Preliminary discussion of the changes to conquest - clan wars are coming

[Prater]

1 hour ago, oleander said:

If they can do it without a wipe I'm all for it, I don't want to have  to grind...again. That's just a lot of moving to be done, you're talking about a lot of ports that are going to change. I guess we will see what happens.

 

You can enter an enemy port with a trader, but unless something has changed you can't build an outpost there. At least the game has never let me do it...

But if you had an outpost in there before, you don't lose your stuff if an enemy takes over.  you can still get it out with a trader and contraband.  You can't use the buildings if I remember right either.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Prater

[Jonathan Arlington]

I want to be honest. This is the worst idea I heard. It kills the sense of Nations, it kills the pb-experience for smaller clans, it will bring endless civil wars. At least the only faction which will enjoy this are Pirates because they are not meant to be a Nation at all. If you want this make a game where every Nation is an AI and all players are Pirates.

But this ... this is ... just worse.

[Hawkwood]

3 hours ago, admin said:

-snip-

 

Brave new conquest world....Sceptical about this.See exploits everywhere

Since nothing happened with Raids, new Pirate mechanics, new boarding system, new alliance system/politics, economy, or whatever else was being considered once upon a time, i will keep my "LIKE" vote for mself.

Wait and see.

 

Edit:

Edited out the full quote as it becomes a wall of text. - Moderating team

[oleander]

18 minutes ago, Prater said:

But if you had an outpost in there before, you don't lose your stuff if an enemy takes over.  you can still get it out with a trader and contraband.  You can't use the buildings if I remember right either.

Right, and you get your stuff back if your nation recaptures. But, if they are doing away with port capture, you would essentially lose it forever.

So looking at things one by one for now. This tax concept, I kind of like it. Good way for Companies to make steady income. I do have a question about what happens to the money once it is collected. Does it just go into a "bank", does it go to the founder, does it get spread out evenly among Company members, can it be shared manually, can you set up ranks and set up a share percentage for each rank? You could theoretically set up a loan system with this, and if the player doesn't pay back the loan they acquire a bounty and can be hunted by anyone, or maybe just hunted by anyone in the same Company. That would be cool.

 

Edited August 2, 2017 by oleander

[Prater]

3 minutes ago, Cortez said:

Since nothing happened

Raids, they said was pointless.
new Pirate mechanics:  pirates have new mechanics, and newer ones were coming down the road, so you are wrong here.
new boarding system was never promised.
new alliance and politics system came and went, wrong here again.
economy has frequently changed
plenty of other stuff has been developed and put in the game, so you are wrong here again.

[Hawkwood]

Just now, Prater said:

Raids, they said was pointless.
new Pirate mechanics:  pirates have new mechanics, and newer ones were coming down the road, so you are wrong here.
new boarding system was never promised.
new alliance and politics system came and went, wrong here again.
economy has frequently changed
plenty of other stuff has been developed and put in the game, so you are wrong here again.

sure sure

 

[Archaos]

5 minutes ago, Cortez said:

Brave new conquest world....Sceptical about this.See exploits everywhere

Since nothing happened with Raids, new Pirate mechanics, new boarding system, new alliance system/politics, economy, or whatever else was being considered once upon a time, i will keep my "LIKE" vote for mself.

Wait and see.

Please highlight the exploits that you see so maybe they can be eliminated before it goes live. I think there will be many but that is the whole point of them opening it up to discussion, gives us time to think about it and highlight where it works and where it does not.

[Prater]

3 minutes ago, oleander said:

Right, and you get your stuff back if you nations recaptures. But, if they are doing away with port capture, you would essentially lose it forever.

Except you missed the part where I said they could allow you to transfer, or you can still transfer by going in with a contraband flag and trader.  Lot of work, yes, but I've had to move several outposts in the past when freeports and ports changed.  I think I had to move a port that took 25 trips once because the devs changed something.

 

5 minutes ago, Cortez said:

sure sure

For someone who joined in June, how would you know?

[Hawkwood]

1 minute ago, Prater said:

Except you missed the part where I said they could allow you to transfer, or you can still transfer by going in with a contraband flag and trader.  Lot of work, yes, but I've had to move several outposts in the past when freeports and ports changed.  I think I had to move a port that took 25 trips once because the devs changed something.

 

For someone who joined in June, how would you know?

reading developers news and announcements. do you?

Edited August 2, 2017 by Cortez

[SUN]

in some nations will be zero national war company then all ports will be controled by players from war companies from other nations this mean that all non war company players of that nation will be ganged 24/7 in their own nations ports and no need for their ennemy to make a trip for that they be based in the same port just go out and hunt

mean trade will be dead!

sugestion: to allow the members of a war company to be from diffrent nations!

[Prater]

4 minutes ago, Cortez said:

reading developers news and announcements. do you?

You obviously don't play the game, read the patch notes, or closely read the developer news then, otherwise you could see how your statements are wrong.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Prater

[Hawkwood]

2 minutes ago, Prater said:

You obviously don't play the game, read the patch notes, or closely read the developer news then, otherwise you could see how your statements are wrong.

Tbh, not much playing because( don`t say it any further) it is a bit boring.

But hey, it is early access   or like Forrest Gump would say " it`s like a box of chocolates, you never know what youre gonna get"...

[DeRuyter]

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

I honestly think this is all a step in the right direction, but what I'd like to see is divorce players from nations all together. For a long time I've asked for players to start out "nation-less" and instead have reputations with each nation. The more trade, PvE, and PvP against/for a nation that a player does, have that contribute to the % tax, likelihood on a fort to fire, etc. on individual players or on individual war clans, etc.

Leave the nations a backdrop to the social aspect to the game, make it interact with it, but don't make the tapestry of the nations be the canvas. Let clans and players form their own relationships with nation states.  

 

2 hours ago, Prater said:

^^ This right here.  To then enter a nation's ports, you have to have decent relations with that nation.  Attack that nation's players or ai too many times, and you can't enter their ports anymore.  So everyone starts off neutral, and anyone can attack anyone, but you will harm your relations with that nation by attacking them.  Pirates, of course, would start off negative with everyone.

An answer to the purpose of nations and a good way to keep some history in the world. Kind of reminds me of Sid Meier's "Pirates" - If you kept attacking a nations ships and ports eventually you couldn't enter that port or the merchants wouldn't trade with you. You did choose a nation starting out though. In the suggestion above players would essentially be privateers maybe working for a company or maybe not. Need to work out mechanics like starting area or what flag you ship flies, etc.

Speaking of flags - with the war companies you should be able to create and fly a company flag on your ship.

[Jean Ribault]

How tax coin will be collected and re-distributed has been guessed at a few times in this thread so far, but nothing definitive.  Also why nations exist.

So tying them together, my suggestion here is that the Admiralty of each nation takes their "cut" of all taxes, which everyone in that nation benefits from in the form of a national's discount on port goods.  For example sugar costs 20% less for French national in a French port, compliments of the Admiralty.  Spanish pay 100%, not the 80% cost.  Same for ships available for purchase at the port.  Then the taxes actually would mean something to every player in the nation, not just those working within the war company.

After Admiralty takes its cut, the war party gets the rest and it's split evenly.  (At this point, I see alts making inroads to exploit the takings; need to divert this).  I suggest at first that the Admiralty takes a 80% cut.

There is an incentive here for the war party, and also for the national.

 

EDIT: If a war company holds power in another nation, yes that other nation reaps financial benefits as a result, and it should.  But the war party does too.  Helps keep nations and being part of a nation having more meaning.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Jean Ribault

[Arthur Peckington]

3 hours ago, Christendom said:

EVE with sails.  and I'm ok with that.  The game needs more players to test a system like this.  I think it's time to merge the servers and get the band back together @rediii  :-)

I think this would be the time to do it if they are putting flag type mechanics back in since you can set the defense timer. Let's get the servers back together!

[Rikard Frederiksen]

Firstly, I'd like to thank @admin and the team for telling us of their idea and asking for our feedback. I didn't think you guys would want to do that again, after past experiences, but I'm glad you have this time.

I like that these War Companies will be able to set up their own princedoms, as it were, and that they can use the port(s) under their control to make money to support their expansion or protect what they've already got. I like that it allows players like myself, being in an OW PvP clan, to get on with what we enjoy; hunting down targets and giving them a cannon shot or two. The general idea is good and I'd actually quite like to see it.

However, I'm also a little concerned about one or two elements. As was raised earlier in the thread this idea of allowing 'normal' clan members to enter any nation port is problematic. A proposed solution was for only allowing 6-7th Rates to visit any port, which I quite like as they're the ships I sail (isn't bias terrible?). However, I'd advocate for trader ships only. No longer will you require the smuggler tag, you just waltz into the port you want to visit on a trading ship. That way the main threat will be warships from the nation where that port lays, or those out hunting and patrolling the waters of other nations.

 

21 minutes ago, SUN said:

in some nations will be zero national war company then all ports will be controled by players from war companies from other nations this mean that all non war company players of that nation will be ganged 24/7 in their own nations ports and no need for their ennemy to make a trip for that they be based in the same port just go out and hunt

mean trade will be dead!

I would argue the opposite. The ships sailing into that port are taxpayers for the War Company that runs the port. Without the taxpayers the War Company makes no money from the port. Ergo, theoretically, it means the War Company will have to protect shipping around their port(s) to protect their income. If traders are being sunk they won't get the tax from them. If traders are being sunk, it is harder to get materials into port. Therefore trading ships in the area near the port are the responsibility of the War Company. However, whether that would be how it worked in reality, I do not know.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Rikard Frederiksen

[Jean Ribault]

Just now, Arthur Peckington said:

I think this would be the time to do it if they are putting flag type mechanics back in since you can set the defense timer. Let's get the servers back together!

This suggestion didn't mention a single thing about merging nor did it ask for anyone to discuss the topic of merging.  Quit beating the same old drum and make another topic for that.  It's irrelevant to this suggestion, whether you want it or not.  A non-merge doesn't make this idea unworkable, so stay on the topic and quit de-railing it.

[admin]

2 hours ago, EliteDelta said:

Well, these war companies can solve they're own disputes with internal factions, whereas the nations could not.

Lets say two clans are part of the same war company. They have a major dispute, and one joins a different war company. Now these two clans (that are part of different war companies) can go to war on the OW and in RvR, but there's no need for a mass exodus from one nation to another. 

thats exactly why we think national gameplay is becoming irrelevant with lower online. Alts ruin it to the extent it becomes unplayable. National infighting or disagreements do not create a unified nation. Its so bad that if some 10 players who you don't know join the port battle on your side you actually never know if they are going to help or interfere - there is not much trust. 

Even simple things will start to work. In reality if a brit was rogue he was demoted and kicked out of the navy (not currently). You will be able to punish rvr players by kicking from clan.

Edited August 2, 2017 by admin

[Arthur Peckington]

2 minutes ago, Jean Ribault said:

This suggestion didn't mention a single thing about merging nor did it ask for anyone to discuss the topic of merging.  Quit beating the same old drum and make another topic for that.  It's irrelevant to this suggestion, whether you want it or not.  A non-merge doesn't make this idea unworkable, so stay on the topic and quit de-railing it.

The post I quoted mentions needing more players to test properly, so yeah it is relevant to the topic at hand. You are not a mod, nor admin, so you don't control what people discuss in this thread. If you see something you don't like, keep scrolling.

[Daguse]

2 minutes ago, admin said:

thats exactly why we think national gameplay is becoming irrelevant with lower online. Alts ruin it to the extent it becomes unplayable. National infighting or disagreements do not create a unified nation. Its so bad that if some 10 players who you don't know join the port battle on your side you actually never know if they are going to help or interfere - there is not much trust. 

Even simple things will start to work. In reality if a brit was rogue he was demoted and kicked out of the navy (not currently). You will be able to punish rvr players by kicking from clan.

what happens to a port if all the members level the owning company? 

[HardyKnox]

The proposals are confusing and complicated, but they seem to have echoes of the actual Chartered Trading Companies of the 17th and 18th century. They had their own private armies, navies, and bought and paid for government officials, even in nominally democratic republics like England. They fought not over national pride, or nominal ownership of ports, but over something far more important to them. "Who controls the trade and the gold?" After all, that is the basis of The Golden Rule, "He who controls the Gold, Rules." See, e.g. https://www.britannica.com/topic/East-India-Company and also https://www.britannica.com/topic/Dutch-East-India-Company(edited)

[admin]

27 minutes ago, Prater said:

You obviously don't play the game, read the patch notes, or closely read the developer news then, otherwise you could see how your statements are wrong.

Indeed. Alliances were in game for AT LEAST 6 months (maybe even more - someone will correct me if i am wrong). They were removed for rework. The only thing he is correct about is new boarding mechanics which we said we will consider after release.. 

[Jean Ribault]

Just now, Arthur Peckington said:

The post I quoted mentions needing more players to test properly, so yeah it is relevant to the topic at hand. You are not a mod, nor admin, so you don't control what people discuss in this thread. If you see something you don't like, keep scrolling.

Then explain yourself.  How can 300 nightly players on PVP global not test this idea?  It requires clans and clans that make war companies.  That's it.  Doable, so quit hashing over the topic that's been discussed already for year or more.  Oh wait, you've read them all in your 48 posts.

[admin]

another statement on the wipe

There will be no wipe. only map reset. In fact there might be no wipes any more even on release. But its not a promise. 

[Vllad]

2 minutes ago, admin said:

Indeed. Alliances were in game for AT LEAST 6 months (maybe even more - someone will correct me if i am wrong). They were removed for rework. The only thing he is correct about is new boarding mechanics. Pirate republic of Nassau is working fine currently even outlaw battle did not split the nation much (especially for global). 

 

Maybe I missed it but I didn't see you confirm that multiple clans can be part of the same war company.