Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

Peter Goldman    1,298
2 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

You know as well as I do that shallows are generally not important.. Only the pirates had a shallow water based econ and the swedes ruined that and in the process the pirate nation.. 

3

Your memory is very weak, you were really bashing us hard for having fun at Santa Fe. Also, San Marcos is important for Spanish as it has 2 or 3 white oak ports not needed for Danish at all. 

Edited by Peter Goldman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bearwall    842
Just now, Peter Goldman said:

Your memory is very weak, you were really bashing us hard for having fun at Santa Fe. Also, San Marcos is important for Spanish as it has 2 or 3 white oak ports not needed for Danish at all. 

It's not like the nationality is preventing ppl from getting to the white oak - no ones up there normally anyway so they can just go right in with smuglers tag.. And I was bashing you hard for Selam + Santa fe because of the position of the ports in relation to the capital area.. And I bashed DN/NG for taking Remedios for the position of the port. It's kinda like in real estate.. location location location..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Goldman    1,298
2 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

It's not like the nationality is preventing ppl from getting to the white oak - no ones up there normally anyway so they can just go right in with smuglers tag.. And I was bashing you hard for Selam + Santa fe because of the position of the ports in relation to the capital area.. And I bashed DN/NG for taking Remedios for the position of the port. It's kinda like in real estate.. location location location..

1. Danish players have outposts there now (mostly HYDRA) and are actively hunting any leftovers and traders.

2. You can't make contracts in enemy ports

3. You can't teleport there. You can only sail there from nearest Spanish port taking the risk of being attacked by Danish players around

 

What about Santa Fe? No important resources. Only shallow ports (can't raid Spanish waters unless you do it in shallow ships which almost no one does). If you even bring Selam, we offered giving it back for Spanish, but they refused our offer saying "We don't trust you". Selam was taken during the presence of VLTRA in Spanish nation, so you should be bashing HYDRA for not defending it. They decided that Sant Iago is more important for them (lol).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IndianaGeoff    91

Kiting is a valid and useful tactic.  Just like the time (durability days) when I demasted and decrewed a mortar brig but did not sink it so it would not make it to a port battle.  I am sure me shooting a shot every 30 secs was annoying to no end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fargo    163
5 hours ago, Skully said:

We can agree and like all we want. If there is no possible escape mechanic, but to escape, then the whole discussion is moot.

What do you actually propose?

In short, force the aggressor into an engagement. If you want to keep a ship in battle, you should have to stay so close that your opponent is able to damage your ship. Within effective cannon range that needs to be figured out. You can think this further, e.g. the range should depend on the largest guns equipped. The smaller your ship, the closer you need to stay. A short timer could act as a buffer. Etc.

RoE proposal: http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/19039-distance-based-roe-proposal/?tab=comments#comment-371518

Not saying its perfect as it is suggested. But think about it in general and tell me the reasoning for timer based RoE? It denies realism and plausibility, this means there should be very good gameplay related reasons.

4 hours ago, Bearwall said:

EDIT: What I mean to say is that it is not allways clear cut why someone is kiting. Thx to the TS the other side may have information that you are lacking and this will effect the decisions in battle.

Kiting is a valid combat tactic if you use it to damage and finally sink your opponent. But thats not what were talking about, and to do this you are way closer to your opponent compared with kiting only to keep someone in battle.

You only try to keep someone in battle to fool him, or to deny him participation in an actual battle. Both makes no sense, i dont get why we have to discuss if it should be possible to waste hours of your opponents time with pure sailing within a battle instance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bearwall    842
4 minutes ago, Fargo said:

.

Kiting is a valid combat tactic if you use it to damage and finally sink your opponent. But thats not what were talking about, and to do this you are way closer to your opponent compared with kiting only to keep someone in battle.

You only try to keep someone in battle to fool him, or to deny him participation in an actual battle. Both makes no sense, i dont get why we have to discuss if it should be possible to waste hours of your opponents time with pure sailing within a battle instance. 

@Fargo As for the first point I agree that a timer based escape mechanic is foolish.. The thought that an enemy should escape purely because it wasn't "tagged" for x amount of time is not only unrealistic but also foolish. Distance to the enemy, perhaps coupled with nighttime buffs should be the deciding factor and no escape of a set amount of minutes in the start of the battle, for example 10 mins to actually allow an OW tag to be decisive.

 

For the second part I can simply not agree. When fighting superior numbers the very point of kiting is to avoid battle on anything less than a favourable condition and/or allow teammates to escape. What you're suggesting would basically take away skill from the equation and settle all encounters by purely size and numbers. Teamwork and coordination will be less relevant. What you are considering a waste of time others are considering a valuable investment either on their on behalf or on the behalf of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raekur    100
8 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

That would ruin chasing ships where you hit sails mostly and sometimes chase takes an hour or so... As I said, trying to find a solution for kiting very often might interfere with other gaming aspects and cause other issues while fixing one. 

How exactly would it ruin chasing down a ship? If you are chasing a ship and are not fast enough to overtake it and keep it within range then how does requiring hull hits  change the fact that the enemy ship will be able to escape? This topic was regarding Kiting not chasing. With requiring hull hits in order to kite someone the person kiting will have to risk also taking hull hits and it becomes an exchange in skill and being able to evade incoming fire. I grow tired of people complaining about wanting some mechanic to compensate for their lacking the ability to plan an attack and actually learn how to intercept a target. People have complained that traders were too fast, so now we have traders that can not outrun anything unless they are without guns or cargo just so some lazy dimwits who want to raid in live oak ships can still catch something other then a cold. If you can not plot an intercept course to catch a ship, then you do not deserve to have some mechanic that will allow you to sit back and ping a target until you eventually catch up after an hour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fargo    163
1 hour ago, Bearwall said:

For the second part I can simply not agree. When fighting superior numbers the very point of kiting is to avoid battle on anything less than a favourable condition and/or allow teammates to escape. What you're suggesting would basically take away skill from the equation and settle all encounters by purely size and numbers. Teamwork and coordination will be less relevant. What you are considering a waste of time others are considering a valuable investment either on their on behalf or on the behalf of others.

Control as a general escape mechanic with removed tagging is basically all im suggesting. How is that affecting teamwork and coordination?

When youre fighting superior numbers (willing to fight) you can do whatever you want, your opponents are not going to escape, no matter if youre out of control range or not. Same for a persuit, your opponents hunting you wont escape. But if you were attacking superior numbers (not willing to fight), you are supposed to be in trouble when you want to force a fight/waste time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bearwall    842
41 minutes ago, Fargo said:

Control as a general escape mechanic with removed tagging is basically all im suggesting. How is that affecting teamwork and coordination?

When youre fighting superior numbers (willing to fight) you can do whatever you want, your opponents are not going to escape, no matter if youre out of control range or not. Same for a persuit, your opponents hunting you wont escape. But if you were attacking superior numbers (not willing to fight), you are supposed to be in trouble when you want to force a fight/waste time. 

I disagree. Not all fights are for the sake of winning. Some are deliberately wasting time for the opponent in order to let other players either leave in OW or get a job done in OW. That sort of kiting would be impossible to discern from basically trolling as the accuser would have to produce evidence for the tribunal that the opposing (kiting) side had no other intention than to waste the time of those in the instance. This would be impossible.

From a personal perspective I'll gladly kite someone from now and untill the end of the servermaintenance if it meant that another objective could be accomplished by someone else. I don't believe that anyone in the game wants to waste their opponents time just for the sake of it. Just the hours req to sail to someone for then just to kite them for the sake of kiting them..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skully    1,025
6 hours ago, Fargo said:

Within effective cannon range that needs to be figured out.

Shoot, any hit equals effective range. To ensure you can get a trader you must hit sails. Ergo, the current mechanic. Your proposal makes little difference to kiting as I can still achieve the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fargo    163
4 hours ago, Skully said:

Shoot, any hit equals effective range. To ensure you can get a trader you must hit sails. Ergo, the current mechanic. Your proposal makes little difference to kiting as I can still achieve the same.

Why do you put my foot down, it should be clear that im talking about a closer distance. Its just a term. 

11 hours ago, Fargo said:

But think about it in general and tell me the reasoning for timer based RoE?

Even if the result would be the same, unless you can answer this question distance based mechanics are simply much more plausible. Still waiting.

 

7 hours ago, Bearwall said:

I disagree. Not all fights are for the sake of winning. Some are deliberately wasting time for the opponent in order to let other players either leave in OW or get a job done in OW. That sort of kiting would be impossible to discern from basically trolling as the accuser would have to produce evidence for the tribunal that the opposing (kiting) side had no other intention than to waste the time of those in the instance. This would be impossible.

I still dont get your point. You can still waste your opponents time, it just would be more risky. In most cases nothing really changes. Only if your opponent is willing to leave with superior numbers or ships.

There is no reason you should be able to keep someone in battle for hours without giving him a chance to fight you off his tail, just for the sake of wasting time. And it dont makes sense either. If you want to reach a destination, and someone would hit one of your sails from time to time on distance, without beeing able to cause serious damage, you would simply dont care and head on to your destination. Intercepting a real ship ment causing serious damage to it, not waiting for an artificial timer to run out.

In general youre only able to hit sails on distance effectively cause your cannons are incredibly accurate compared with real cannons, and you dont have to care about ammunition. Take this into account when thinking about plausible mechanics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me this is an easy solve. If your out of range, your out of the battle. Darkness should also play a role. At night fall the range is halved. 

Battle timers are a rediculous mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skully    1,025
51 minutes ago, The Old Pretender said:

Seems to me this is an easy solve. If your out of range, your out of the battle. Darkness should also play a role. At night fall the range is halved. 

Battle timers are a rediculous mechanic.

Range plays no role in kiting, nor does whoever initiated the attack. :D

F149A928B92B4080CD8E1616381E412ADC4878CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dagdriver    38

I would say that one of a  screening fleet's tasks could  be to Kite the enemy PB fleet, delaying its arrival to the port battle. - A valid tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fargo    163
7 minutes ago, dagdriver said:

I would say that one of a  screening fleet's tasks could  be to Kite the enemy PB fleet, delaying its arrival to the port battle. - A valid tactic.

Again, it shouldnt be a valid tactic for two reasons. In terms of realism, a PB fleet would simply not care and continue sailing to its destination. To intercept a real fleet you would have to seriously damage ships, an actual fight would happen. In terms of gameplay its super boring for both sides. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skully    1,025
48 minutes ago, Fargo said:

Again, it shouldnt be a valid tactic for two reasons. In terms of realism, a PB fleet would simply not care and continue sailing to its destination. To intercept a real fleet you would have to seriously damage ships, an actual fight would happen. In terms of gameplay its super boring for both sides. 

https://youtu.be/WE8cXGonBxc?t=949

http://forum.game-labs.net/topic/14676-pvp1-june-the-british-honduras-campaign-pirate-perspective/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-276082

Depends on your view of "boring" :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IndianaGeoff    91
On 9/5/2017 at 9:58 AM, Fargo said:

Again, it shouldnt be a valid tactic for two reasons. In terms of realism, a PB fleet would simply not care and continue sailing to its destination. To intercept a real fleet you would have to seriously damage ships, an actual fight would happen. In terms of gameplay its super boring for both sides. 

Simply not true.  There are many historical accounts of inferior harassing ships and fleets forcing an enemy away from it's intended destination, tying it up away from the main battle/port or to protect a trade ship/fleet and peeling off parts of the fleet to harass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fargo    163
32 minutes ago, IndianaGeoff said:

Simply not true.  There are many historical accounts of inferior harassing ships and fleets forcing an enemy away from it's intended destination, tying it up away from the main battle/port or to protect a trade ship/fleet and peeling off parts of the fleet to harass.

In this case the attacker is threatening the Fleet. When the defending fleet is avoiding a fight, thats a different talk and no problem. This means the aggressor would be able to cause serious damage/win the fight, and he would be willing to fight. Both is not the case for the time wasting scenarios were talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×