Rather than PvE Zone; Neutral Nation

[Wesreidau]

The devs have decided to merge the RvE server into the PvP server for launch and designating some portion of the Gulf of Mexico an RvE area.

I like the first half of this.

Putting PvE players in a rather dull corner of the map seems bad to them, who wanted to sail the whole carribean. It also seems troublesome that they'll run delivery contracts with no risk of interception, amassing gold produced from NPCs. Its further troublesome they'll produce resources, craft ships, and do everything else in the Gulf, because it develops the region into an economic trade basin with full security from piracy that frankly every player will want to craft, trade, and produce their 1st-rates in.

These unintended consequences will turn a dull corner of the map into the place all merchants and crafters go, while the pirates and nationals wander empty oceans wishing we had merchants to raid or defend. Meanwhile, the actual PvE players have their waters swamped by people who are just dropping by to clear-cut the forests.

 

Lets draft some goals.

1. Allow dedicated PvE players to sail in a PvP server without being attacked.

2. Keep the PvP players from using the PvE protection system.

3. Ensure PvE players can sail anywhere they like and attack or be attacked by any AI opponents they care to.

4. Make sure everyone knows a PvE player when they see them.

5. Allow PvE players to sample a bit of PvP under controlled circumstances.

6. Minimize market distortion, not activity.

 

All of these can be met with an eight nation that remains politically neutral, which no other nation can attack, but which can sail between all nations. They can open outposts in free towns, enable smuggler flags, sail between nations, find market imbalances and trade between nations. PvE players then fill a vital economic role of trading between the alliance blocks. These PvE players are free to craft ships in trade towns, operate their markets there, trade in and out of national boundaries, and the free towns become points of interest. Being under a neutral flag, they are easily recognized as PvE players and can't join any PvP conflicts.

Call the neutral nation whatever you like, "Freebooters", "Privateers", "Free Ports"... avoid any specific national flag to prevent national biases.

Problems.

1. Neutrals can spy.

2. Neutrals can't produce resources since they lack access to resource-producing cities.

3. PvP players may make neutral accounts and use them to safely ship resources.

Mitigating factors.

We've had spying within the same nation forever.

Neutrals being unable to produce resources yet looking to use their labor hours may well buy up resources from various factions and craft manufactured products in free towns, where they have outposts to craft in and can post them for sale. This is useful and makes the free town a trade up, from all nations, to all nations. Shipbuilding can occur here as well. And, without an outpost in national territory, port battles won't interface with neutral outposts.

PvP players can't use the PvE system for protection without deleting their mains or buying an alt account. With an alt account, however, they can ship products around securely, anywhere. However, their alts cannot build outposts in national territory. They'd have to trade to themselves either through the market or directly, and if player-to-player trades are recorded, you could have proof supporting any decisions made. But an advantage of no outposts in national territory is that a neutral alt can't be used to produce the products of a rival nation's block.

PvP players without alts, however, enjoy resources moved around by the neutrals in their markets, free ports with resources and ships for sale, other PvP players going to free ports and being intercepted...

So I'm floating this suggestion to see what PvE players think of this compared to the Gulf PvE Pond solution.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Wesreidau

[admin]

if neutrals can't be attacked then they can change economy and resource distribution. 
 

[Bragan Benigaris]

What about bringing together PVE and PVP in a kind of protected transition at least for the long haul from the PVE zones in the west to the hot zones in the east? Outside the PVE waters, as long as a trader is escorted by player warships, it's invulnerable. If tagged, it will be brought to the instance together with the escort ships, but can't be attacked as long one of his guards is still living. Much time to escape and a good chance to create OW PVP for escort and raider parties. There could be created a distinct market place for this safe conduct services.

Only an unreflected idea...

[Wesreidau]

@admin

The difference is the way they change resource distribution. With PvE isolated to the Gulf, we lose a block of territory for national conflict and conquest and instead create a free trade basin that's isolated from the rest of the server. I consider that a change for the worse; we lose territory, PvP crafters sail around in safe PvE waters, and PvE players aren't happy being in a kiddy pool.

With a neutral flag, we have the PvE players create a free trade network between all the free towns. PvE players are then...

1. Able to explore the whole Caribbean.

2. Operating out of free ports, creating commercial hubs.

3. Able to safely move resources from one national marketplace to another, resolving price disparities.

Remember how critical resources like silver and gold can cripple shipbuilding if a nation doesn't have access to a producing mine? Neutral traders going into the a silver-rich capital might buy up silver at 200 gold, return it to the nearest freeport, and sell it for 300 gold or haul it to a silver-starved nation to sell for far higher. This helps normalize the marketplace, and uses player time to do it.

Come launch, we'll doubtlessly have a lot of players who want to just craft and trade and learn the mechanics. They'll enjoy a lively world on the PvP server while serving a crucial economic role as neutral arbitrage traders. They won't feel like second-rate or segregated-off players, they will be engaged in the primary game world and contribute to the server population. Adding some eventual mechanism to join a nation later on, or transition between nations by joining the neutrals temporarily, helps players mismatched in their initial nation shuffle around without the pain of character deletion.

I think a lot of good can come of a neutral merchant nation as the PvE faction, provided that neutral nation can only shuffle goods around and craft. If we accept that crafting or shipping alts will exist somehow, I think this is a net positive for both PvE players and the PvP economy. Very few people used the smuggler flag for inter-alliance trade, that I saw.

 

I understand you'd prefer AI traders doing this, but AI traders can be intercepted, and then its just free loot. if an AI merchant buys 1000 of my stuff at 1 gold each, and you intecept that merchant and steal the stuff, then we just printed 1000 gold and we still have 1000 stuff. Imagine compass wood. 1,000 compass wood at 1,000 each, the NPC sells me a million anticipating your buy contract of 1100g each, you're out in the harbor and intercept the NPC, you get the 1,000 compass wood, you hand me the compass wood back, i stick it back on the market, another trader spawns...

Whereas this has a human intelligence playing the market as its own economic game-play. 

Edited March 17, 2017 by Wesreidau

[delaine]

we at one point had a neutral nation in the game earlyer on it was removed however i do like the idea of players with such a flag can not be attacked even in a hostile area

[Rebel Witch]

Look to the sky for guidance and you shall find it.

EVE Online started so small and gradually worked up to become among the most successful and notorious MMOs in gaming history for a reason. Its model works brilliantly. I am among those who believe the mechanics of EVE Online would serve Naval Action well and make this game a blockbuster, given time to raise her sails!

EVE had a high sec region and nul sec region, it worked brilliantly . While i think the high sec region of NA could be around jamaica, east cuba, haiti, i think what the Devs are doing is a step in the right direction here.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Rebel Witch

[Wesreidau]

The problem is EVE is a radial galaxy with the center made safe and the outside dangerous. NA is the Caribbean, and the most interesting PvP waters are the center. Making Jamacia/Cuba/Haiti the PvE zone furthers the kiddy-pool problem for PvE players while turning the best PvP waters into a no-go. The Gulf might work, but its still a kiddy-pool and a very ugly one at that. This is why I think we should let the PvE players roam free on the PvP server under the protection of a neutral flag of free towns. The merchants will be tremendously useful balancing out major economic imbalances, the plain PvEers will fight AI ships the PvP guys don't want anyway, and there aren't too many of them anyhow to really influence the economy otherwise.

Kingston / Pedro Cay would be as "highsec" as you'd get in Eve, yet in this game it was a nail-biter every holdful of tobacco I ran. I don't want highsec/lowsec, I want full PvP. This proposal lets me keep my full PvP, lets others keep their full PvE (sans resource harvesting, a tragic loss I'm sure), and lets us interact through the market and through whatever events and challenges the PvE players decide to join. Who knows, they might take to defending the raids. PvPers were complaining raids were against AI's... those AI's might be PvE players half the time. Its not their ship to lose and they volunteer to do it. I think that would be another great point of synergy between these two camps.

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, Wesreidau said:

The problem is EVE is a radial galaxy with the center made safe and the outside dangerous. NA is the Caribbean, and the most interesting PvP waters are the center. Making Jamacia/Cuba/Haiti the PvE zone furthers the kiddy-pool problem for PvE players while turning the best PvP waters into a no-go. The Gulf might work, but its still a kiddy-pool and a very ugly one at that. This is why I think we should let the PvE players roam free on the PvP server under the protection of a neutral flag of free towns. The merchants will be tremendously useful balancing out major economic imbalances, the plain PvEers will fight AI ships the PvP guys don't want anyway, and there aren't too many of them anyhow to really influence the economy otherwise.

Kingston / Pedro Cay would be as "highsec" as you'd get in Eve, yet in this game it was a nail-biter every holdful of tobacco I ran. I don't want highsec/lowsec, I want full PvP. This proposal lets me keep my full PvP, lets others keep their full PvE (sans resource harvesting, a tragic loss I'm sure), and lets us interact through the market and through whatever events and challenges the PvE players decide to join. Who knows, they might take to defending the raids. PvPers were complaining raids were against AI's... those AI's might be PvE players half the time. Its not their ship to lose and they volunteer to do it. I think that would be another great point of synergy between these two camps.

The problem is you want to be safe and play in the fire too, you can't have it both ways.   If you want to stay safe than you stay in your nations safe zones.  Though I'm not so sure about the locations. The Brit one seems a bit off, though it would be better if they moved it to the other side of the coast so that it's actually THE GULF OF MEXICO that is PVE zone and not part of it and part of Central America.   That still gives them a lot of area to trade in.  They can still craft as we can bring them resources and that encourages trade.  They want to come out of the safe zone than they need to get a nice escort and prefer one of player base not AI (cause they are pretty stupid in fights).   

A neutral nation that can't be attacked will abused things I'll promise you.  Folks will have a PVE char that can't eb attacked to do all there hauling so this system the Devs came up seems to be best for all around. I'm sorry they never promised any PvE only server until after the game is released so the folks should be happy they are getting what we have now or even what is to come with the patch.  It's a very reasonable system, way better than the pacific coast and guess what?  Those of the nations that couldn't get certain things on PvE now have means to get materials and resources.  They trade with some one willing to go into the PvP area and bring them back.   

I'll be honest with you ever complaint I heard form PvE's been sounding like they think every one of us PvP players are a bunch of CoD teen agers just wanting to gank and kill them.  I did mostly solo PvE when I started this game and was rarely ever jumped.  I don't even remember the last time my traders been jumped.   The reason why?  Cause I don't AFK sail like a noob and get ganked thinking it's 100% safe all the time.   Sorry it's part of the risk of the game and if your smart and don't do every thing the fast easy way you will prob never are very rarely get jumped.  The few times I have been I escaped but the only reason I got tagged was cause I went into a hot zone to get goods and I new that zone was hot and dangerous.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Sir Texas Sir

[Wesreidau]

I'm sorry, you seem to think I'm a PvE player.

I don't want to have it both ways any more than you do. In fact, a neutral faction ties the PvE player into the game better than the isolated kiddy pool will. Having it both ways is shutting down the PvE server and stuffing its players into a corner of the PvP map. The location they chose is the Gulf of Mexico, so that will block off a big swath of ports. PvE players will get one dull concave coastline to sail up and down, get bored, and quit. They were sold a sandbox, they got a kiddy pool.

My proposal acknowledges its flaws with regards to crafting alt abuses, but we already have crafting alt abuses. Neutral alts won't be able to harvest resources, so these alts won't be glutting the resource markets. Instead a neutral alt can only consume resources or move them from port to port, never produce them.

The small number of PvE players can easily buy their shipbuilding resources from national capitals or regional production sites, but producing the resources for PvP shipbuilding is going to still be same-nation alts.

Maybe the Free Ports faction would need to enable smuggling to enter national ports, and when smuggling, can be attacked in PvP. We could try that for a while. A player who agrees to take a risk temporarily for a reward accepts that risk. It also makes neutral alts to ship resources around entirely pointless.

[Koltes]

I agree 100% with @Rebel Witch

Making capital surroundings semi safe is a good move. This should be nation trade hubs. These are the regions for newbs too (instead to wasting Bahamas). You should still be able to attack players in safe zones, but AI patrol retaliation is great.

To ensure pvp activity in other regions capitals should only provide basic means to survivals. Crafting will have bonus in there, but capitals should be poor in resources. 

Other regions needs to have resourse concentration on a map with a free port trade hubs that linked with other free port trade hubs for goods to access global economy, thus creating areas of pvp concentration. 

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

5 minutes ago, koltes said:

(instead to wasting Bahamas).

Not to mention the rookie zone at the Bahamas at times creates disconnect between new players and majority of the rest of the faction. 

[Guest]

Greatly prefer this solution over the PvP zones.

Just to add to it, it seems like it could be a good way to facilitate the ‘new player experience'. Currently it seems as if many (including myself back in the day) start on the PvE server to learn the basics before starting for real on a PvP server, and that many pick a nation with minimal info that they'd might regret (while a rare few spend time nation-hopping to audit different nations before choosing).

If every new player would start neutral before enlisting we'd get a slam dunk solution for both of those.

And perhaps also add them the ability to attack any AI at all in the OW - as was mentioned in the ‘alliances or not' poll - as an intuitive PvE experience that we lost with the alliance implementation. Albeit with a minor risk of that being used for trolling, since people will be people...

Edited March 17, 2017 by Guest

[Wesreidau]

The EVE players would do well to recall that high-sec was possible thanks to overwhelming firepower appearing from nowhere in the form of CONCORD. We have no such faction, nor should we introduce such a faction. Additionally, capitals are not evenly distributed. Most of the Antilles would be in a French / Swedish / Danish high-sec zone. Then we see capitals in Bermuda rendering large portions of the newbie area unplayable.

Frankly, we have a high-sec area, its Bermuda, and I don't want to see strange tagging rules spread across the rest of the map. I thought I was accused of being a carebear! By the time a player gets to deep-water ships, he's out of the newbie valley and off to the big leagues.

The point of the neutral faction is to let players who want to be PvE players be a PvE faction, and not mix them in with all the other factions. If we mix the PvE players in with the PvP factions, there will be a lot of "ganking" and "griefing" cries, as well as exploitation of whatever PvE-protecting feature we work in.

A simple neutral faction to let PvE players sail between free ports merrily trading, crafting, and sinking AI ships is all we need. Lets not over-complicate this.

 

[Rebel Witch]

On 3/17/2017 at 10:29 AM, admin said:

if neutrals can't be attacked then they can change economy and resource distribution. 
 

I am thrilled at the recent announced changes because it feels like the Devs have found their mojo, a direction they want to take the game that will bring it to release and a steady growth.

PVE, PVP area's are a big plus.

I really really hope they soon announce that players will be able to affiliate with not just an NPC nation but can choose to create their own small nation, join player created nations etc.

Naval Action will open up into a massive ocean sandbox if players can cut the shackles of the NPC nations and start to create their own clan like nations and even start taking ports for their nation, would open this game up completely!!!! would be like opening up the barn doors and letting all the horses run free, it would breath a whole new fresh air to the game play while keeping with the historical feel.

It would be like an ALTERNATIVE REALITY, where the european powers have lost control of the sea and instead of a pirate faction, players are the pirates and privateers and they carve out a whole new tall ship era. instead of players being "pirates" and their ports a dark brown. players would make their own clan nations, ports they take are for their nation not for entire pirate nations. and each nation can pick their own color, maybe turn the port dots into little flags players can create to identify their ports with.

man the possibilities become endless when players can create their own nation and ports open up for everyone to take instead of just NPC nations and npc ports.

 

just my thoughts for future possibilities

[Crayon]

On 3/17/2017 at 10:29 AM, admin said:

if neutrals can't be attacked then they can change economy and resource distribution. 
 

Is that such a bad thing? We all want a 100% player based economy and these players will most likely fill that role outside of their missions. In fact, they should get their own faction specific missions to fill those gaps.

The ONLY problem with giving them their own faction, is the loss of their previous loyalties. To that end, I believe giving them their own faction is somewhat short sighted, and perhaps a little too extreme for players who find loyalty to their nation a big deal like myself. 

I believe there should be a 'Safe Mode' like how there is a smuggler role. Perhaps a rework of the smuggler mode could solve the issue and maintain their nationality and identity.

There is also, the opportunity now to create shipping lanes, to help these new comers get adjusted to the scene in PVP1&2

Edited March 22, 2017 by Crayon

[AngryPanCake]

Thank you for starting this suggestion thread touching upon the future merger of the 2 servers and the bringing together of 2 different play styles.

With my limited experience in playing this game, I still think the PvE and PvP styles can work together in the OW through trade/crafting. If it is balanced (or imbalanced) in such a way that PvE or PvP players can not produce/craft everything they need without goods/materials from other areas, then this will induce or force movement between the 2 zones/areas. No one nation can be self sufficient. So, PvE players that need something so badly, will be compelled to come out of their "safe" zone and go fetch what they need elsewhere, which puts them at risk for being preyed upon, which also adds more players into the PvP pool.

PvE players, who are really not interested in any PvP action, may elect to remain in their safe zone and produce goods, craft, fight bots or do whatever floats their boat and rely on PvP players bringing them resources or purchasing goods needed by either one of them.

Through my reading the forums, I seem to feel players' AI fleets are strongly disliked for many different reasons. Would it be appealing to most players to limit those fleets? For instance, one would have trade convoys only. A convoy would consist of a player's trade ship and a warship as an escort (a traders brig escorted by a similar armed ship such as a navy brig or whatever warship falls in the same class).

Of course the details and the mechanics will depend on the developers.

[Wesreidau]

Some further reflection.

First off, people in the PvE community are voicing a lot of concern about both being stuck in a PvE zone and not having the full Carribean, and PvPers are also concerned that PvP players will use the PvE zone as one big shipyard to fuel their war efforts, and lose interest in actually capturing resource-producing ports in more dangerous waters. These two reasons are why I'm against the PvE zone.

Secondly, I see little to no argument against a neutral faction operating out of free ports and  attacking various fleets and AI's and contraband-smugglers. Nobody seems to think the PvE players scooping up PvE targets will be a concern.

Third, economic concerns do exist, and I think they can be mitigated.

1. PvE players should only be allowed to build outposts in free ports. Thus they cannot harvest resources, and so factional ownership of resources remains relevant.

2. PvE players should not be allowed to conduct player-to-player trades outside of free ports. Thus they have to operate through the commodities market to buy or sell resources, and by operating through the market, a player using a neutral alt as a mule will pay the contract placement prices. After that point, the alt is no different than an actual other player.

3. PvE players MAY, if need be, be forbidden from placing buy and/or sell contracts in foreign ports, or foreign ports other than regional and national capitals. This depends on if buy and sell contracts by Neutral players interfere with the local economy in a way I'm not foreseeing.

Fourth, many players are fond of certain national identities. As such, neutral players can select their own national colors to display inside of battle (neutral PvE player selects an American flag to fly in battle, then sees it when fighting an AI British ship. If an American-flagged neutral fights American AI, the AI become Pirates). Other players (if there ever are other players in battle with a PvE player) will see the ordinary flag for whichever team that PvE player was on (ie, red or blue from a Small Battle).

[Kiefer Cain]

With Wesreidau's continued fine tuning of his suggestion, I find it the most palatable of all the PvE--PvP server suggestions to-date.  In particular, the prohibiting of direct trades between neutral and nation players. Though, I would eliminate Neutral player-to-Nation player trades 100%, Freeport or not.  Forcing inter-nation trade to be subject to prevailing market prices, made public, and (hopefully with a revamped trading interface) a much more visible trading history in each port/region/server. 

This nullifies to a great degree the feared Neutral alt/nation main account abuse many (myself included) are aware would happen.

A solid solution.  IF we are to make room for the non-aggressors among the population, this is the best way. 

Edited March 23, 2017 by Kiefer Cain

[LeBoiteux]

Neutrals have already been implemented in early testing phase. Very few players enrolled in it. I guess it's because PvE-ers would rather be nationals than neutrals, maybe a matter of immersion...

[Kiefer Cain]

20 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said:

Neutrals have already been implemented in early testing phase. Very few players enrolled in it. I guess it's because PvE-ers would rather be nationals than neutrals, maybe a matter of immersion...

I don't think there are any perfect solutions.  Wesreidau, best threads the needle between the two styles of play.  Wesreidau, even affords the ability to hoist national colors.  In order for complete immersion into the environment (or earn the national tag), one should assume some responsibility of risk to be a part of that nation.  It isn't fair to all the other players that assume the risk of hauling, pvping, trading as a national.  True nation membership could be the carrot to draw PvE players into the PvP possibility side of the game, when they are ready for it.

Edited March 23, 2017 by Kiefer Cain