Flags or Hostility

[Fenris]

As one of the admins posted in another thread :

" the conquest is still being discussed/reworked. Current ideas are
1) return conquest flag - sell it for pvp marks and create PB on purchase removing all exploits potential
2) change (bring back) hostility missions to only generate for regional capitals and be open all the time (allow missions to generate only for nearest 2 enemy regions - to create some form of frontlines "

 

These are the only possibilities to achieve sustainable conquest in the game. Why?

1 .FLAGS: Pos : Surprise, unpredictability, Conquest around the map(FOR THOSE WHO LIKE IT)Gather players,purchase flag and go. If you want to throw away the PVP marks,by not showing up in a PB, thats your problem/nations, and most important thing(NATIONS NUMBERS DO NOT MATTER), forces players to sail the f..k out

                 Neg : Conquest around the map(SOME MIGHT NOT LIKE IT), Abuse through alt accounts,(who is this guy who bought the flag, wtf is going on) Abuse through

                          multiple flag buys(although this is the only way of confusing enemy and forcing him to sail out)--imo this could be prevented by 72 hours cooldown on regions to

                          avoid player attrition,and buying simultaneously ONLY 3 flags.

                       

2. HOSTILITY : Pos : Idea of FRONTLINE, PvP  self explanatory due the presence of friends and foes,(which are considered as such:) )  focus on certain areas.

                         Neg: Blockbuilding(again),danger of "forever trying to rise hostility" ,NATIONS NUMBERS MATTER,unability to operate "mapwide",absence of surprise and

                                 unpredictability leads to static, in long terms boring conquest.

Myself prefer FLAGS because of the named positive aspects. I would like to dicuss with my fellows in clan, and other clans in nation which areas are needed,and we can decide on our own where to go.

Dynamic conquest does not force me to focus on regions which are useless,have no resources,but because of the game mechanics HAVE to be taken.Blue,red or yellow dots on the map DO NOT MATTER, silver,gold and refits do.:)

With a given cooldown of AT LEAST 96 hours, it is worth for a nation to make an effort,conquer the region,AND gather resources in case of being defeated after cooldown by previous owner.

Player attrition is not given, because the conquest can be organized by anyone,anywhere,for whatever the reasons.Take part or don`t.

I hope one day there will be some sort of campaign for each nation.That is what i would like to see

Thank you for reading.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Fenris

[Elric]

I like the idea of hostility generation, but the amount of AI grinding is awful.  In the testbed it is just about impossible to raise aggression - they are just too few enemy fleets of the right nation in the area.

Flags would be OK providing there is a 1-2 day lag between pulling the flag and the battle.  Plus, I do think having a preset range of possible attack hours like in the past would help.  Maybe 4 hours instead of the 2 hours in the past.

I would like to see the defensive side have more control over when the battles occur - and not in the middle of a weekday, or in the middle of the night.

[Fenris]

29 minutes ago, ElricTheTwo said:

I like the idea of hostility generation, but the amount of AI grinding is awful.  In the testbed it is just about impossible to raise aggression - they are just too few enemy fleets of the right nation in the area.

Flags would be OK providing there is a 1-2 day lag between pulling the flag and the battle.  Plus, I do think having a preset range of possible attack hours like in the past would help.  Maybe 4 hours instead of the 2 hours in the past.

I would like to see the defensive side have more control over when the battles occur - and not in the middle of a weekday, or in the middle of the night.

That is why is only option FLAGS OR HOSTILITY. You can not combine both.

Either conquest is static or dynamic.

Choose one.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Fenris

[van der Clam]

Flags should be used for the supporting ports in each region. That would build hostility toward the regional capital. Once a majority of the ports in a region are captured, then the regional capital would pop 46 hours after.

Maybe also the flags should be bought for a time in the future; say 6 or 12 hours to give defense time to prep so there won't be surprised empty PBs. Also, there should only be allowed 2 flags bought within a 12 hour time frame.

Just mho

[Elric]

1 hour ago, Fenris said:

That is why is only option FLAGS OR HOSTILITY. You can not combine both.

Either conquest is static or dynamic.

Choose one.

I don't know that is has to be one or the other - there could be a requirement to gain aggression after the flag is purchased - then the defensive side has the ability to intercept the port battle before it happens. 

I do like the idea of gradually capturing regions one port at a time - then there can be a little more ebb-and-flow than just an all or nothing capture.  If the region capital is harder to capture that would be good too.

[Fenris]

21 minutes ago, van der Decken said:

Flags should be used for the supporting ports in each region. That would build hostility toward the regional capital. Once a majority of the ports in a region are captured, then the regional capital would pop 46 hours after.

Maybe also the flags should be bought for a time in the future; say 6 or 12 hours to give defense time to prep so there won't be surprised empty PBs. Also, there should only be allowed 2 flags bought within a 12 hour time frame.

Just mho

There is no need for preparation of whatever.

Player generated hostility is selfexplanatory. As said, it forces players to sail and search for a fight.

Preparation of all kind does not.

 

6 minutes ago, ElricTheTwo said:

I don't know that is has to be one or the other - there could be a requirement to gain aggression after the flag is purchased - then the defensive side has the ability to intercept the port battle before it happens. 

I do like the idea of gradually capturing regions one port at a time - then there can be a little more ebb-and-flow than just an all or nothing capture.  If the region capital is harder to capture that would be good too.

We had gradually capturing ports at the time.If you implement such thing, you need to lower the price for the flag, and that causes abuse. Otherwise the conquest is too slow and becomes again too static.

Expensive flags for regions would prevent abuse.Even if you can buy few of them to confuse the enemy.

And also as said, PREPARATION is bad for small nations.

[Fellvred]

1 hour ago, Fenris said:

That is why is only option FLAGS OR HOSTILITY. You can not combine both.

Either conquest is static or dynamic.

Choose one.

Could maybe change the 'flag' into a battle marker which the attacker would place at sea in an enemy region.  For each hour the marker is defended hostility would increase by x%. 

The defenders would need to interact with the battle market location (or kill an AI ship in an always open battle at the location?) to stop the hostility increase. With any luck this would push defenders to actually defend and attackers could increase hostility quickly if no defenders were around.

 

[Fenris]

Just now, Fellvred said:

Could maybe change the 'flag' into a battle marker which the attacker would place at sea in an enemy region.  For each hour the marker is defended hostility would increase by x%. 

The defenders would need to interact with the battle market location (or kill an AI ship in an always open battle at the location?) to stop the hostility increase. With any luck this would push defenders to actually defend and attackers could increase hostility quickly if no defenders were around.

 

Sounds like it could last forever?

I think most players need more "instant" action, than generating hostility for too long. We seen that AI shooting hostility did not work properly.It is frustrating,boring,almost never fun in it.

Scheduled PB, scheduled conquest as such, does not motivate players to sail and "search and destroy". We sit in ports and teleport ships to PB."Yaay".

Using PVP marks as admin suggested, to buy flags, would provide abuse,and allow instant action, motivating players to SAIL OUT and do PVP.

I am still convinced, that the "old flags" just needed to be improved, instead of being removed.

And PVP marks as currency for flags would provide that.

[Fenris]

1 minute ago, Hodo said:

I like the hostility system, it just needed a lot of work.  Work that most people didnt want to put into it, including the devs.

Shooting AI is fun?

Maybe to grind XP,not to gain a region for resources or refits.

Announce yourself 2 days ahead and lose PB anyway? That fun? You are kidding right?

[sveno]

IMHO

Flags should toggle a raid, if that raid is won, that should toggle a PB after 46 hours.

Like this, setting a PB is less grindy. When the flag is crafted, it should be announced and listed as in the old conpuest flag days.

This gives the defender two options to defend a port.

i would like that!

[Fenris]

31 minutes ago, sveno said:

IMHO

Flags should toggle a raid, if that raid is won, that should toggle a PB after 46 hours.

Like this, setting a PB is less grindy. When the flag is crafted, it should be announced and listed as in the old conpuest flag days.

This gives the defender two options to defend a port.

i would like that!

Scheduled PB is not an option for a small nation.

Should know that. Announce attack on a region and you have,as always, a screening problem. Go figure

Leads to frustration and attrition.

Raid should not have anything to do with PB, but only RAIDING, which is a good opportunity for PvP and loot.

[Anolytic]

42 minutes ago, Fenris said:

Should know that. Announce attack on a region and you have,as always, a screening problem. Go figure

Once all teleportation magic is purged from the game, screening will be less of a problem and smaller nations will likely be less disadvantaged. Each nation will have an area within which they can field more than decent numbers and screen away attackers. For more populated nations the radius of this area will be larger than for small nations, as it should be, and between the edges of these areas we can have lots of fun port battles with front-lines moving back and forth.

Without teleportation ability the 46 hour (or 24 hour ideally) preparation system could actually shine.

Also, the most fun fights were always the ones over nameless ports with only honour and glory on the line, rather than the unbalanced resources and refits that made RvR affect too heavily also players that take no part in it. 

[Bach]

5 hours ago, Fenris said:

Shooting AI is fun?

Maybe to grind XP,not to gain a region for resources or refits.

Announce yourself 2 days ahead and lose PB anyway? That fun? You are kidding right?

I think you might be looking at this from to narrow a spyglass.  Having some amount of grind stops one player from solo flipping undefended ports late a night.  Further, if I see hostility going up on a home port I can come sink your ass on the OW and not just in a PB.  The open world fights are more dynamic and random. I just see hostility going up. I don't know how many ships you have there and you don't know how many I got coming for you.  Even in this scenario the AI are a wild card that mixes it up as they may or may not be in the pvp battles.    

If you think it's just going to be sailing to a port and grinding NPC unmolested then you were probably already picking on an undefended port anyway.  The port battles themselves aren't always good. If you buy a flag and attack a hemp port while these British guys are attacking an iron port guess what. Since we won't be able to teleport between ports. Your probably waiting two days to fight nothing after buying a flag and fighting nothing. At least with hostility gains you get two chances for PvP. 

Edited April 19, 2017 by Bach

[Fenris]

7 hours ago, Bach said:

I think you might be looking at this from to narrow a spyglass.  Having some amount of grind stops one player from solo flipping undefended ports late a night.  Further, if I see hostility going up on a home port I can come sink your ass on the OW and not just in a PB.  The open world fights are more dynamic and random. I just see hostility going up. I don't know how many ships you have there and you don't know how many I got coming for you.  Even in this scenario the AI are a wild card that mixes it up as they may or may not be in the pvp battles.    

If you think it's just going to be sailing to a port and grinding NPC unmolested then you were probably already picking on an undefended port anyway.  The port battles themselves aren't always good. If you buy a flag and attack a hemp port while these British guys are attacking an iron port guess what. Since we won't be able to teleport between ports. Your probably waiting two days to fight nothing after buying a flag and fighting nothing. At least with hostility gains you get two chances for PvP. 

How many times did you intercept enemies grinding hostility in your waters?

What are the odds finding those? And with the magic teleport to friendly port, it was almost impossible to meet one of them.

And if "enough" people do the right fleet missions, they need to accomplish only 1 of those each , and there is no OW battle.

 

 

[Fenris]

10 hours ago, Anolytic said:

Once all teleportation magic is purged from the game, screening will be less of a problem and smaller nations will likely be less disadvantaged. Each nation will have an area within which they can field more than decent numbers and screen away attackers. For more populated nations the radius of this area will be larger than for small nations, as it should be, and between the edges of these areas we can have lots of fun port battles with front-lines moving back and forth.

Without teleportation ability the 46 hour (or 24 hour ideally) preparation system could actually shine.

Also, the most fun fights were always the ones over nameless ports with only honour and glory on the line, rather than the unbalanced resources and refits that made RvR affect too heavily also players that take no part in it. 

I am not sure i understand what teleportation has to do with screening, even if it goes away.

Buy a worst possible ship, tag enemy, keep in battle. That was screening.(or will remain). And that was the situation with multiple durability ships.

Now, consider human nature and with next patch given 1!!!! Durability ships.

I think there will be no fun in it

[Anolytic]

22 minutes ago, Fenris said:

I am not sure i understand what teleportation has to do with screening, even if it goes away.

Buy a worst possible ship, tag enemy, keep in battle. That was screening.(or will remain). And that was the situation with multiple durability ships.

Now, consider human nature and with next patch given 1!!!! Durability ships.

In ports close to home waters, screening will be massive, yes. But the further you get from the capital, the less people will be sailing there to screen when they can no longer sail there once and then TP 5 ships there. Add to that the new RoE that means you need 24 Vics to tag 25 Vics, and that high BR SoLs will be much harder to produce and come by.

[Fenris]

11 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

In ports close to home waters, screening will be massive, yes. But the further you get from the capital, the less people will be sailing there to screen when they can no longer sail there once and then TP 5 ships there. Add to that the new RoE that means you need 24 Vics to tag 25 Vics, and that high BR SoLs will be much harder to produce and come by.

I see you prefer "neighbour hostility" mode

[Anolytic]

11 minutes ago, Fenris said:

I see you prefer "neighbour hostility" mode

I want frontlines, yes. Like we had with limited flag reach. Although I don't miss the entire flag system per se. I see the benefits of 46 hour preparation time, but it also aggravates the issue of player number imbalances. 

[Bach]

4 hours ago, Fenris said:

How many times did you intercept enemies grinding hostility in your waters?

What are the odds finding those? And with the magic teleport to friendly port, it was almost impossible to meet one of them.

And if "enough" people do the right fleet missions, they need to accomplish only 1 of those each , and there is no OW battle.

 

 

Quite a bit. We actually became known for it. So did many Spanish pvp1 clans.

Its not hard to find them. There is a very logical and predictable sequence of events in most cases.  Of course you aren't going to protect them all. But making a handful of them very hard to flip is entirely possible.  The teleport to friendly port is being discussed in other threads. It is one of the "easy mode buttons" that creeped into the game near the end of last year.  It is entirely unrealistic and against the war simulation.  But in any event, once used they aren't gaining hostility anymore.

If single missions exist that can generate a port flip by themselves then either the Devs will remove them from hostility zones or adjust the amounts of hostility.  Hardly a difficult problem.

You neglected to address the fact that in your preferred method any one player can buy a flag and set a port battle.  So let's explore that one a bit.  The single biggest problem with that is meta-gamers.  If you are playing Britain and attacking the Pirates it might take 25 pirates to defend the port battle.  But what if they can't get a 25 man PB fleet?  Sucks to be beat down to one region. So they log in British Alts. Brits only get x4 port battles. The simply buy x4 flags and set them against French ports on the other side of the map.  Problem solved. The Brits can't attack Pirate ports and unless they want to sail across the Carribean to actually fight the French the get hired and quit the game. Yeah Pirates Win!   The single player pulled flag system is so open for abuse it isn't funny.  Grinding over time, be it grinding players or NPCs, is the best equalizer to meta gaming shinanigans.  But it needs to be tweaked so it becomes favorable for players to meet each other off coasts to OW PvP. 

[Fenris]

13 minutes ago, Bach said:

Quite a bit. We actually became known for it. So did many Spanish pvp1 clans.

Its not hard to find them. There is a very logical and predictable sequence of events in most cases.  Of course you aren't going to protect them all. But making a handful of them very hard to flip is entirely possible.  The teleport to friendly port is being discussed in other threads. It is one of the "easy mode buttons" that creeped into the game near the end of last year.  It is entirely unrealistic and against the war simulation.  But in any event, once used they aren't gaining hostility anymore.

If it was not hard to find them,they did hostility grind totally wrong.

If single missions exist that can generate a port flip by themselves then either the Devs will remove them from hostility zones or adjust the amounts of hostility.  Hardly a difficult problem.

There is no need to do a single mission for hostility grind. Still glad to see there are players around which do not know how to grind hostility in one single try.

You neglected to address the fact that in your preferred method any one player can buy a flag and set a port battle.  So let's explore that one a bit.  The single biggest problem with that is meta-gamers.  If you are playing Britain and attacking the Pirates it might take 25 pirates to defend the port battle.  But what if they can't get a 25 man PB fleet?  Sucks to be beat down to one region. So they log in British Alts. Brits only get x4 port battles. The simply buy x4 flags and set them against French ports on the other side of the map.  Problem solved. The Brits can't attack Pirate ports and unless they want to sail across the Carribean to actually fight the French the get hired and quit the game. Yeah Pirates Win!   The single player pulled flag system is so open for abuse it isn't funny.  Grinding over time, be it grinding players or NPCs, is the best equalizer to meta gaming shinanigans.  But it needs to be tweaked so it becomes favorable for players to meet each other off coasts to OW PvP. 

If the flags are expensive, the abuse is almost impossible.

 

[Bach]

Expensive flags will stop small nation progression just as much as abuses.  There are and inevitably will be some players that develope more money than entire clans. The best merchants, and these guys seldom get the credit in MMO's they deserve, will amass more wealth than some nations active players combined.  I'm not saying I am not open to some form of tweaked flag system. We intercepted many under the old "carry the flag" rules and it was good PvP.  But I just think it's a very hard system to balance and wealth between players is so random I don't think it will really work.