Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Peter Goldman

Port Maintenance

Recommended Posts

Peter Goldman    1,271

What do we pay for? How the port maintains itself if it's not controlled by anyone and it is neutral? That's a mystery for me... We pay for the port to... remain national. We pay for the flag. Does it make sense at all? I hope this will be heard by Devs ( @admin/ @Ink) and reconsidered)

My proposal:

  1. Clans won't pay for port maintenance (it's removed)
  2. All towers/forts and coastal defences will be removed from ports with exception of permanent ports in safe zones (non-capturable aka non-RvR ports)
  3. Clans can build towers/forts and hire bigger NPC patrol fleets for money
  4. Clans need to maintain coastal defences that were built by them
  5. Possible crowdfunding function (pubbies, newbies, clanless players can donate gold to support maintenance or future defences of the port/region)

With this proposal, we actually pay for something. We pay for safety. Safety attracts more traffic, traders etc. 

 

My personal statement for the current game mechanic coming in next update is - I won't pay a broken penny for any single port because for me it's not worth a dime to me to pay for nothing.

Even if I can afford it, even if they increase gold rewards for PvE 8x or 20x or 50x and I will be swimming in gold having 500m gold in my pocket (besides the fact that I try to avoid PvE just like fire), just out of my own principles that I follow - I ain't paying for nothing.

 

signed,

Peter Goldman

Edited by Peter Goldman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this suggestion for the port maintenance. The suggestion for the donations could be done by implementing a port info tab which may have something like port coffers in it or gold required for maintenance, (of course it won't show how much gold the port has as this is controlled by the clan that owns it) which will show how much money has been donated to the port and how much will be needed for maintenance or upgrades. If the maintenance is kept then I personally think it should be lowered as 100k per day may not be best if players are not online one day. Also if the donations or port coffers go above the maintenance cost then that gold should carry to the next day and so on... this might also improve the raiding mechanic if there is going to be one, as a raider will loot the ports coffers and port warehouse.

The suggestion for removing forts is good and making the clans that control them build them or upgrade them, however as the patch is tomorrow I understand that if the dev's were to adopt this idea then they would have to put it into another future patch. I do think that implementing something such as this would, in fact, improve the dynamics of the economy of the game and could make the location of rich ports more dependant on the player base rather than purely on the location of resources.

Edited by that guy that time
more info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Texas Sir    3,661

I still think there should be a small maintance, but the base tax should covcer a good chunk of that cost.  A productive port would cover all and than some.  Allowing for a clan to pay for the upgrades too.  The ports need a Port Coffer too.  Kinda wish it was more govenor ran than just the clan leader.  Does any one know if the officers can adjust things too?   Didn't get a chance to get the clan mates on testbed and test it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some mention was made of a port governor but it may have been referring to the clan leader as governor of each port. I think that the clan leader should be able to assign member of a clan to governor  and maybe this is a chance to make the lord protectors actually matter... that is to say that maybe they could say that only the members that have taken part in a port battle might be assigned as governor or something to this measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole idea behind paying port maintenance it so a map does not get painted by a single nation and nations don't take ports national ports for no reason.  It is to control national expansion.  Why would you pay for ports you don't need and don't use?  I hope it is effective enough that a large clan could hold one or two strategic ports

I think it is a good idea but we will see.  If it doesn't work perfect the first time, you know the devs will throw the baby out with the bath water anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well considering the fact that the maintenance is 100k a day, and that they are raising the gold value gained from missions, I think that a relatively large clan, if they were motivated enough, would be able to hold and maintain numerous ports without difficulty. if a clan put their minds to it then they could easily raise a few million gold a day to upkeep their ports... and an entire nation full of clans is certainly able to do this. So I don't see at all how this would restrain nations from expanding too much... and if it does then you will see the end of RvR except for nations which hold territories right next to each other. Especially as the devs have said that they were going to implement a range restriction to the distance you can raise hostility from your nation or clan owned ports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Texas Sir    3,661
8 minutes ago, Salty Dog on Global said:

The whole idea behind paying port maintenance it so a map does not get painted by a single nation and nations don't take ports national ports for no reason.  It is to control national expansion.  Why would you pay for ports you don't need and don't use?  I hope it is effective enough that a large clan could hold one or two strategic ports

I think it is a good idea but we will see.  If it doesn't work perfect the first time, you know the devs will throw the baby out with the bath water anyway.

Yah like we seen some nations do on GLOBAL and I assume EU too, but going to be interested if some one tries it and finds out they can't keep the funding up.  Though I still think ti should be a regional thing not each port.  There are just way to many ports a lot of them are going to just sit empty and you can't put any good buffers around your ports like we all ways done with Mort.  Now that any one can just use a Neutral pot and telport around your going to see folks just say screw RvR and camp the crap out of nation ports by using the Neutral ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teutonic    1,055

Port maintenance is fine.

If we come to realize there are not enough bonuses to owning a port, or the maintenance is too cheap or expensive, fixing these is "easy." (Easier than some other options)

So lets say the port maintenance is too high, well then we suggest the admin lowers it or we add something else to offset the cost.

Lets add more bonuses to owning ports yeah? Tower defense, more customization, clan shipyards, etc

Lets make port maintenance be an exponential cost maybe?

There are a myriad of things we could balance here to make this work - but i believe this is one of the better decisions by the devs to make maintenance, simple fact being a nation that wants to control the map, must make sure they can actually maintain it as well.

If you don't want to pay the cost to have a port, then don't because you don't have too. 

Edited by Teutonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Goldman    1,271
39 minutes ago, Salty Dog on Global said:

The whole idea behind paying port maintenance it so a map does not get painted by a single nation and nations don't take ports national ports for no reason.  It is to control national expansion.  Why would you pay for ports you don't need and don't use?  I hope it is effective enough that a large clan could hold one or two strategic ports

I think it is a good idea but we will see.  If it doesn't work perfect the first time, you know the devs will throw the baby out with the bath water anyway.

If one nation does it, then it gets overextended. Attack multiple ports at once and you win. One huge nation cannot field 200 players to defend all ports at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skully    1,022

Or how about town maintenance is expressed in a cut from the tax. So by default 50%, more defenses 75%, better labor another +25%.

That would scale and does not form any kind of passive sink.

Anyway, we'll see soon how it currently acts. Then we can reassess based on true experience. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Goldman    1,271

I can't understand why people fear of one clan controlling half of the map or so... Taxes won't stop them because huge clans have 100m in the warehouse or even 500m gold. It stops small clans from doing anything. Also, players are too stupid to understand concent of overextension. The bigger you are, the harder it is to defend everything. Every consecutive port you need more manpower to defend it.

But we all see "Ah noes, BLACK and SORRY control everything, big bad clans control the whole map!" ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stepp636    62

I also fear that many ports remain neutral because most of them have no strategic purpose that justifies the maintenance costs.

I might be wrong about this but if most of the map stay neutral let's try the OP's suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

Yah like we seen some nations do on GLOBAL and I assume EU too, but going to be interested if some one tries it and finds out they can't keep the funding up.  Though I still think ti should be a regional thing not each port.  There are just way to many ports a lot of them are going to just sit empty and you can't put any good buffers around your ports like we all ways done with Mort.  Now that any one can just use a Neutral pot and telport around your going to see folks just say screw RvR and camp the crap out of nation ports by using the Neutral ones.

I suggested the idea of being able to capture the whole region which reduced the costs of each port in the region.

If you captured the entire region, the only port that could be attacked would be the regional capital.  Once it is retaken all the other ports could be up to capture. 

Edited by Salty Dog on Global

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teutonic    1,055
10 minutes ago, Salty Dog on Global said:

I suggested the idea of being able to capture the whole region which reduced the costs of each port in the region.

If you captured the entire region, the only port that could be attacked would be the regional capital.  Once it is retaken all the other ports could be up to capture. 

I'd rather the region give you give you a bonus than a reduced cost.

Something like better production or "national resource support."

Not that I disagree with your suggestion, just I would prefer something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Teutonic said:

I'd rather the region give you give you a bonus than a reduced cost.

Something like better production or "national resource support."

Not that I disagree with your suggestion, just I would prefer something else.

that's a good idea... own the entire region, you get the bonus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cmdr RideZ    647

I believe forts, towers and maybe even AI ships will be something that clans can buy to protect their ports in the future.  I actually assumed already that this is where the game is heading in the future.  I would be disappointed if not so.

Clans collect taxes so they fund also defenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Goldman    1,271
19 minutes ago, Cmdr RideZ said:

I believe forts, towers and maybe even AI ships will be something that clans can buy to protect their ports in the future.  I actually assumed already that this is where the game is heading in the future.  I would be disappointed if not so.

Clans collect taxes so they fund also defenses.

Taxes will barely cover the maintenance cost if at all... Maintenance of what....? National flag or colour on the map?

Edited by Peter Goldman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    482
6 hours ago, Salty Dog on Global said:

The whole idea behind paying port maintenance it so a map does not get painted by a single nation and nations don't take ports national ports for no reason.  It is to control national expansion.  Why would you pay for ports you don't need and don't use?  I hope it is effective enough that a large clan could hold one or two strategic ports

I think it is a good idea but we will see.  If it doesn't work perfect the first time, you know the devs will throw the baby out with the bath water anyway.

Pretty much what i am thinking. The system keeps big nations / clans in check, preventing them from steamrolling and also it destroys some gold, which is always good for the eco when you can generate gold out of thin air. It is also quite realistic that if you take too many ports you can't hold them for long without the means to pay ( supply ) them. I think they should expand on this system so you can pay less and set taxes high but it has a chance of causing a riot / revolt setting the port back to neutral etc. . I keep hearing people say they don't want to pay for a port that gives them nothing... then why do they want to own the port in the first place? Maybe they should add a 3rd state of port that is national but not maintained. So it would have the nation colour for all those that need the map in their nation colour but anyone can enter the port ( and maybe build there ) and the forts / towers dont shoot ( no powder / shot / men ) making it owned by the clan that captured it but basically a neutral port in their nation colour? Otherwise you would only see the big clans taking all ports and forifying them with the endless gold in the system that gets more and more every day, leaving them with all the ports on the map fortified, yet again pushing away the small nations / casuals - those who need some ports for their eco too and don't want to sail hours to some pvp zone because every port inbetween is owned by the same clan so they have no way of teleporting to the "frontline"... 

Edited by Captain Lust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    482
2 hours ago, Stepp636 said:

I also fear that many ports remain neutral because most of them have no strategic purpose that justifies the maintenance costs.

I might be wrong about this but if most of the map stay neutral let's try the OP's suggestion.

And why is this a bad thing? You can tp to neutral towns for fast access to pvp, while you can't tp to another nations port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Salty Dog on Global said:

I suggested the idea of being able to capture the whole region which reduced the costs of each port in the region.

If you captured the entire region, the only port that could be attacked would be the regional capital.  Once it is retaken all the other ports could be up to capture. 

This sounds like more of the same of what we've already got.  Isn't the basic intention of the patch to reduce the regional RvR grinding? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teutonic    1,055
1 hour ago, Salty Dog on Global said:

that's a good idea... own the entire region, you get the bonus?

yes. As for what type of bonus? I don't know.

It could be better resources due to "increasing demands to find rare resources), or it could be something like more trade goods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    482
44 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

Maintenance of what....? National flag or colour on the map?

I guess if they had to explain it from a roleplay point of view, they would say it is to supply the port with food, weapons and other goods. A port back then in the caribbean owned by a nation would obviously have a garrison there and need all sorts of supplies for soldiers and citizens... but i don't think they added it for the sake of realism but rather balance as @Salty Dog on Global suggested already.

3 hours ago, Stepp636 said:

I also fear that many ports remain neutral

Even tho i think it is good to have as many neutral ports as possible, they could make it so the first owned port per clan is free, the 2nd is 25k and the 3rd 50k etc. per day. This would stop big clans from gobbling up all ports without losing serious amounts of gold while giving smaller clans the chance for a piece of the cake. Seems like the most reasonable compromise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Goldman    1,271
5 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

I can't understand why people fear of one clan controlling half of the map or so... Taxes won't stop them because huge clans have 100m in the warehouse or even 500m gold. It stops small clans from doing anything. Also, players are too stupid to understand concent of overextension. The bigger you are, the harder it is to defend everything. Every consecutive port you need more manpower to defend it.

But we all see "Ah noes, BLACK and SORRY control everything, big bad clans control the whole map!" ... 

@Captain Lust 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Goldman    1,271

In addition... I will say that just 10 players from my clan have roughly 500m gold altogether. The clan is much bigger doe than just 10 players. If we wanted to, we could maintain a huge part of the map. Right now that 500m would be enough to keep 100 ports for 50 days, not considering the possible income from taxation.

 

Any of you still believe that 100k maintenance prevents big clans from controlling the map?

Edited by Peter Goldman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Lust    482
5 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:
5 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

I can't understand why people fear of one clan controlling half of the map or so... Taxes won't stop them because huge clans have 100m in the warehouse or even 500m gold. It stops small clans from doing anything. Also, players are too stupid to understand concent of overextension. The bigger you are, the harder it is to defend everything. Every consecutive port you need more manpower to defend it.

But we all see "Ah noes, BLACK and SORRY control everything, big bad clans control the whole map!" ... 

@Captain Lust 

 

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

×