Alternatives to the removal of endresult screen

[sveno]

8 minutes ago, Liquicity said:

Tactic of abusing ow speed buff compared to battle speed? So any big ships can easily catch up without any issues?

Sry but thats just bs

You do understand this is EA? We all have to deal with it, manage your expectations.

I am starting to think you might do a break and wait for Naval Legends...
 

[Neptune]

1 minute ago, sveno said:

You do understand this is EA? We all have to deal with it, manage your expectations.

I am starting to think you might do a break and wait for Naval Legends...
 

Mate, look at what this conversation looks like right now. Do you not see that this thread is about fixing an exploit and somehow redii is here trying to defend it saying well "it's okay". If you had no defense for the exploits mentioned and why you shouldn't use them or add to the ideas to fix them than I'm not sure why you guys are on this thread in the first place.

[Neptune]

2 minutes ago, rediii said:

How was it before?

You want the "back to port" back again? that was bulshit and is actually a exploit in my understanding. go somewhere with signaling, kick his ass, repeat

The way you are conducting yourself right now on this thread is not adding any input on how to fix this exploit. Infact you are just here to complain and I don't see a reason why. If  you were concerned about this game and wanted it to do well you would offer new suggestions if you think the teleport to freindly port wasn't good and not be dead set on a mechanic that is absolutely horrendous and very unrealistic.

But you will agree that escaping and then escape again is realistic? Or that a enemy fleet can sneak up on you all stealth ninja style without you knowing with compressed open world speeds while you are in battle? Something seems weird here, and I'm not sure I am the only one that thinks that.

[Liq]

4 minutes ago, rediii said:

How was it before?

You want the "back to port" back again? that was bulshit and is actually a exploit in my understanding. go somewhere with signaling, kick his ass, repeat

Whats wrong with signaling

We said before we support tweaking jt so the defending side could bring in 20% more br or something

I fail to understand how this is bad

[sveno]

4 minutes ago, Neptune said:

Mate, look at what this conversation looks like right now. Do you not see that this thread is about fixing an exploit and somehow redii is here trying to defend it saying well "it's okay". If you had no defense for the exploits mentioned and why you shouldn't use them or add to the ideas to fix them than I'm not sure why you guys are on this thread in the first place.

 

Fair point taken, the discussion being held here might not follow OP intentions.
But, the fact we see what they trying to pull off in-game and seeing they calling exploits repeatedly kinda calls for an answer.

There are different views on what is happening around RoE right now, i think there should be opinions allowed on that.
Wouldn't you agree?
 

[Neptune]

2 minutes ago, rediii said:

Battlescreen was bullshit because people waited for each other.

back to port was bullshit. Easy ganking with no chance in getting the gankers

i actually like the current implementation. 5 Minutes is maybe pretty long, Make that 2 min. Fix the BR ratio if there is a problem.

 

 

Mate the problem isn't the 5 minute timer, It's the revenge fleets surrounding your location. No matter if the battle timer is 1 Hour 30 Minutes or instant close you are screwd either way because enemy will spawn right on top of you.

Oh and It's not just revenge fleets that do it.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Neptune

[Neptune]

2 minutes ago, sveno said:

 

Fair point taken, the discussion being held here might not follow OP intentions.
But, the fact we see what they trying to pull off in-game and seeing they calling exploits repeatedly kinda calls for an answer.

There are different views on what is happening around RoE right now, i think there should be opinions allowed on that.
Wouldn't you agree?
 

Anyway you put it, tagging enemy with a fast fir ship and then keeping them tagged at range until your fleet surrounds them and then leaving is a horrendous mechanic and needs to be adressed. This is just bad for the game and is an exploit to ships speeds.

[Liq]

6 minutes ago, rediii said:

Serious question. Do you want the "back to port" back again even though it's a free card for gankers?

Yes but combined with signaling being default (maybe tweaked with that 20% thingy) which will hurt gankers

You shouldnt have to escape twice

Even admin said so a while ago

But changed his mind apparently

Edited June 1, 2017 by Liquicity

[Neptune]

Just now, rediii said:

dude you are invisible. If they leave battle wait 30 seconds so you see them. I don't know where the problem is.

Just dont sail in front of a capital and expect to get out with slow ships again. there are other places on the map.

 

Serious question. Do you want the "back to port" back again even though it's a free card for gankers?

Mate unless you are not very familar with this game and how we've tested invisibily and it doesn't work. You see invisibilty doesn't matter when you get kicked out of battle because enemy knows you will sail at best point of sail or away from the forts. So you see invisibilty does nothing and enemy will sail beside you until you are tagged.

Now on to the question, do I support exit to freindly port? Well right now I would perfer it over the highly exploitable force out of battle mechanic we have right now. And why? Well the enemy would of escaped anyway in reality because you would have never known it was taking place back in the day, no team speak and no compressed open world speeds.

Would I favour something better than both of these? Yes, I would. But the forcing people out of battle screen to die for no reason even if they were the side outnumberd is ludicrous. This in the long run will force people to quit, they can't leave after a battle even if they were the side that got ganked and escaped. Tey are forced to die even though they escaped.

I'm a lover of naval action, do I want people to quit because they were forced out into a fleet that was called on teamspeak and they have no chance of getting away because of openworld and battle being different instances? No I am not that type of spiteful person that needs revenge that will only cause this game much harm in the end. I want this game to live a nice long healthy life, and with this mechanic it will not. We need something better, and now.

[sveno]

3 minutes ago, Liquicity said:

Yes but combined with signaling being default (maybe tweaked with that 20% thingy) which will hurt gankers

You shouldnt have to escape twice

Even admin said so a while ago

But changed his mind apparently

Ok, so this is what you want (example like you move currently in-game):

Tag (a) ship(s) near Gustavia with your ship(s), denying ships in visual range (there are tons there) to fully support the tagged ships.
And after the fight you expect a fairy to come flying and magically teleport your ship to your harbor for rinse and repeat?

Did i get this correctly?
 

[Liq]

Almost

1.5 - 2 min timer is ok too cause anything in sight should be able to join (after that signaling applies)

But 5 minutes ... Enough time to sail from port to battle location

What you describe as "and there will be lots of them" is 99% of the times the revenge fleet. But if you werent there when the first tag was made,  ships cant just teleport om command to help you out

Conflict between ow and instance speed is just way too massive

After finishing the battle you also escaped. Imagine seeing a revenge fleet sailing to you in hyper speed in the battle. You should not have to escape from them.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Liquicity

[Neptune]

Just now, sveno said:

Ok, so this is what you want (example like you move currently in-game):

Tag (a) ship(s) near Gustavia with your ship(s), denying ships in visual range (there are tons there) to fully support the tagged ships.
And after the fight you expect a fairy to come flying and magically teleport your ship to your harbor for rinse and repeat?

Did i get this correctly?
 

Ok you will admit that exit to freindly port is magical, we know that and we have seen it.

Now the question is, do you agree that being able to camp on top of a enemys battle position and sail to it without them seeing you is magical? Do you agree you should be able to exploit a mechanic by tagging ships with a speed tagger and then having him leave so you can surround the enemy so they have no chance of escaping?  Do you agree that being forced to die even if you were the side that got ganked is good for the game?

It goes both ways mate, you can't pick one. We need to find a solution and not act out towards one or the other.

[Neptune]

15 minutes ago, rediii said:

If you want symmetrical fights wait for the arenagame. This will fit your playstyle perfectly in my oppinion. In this mmo it's possible for players which are not as experienced as you are to gather and still sink your (atm)cheap shop ships.

i actually like the danger if i attack something close of the capital and the chance to get followed after this and become the hunted. It's part of the fun.

You are completely missing the point here. This isn't about fair fights it's about taking advantage of a mechanic and being a poor sport.

Have you read the last 2 pages, it doesn't just happen by capitals it happens anywhere even in your own waters. What part of 1 person being attacked by 4-5 people and then having 5-10 more outside surrounding them do you not understand?

Are you not reading this correctly mate? This is nothing to do with arena it has to do with griefing and exploiting mechanics. In no way is this directed at becoming an arena game.

You cannot actually argue that teleport to freindly port is magical and on the other hand say that sailing to an enemy's battle without them seeing you is not*. That is 2 faced and makes absolutely no sense. You favour one mechanic over the other because one is magical but the truth is both are.

Are you not concerned about what this will do to the game in the long run? You can keep arguing back and forth here but when you keep missing the point it does not matter at all.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Neptune

[Liq]

11 minutes ago, rediii said:

This has 2 sides. Back to port is a free card for gankers. There was NO point whatsover to do a coastguard. Enemys got spotted, people said they need help. Nothing was possible to do, enemy ganked someone and teleported back to port to repeat as usual.

I think here lays our main opinion difference

(keep in mind we support signaling (and buffing it to +20% for def. Side) AND 1.5 - 2 min join timer)

When a group of 5 frigates attack one frigate, with signaling being active, 4 (or maybe even 5 when tweaking signaling) frigates can join and help

How can this be considered as ganking?  IMO such a battle is the best thing you can have in this game (OCEAN still wont actively gank tho)

And if jt was just one frigate attacking one frigate. Def. Side has 120 sec max time to reinforce if anyone was in sight. After that signaling applies.

Is that not fair?

[sveno]

Lets start on what we agree on (much easier this way):

- 5 minutes should be changed to 2 minutes.
- Signaling was/is a nice feature to get balanced fights.
- OW speeds - light vs hvy ships should be reflected (i think they are working on that).

But what i do not agree on at all, is that you in all seriousness expect to be able to tag ships next to a capital and get away EACH TIME, with magic!?

Heresy i call that! Admin clearly aimed for a more realistic gameplay, and i think they got pretty good development in that.

Guys, really, if you are looking to have fights without revenge fleets, maybe move out of spitting distance of one the most active capitals on the map...
 

Edited June 1, 2017 by sveno

[Liq]

But what do you mean with "get away with it"

We are not looking to gank but to have nice equal battles using the changes i suggested in the post above

Can we not get away with having fun?

[Neptune]

1 minute ago, sveno said:

Lets start on what we agree on (much easier this way):

- 5 minutes should be changed to 2 minutes.
- Signaling was/is a nice feature to get balanced fights.
- OW speeds should be same as instance speeds (i think they are working on that).

But what i do not agree on at all, is that you in all seriousness expect to be able to tag ships next to a capital and get away EACH TIME, with magic!?

Heresy i call that! Admin clearly aimed for a more realistic gameplay, and i think they got pretty good development in that.

Guys, really, if you are looking to have fights without revenge fleets, maybe move out of spitting distance of the most active capital on the map...

 

Actually what I'm advocating for is less of the gank fleets coming to my enemy waters and taking advantage of this shitty system. They tag me with a speed ship and then surround me on the open world while I escape only to be tagged again and then have to die, even though I escaped.

Both mechanics support easy mode, but in reality you would never find out about a battle on teamspeak anyway since they didn't have it back in the age of sail. Nor did they have invisible stealth mechanics to creep up on enemy why they are battling

Yeah mate it goes both ways, you are not special and either am I. Both problems need to be adressed, not just yours.

[Liq]

6 minutes ago, sveno said:

Lets start on what we agree on (much easier this way):

- 5 minutes should be changed to 2 minutes.
- Signaling was/is a nice feature to get balanced fights.
- OW speeds - light vs hvy ships should be reflected (i think they are working on that).

But what i do not agree on at all, is that you in all seriousness expect to be able to tag ships next to a capital and get away EACH TIME, with magic!?

Heresy i call that! Admin clearly aimed for a more realistic gameplay, and i think they got pretty good development in that.

Guys, really, if you are looking to have fights without revenge fleets, maybe move out of spitting distance of one the most active capitals on the map...
 

Also on a sidenote

I remember seeing you guys outside kpr often

Sometimes you won, sometimes we won, it was always fun

But i can also remember you guys disappearing after the battles using tp to nearest port

Also right outside a capital

If you were consequent in what you are saying you should have left to open world and dealt with reinforcements

So much fun right?

[Neptune]

Just now, Liquicity said:

But i can also remember you guys disappearing after the battles using tp to nearest port

Well that is unfortunate to hear, I would of thought if they really hated it they wouldn't of taken part in that sort of behaviour.

[sveno]

That was really a very different situation, with different rules and setting.
I do not think that example adds anything to this very discussion.

I wouldn't do what i did there out of a multitude of reasons.
And yes, i also miss small battles, but i am OK to accept that NA is not an arena game, but a honest try to make a realistic naval simulator.
 

[Liq]

I dont see how HRE visiting kpr pre patch is any different to OCEAN visiting gust. Post patch

Right now you are saying you are not a fan of tp to port After battle because one would have to live with the consequences of being next to a capital

Yet you also gladly used the tp to port feature before patch 

I dont blame you for that because revenge fleets are shit and we shouldnt have to deal with them

[sveno]

I like to differ now very much!

Before the patch, HRE (or mixed bag of Swedes and Danes), WAITED for PvP WILLING brits to form FLEETS mostly overmatching ours.

After the patch, OCEAN is tagging mostly UNWILLING not PvP oriented SWEDES doing missions or trade from the capital.

Now, please for the love of god, lets stay reasonable and not derailing into silly argumentations. 
 

[Neptune]

I Mean maybe it's just me but I don't see why you should be granted a free victory in PvP.

My Naval Action Review On Open World Combat.

• The hunters need to find their target, catch them in open world and then in battle. And then they needed to actually win the fight.
• Now that the battle is over and upon leaving it is certain death for you and your mates. You looked for PvP, that is a terrible mistake and you should never under any circumstances do that. Unlike the enemy revenge fleet you earned it but now you shall face your fate of dying to a revenge fleet because you could not run away even though you knew they were outside waiting. Sorry for you the enemy has to do no work to catch you, they get free kills without even having to chase you. They will make you pay for looking for PvP and by the end of it you will not want to PvP anymore. They will use teamspeak like they used back in the age of sail along with the compressed open world speed to get to your battle and ensure you a safe trip home.
• Not only that you will get to face the wrath of the force out to open world mechanic in your own waters as well, enemy will indeed tag you with a speed ship and surround you on the open world. Upon leaving you will meet your fate and it is well deserved, because you were sailing around your own capital.
• This is the type of combat you can expect upon purchasing Naval Action. Expect lots of this behaviour since it is indeed the way some folks need to have the game, they need revenge, they need it right away. And they do NOT want to earn it.  Steam review? No just kidding, hopefully this gets fixed. <3

Edited June 1, 2017 by Neptune

[Liq]

On 1.6.2017 at 3:22 AM, sveno said:

I like to differ now very much!

Before the patch, HRE (or mixed bag of Swedes and Danes), WAITED for PvP WILLING brits to form FLEETS mostly overmatching ours.

After the patch, OCEAN is tagging mostly UNWILLING not PvP oriented SWEDES doing missions or trade from the capital.

Now, please for the love of god, lets stay reasonable and not derailing into silly argumentations. 
 

Okay so next time we will wait for "willing" pvpers to come and have a fight, on a pvp server lol

Problem is people prefer easy mode and tend to only engage at double the numbers (see kpr before patch; I had to tell them not to take lineships for a frigate battle)

Since we dont plan to gank and make batlles relatively fair (except traders ofc) we expect our oponents to be willing to pvp since they got equal chance of winning

If they still are not, pvp server is not for them im afraid

Edited June 6, 2017 by Liquicity

[Neptune]

26 minutes ago, sveno said:

I like to differ now very much!

Before the patch, HRE (or mixed bag of Swedes and Danes), WAITED for PvP WILLING brits to form FLEETS mostly overmatching ours.

After the patch, OCEAN is tagging mostly UNWILLING not PvP oriented SWEDES doing missions or trade from the capital.

Now, please for the love of god, lets stay reasonable and not derailing into silly argumentations. 
 

Am I wrong here but, if players are on the PvP server and aren't willing combatants then can you explain to me why they are on a PvP server? Is that not what the server is for, PvP? I cannot quite understand this, please enlighten me sir.

Now read this and tell me if something is wrong with this type of game play? Think about the big picture, and not you or your clan but how it effects everyone on the game.

I see the problem with both mechanics and the truth is we need a new one. Maybe spawn a certain distance away from the where the battle was at and not to port? Just brainstorming, but I'm sure we can come up with some sort of middle ground to avoid exploits.

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by Neptune