Is this an unacceptable exploit?

[Busterbloodvessel]

Whilst trying to screen at Bahia Escocesa (14/11/17) the Danish BF clan and friends avoided the Russian screening fleet by creating a fake battle with a Pirate right outside the PB port. Shortly after the PB started the Danes exited the fake battle and ran the short distance to the port to enter the PB unmolested; apart from two Danish screening Wasa's seen in first spyglass view of video who were not part of the PB fleet.

The Pirate player involved, qw569 from KIWI clan (sailing a shop bought Essex, I am sure of this because when sunk he had no repairs or rum of any sort on board; video available upon request). The entire Danish fleet entered the PB and won the port (good fight apparently, no complaints there). 

I want to know if this method of avoiding a PB screen is considered acceptable. Having been demoted once, following the "Gunless French PB at Cap Francais", I do not wish to endure another keel haul for another exploit if the Russians use the same method. Could I add that If it is NOT an exploit, can you please bring back logging off outside the port so we don't have to go through the farce of bringing out a friendly nation to create a fake battle for what is the same effect

Video below is a clip which is self explanatory, fortunately I was scouting from a balloon so caught the Danes emerging red handed.

Looking forward to a response.

 

Buster (Tarantino eat yer heart out)

Edited November 15, 2017 by Busterbloodvessel
I always edit on principle.

[Christendom]

Unfortunately this type of behavior is a byproduct of not having an alliance system.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

Just like logging out before PB was 100% legal, so is hiding in battle instances. It would be hard to find a solution for that or to make it an illegal action. 

Not really just make a CD of 30 mins after exiting a battle before you can join a PB.. Problems from that would be aplenty tho..

[FurQ]

  It's another simple fix. They must have tagged the pirate, as he wouldn't have had the br to tag the battlegroup in. So if your battlegroup tags, you get a pb timer on exit, if you're tagged by the screening fleet you don't get one.

[Sir Texas Sir]

6 hours ago, ShroudedRecluse said:

oh wow - isn't this the reason they removed pirate outlaw battles?

(ironically at least in a pirate outlaw battle you could still join and see who was in it, what ships they were sailing etc - with this method the entire fleet goes invis when the battle closes with defenders having no idea of numbers/BR)

@admin - to be consistent, please either make it so that one nation cannot tag another nation to prevent this same abuse that pirate outlaw battles were removed for, or bring back pirate outlaw battles

ty

(yeah i know it sounds ridiculous, however so was the pathetic excuse for removing pirate outlaw battles)

Exactly the problem I was seeing on our server was never the Pirate outlaw battles as you can position join them, they are open the whole time and any one can join.  WIth these other battles it's very exploitable.

My solution is make zones. 

• You have your safe zone that is around capitals.  Are set up like our normal battles, but you get reinforcements and they close after a set timer. Normal green on green rules.
• You have your  normal zones.  These are any National owned waters that isn't a capital safe zone.  They have the normal circle and than they have the big circle that you have the option to join (remember when we had two circles).  The window to join/option remains 2.5 mins but this are positional join only if your out side the normal pull circles.  This will allow you to join from any direction and you don't have to turn around an. Normal green on green rules.
• Than you have your PvP hotzones.  These are certain areas of the map that are unsafe for traders and nothing but PvP is expected in these zones.  It's Pirate Free For ALL BATTLES in these zones. There are only two ways to have this zone.  One any port in AGRO for a port battle turns into a PvP ZONE until the Port Battle happens.   This is a war zone after all.  Make it a small bubble that only covers that port and have it shown red on the map all ports in this contested zone.  Any battles started are positional join and you can fight any one in the battle except your own nation. The other way is Clans can actually set there ports to be hotzones.  Green on green rules will only apply to your own nation.
• Last we have the TRUE PVP ZONES.  These are perm zones on the map (kinda like the old PvP Events).  The ports are neutral around them or free towns so no one can capture them.  They have a perm red zone around them.  Any combat in this zone will be the free for all mechanics.  Any thing goes in these areas La Mona, La Navasse, Tumbabo, La Tortugas ports that are a bit from other ports but in the middle of areas.  Prob some other better picks out there.  Pretty much all the free towns are these zones, but we can rename these ports to Outlaw Havens.  There is no Green on Green in these ares anything can go.

Edited November 15, 2017 by Sir Texas Sir

[Lonar]

Funny i was pretty shure i saw the same thing from the russians when they conquered Bermudas. Yes it was not nessesary, but you had a pirate with you wich you tagged or he tagged you but then all of you jumped south of flatts into the battle. So now somone other uses your tricks now its a bad thing and goes to the tribunal? Or am i mistaken?  

[Lord Gud]

It's a dirty tactic that should be fixed along with two nations that tag each other to escape a third nation that is fighting both of them.

[Busterbloodvessel]

31 minutes ago, Lonar said:

Funny i was pretty shure i saw the same thing from the russians when they conquered Bermudas. Yes it was not nessesary, but you had a pirate with you wich you tagged or he tagged you but then all of you jumped south of flatts into the battle. So now somone other uses your tricks now its a bad thing and goes to the tribunal? Or am i mistaken?  

Yep your mistaken, I looked in my diary of misdemeanours.

If permitted, I am reluctantly willing to use the BF tactic on you next PB though! 

 

Buster (looking over top of specs)

 

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by Busterbloodvessel

[qw569😳]

@Busterbloodvessel

Why you didn't write about PB for Port-de-Paix? Especially about how attackers enter to PB.

Could they be intercepted?

maybe because Russian Empire was attacker

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by qw569

[Busterbloodvessel]

5 hours ago, qw569 said:

@Busterbloodvessel

Why you didn't write about PB for Port-de-Paix? Especially about how attackers enter to PB.

Could they be intercepted?

maybe because Russian Empire was attacker

 

 

 

 

@qw569

Thank you for your response.

I will not defend the heinous act of travelling from La Tortue to Port-de-Paix without allowing an opportunity of being screened by Pirates! I didn’t actually do it, but I would, I am so condemned! It’s rather different to a fake battle instance though isn’t it.

I take a couple of things in evidence from your post:

1.       You don’t deny that you were party to the BF arrangement as I claim.

2.       You cite game play by others as being your motive.  I take this to mean that you would also prefer not to see this in the game.

@admin 

To me the evidence is clear. The video shows what happened. By qw569’s mail it is more than reasonable to conclude a fake battle instance was used. BF and qw569 colluded in this ploy. The only defence, if you decide that a defence is needed, seems to be that others did or would use it.

I haven’t seen a single post that applauds this means of entering a PB. The method is open for use by anyone who cares to use it. I fear it will become standard practice unless you declare against it and enforce abstinence. If not, it’s going on my to-do list tomorrow.

What say you!

 

Buster and Buster (Attorneys)

Edited November 15, 2017 by Busterbloodvessel
I always edit

[admin]

 

@qw569 sailed both WITH and AGAINST the BF (all on live streams) so its hard to make a decision in this particular case as:

it is allowed to attack other players
it is allowed to stay in battle until battle is over
formally no rules were broken but the intent was clear
qw is clearly not an alt and is an active player for a pirate nation

Players should stop discussing BF or RUS or RED. The discussion must focus on where should we stop letting players using allowed mechanics to their benefit because there are lots of rules that can cause such concerns (for example shooting enemy sail with single shots for 1.5 hours).

Basically should we punish players for staying in battle because it gives them advantage and if yes should we then punish players for using yards because it gives them an advantage in turning)

[North]

20 minutes ago, admin said:

 

@qw569 sailed both WITH and AGAINST the BF (all on live streams) so its hard to make a decision in this particular case as:

it is allowed to attack other players
it is allowed to stay in battle until battle is over
formally no rules were broken but the intent was clear
qw is clearly not an alt and is an active player for a pirate nation

Players should stop discussing BF or RUS or RED. The discussion must focus on where should we stop letting players using allowed mechanics to their benefit because there are lots of rules that can cause such concerns (for example shooting enemy sail with single shots for 1.5 hours).

Basically should we punish players for staying in battle because it gives them advantage and if yes should we then punish players for using yards because it gives them an advantage in turning)

So it's a grey aera. Perfect. No need for screening pb either delene or offensive, glad you clear this up. Now we can use screeners to make 2 pb  at same time and hide in battle so we dont need screening. 

Edited November 15, 2017 by North

[Christendom]

4 minutes ago, North said:

So it's a grey aera. Perfect. No need for screening pb either delene or offensive, glad you clear this up. Now we can use screeners to make 2 pb  at same time and hide in battle so we dont need screening. 

I like it north.  Starting to think like a night flipper  :-)

[qw569😳]

8 minutes ago, North said:

So it's a grey aera. Perfect. No need for screening pb either delene or offensive, glad you clear this up. Now we can use screeners to make 2 pb  at same time and hide in battle so we dont need screening. 

Incorrect.

The screening fleet must start looking for the enemy before 1h30min +15 min (duration of battle)

[admin]

19 minutes ago, North said:

So it's a grey aera. Perfect. No need for screening pb either delene or offensive, glad you clear this up. Now we can use screeners to make 2 pb  at same time and hide in battle so we dont need screening. 

Several nations hid in battles before.  hundreds of times. several nations logged off before the PB (which caused us to add a 30 min pb timer log off timer) several nations teleported to battle using TP to regional capital forcing us to change the tp city.. all those were allowed valid mechanics, but were used to get to PB without interference.

 
But this one is hard because we can't remove attacking other players . Also if a screening fleet is attacking a port battle fleet does it in reality also keeping them in battle (sometimes with no intention of fighting)? 

Maybe players can just relax and play normally instead of turning into trash asshole dickmans?

[Doug Maoz]

4 minutes ago, admin said:

Maybe players can just relax and play normally instead of turning into trash asshole dickmans?

+1

I'm not sure why there is a need for screening in most cases, why not have a good fight in the PB? I do understand some ports are more strategic than others and may warrant defending at all costs, but I suspect in the majority of cases port ownership is not as important as some make it out to be...

[North]

5 minutes ago, admin said:

 

Maybe players can just relax and play normally instead of turning into trash asshole dickmans?

Proberly not possible, you read forum so you proberly know this allready

Tribunal was posted to get a answer, and without all the other things written. It is basically allowed, but not good game play.

[admin]

9 minutes ago, North said:

Proberly not possible, you read forum so you proberly know this allready

Tribunal was posted to get a answer, and without all the other things written. It is basically allowed, but not good game play.

we have not yet said it will be allowed in the future - its under investigation.
investigation goal is to maybe find the way to block it by design. but as you understand its very hard to remove attack   Any combat NPC could be attacked and a fleet can sail away from him for 1.5 hours.

to fix this invisibility and speed boost must be removed. but i think its generally a very much liked feature

[Busterbloodvessel]

@admin

A difficult nut to crack eh?

How about making a battle free area around a PB port where it is not possible to tag players or NPC. The size of the battle free area would be twice the maximum render range from the PB port dock in good visibility. The duration of the battle free area would be for at least 2 hours down to 15mins before port battle start time.

This would mean no battle could start close enough to allow an invisible sail-in and any battle starting before 2 hours would not be a safe haven as it will close at least half an hour before the PB starts. The battles opening 15 mins before would allow screening action to commence but be so close to PB time that the battle swords would be visible for sufficient time for screeners to disrupt

 

Buster (on trash arsehole dickmans watch) 

Edited November 15, 2017 by Busterbloodvessel

[Kloothommel]

47 minutes ago, admin said:

Maybe players can just relax and play normally instead of turning into trash asshole dickmans?

I just found myself a new forum sig

[Powderhorn]

What if, around port battle zones, fleets of AI Gunboats would come out to defend the port?  I wonder if that would help do something about hiding in a battle?  It'd at least get that model back in use...

[Busterbloodvessel]

1 minute ago, Powderhorn said:

What if, around port battle zones, fleets of AI Gunboats would come out to defend the port?  I wonder if that would help do something about hiding in a battle?  It'd at least get that model back in use...

nice troll

[Powderhorn]

I'm just spitballing here.  But the problem is people hide in the fight until it is safe for them to leave.  Gunboats carry... what... a 24lb bow chaser?  And some sort of stern carronade, if memory serves.  It seems it would be less profitable to hide in a fight if 24 gunboats (24x24lb guns), came out to smash you up a bit.  If nothing else, you'd have to run, which would throw off the timing of your escape.  Or you'd take some damage, and need to use up some repairs.

[Christendom]

There isn't really a solution to this problem as @admin mentioned.  You could say that this is perhaps an ethics thing and it should be tribunal worthy, but it happens so frequently that seems impractical.  Technically they are enemies and you would have to change the ROE for every fight to just fix this problem.   

One fix would be to bring back the alliance system.  Perhaps inter-clan alliances not dependent on nation.  Another one would be to make all engagements x amount of kms from land be outlaw style battles.  Another thought would be to have a rule that if you leave any sort of combat, you have to wait...say 10mins....to join any PB.  This means you have to sail there.  

It does seem rather stupid to blame this nation vs that one.  RUS/RDNN were on the forefront of some interesting tactics back in the day, like logging off in front of ports and some war bomb stuff.  I remember our frustration at not being able to screen them out.  Now they're on the receiving end of some.  Basically shit happens.  Not everything is gonna be perfect in this game.

 

[Hodo]

2 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

What game should do is kick out players from a fight if they don't get any hits for 10 minutes. Of course there can be friendly fire or simple tagging, but it will fix a small % of griefing when someone tags NPC and runs away fro 1:30h

LOL you havent sailed a SoL that ends up in a bad position at the start of a battle.  It can take 10 minutes just to get with in 750m of where the fight started when you loaded in.  

I have had chases last longer than 10min where I have done no damage, but they are in my "control" range, does this mean they get an automatic get out now because I dont shoot them or they dont shoot me?  LOL no.