From 48 to 24

[Thonys]

port battles have now a schedule at 48 hours (-2hours) reduce that to 24 hours (-2hours)

 

benefit ;

certain player have more benefit from it and don't have to wait (more flow in the game)

some players will return faster (player base)

more action. (more attraction)

more flexibility for players to participate in a battle (more content)

less agenda work (waiting time )

 

Edited January 30, 2017 by Thonys
typo on hours

[Thonys]

4 minutes ago, rediii said:

Port battles are scheduled by 46 hours (2 days - 2hours) to still be inside the primetime if the effort to grind hostility takes more time. So i would be ok with a schedule of 22 hours because i think -2 hours makes sense.

 

corrected the typo thx

[Kloothommel]

attrition will be higher though.

[Prater]

The 46 hour window is important to give people time.

[Jean Ribault]

Personally I find the 46 hours is way too much.  I don't do a lot of them but did want to do one yesterday, and I missed it because it's another thing to remember in the course of busy RL activity.  For 2 days I gotta remember to log on at a certain time?  It's too much.  I don't see why we need this dumb setup time anyway, we used to have immediate PB's all the time with flags, and that never stopped numbers from joining, it created a flurry of activity instead.  Nightflips go both ways so who cares?  There always used to be PB's whenever I was in the game, now most of the time not, and seriously now I have to put these on my Outlook calendar to remember when it is?  Dumb.  46 hrs to 22 is probably a pretty good suggestion, even though I'd rather just go back to no PB scheduling at all.  Sorry for the mini-rant.

Edited January 30, 2017 by Jean Ribault

[Sir Texas Sir]

Personally I hate the -2 hour part cause it means you port battle is two hours before you reach the 100%.  It should all ways be when you reach that point not two hours before.   This way you can control it more easily and well of the US players we can't get port battles half the time cause the cute off is 10pm CST for 8PM port battle.  That is 6 PM for PST and most of them aren't even home yet.  

[van der Clam]

I agree with @Jean Ribault and @Sir Texas Sir. I prefer it 24 hours later and no -2 hours. The reason we want a PB to pop at a certain time is because that is when we are able to play. Instead we have to stay on two hours later than normal to get the PB at the time we want.
But, I prefer my overall suggestion on making PBs for every port at intervals throughout the day, allowing for morning players and evening players to play PBs at their time, whichever they are able to attend.

 

[Kiithnaras]

This discussion may potentially be mooted by the introduction of the upcoming Admiralty system and a return of a mechanic similar to ("But without the exploits [of]") the old Assault Flag system.

No, this upcoming feature/mechanic was not discussed in detail.

[Koltes]

On 1/31/2017 at 5:12 AM, Sir Texas Sir said:

Personally I hate the -2 hour part cause it means you port battle is two hours before you reach the 100%.  It should all ways be when you reach that point not two hours before.   This way you can control it more easily and well of the US players we can't get port battles half the time cause the cute off is 10pm CST for 8PM port battle.  That is 6 PM for PST and most of them aren't even home yet.  

I would prefer that soon as you get hostility up to 100% you are able to choose time when you want to attack from 24 to 48 hour window, so the soonest you could attack is in 24 hours or you could set it further away up to 48 hours if that suits you more.

We had this before with flags, a person who bought the flag had to sail to that port and set the timer. In hostility it will be the person who had earned more hostility points.

Edited February 1, 2017 by koltes

[Aventador]

On 1/30/2017 at 11:25 AM, van der Decken said:

I prefer it 24 hours later and no -2 hours. The reason we want a PB to pop at a certain time is because that is when we are able to play.

100% agree with you