Ratline

Agree that 3 ships per day is too many. Limit to 1.

This is surely just as true of the current system and will quite possibly apply to all aspects of OW pvp now we've moved to one dura, especially given that they seem to have made crafting more time consuming and transportation of materials more risky. I still feel that having ports flipped in a few hours worth of activity is too quick, more so now that the impact on players of losing a port where they have buildings and assets will be really severe. I agree that the new system is an improvement on what we had before though. You make a fair point regarding activity and pve as the trigger. Personally, if I was designing from teh ground up I'd like to see a system which took all sorts of player activity into account but we're well past the point where that is feasible. Your last point, regarding nation numbers is also good, although I also always thought there were simply too many nations in this game and that splitting of the player base has been one of the constant issues we've faced. Which kinda brings us back to the op, in that further segmenting the players just doesn't seem wise. Amalgamating nations might actually be a way to lessen the impact of night flipping but people like their little national flags too much.

It's closer, but without the npc grind. What you claim to be an 'ordeal' I would see as multiple opportunities to generate OW pvp and emergent, player generated content. It does not need to be so long it becomes painful, but should be long enough to allow forces from each side to react and build rather than logging on and thinking 'Shit, Flash.. we've only go 14 minutes to save the region!', 'oh let's not bother and just fight the PB.' While the new system removes "PvE grind at X hour countered by PvE grind at Y hour" it does not remove PvE grind, which is my whole point. PvE is fine, but pretending it's a good part of PvP I don't buy. The new system also does not resolve timezone issues, at least not entirely so don't believe that. If a group of Russian players decide to grind hostility against a nation largely populated by W. European players while the latter are at work it's pretty much same same.. But nvm, you don't need to bother contesting hostility anyway, just show up for the arena match.

I don't see it happening either, but as I say removing PB does not mean removing conquest or large fleet actions. I love the idea of blockades etc being a part of the game, unlike now. It'd also negate all the sitting in port waiting for port battles to happen stuff. Enemy is blockading your regional capital then you put together a viable fleet and sail out to break the blockade... there's your 'port battle' right there, except now it has a meaningful relationship to what is happening on the OW.

And yet this is exactly what the current system demands. Look, I don't really expect them to remove PB, they're way too invested in the concept,so I'm being slightly facetious but I do think they're pretty bad. The fact that they're having to come up with ever more elaborate and gamey arena rules for them is clearly an indicator of this imo. Personally I've always argued that territorial control based on ships in the water (in OW) + kills for attackers vs kills for defenders would be simpler, lead to more and better pvp and would result in way less bullshit gamey cheesing. The only way to take territory would to be out and exposed to attack, the only way to defend would be to fight. All in OW, no stupid win circles. It would encourage real world tactics such as blockades, defensive patrols etc. Not just a couple of fleets grinding npc like true pve pros. Yeah, you'd still have time zone issues but since everything wouldn't be compacted down to a couple of hours hardcore grinding and a 90min port battle it would be less of an issue. One server would then clearly be the better solution. We're currently heading in teh direction of ever more Byzantine rules and mechanics and ever more localised and divided player groups simply to deny an issue created by the fact that the devs have hinged the entire game around a bad concept.

Indeed, and if anything port battles are far closer to the arena game than proper ow pvp. Perhaps it's the PB afficionados who should be holding out for arena mode so that the OW game can have some decent mechanics.

I never said anything about removing RVR. I've always held that port battles are terrible, unhistorical and simply lead to stupid gamey tactics. It was bad with fantasy flags, it's even worse with magical capture circles and meaningless, abstract war supplies. There must be better ways to encourage OW pvp (pb are rubbish for that.. people grind npc then sit about in port waiting for their oh so bloody important port battle). Territorial control could be done much better and in a way which negates the problems port battles create.

Get rid of port battles, no more night flipping

Definitely needs more flexibility. Personally prefer the 2nd option of mutually exclusive groups. Been testing new player experience and as it stands 50% is really a no go if you're sailing a cutter or the likes. In turn that means new captains will be very vulnerable to being boarded as they learn the ropes, even by AI.

The biggest myth is that access to teleports creates more 'action'. It's rubbish, it does the opposite. Before t/p came in we knew where the action was. It was on the east coast of Jamaica, around western Hispaniola, the windward passage etc.. clans held areas and fought against other clans for ports that actually mattered to them. Switching operations to a new front was a significant logistical effort... it was an event worth noting in game. In short.. the game worked, rvr worked, locality mattered, holding territory mattered. Now it's just a homogeneous magiporting gank fest, which is about to get worse. Teleports reduce the game to an arena with slightly differing backdrops. What's the point of Admin saying he wants to bring OW alive again but then ignoring the one thing doing the most harm to that?

Indeed, and instant t/p + gps map co-ords makes it a terrible decision to bring them back, especially if players are forced into OW post battle. The kind of metagaming with teleports that you describe is exactly why I hate them. Teleports screwed up the game in a big way, but the least destructive to gameplay was the tp to port after battle. What's ironic is that Admin is scrapping this but keeping the truly detrimental form of tp. At the very least teleports need both a cooldown and an activation cost and timer.

Hmm, I want tp between outposts removed and only have the one account. On the other hand I think tp to friendly port after battle should remain (unless other changes are implemented) because revenge gank fleets were a terrible part of this game. I consider people who sit in port waiting for revenge gank fleets to form for easy kills 'carebears' but hey, maybe that's just me

That would be better than nothing, what would also be necessary would be an activation timer before it can be used to stop people tping in from all over the map to join revenge ganks.

Wtf is the point of a HUGE map if everybody can hop about it as if it was tiny? All teleports need to go so that locality actually means something, so that local rivalries can develop and so that small nations can't so easily be bullied by the teleporting, map hopping gank fleets.

See where you're coming from Wraith but I think Texas is probably right on this. Those who can sink huge amounts of hours into the game will have all their unlocks, it's the casuals who will always be in sub-par ships. One way around this could be to allow people to declare a 'primary' ship. They would be able to unlock all 5 slots on this ship without any prerequisites. All other ships they would need to unlock as normal. Perhaps the primary choice could be changed for a hefty donation in marks or something.