Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Invisibility poll

Invisibility poll  

119 members have voted

  1. 1. Please provide your vote on invisibility and speed boost after battle

    • Keep as it is
      70
    • Reduce by 50%
      20
    • Remove completely
      29


Recommended Posts

Borch    412
34 minutes ago, Liquicity said:

Exactly. Sometimes you get caught off guard because an enemy was IN RANGE. your revenge fleet mates most lf the time are NOT in range (3ish minutes), why should they be able to get to a target they never would have gotten to? Ganking sucks and happens to everyone, but that doesnt mean there should be a free revenge mechanic simply because we cant run OW and battles in the same speed instances.

It's like i would ask, why are you able to get from Navasse to Kingston in the time a casual is doing his mission to be attacked straight after. This works both ways. 

I dont think there is solution that suits all in  this case. Only way is to either slow everything down to in battle speed or get rid of instances. Both are inpossible to do.

Share this post


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

You wish to intercept enemies in friendly waters by giving them a free ticket home?

Do you see the contradiction, or is it just me?

Thats not what i said. I explained myself, if you dont agree with my points pls refer directly to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rickard    311
On 6-9-2017 at 3:04 PM, admin said:

Captains

Due to addition of safe zones and reinforcement fleets around capitals and due to changed status of many free towns lets discuss invisibility and speed boost.

Invisibility was implemented to reduce revenge fleets. In the new design hunting around enemy capitals will be very hard.
Cities that will be controlled by clans should be protected by their own player driven defence fleets that should have a chance to destroy the potential harassers. As a result we see no benefits in keeping invisibility as they allow a very safe escape option limiting pvp opportunities. 

Discuss.

 I would like to see the invisibility removed and replaced with the former spawn in a friendly port/capital option, the game should give you the option to escape an area after you escaped the battle in my opinion. invisibility and speed boosts are (for me personally) ruining the immersion and are to much world of tanks, world of warships type mechanics,( yes, I know those 2 games don't use them) they should not belong in a (partially) simulator game about sailing in the golden age of sailing other than creating the ability to hoist extra(studding) sails (LIKE IN MASTER AND COMMANDER!! best movie ever!!).

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor master and commander chase

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor master and commander extra sails

 

Edited by Rickard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
4 hours ago, admin said:

Captains

Due to addition of safe zones and reinforcement fleets around capitals and due to changed status of many free towns lets discuss invisibility and speed boost.

Invisibility was implemented to reduce revenge fleets. In the new design hunting around enemy capitals will be very hard.
Cities that will be controlled by clans should be protected by their own player driven defence fleets that should have a chance to destroy the potential harassers. As a result we see no benefits in keeping invisibility as they allow a very safe escape option limiting pvp opportunities. 

Discuss.

May i remind....

 

From all suggestions made, the worst possible has been chosen.

Now remove it instantly if you please, no reason is needed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fargo    163
2 hours ago, Borch said:

It's like i would ask, why are you able to get from Navasse to Kingston in the time a casual is doing his mission to be attacked straight after. This works both ways. 

I dont think there is solution that suits all in  this case. Only way is to either slow everything down to in battle speed or get rid of instances. Both are inpossible to do.

Its always realism vs. gameplay. You could argue the other way round that after a battle you should gain a significant speed boost, cause a 75 minute battle would have lasted only one minute in OW time, so you need to catch up 74 minutes in this case. This would be a realistic compromise, but in terms of gameplay it makes no sense. Denying compressed players to wait for players leaving real time is realistic and does not affect gameplay in a negative way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liq    3,273
1 hour ago, Rickard said:

ability to hoist stay sails

Those on the pics are studding sails tho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liq    3,273
2 hours ago, Borch said:

It's like i would ask, why are you able to get from Navasse to Kingston in the time a casual is doing his mission to be attacked straight after. This works both ways. 

I dont think there is solution that suits all in  this case. Only way is to either slow everything down to in battle speed or get rid of instances. Both are inpossible to do.

Well in this case its mostly coincidence though that you met that player leaving a mission, compared to ACTIVELY waiting on an exact battle pos (f11 coords posted by the guy being attacked). It still is an issue though, I agree. Maybe grant a shorter invis timer when leaving a mission, so that it gives the guys leaving mission a fair chance to gain some distance from nearby bandits; and at the same time cant be abused by hopping in and out of a mission on purpose.

Edited by Liquicity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
26 minutes ago, Liquicity said:

Well in this case its mostly coincidence though that you met that player leaving a mission, compared to ACTIVELY waiting on an exact battle pos (f11 coords posted by the guy being attacked). It still is an issue though, I agree. Maybe grant a shorter invis timer when leaving a mission, so that it gives the guys leaving mission a fair chance to gain some distance from nearby bandits; and at the same time cant be abused by hopping in and out of a mission on purpose.

It is not "an issue". It is THE ISSUE.

It needs to be removed.

It is idiotic and it does not "prevent the revenge fleets" at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liq    3,273
11 minutes ago, Cortez said:

It is not "an issue". It is THE ISSUE.

It needs to be removed.

It is idiotic and it does not "prevent the revenge fleets" at all.

How is actually giving the initial idea of a 3 min join timer, which decides which ships are in range of the battle and which are not and therefore dont have any right for taking a revenge, a reason, idiotic? Might aswell have forever open battles then. Seems much less idiotic, right? /sarcasm off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    487

I agree with Liquicity... revenge fleets are much more ganking than the victim of them is a ganker more often than not. The players that voted to remove invisibility without coming up with a better solution are probably the same cucks that sit in the greenzone for pve and only join pvp fights that are massively in their favour / on their terms...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
2 minutes ago, Captain Lust said:

I agree with Liquicity... revenge fleets are much more ganking than the victim of them is a ganker more often than not. The players that voted to remove invisibility without coming up with a better solution are probably the same cucks that sit in the greenzone for pve and only join pvp fights that are massively in their favour / on their terms...

Reported your post for "cucks".

Just want you to know that :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
14 minutes ago, Liquicity said:

How is actually giving the initial idea of a 3 min join timer, which decides which ships are in range of the battle and which are not and therefore dont have any right for taking a revenge, a reason, idiotic? Might aswell have forever open battles then. Seems much less idiotic, right? /sarcasm off

This thread is about removing your idea of invisibility.

Idk what a join timer has to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    487
Just now, Cortez said:

Dude...

Get a life  :)

Says the one that gets upset about someone saying "cuck" on the internet. Don't let your parents know, please... i don't want them to think of me as a bad boy... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
Just now, Captain Lust said:

Says the one that gets upset about someone saying "cuck" on the internet. Don't let your parents know, please... i don't want them to think of me as a bad boy... :)

You called players of this game "cucks".

You are not a bad boy for sure.

You are an internet warrior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macjimm    477

I'm not a big fan of reading responses that are copy pastes of multiple quotes.  But it seems obvious that people do not want to be forced into continuous battles ....

 

5 hours ago, Demsity said:

If reduced or removed, a system needs to be implemented to prevent forever tagging. Forever tagging is when a group of player tag you over and over again after escpaing battles, leading to chases taking hours upon hours.

 

5 hours ago, Serk said:

This is the main culprit IMO. Being hostage to the game must be avoided at all cost, so either leave it as it is, or add the option to quit the game immediately after a battle. 

 

4 hours ago, Aegon Targaryen said:

I still like a battlescreen with the option to logout if you were the defender. That means you can go offline after successfully escaping a defense battle.

 

4 hours ago, Liquicity said:

 We didnt have either but we did have battlescreen which also somewhat did the job of preventing silly revenge fleets.

 

2 hours ago, Rickard said:

the game should give you the option to escape an area after you escaped the battle in my opinion. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liq    3,273
2 minutes ago, Cortez said:

This thread is about removing your idea of invisibility.

Idk what a join timer has to do with it.

well the 3 minute join timer simulates the fact that only ships in range, 3 min OW time covers a lot, should be able to join and get to the target. If we're going to get rid off invisibility, the 75x compressed OW will allow players to camp on an exact battle pos and wait for someone to pop out; a target they should never and would never have reached, because they were not in range (3 min join timer).

Anyway. I kinda want to see no invis / no speedboost now, at least as a TEST, see how much PvP actually gets created and see whether or not those that are initiating the PvP, therefore sailing to enemy waters, will get tired of it pretty fast, because they will have to deal with players which would never have reached them.
I'm also curious to see where players imagine PvP to happen , if not in national waters. "Let's randomly sail half way to nowhere and meet that spanish player group, because they totally have a reason to be there".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
2 minutes ago, Macjimm said:

I'm not a big fan of reading responses that are copy pastes of multiple quotes.  But it seems obvious that people do not want to be forced into continuous battles ....

 

Ofc not.

Already suggested here, and as said, the worst solution has been chosen.

When the battle is over, Ow or RvR, the game should automatically kick players to their starting ports.

Problem solved.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    487
Just now, Cortez said:

You called players of this game "cucks".

You are not a bad boy for sure.

You are an internet warrior.

I called those that didn't come up with an alternative to invisiblity timer while at the same time wanting it removed that, and rightfully so. If they want it removed we need another way of preventing revenge fleet camping. If speaking the truth makes me an internet warrior, then fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
Just now, Captain Lust said:

I called those that didn't come up with an alternative to invisiblity timer while at the same time wanting it removed that, and rightfully so. If they want it removed we need another way of preventing revenge fleet camping. If speaking the truth makes me an internet warrior, then fair enough.

You have no right to call the players "cucks" here, they play PvE or PvP., if they suggest or not.

"Speaking the truth"..You?

Lol.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Invisibility balances the removal of the previous 'teleport to port' battle exit and the 'log out on battle screen' both of which I found less satisfying and the revenge fleet a poor means of PvP.

If a player is mob attacked/ganked but manages to escape a battle the invisibility function will allow the player to escape without being repeatedly attacked.

A further balance for me would be that the invisible Captain should not be able to see OW vessels while invisible. This will avoid an invisibility attack positioning on other OW players.

 

Buster (put my invisible leg somewhere anyone seen it?)

 

Edited by Busterbloodvessel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    487
6 minutes ago, Cortez said:

You have no right to call the players "cucks" here, they play PvE or PvP., if they suggest or not.

"Speaking the truth"..You?

Lol.

What is this offtopic spam about? Do you have an alternative to invisibility timer? If not, why spam here? I get you're butthurt over what i said, mate...

further balance for me would be that the invisible Captain should not be able to see OW vessels while invisible. This will avoid an invisibility attack positioning on other OW players.

 

I would like to see this, good idea.

Edited by Captain Lust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macjimm    477

Seems that the poll is incomplete and is missing critical options:

  1. Keep as it is .
  2. Reduce by 50%.
  3. Remove completely.
  4.  Remove completely and add option to log out of game after a successful escape.
  5.  Remove completely and add teleport to safety (port) after successful escape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cortez    63
Just now, Captain Lust said:

What is this offtopic spam about? Do you have an alternative to invisibility timer? If not, why spam here? I get you're butthurt over what i said, mate...

 

I would like to see this, good idea.

I have nothing to say to you.

You called the players of this game "cucks".

Ignored and reported.

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

×