The 2 minute timer cannot stand!:

[Enraged Ewok]

Why?? 

 

Why all these rules to PREVENT battles? Don't get it. Sry.

 

It doesn't prevent a battle. It prevents the freeport gank of:

 

1. Smaller "tag" ship draws a larger ship or fleet outside of dock range into battle

2. Overwhelming fleet undocks and joins/drops from battle instance and joins

 

If you want help, your help MUST be at sea already.

[fox2run]

One free-port gank after the other. Players will always seek advantage... Right now even ganks are boring. In a futile attempt to make OW an equal and less dangerous place it has been disrupted from action and battles.

 

In the short lifetime of the social perk I saw two huge battles developed and the game where fun like in the good old days. One I lost and one I won. 

 

Too long the scare of ganking has taken the forums and the devs as hostages.

 

The price have been an empty game-world for the few.

 

The action is gone. The social aspect has passed away.

Edited September 19, 2016 by fox2run

[Bach]

The flaw in the two minute timer is that the battle join timer is also two minutes. This allows players in ports or battle screens a 20second window to do pop out attacks. All that needs to be done to fix it is to extend the exit port/battle timer to 2min 30sec and leave the join battle that met at 2min. Or something similar.

This past weekend I've watched players of different nations use both methods to gain Suprise attacks.

[Hethwill]

Why?? 

 

Why all these rules to PREVENT battles? Don't get it. Sry.

 

Invisibility.

 

Coming out of port, coming out of battle, is the same.

 

Or else an entire fleet can stay in battle ( not in battle screen ) and suddenly materialize out of thin air and join any squadron that did bite a "bait".

 

Same could be done resorting to a port, having a fleet hiding and then unleashing on any squadron that did bite a "bait".

 

... we've tested and exploited the possibilities. C'mon... you talk about ganks but apparently you've never been caught in one that actually abused the extended timers with no cool downs.

[fox2run]

No. But I have seen player base drop to 25%. I have been ganked terrible under the 2 min rule. I have been denied action with "battle is closed" a million times.

 

I wonder which problem is biggest...

[Hethwill]

No. But I have seen player base drop to 25%. I have been ganked terrible under the 2 min rule. I have been denied action with "battle is closed" a million times.

 

I wonder which problem is biggest...

 

Let's establish one thing. No more talking about population. We do not have the numbers, devs do. Are you a Dev ? No. Neither am I.

 

Back to the discussion at hand - why 2 minutes work and how imperfect it still is.

[fox2run]

Let's establish one thing. No more talking about population. We do not have the numbers, devs do. Are you a Dev ? No. Neither am I.

 

Back to the discussion at hand - why 2 minutes work and how imperfect it still is.

Actually we have. There is no doubt at all. The steam stats says it all. And the log on counter. It's dying compared to the action filled days with longer timers. 2 min is the wrong answer. Safe zones or some kind of a convoy system would be better. This game is too fixed on a small group of players with too much sparetime. 

[jodgi]

So even if we saw him the 2mn timer wasn't enough to answer the call.

It has to be with good wind. That way a cheeky attacker can tag someone with help far downwind but still in drawrange. That opens up for tactics using wind, a lot like attacking with impunity from high altitude in flightsims.

We can't design the game so everyone soloing in a free buccy can just wander off to farm bots and always be safe in the knowledge that help will always be available. How many ganks do people need to suffer before they plan accordingly? It's not rocket science.

[akd]

Actually we have. There is no doubt at all. The steam stats says it all. And the log on counter. It's dying compared to the action filled days with longer timers. 2 min is the wrong answer. Safe zones or some kind of a convoy system would be better. This game is too fixed on a small group of players with too much sparetime. 

 

The devs have added more ships as population declined, therefore adding ships has killed the game.  Devs must immediately remove new ships to save it!

[fox2run]

It has to be with good wind. That way a cheeky attacker can tag someone with help far downwind but still in drawrange. That opens up for tactics using wind, a lot like attacking with impunity from high altitude in flightsims.

We can't design the game so everyone soloing in a free buccy can just wander off to farm bots and always be safe in the knowledge that help will always be available. How many ganks do people need to suffer before they plan accordingly? It's not rocket science.

 

No. It's just very, very boring to wait for days or even weeks for a big battle that once where easy to get to within minutes. The game got boring. That's all.

Edited September 19, 2016 by fox2run

[fox2run]

To succeed we need:

 

Easy access to the action part. Bigger battles. More battles.

 

Cheaper ships so no one is reluctant to loose them (or a honor system that favor the bold).

 

Easy ways to participate in PBs and or other aspects of the game. 

 

A game not dependent on heavy time consuming and TS.

 

Maybe some kind of system where people fight instead of surrendering. Gives fun instead of white flags.

Edited September 19, 2016 by fox2run

[Vernon Merrill]

To succeed we need:

 

World of Warships with Sails.

P.S.--  Did you get fired from Teamspeak Corp. or something.  You're very agro about it.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Vernon Merrill

[jodgi]

Actually we have. There is no doubt at all. The steam stats says it all. And the log on counter. It's dying compared to the action filled days with longer timers. 2 min is the wrong answer. Safe zones or some kind of a convoy system would be better. This game is too fixed on a small group of players with too much sparetime.

Anyone can say things. Show us the correlation between player numbers and 5 min timers, then two min timers, then the introduction and disabling of the social perk. Cross check your numbers with the inevitable steady decline from the EA craze with bumps every time a content patch hit. Ponder the numbers, don't forget the dates and report back if there is a statistically significant correlation that supports your assumptions.

If not, this is all just hot air.

It's ok that you prefer the chaotic and snowballing large fights to the deliberate and skill based OW-hunting that is enabled by short timers.

Also, doom and gloom won't get you far.

[fox2run]

This has been done in another place. It is without doubt that the player base went bad since Marts and April when timers where cut

[jodgi]

To succeed we need:

 

Easy access to the action part. Bigger battles. More battles.

 

Cheaper ships so no one is reluctant to loose them (or a honor system that favor the bold).

 

Easy ways to participate in PBs and or other aspects of the game. 

 

A game not dependent on heavy time consuming and TS.

 

Maybe some kind of system where people fight instead of surrendering. Gives fun instead of white flags.

You know, with no strings attached I fully share the above whishlist. (Except I don't pine for big battles, I prefer smaller engagements.)

[fox2run]

It's like action and big fun battles is terrible in your eyes. But don't worry. You will probably win and the empty sea will be yours... 

 

"Battle is closed"

Edited September 19, 2016 by fox2run

[jodgi]

...without doubt...

I distrust a statistical analysis with no numbers and an absolute statement.

[Enraged Ewok]

It's like action and big fun battles is terrible in your eyes. But don't worry. You will probably win and the empty sea will be yours... 

 

"Battle is closed"

 

I have no issue with this, because 90% of my battles start when a timer above myself or my target hits 0, and starts and stays as a 1v1 or 2v2. As I've said, and others have said. We don't all want big battles every time all the time. A lot of us like smaller engagements. Currently we can have both big and small battles, yet you would change OW ROE to ensure to the best of your ability that every battle spirals into a giant clusterfuck and deny the ability to ever have a small battle outside rare occurences far from port, and in the duel room. Why should the ROE cater to you and solely to you? 

[fox2run]

I have no issue with this, because 90% of my battles start when a timer above myself or my target hits 0, and starts and stays as a 1v1 or 2v2. As I've said, and others have said. We don't all want big battles every time all the time. A lot of us like smaller engagements. Currently we can have both big and small battles, yet you would change OW ROE to ensure to the best of your ability that every battle spirals into a giant clusterfuck and deny the ability to ever have a small battle outside rare occurences far from port, and in the duel room. Why should the ROE cater to you and solely to you? 

 

small 1 vs 1 battles should maybe be at the "mission" or duels? Guys like you kills the fun waiting for a 1 vs 1 outside free ports (or rather 1 vs 4)... 2 min does not work. Im sorry. 

[jodgi]

It's like action and big fun battles is terrible in your eyes.

I like action and fun battles, you can do the big ones and I can look for smaller ones. Long timers very often force big battles on everyone and takes away almost all clever OW hunting, positioning and risk assessment. Long timers give you one thing: Big battles, but it takes away many skill based components of OW gameplay.

[fox2run]

I like action and fun battles, you can do the big ones and I can look for smaller ones. Long timers very often force big battles on everyone and takes away almost all clever OW hunting, positioning and risk assessment. Long timers give you one thing: Big battles, but it takes away many skill based components of OW gameplay.

 

"Battle is closed" is a no go - sorry to say. No game can survive that. Now around 400-800 players log on in avg. Before this number where 2000 on pvp1 alone. Some action has to be made. I almost give up on finding battles. It takes too long. I log on and craft some times. But thats it. Yesterday i lost an evening trying to find a battle. Only one was as a member of a ganking group and the only ships found surrendered after 3 min in battle. Whats the fun in that? I play other games now. Its a shame becourse I loved the game as it was before the 2 minutes killed everything. 

 

To have a chance for fun you need to: 

 

Be on TS for hours on end

 

To play for month to get some ships

 

Like small battles or trading hunting.

 

To like ganking small victims.

 

 

 

2 min favour all that. Im not that kind of player and I guess 75% aint that too.... so...

Edited September 19, 2016 by fox2run

[Anne Wildcat]

No. It's just very, very boring to wait for days or even weeks for a big battle that once where easy to get to within minutes. The game got boring. That's all.

To me it sounds like the open world is not for you; you are looking for an age of sail arena combat game. Sorry, that is not NA. If you find one, let me know & I'll play that and NA.

Maybe mods need to change big/small battles in the missions tab so you do not lose your ship or crew when sinking, similar to how duels are?

Edited September 19, 2016 by Anne Wildcat

[Enraged Ewok]

snip

 

 

*Sail in 6th or 5th rate to a high traffic area (capitals, other freeports)

*Stand off up the coast or off the coast, using land or distance to hide yourself

*pick fights with passing enemy ships or traders

 

Fixed that for you. Guaranteed action within 30 minutes. Cap traders, fight 1v1s. Start your own battles and use wind and land to gain the upper hand in OW before the battle. No need to go hunting for battle markers. No need for AI fleet, no need for friends if you picked a ship right and aren't alt+tabbed for netflix.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Enraged Ewok

[fox2run]

*Sail in 6th or 5th rate to a high traffic area (capitals, other freeports)

*Stand off up the coast or off the coast, using land or distance to hide yourself

*pick fights with passing enemy ships or traders

 

Fixed that for you. Guaranteed action within 30 minutes. Cap traders, fight 1v1s. Start your own battles and use wind and land to gain the upper hand in OW before the battle. No need to go hunting for battle markers. No need for AI fleet, no need for friends if you picked a ship right and aren't alt+tabbed for netflix.

 

I dont know how long you played this. But I can tell you: this game was FANTASTIC back in february... Now its just... boring... sorry... not my mistake... 2 min killed the old spirit somehow.

 

Back then you could almost always join an ongoing battle. They where fun and exciting - no option to surrender just to save your men - it was fight to the end! The armour was a bit lesser so it was sink or die!

 

It was thrilling and everyone was doing the best also in uneven fights. Now players surrender to save some perks. And in good time before a leak. Its bloody boring in a gaming point of view. 

 

Its realism when it goes wrong. When realism is done right it is doing some good for gameplay. Sid Meier would never make such boring changes for a game like this as it has been done here.

Edited September 19, 2016 by fox2run

[Anne Wildcat]

@fox2run

Please vote in my poll.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/16515-remove-loss-of-durability-from-smalllarge-battles-under-missions/?p=313931