Two type of Port battles = Allowing server merged + dynamic&balanced RvR

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

 Hi fellow captains,

Port battles have been the subjects of a great number of topics. They are a key asset in the RvR mechanisms and have changed quite few time up to the point we are now: there is nearly no contested pb anymore.

 I know devs are working on hostility missions atm and they seems to be working on how RvR could work better via improving how pb are launched, how to prevent alt abuse and griefing, and maybe even work on a future merge of the two pvp servers.

 

Here I come with two simple concepts that could work whatever they are working on right now in term of hostility etc. and allow for better RvR between nations with population disparity in term of numbers, organisation and time zones.

 

1> Once requirements to set a port battle are reached, the attacker can choose between two type of operations: Naval battle or Land operation.

2>  When an operation is selected the defending side is alerted via pop up+ mail about the operation, same for the attacker and his allies.

3> By selecting an operation, both sides and up to two of their allied clans get access to a flag item.

The flag carrier is listed as flagship this allow him to create a port battle group and invite up to 25 clanmates like actual battle groups.

Flag item is active only for the targeted port and dissapear after the pb

 

[ LANDING OPERATION ]

 

• landing operation flag must be brought to the targeted port

Once placed, both sides have 24h to bring any quantity of war supplies. If defender don t bring any, it s the stock already present on port + the combat value of present forts and towers that is taken in account. War supplies and fortifications  define the number of troops and guns for each side of the siege

After this delay, each admiral have the option everyday to set a command for his land troops ala Rock Paper Scissors ( entrenching/ mines/ artillery fire/ assault) Resolution of each day of fight is solved during maintenance.

Troops from each sides must be supplied with provisions to continue the fight. They consume provisions each days depending on their numbers.

if a party loose by the lack of supplies or have no more troop able to fight due to combat losses, the port battle is lost.

=> economic war if a clan lack a powerful pb fleet

=> ship movements around targeted ports and increased potential ow pvp against cargo fleets bringing supplies then provisions.

=> open the possibility for merge with global server as those battles allow for contests between clans not playing on the same time zone.

 

[ NAVAL BATTLES ]

 

• The naval battle flag open for a port battle like we have now after a 22h delay during the time window if set by the defender or the server.

This flag allow the bearer to group up to 25 clans mates in a limit of 25 slots.

Depending on the pb category (shallow, 4th or lineship) each ship model count for one slot or more (for exemple in a lineship port battle, agga count for 1 slot, bello 1.5, pavel2, bucc 2.5, victory 3 and santi 3.5. While in 4th, agga could count for 3, indef 2.5, trinco 2, surprise 1.5, cerb 1) pure exemples values.

The admiral ship (flag bearer) enter the pb with all his group, after that, one or two allied admirals can enter with their groups in the limit of 25 players per sides.

When a naval battle flag offensive or offensive is paid for, only the two rvr clans allied to the bearer can still buy one for this port (if the targeted port is not controlled by their nation) by doing so they don t set a new pb but are allowed to create pbgroups able to join the pb next to their Allie.

=> Naval port battles allow for more ship setup and variety, favoring tactics and less an economic domination tool as we know now, where the one able to produce and gather 25 first rates Rule the pb.

=> mitigate the formation of super clans in nations where one clan regroup the whole rvr players, and favorise working with allied clans

=> assistance in pb from a clan from another nation allow small nation with a smaller player base to remain competitive even in lineship pb. Same for the slots limitations.

 

Of course the naval battle is the essence of naval action, the landing operation can be dropped if the devs and players don t feel the need for the pvp servers merges.

But both operations could be viable anyway. And they both serve the purpose of balancing port contests between unbalanced nations. Allowing weaker nations and clans to have chance to take part and initiate pb and removing the 25 of the best ship untold rule.

I hope devs will take a look into it as I seriously think this could be a game changer to succès and fun.

 

please comment and tell me what you think of it and how this could be improved?

 

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

 

• The naval battle flag open for a port battle like we have now after a 22h delay during the time window if set by the defender or the server.

 

(My underlining) How exactly will this differ from the already tested lord protector system? - the brits and the US will just place all deff timers in the US timezone and everyone else will only be able to attack them in the weekends while they can attack at leisure. It's been tried, it's been tested and it's been found wanting. I'll rather drink terpentine and piss on a brushfire than test that again - almost as bad as the nightflips.

As for the "landing" goes.. It sounds awfully PvE and dull to me. The notion to try and "mix" up the BR in PBs has been suggested by others and is something I really find intriguing. The 25 1st rates in PBs is actually somewhat dull and repetitive whereas a BR cap would make for different mix' according to the deff map.

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

Naval battles don t differ, there is no way a naval battle can be contested between a clan playing in Belgium and a clan playing in Australia so with or without pb windows,    You can t have a naval battle when your enemy is not connected so I suggest nothing new for that matter. Either keep it on separate servers, or bring back lord protector as long as another kind of operation is available to switch port regardless of the defender time zone.

 

For that situation, the landing operation stand as the way to go.

i don t see what is pve in it ? Are boarding pve to you? Dull, maybe a little as it s not a live action and we don t have ui and illustration yet. (I would love some kind of ultimate-general like land battles but will never happen) instead this landing ops suggestion is here to incitate the formation of screening patrols, provisions convoy etc.. meaning pvp potential in the ow. Maybe make ow pvp in the port zone count for victory points, the idea is a conquest process requesting naval activity in the zone.

 

and yes about naval port battles, i think 25vs 25 of a same best ship is a problem in game with the kind of population we have as someone not able to bring that king of lineup will simply not do RvR.

I think the slots suggestions is a better idea to implement the br cap idea as its easier to organise and allow asymmetrical balance in number vs power. Instead of simply filling the br with the max of the best ships. Br don t reflect the combat value gap between a 3rd rate and an ocean, slots are a solution to that.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Skully]

4 minutes ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

Naval battles don t differ, there is no way a naval battle can be contested between a clan playing in Belgium and a clan playing in Australia so with or without pb windows,    You can t have a naval battle when your enemy is not connected so I suggest nothing new for that matter. Either keep it on separate servers, or bring back lord protector as long as another kind of operation is available to switch port regardless of the defender time zone.

And herein lies a fundamental problem. What if the Australians show up, but the Belgiums never do (not even on their own timeslot)?

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

If you are talking about fake attacks, it is an hostility / flag cost matter and I ve said in intro that my suggestions are strictly about contests, not how they are triggered.

 

And If they don t show up to defend on their own time slot a naval port battle , they loose the port battle, How could it be different?

But why would they do so if they are active ? With alliance and slots system I suggest, they have more chance than ever to successfully defend such battles.

 

Edited August 20, 2017 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

In my original topic in the french langage section I explain more in details my views about how to trigger pb but as devs seems to test hostility mission on testbed since the moment I posted, i choose to focus on contests, whatever they choose as pb trigger mechanism.

[Skully]

37 minutes ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

And If they don t show up to defend on their own time slot a naval port battle , they loose the port battle, How could it be different?

With a defense timer slot they never need to show up at all. The timer window will then be the defense, resulting in a map lockup.

To counter you say a landing operation.

On 8/19/2017 at 5:42 PM, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

Once placed, both sides have 24h to bring any quantity of war supplies.

A large Nation can deliver more supplies. How can small Nations counter this?

It also means that Clan HQs are subject to defense by other players. Not necessarily a bad thing, but we know how cooperation goes down. 
I think the credo of a lot is: "Never trust an ally to counter a 'night' flip."

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

2 hours ago, Skully said:

A large Nation can deliver more supplies. How can small Nations counter this?

1- for what I understood, RvR was going to be clans matters, small nations can have large & efficients clans.

2- the idea is not to deny victory to a more powerful nation. If you are the underdog, you may not be able to gather as much war supplies as a bigger attacker, yet:

•you can still get some war supplies from allied clans & nations willing to help you

•the larger the army at day one, the more provision is needed each days.  And we can very well imagine that forts prevent 1 turn assault win. So attacker will have to bring enough provision on day2 to continue the fight while a defender with less base warsupplies may be able to continue the fight with less provisions.

•Also max warsupplies can very well be capped related to port size if needed. So like naval port battles, the contest happen on an even ground.

About provisions, all provisions bringed dissapear each turn(troop eat and drink more, contraband, steal & expiration date ^^) so bringing millions at first turn don t prevent the need to bring enough at day 2.

keep in mind that supply and provisions can get intercepted too.. even by third party like pirates seeing some land operations as opportunity for convoy interceptions. And without enough provisions, the army rout and fight is lost.

 

At the end of the day, it s still a contest and both kind of operations (land or naval) have to give roughly the same base chance of success for attackers and defender otherwise one will be abused by the strongers, like if everyone use land operations as it's easier to win if you have the bigger population and economy and impossible to win for small factions, we will see more impossible port windows (in case of lord protector return) to force this choice and be assured to keep the port. 

For that I thank you for your comment as I understand that max warsupplies cap may be needed. But that s to be discussed as a cap will surely mean each side always have to bring the max, and nearly everything reside in the Rock Paper Scissors , while without cap, a small nation/clan can very well surprise a larger one with a well prepared unexpectedly large offensive.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Skully]

2 hours ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

keep in mind that supply and provisions can get intercepted too.. even by third party like pirates seeing some land operations as opportunity for convoy interceptions. And without enough provisions, the army rout and fight is lost.

We'll see alts having the supplies delivered and Pirates doing the escorting.

2 hours ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

For that I thank you for your comment as I understand that max warsupplies cap may be needed. But that s to be discussed as a cap will surely mean each side always have to bring the max, and nearly everything reside in the Rock Paper Scissors , while without cap, a small nation/clan can very well surprise a larger one with a well prepared unexpectedly large offensive.

There might be merit in having some form of cap. I need to think about it.

No cap works against a smaller Nation. We have already proven this in game. (For personal reference: The Bombing of Aves.)

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

I wanted to keep my suggestion as simple as possible, so the global concept can be discussed, and devs can adapt it to fit their plans, but of course i can see ways to create rules to prevent abuse.

having allies supporting operation is legit, alt

1- attacking & defending flag bearer(admirals) 's can form one supply group each day, only members from this group can carry the reinforcements and drop them in a timed delay after the admiral dropped the first one. This force the supplies to be carried by clansmates and limit the max volume But this don t prevent the smuggler abuse to form and load from the targeted port.

2- another solution: warsupplies drop sequence could use the same pb instance we have for naval pb, attacking admiral launch the instance by clicking the port then he and his fellow warSupply carriers ships Can enter from the outer ring, then have to reach one of the 3 zones under forts protection then stay1mn idle there to discharge before escaping.

defenders are able to join the instance to try to prevent the supply landing.

Once attacker have dropped his war supplies , defender have 24h to use war supplies in the targeted port up to the cap.

If we go for a max cap,  both side could have a troop limit equivalent of like the capacity of 15 of the largest trader ships allowed in the port (depending on the port type)

That way, the attacking landing sequence open for a potential naval combat while defender still keep a fair chance even if unable to show up. In a same way, attacker is not forced to loose even if some of his supplies are intercepted has the defender can still lack some supplies or provisions or loose more troops during each combat turns.

[Fletch]

I don't think port battle system ever reached the average player apart from screening. I think the old conquest flag system was more fun than the current system,  it also made the world map a bit more tactical.  It meant your empire could only spread an hours sailing at a time and you had to leap frog your way across the map.

 

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

flag or hostility are the trigger mechanism, the topic here is about the contests, either triggered by flag, warsupply bomb or hostility grind.

[fox2run]

It's all too complicated. As a pc player I log in. See what options are ASAP. If none I log out playing something else.

Players gets bored in no time. Thats why they give up on the game. 

Port battles should be open for all and there should be port battles every night. Like a lobby in any wargame. If you like to go in one, you will see one.

Port battles should be preset and not made up by players. It will never work that way.

[Sir Texas Sir]

9 minutes ago, fox2run said:

It's all too complicated. As a pc player I log in. See what options are ASAP. If none I log out playing something else.

Players gets bored in no time. Thats why they give up on the game. 

Port battles should be open for all and there should be port battles every night. Like a lobby in any wargame. If you like to go in one, you will see one.

Port battles should be preset and not made up by players. It will never work that way.

And you will get exactly that with Legends.

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

I think there could be a way to make those two kind of operations only one:

 

A clan trigger a pb via flag or hostility, he have a timed delay to form a naval port battle group and join the targetted port (1 hour or 24 i don't mind). Defender nation and clan are alerted.

 

To enter the PB all member of the attacking pb group must have at least 1 warsupplies in hold, allied pb groups can also join the instance

 

If Port owner clan comes to defend with his allies,  the PB take place like i describe in the naval port battle

If Port owner clan don't come, the pb turn into a landing operation, anyone from the port owner country can join to prevent the landing. Attackers have to sail to the cap zones and stay idle there the time to transfer their war supplies. After the instance close, defending clan have 24h to drop up to a capped amount of war supplies in the port, then the landing operation take place as i described.

 

If the attacking clan which triggered the pb don't show, maybe give a 24h free flag for the defending clan so he can counter attack for free.

 

That way naval port battle stay the main contest, but if defender is attacked out of his timezone or don't want to wait outside in case of fake attack, the contest turns into a land operation. Isn't that fair enough and allow for a better dynamic conquest ? While allowing to merge all timezones on a same server ?

Edited August 24, 2017 by Baptiste Gallouédec