighting a fire. They'd sooner all jump overboard and take their chances with the sharks than continue working next to a burning fire slowly approaching the gun powder storage. Any captain ordering a fire not to be fought would be relieved of command within moments by his other officers for insanity.