Anti-gank rewards nerf!

[Havelock]

I think this is a very good suggestion, very simple and effective. It will promote more even fights and reduce the urge of ganking. Of course this mechanic may only be implemented together with BR adjustments.

For the realism crowd: PvP marks are given to you by the admiralty. If you sink a smaller ship theyll be like "yeah cool, keep doing yer job mate" but if you sink a superior ship youll probably get some medal for bravery = more marks.

[Hethwill]

5 hours ago, Havelock said:

For the realism crowd: PvP marks are given to you by the admiralty. If you sink a smaller ship theyll be like "yeah cool, keep doing yer job mate" but if you sink a superior ship youll probably get some medal for bravery = more marks.

Yep. Perfectly said.

 

[Fargo]

12 hours ago, Havelock said:

For the realism crowd: PvP marks are given to you by the admiralty. If you sink a smaller ship theyll be like "yeah cool, keep doing yer job mate" but if you sink a superior ship youll probably get some medal for bravery = more marks.

Gold is also given to you by the admiralty... Yes it makes sense for a reputation system, but PvP marks dont represent that. Usually you cant sell your reputation for millions and its gone then, its a reward. In terms of rewards the admiralty would never promote high risk, but to keep losses as low as possible.

[Hethwill]

Not entirely false nor entirely true. The RN captains ( base for many of the game mechanics is RN ) were expected to engage and prevail against superior ships. But there's too much in between and we cannot really look to history given we do not have a Navy/Naval career system.

[Fargo]

1 minute ago, The Red Duke said:

Not entirely fals nor entirely true. The RN captains were expected to engage and prevail against superior ships. But there's too much in between and we cannot really look to history given we do not have a Navy/Naval career system.

When there is a 3v1 situation, no admiralty would tell you to engage one by one or to ignore the target because the fight is not fair. This doesnt mean that you should run from a 3v4.

[Hethwill]

Just now, Fargo said:

When there is a 3v1 situation, no admiralty would tell you to engage one by one or to ignore the target because the fight is not fair. This doesnt mean that you should run from a 3v4.

Yes, that's true, the admiralty left a big dose of liberty of decision to the captains. That's why so many rose fast, due to their cunning and bravery, but we do not have that commodity. Any ships can beat against the wind within a useful timeframe while many ships back in the day did attack 1 by 1 while the rest were still trying to come about and check their options.

But you can easily find these examples, of one versus many ( 1:5 and more ) on its own accord. One being still during Napolenic reign and other during 1812.

Yet another is even more famous. With a british home fleet engage a allied fleet, with bigger numbers of ships and guns.

Career enters and what is expected of captains at any given Station back then  A mission for a Irish Sea captain wouldn't be similar to the missions given to Captains stationed in the Indic for example.

In the end the game doesn't simulate that, so expect a coin to always fall on one side is a bit too much.

 

[Fargo]

16 minutes ago, The Red Duke said:

 

All true, but i dont get the point :s

[Capn Rocko]

The biggest problem I am running into is players retreating from 1v1 and 2v2 battles. If players are scared of evenly-matched fights, then there is something fundamentally wrong with this game (or the collective mentality). I think this suggestion would go a long way in encouraging fair fights and should be implemented asap. Here is an example from last night, where 2 Frenchies had sailed to KPR only to run away from a fair fight:

[Fargo]

6 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

The biggest problem I am running into is players retreating from 1v1 and 2v2 battles. If players are scared of evenly-matched fights, then there is something fundamentally wrong with this game (or the collective mentality). I think this suggestion would go a long way in encouraging fair fights and should be implemented asap. 

On paper its a fair fight, but if these ships are fir they are exponentially weaker than any teak ship. Fir is heavily imbalanced, its not a fair payoff of hullstrenght for speed even if you define speed as extremely valuable. Such ships are made for escaping, what game mechanics allow and support. Thats ganking. Reducing rewards isnt fixing any of those issues...

[Capn Rocko]

45 minutes ago, Fargo said:

On paper its a fair fight, but if these ships are fir they are exponentially weaker than any teak ship. Fir is heavily imbalanced, its not a fair payoff of hullstrenght for speed even if you define speed as extremely valuable. Such ships are made for escaping, what game mechanics allow and support. Thats ganking. Reducing rewards isnt fixing any of those issues...

And how do they know our ships are not fir? 

This screen shot is just one example, not a blanket statement. These situations reoccur every day (often times with me in a fir ship) 

What do you suggest should be done @Fargo? Or do you think that battles should only be fought 3v1? 

[Cmdr RideZ]

No additional reward is needed.  It is alt abusable anyway.

Reward reduction is a good idea.

Gank reduction features in general has been asked many times.  Why we don't get these?

@admin You have a good reason?

[Slim McSauce]

6 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

And how do they know our ships are not fir? 

This screen shot is just one example, not a blanket statement. These situations reoccur every day (often times with me in a fir ship) 

What do you suggest should be done @Fargo? Or do you think that battles should only be fought 3v1? 

People are so afraid to lose, even if its the most easily acquired ships in the game. Unless the other side wants to fight too, they'll just run, defensive tag, escape, repeat until they get to a port and there isn't much you can do.

 

Just now, Cmdr RideZ said:

No additional reward is needed.  It is alt abusable anyway.

Reward reduction is a good idea.

Gank reduction features in general has been asked many times.  Why we don't get these?

@admin You have a good reason?

The best gank reduction would be give the players a way to find PVP without having to gank. 

[Fargo]

8 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

And how do they know our ships are not fir? 

This screen shot is just one example, not a blanket statement. These situations reoccur every day (often times with me in a fir ship) 

What do you suggest should be done @Fargo? Or do you think that battles should only be fought 3v1? 

How do they know they are. If they are its still a risk that they dont have to take.

Well, balance frames and planks?!^^ Most importantly nerv escaping: Remove speedcap. Remove defensive tagging. Restrict repairs. Allow ships to intercept an close enemy. Nerv 100% accurate chasers. Control as a default mechanic. It should be obvious that open world PvP cannot work when ships are not able to force each other into battle. Besides that this all is simple, logical and fair.

Its neglectable how battles are fought, its important that they are fought.

[Malachy]

On 11/17/2017 at 9:45 AM, Cornelis Tromp said:

Contrary to the tags on this thread (clickbait ftw) I have a nice solution (and easy to do!) for the ganking issues  that plague PVp at the moment.

here it comes...

Make PVP rewards scale to BR difference.

mind blown yet? Please follow my thinking:

Target BR : attacker BR x100%= % of rewards.

And I do not mean rewards per player, but total potential rewards across all players for the attacking group.

Group of players x attacks player y. The BR difference is X: 500, Y: 100. So the maximum rewards for the players in group x can be AT MAXIMUM 20% of what it would have been in an equal br situation.

Same goes the other way around. Guy in small ship (e.g. @The Red Duke/Hethwill in a privateer) br 40, attacks an LGV br 110. This gives Hethwill a potential (110:40)x100= 275% for possible pvp rewards!

 

Relatively simple solution to a relativly complex problem. PVP rewards will force down large groups of attackers leading to less ganking.

Because face it: Outnumbering an enemy BR wise is NOT a show of skill. This way it would be high risk, high gain, no risk, no gain.

Absolutely and positively no. Especially the reverse scale. Already snows are encouraged to attack larger ships because their risk is small and they gain great rewards. However the larger ship gets squat for killing them. I will not support a system where this is rewarded. 

[Malachy]

8 hours ago, Fargo said:

How do they know they are. If they are its still a risk that they dont have to take.

Well, balance frames and planks?!^^ Most importantly nerv escaping: Remove speedcap. Remove defensive tagging. Restrict repairs. Allow ships to intercept an close enemy. Nerv 100% accurate chasers. Control as a default mechanic. It should be obvious that open world PvP cannot work when ships are not able to force each other into battle. Besides that this all is simple, logical and fair.

Its neglectable how battles are fought, its important that they are fought.

Removing speed cap will have everyone in the fastests ships in minutes. I prefer variety to cookie cutter ships.

[Hethwill]

3 hours ago, Malachy said:

Removing speed cap will have everyone in the fastests ships in minutes. I prefer variety to cookie cutter ships.

And Penetration stacking. And boarding stacking. And... and... oh wait. Maybe the best would be to remove envelope limits but

- permanent refits > keep 3 slots but have them type specific - 1 for sails or masts , 1 for guns or crew, 1 for hull or structure

- knowledge in same fashion

- max %% bonus in any unique "epic gear" piece  = 0.02

 

[z4ys]

17 hours ago, Capn Rocko said:

The biggest problem I am running into is players retreating from 1v1 and 2v2 battles. If players are scared of evenly-matched fights, then there is something fundamentally wrong with this game (or the collective mentality). I think this suggestion would go a long way in encouraging fair fights and should be implemented asap. Here is an example from last night, where 2 Frenchies had sailed to KPR only to run away from a fair fight:

The game offers to much infos. How do you would feel standing close to celebrity. I mean you both are humans so shouldnt it feel like the same while standing in bus or train next to a person? Same here. Some names are well kown for being good pvplers, so why should I fight a well known pvpler in an even fight?

Because of Liq i know there are 3 kinds of fights that  he gets:

1. Uneven when he gets attacked by player who know him

2. Even when players dont know him yet.

3. Forced when he attacks.

 

In my opinion we need:

- No enemy names in OW

- No enemy names in scoreboard till they sunk/captured

Just display Player1,Player2 when not in the same team

Edited November 20, 2017 by z4ys

[Fargo]

3 hours ago, Malachy said:

Removing speed cap will have everyone in the fastests ships in minutes. I prefer variety to cookie cutter ships.

Please dont start this disussion again. Equaling out conditions has absolutely nothing to do with variety. Variety is a result of balanced options. Speedcap simply reduces these options?! Balance ships, frames and planks if you want more variety. And reduce the OPness of speed, in the first place by removing this magical cap granting sanctity, messing up all general ship balancing. Youre not only lacking an explanation how exactly this should lead to more variety, reality proved that its not working.

[Malachy]

2 hours ago, Fargo said:

Please dont start this disussion again. Equaling out conditions has absolutely nothing to do with variety. Variety is a result of balanced options. Speedcap simply reduces these options?! Balance ships, frames and planks if you want more variety. And reduce the OPness of speed, in the first place by removing this magical cap granting sanctity, messing up all general ship balancing. Youre not only lacking an explanation how exactly this should lead to more variety, reality proved that its not working.

Right now there is lots of variety in pvp, when there were no speed caps everyone were in renomees, surprises, and endy. The results of speed capping is easily observed. And I for one like and support having dozens of ships pvp viable.

[Fargo]

10 minutes ago, Malachy said:

Right now there is lots of variety in pvp, when there were no speed caps everyone were in renomees, surprises, and endy. The results of speed capping is easily observed. And I for one like and support having dozens of ships pvp viable.

It was a pure surprise meta after the cap... I dont know the current situation, but thats hard to believe reading about speedcapped Wasas. If something improved then because they nerved speed boni and increased the speedcap -> made the speedcap less important.

[Malachy]

1 hour ago, Fargo said:

It was a pure surprise meta after the cap... I dont know the current situation, but thats hard to believe reading about speedcapped Wasas. If something improved then because they nerved speed boni and increased the speedcap -> made the speedcap less important.

It was surprise meta BEFORE the cap. There were a lot of surprises around after the cap because folks had them already. I actually haven't seen a surprise in a battle in awhile, though I know they are out there.

Speed capped wasas aren't the end all of pvp. The best pvpers don't even use them. Actually most wasa aren't even close to speed capped. I don't even think you can speed cap them without the navy hull pvp refit and really good pvpers won't waste 15 pvp marks on a damned wasa. I can speed cap a Connie with 6 slots, couldn't do that with a wasa because of the heavy guns. Also, most other ships can get away from them if you don't let them tag you at close range. Their acceleration leaves abit to be desired in a chase ship. I watch what the other good pvpers use, and it's more connies and trincs and indefatigables, renomees, pirate frigates, frigates... pretty much anything with chasers and greater than 3.15 turn rate. I usually see less skilled players in wasas, mainly because it makes them feel tough. While I feel the wasa is overgunned, it's by far not invincible or even the best choice for a 4th rate in os pvp.

In games like this speed is always going to control the fight. There is no way to prevent this. I had this pointed out to me again yesterday by exile in our tournament match. As long as one ship is faster than another, that ship will be the pvp meta. With the speed caps, many ships can approach similar speeds, but you have to know how to sail to your stronger points of wind and the enemy's weaker points to outrun someone or catch them. This promotes greater variety in pvp and variety is a grand thing.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Malachy

[Fargo]

1 hour ago, Malachy said:

 

No, people used Surprises for month. Whats the point then to use Indef or trinc over Connie, or Frigate over Pirate Frigate?! Maybe they buffed those ships, equaling out turnrate in addition?! Reno is a worse ship even in teak compared with a fir surprise.

Why dont just give all ships same base speed for maximum "variety"?! Thats nonesense, so is speedcap. Its not variety if all those "different" ships are speedcapped, build in the same way and have similar specs. How much decisionmaking is involved here?!

Speed grants some control in OW and battle besides beeing a combat stat and is always going to be important, but it must never control the fight. And thats exactly what speedcap does, pushing the value of speed to extremes. We should do the opposite and try to reduce the meaning of speed. If you cant fully repair inside a battle, speed wont lets you escape when you messed up. If slower ships can intercept you, speed looses value. If smaller ships are by default faster than larger ships, speed looses meaning. Speed is not that great anymore once youre in an actual fight. Since your fastest connie is going to be catched by fast smaller vessels and outruns all other 4th rates nevertheless, there is no need anymore to go for max speed. Then balancing is possible. Variety is achieved when people start to make decisions how much speed they need at cost of manouverability or firepower. Brainlessly maxing out speed has nothing to do with this. 63 wood combinations, dozens of upgrades and skills. Assume those would be balanced, do you realise that it makes 99% of this redundant?!

I can just point out the obvious again. OW PvP is not working when ships are all the same speed and enemies have to agree to fight each other.

[Malachy]

38 minutes ago, Fargo said:

No, people used Surprises for month. Whats the point then to use Indef or trinc over Connie, or Frigate over Pirate Frigate?! Maybe they buffed those ships, equaling out turnrate in addition?! Reno is a worse ship even in teak compared with a fir surprise.

Why dont just give all ships same base speed for maximum "variety"?! Thats nonesense, so is speedcap. Its not variety if all those "different" ships are speedcapped, build in the same way and have similar specs. How much decisionmaking is involved here?!

Speed grants some control in OW and battle besides beeing a combat stat and is always going to be important, but it must never control the fight. And thats exactly what speedcap does, pushing the value of speed to extremes. We should do the opposite and try to reduce the meaning of speed. If you cant fully repair inside a battle, speed wont lets you escape when you messed up. If slower ships can intercept you, speed looses value. If smaller ships are by default faster than larger ships, speed looses meaning. Speed is not that great anymore once youre in an actual fight. Since your fastest connie is going to be catched by fast smaller vessels and outruns all other 4th rates nevertheless, there is no need anymore to go for max speed. Then balancing is possible. Variety is achieved when people start to make decisions how much speed they need at cost of manouverability or firepower. Brainlessly maxing out speed has nothing to do with this. 63 wood combinations, dozens of upgrades and skills. Assume those would be balanced, do you realise that it makes 99% of this redundant?!

I can just point out the obvious again. OW PvP is not working when ships are all the same speed and enemies have to agree to fight each other.

I'd like to go come out and pvp with me so that you can learn the error of your statements. Even if two ships have the same speed, they have different points of sail which adds quite abit of variety. A Connie and trinc could always take on a surprise. Speed will always be king because the main point of combat in this game is to secure the wind advantage. As long as some ships are neutered and unable to keep up, they will never be competitive. Watch the aloha vs  exile battle on liquicitys stream. That demonstrates completely how speed controls a fight. Our two indes were much heavier and slower and their little frigates won pretty easily by controlling the fight. Slow ships will never have an advantage no matter how tough or maneuverable you make them. Fast ships will jockey for position, obtain the position and take down sails. Once they have your sails down, a heavy ship is a setting duck. Why do you think it's so easy to take a first rate out with a 4th or 5th rate? It's speed. 

Ow pvp is working better now than it has ever worked. Bringing back 17 knot endymions and surprises would set this game back months and ruin all the positive progress we have made. 

I would be more than willing to demonstrate the flaws in your argument in person, either opposing you or sailing with you. Sounds like you need to spend more time pvping under new mechanics instead of rehashing old flawed arguments about why some ships should be more powerful than others. Speed is king and always will be. Now pvp is more about recognizing and understandings how to defeat your opponents sailing profile. No more ships avoid battle now than they did in the past. The difference is with the caps, more ships are viable now and the previously overpowered ones are in line with everything else. A surprise can still escape upwind, but it's not gonna chase down a Connie downwind too. That's the most important change the speedcaps bring. Anyone who wants speed caps removed wants to bring back the old meta and an artificial advantage they lost. Ships are on a much more even footing now than they have ever been. Pvp abit more. Sail with some good folks. It helps.

[Slim McSauce]

No ship will even reach 15.5 knts without stacking sail force bonus mods. That's what we should be looking at

[Malachy]

1 hour ago, Slim Jimmerson said:

No ship will even reach 15.5 knts without stacking sail force bonus mods. That's what we should be looking at

That's actually not true. The Endymion, renomee, and 5 or 6 of the 6 th rates can. It's mainly 4th and 3rd that need sail force. Maybe half the frigates. Even with sail force, half the mods And skill books you need is rare as hell and only a few will have them. Part of the problem in this game is low populations so many new to pvp keep running into the elite few who only pvp.if it ever goes live hopefully the skill levels will balance out abit.

sail force has quite abit of malus, whichever way you go with it.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Malachy