Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

Patch 14: Part 2 experimental patch increasing realism in ship behavior

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, admin said:

Important experimental update.

Gameplay changes
Victory marks (marks received for winning the map) conversion is now only available for the PVE server

Improvements
Crash reports sent only take into account logs of the recent crash (speeding up returning to the game significantly after the crash)

 

Conversion was removed to increase importance of port capture and victories in conquest. Expected effect = more port battles and more pvp; higher importance of port control and port victories.

Did you have a look in the conquest leader board this week? Russia conquered most of the ports and Britain lost most of them. Anyway Britain is number 2 in the leaderboard and Russia number 5. The winning nation Sweden didn't do any active rvr. They only lost a port due to a Russian attack. How do you think the most successful RvR nation at the moment will be able to gain Victory marks when the current system awards not winning ports but owning them? 

It will not be enough to conquer those ports from the zerg nations. You force us to conquer them without losses on ships. Otherwise we will win ourselves to death. It seems that Devs think we have magical power. Sorry we don't.

There is nothing to say against victory marks, if you hand them out to the participants of rvr and not to the sleepers.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, rediii said:

Isnt the vic buildable with combat marks?

All 1st rates take Victory Marks. Also to note the Heavy Rattler takes Victory Marks. As does the Ingermanland, Wappen, Naigara and Prince.    We will see who will domenate the port battles on most all levels.

7 minutes ago, rediii said:

Shouldnprobably be first 3 places but how are nations supposed to get to one of the first 3 places after 2 months not being there? Very snowbally

I listed the same it should be multi winners not just the same nation over and over.  Oh and I just thought of this.  @admin  Don't base it off National owner ship of ports.  Make it based off clans ownership of ports.  This is more about clan base game now isn't it, but yes do the multi rewards according to your place in the ranking at the end of each cycle that is counted and rewarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin

Victory marks for the weekly win not for most ports. small nations must also be able to win

Most PBs win in the week = Victory Mark

Edited by Christoph
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, z4ys said:

You told us more than once that ships are content now you want to restrict 8 nations from getting content in a game that almost has no content?

Still i like to have a reason for RvR but its a bad approach. Have you thought about the people who only enjoy mission with their Sols but playing on PvP server? Are you telling them in a roundabout way go to the pve server "there is your place guys"?

Giving marks for top 3 places will be a good solution and a goal for everyone. The current change accentuates the need to participate in the end game. Because this is a game -raging war for the control of the Caribbean focused on small scale and large scale pvp and port battles, supported by trading taxes and resource wars.

Also @z4ys we never said "there is your place guys" regarding to pve server
pve server is a gift to players who don't want to meet other players in battle; server that we promised long time ago on this forum and delivered. We do still keep this promise. If we did not make this promise there would be no pve server today.

7 minutes ago, Christoph said:

Victory marks for the weekly win not for most ports. small nations must also be able to win

then nations will trade positions. Trading positions is impossible in current implementation. if you lost your place you will have to get it back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Are you telling them in a roundabout way go to the pve server "there is your place guys"?

Well, that I could respect to be honest... :lol:

The PvP OW server could be so good with a few hundred more players and people actually seeking PvP instead of afk missioning in the PvE zone....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said:

Did you have a look in the conquest leader board this week? Russia conquered most of the ports and Britain lost most of them. Anyway Britain is number 2 in the leaderboard and Russia number 5. The winning nation Sweden didn't do any active rvr. They only lost a port due to a Russian attack. How do you think the most successful RvR nation at the moment will be able to gain Victory marks when the current system awards not winning ports but owning them? 

 

I did. Russia only has 2 battle points. They have 24 points now compared to old 21. Sweden did not do any RVR indeed but they will soon.  They will be attacked on all fronts at the same time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Landsman said:

Well, that I could respect to be honest... :lol:

The PvP OW server could be so good with a few hundred more players and people actually seeking PvP instead of afk missioning in the PvE zone....

thats right but i doubt that these people will keep playing. You can say they never added anything to the game but they will make the next wave of bad steam reviews so bad for us as well.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, admin said:

Important experimental update.

Gameplay changes
Victory marks (marks received for winning the map) conversion is now only available for the PVE server

Improvements
Crash reports sent only take into account logs of the recent crash (speeding up returning to the game significantly after the crash)

 

Conversion was removed to increase importance of port capture and victories in conquest. Expected effect = more port battles and more pvp; higher importance of port control and port victories.

Can you still change a victory mark for XX number of combat marks?

Edited by victor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, victor said:

Can you still change victory mark for XX number of combat marks?

VM to CM is still possible

CM to VM not possible

Edited by z4ys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, admin said:

Giving marks for top 3 places will be a good solution and a goal for everyone.

What if you give Victory marks for PB participation instead? More people will be interested in RvR and more PBs will happen ( probably ) but the weaker nations won't be hello kittyed and pushed out of the game as long as they fight back. So the incentive for battles is there but you won't put small nations out of the game... 

Give x amount of marks to each side after the battle if both sides caused x amount of damage. The winner of the PB will still have the advantage because he has more ports for more PBs but it isn't as snowbally....

Edited by Landsman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin said:

Giving marks for top 3 places will be a good solution and a goal for everyone. The current change accentuates the need to participate in the end game. Because this is a game -raging war for the control of the Caribbean focused on small scale and large scale pvp and port battles, supported by trading taxes and resource wars.

That's not enough. Gaining ports must generate much more points than holding them. Didn't you say you wanted to generate more rvr with that move? With the current point system and your proposal you generate 3 nations with a huge number of ports, where a lot of players have to do nothing else than generating money for maintenance fee and 8 other nations without access to PB ships. 

How shall we do rvr, if you deny us access to ships? Shall we swim and spit?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Landsman said:

What if you give Victory marks for PB participation instead? More people will be interested in RvR and more PBs will happen ( probably ) but the weaker nations won't be hello kittyed and pushed out of the game as long as they fight back. So the incentive for battles is there but you won't put small nations out of the game... 

conquest marks? people will trade port battles then. Current system does not allow trading because when losing ports you lose a lot more points. So if you traded your ports to a friendly nation you will drop deeper on the leaderboard

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Landsman said:

What if you give Victory marks for PB participation instead? More people will be interested in RvR and more PBs will happen ( probably ) but the weaker nations won't be hello kittyed and pushed out of the game as long as they fight back. So the incentive for battles is there but you won't put small nations out of the game... 

In theory a good idea but then we are back to farming the marks like it was with the conquest marks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Christoph said:

or a new system

You win the most pbs in week

1. Gold Mark (For all ships)

2. Silver Mark (Victory Permit and down)

3. Bronze Mark (Small ships)

Just do a tier.  I think every one should get a mark for going to port battles win or lost.  Than give first place 3, 2nd place 2 and 3rd place one for the whole nation.  Than adjust the marks system for what things cost so that you can instant get a first rate with one mark.  Maybe 3 marks for a first rate so every one has a chance to build them, just some can afford to loose them more than others.  If you loose to many than you will need to bring lower BR ships to PB and make it up with numbers and skill.

4 minutes ago, admin said:

I did. Russia only has 2 battle points. They have 24 points now compared to old 21. Sweden did not do any RVR indeed but they will soon.  They will be attacked on all fronts at the same time. 

shhhhhh don't give them our battle plans..... every one hear that it's been order, attack the Swedes from all fronts, Devs order it so now lets get to work.  Don't worry we US players will cover the night flips if they didn't set ports in proper EU times.               

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, admin said:

we want to give nations a clear goal for endgame - become N1. Perhaps VM should be distributed for first 3 places, instead of 1st place only. 
VMs were not tested in clan port control mechanics and previously all ports had to be fought with 25 captains in oceans. Now there are minor ports and you can get on #1 position through controlling only minor ports.

Please, make it for the first 3 places at least. I would say 5 first palces because of having 11 nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Graf Bernadotte said:

That's not enough. Gaining ports must generate much more points than holding them. Didn't you say you wanted to generate more rvr with that move? With the current point system and your proposal you generate 3 nations with a huge number of ports, where a lot of players have to do nothing else than generating money for maintenance fee and 8 other nations without access to PB ships. 

How shall we do rvr, if you deny us access to ships? Shall we swim and spit?

Winning ports already gives more points. You get points for port capture, you get no points if you hold the port, you LOSE more points if you lose the port. It already promotes offense. Getting victory marks without port battle victories is a bad design, it does not gives you incentives to venture out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stepp636 said:

In theory a good idea but then we are back to farming the marks like it was with the conquest marks.

Yeah, but that's happening with all marks and I think it's still better than having the 3 top nations snowball out of control to the point where the other nations are forced to stay in their PvE zones...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, admin said:

I did. Russia only has 2 battle points. They have 24 points now compared to old 21. Sweden did not do any RVR indeed but they will soon.  They will be attacked on all fronts at the same time. 

Sweden might be a sleeping nation right now, but it is still one of the strongest nations in game. With their number of ports they don't have to win PBs. They only have to sink enough of our ships. As soon as we don't have the ships anymore we are not able to win battles against them.

By the way. Russia had 4 PB wins this week. We gave away one port, since we couldn't know about this new move of devs. But even without giving away Las Tortugas we would still be on Number 5 of the ranking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, admin said:

Mise à jour expérimentale importante.

Changements de gameplay
Les marques de victoire (marques reçues pour avoir gagné la carte) sont désormais uniquement disponibles pour le serveur PVE

Améliorations Les
rapports de crash envoyés ne prennent en compte que les logs du crash récent (accélérant le retour au jeu après le crash)

 

La conversion a été supprimée pour augmenter l'importance de la capture du port et des victoires dans la conquête. Effet escompté = plus de batailles portuaires et plus de pvp; plus grande importance du contrôle portuaire et des victoires portuaires.

Dumb...

Tomorrow I lose my ranks 1 (pvp pvp rvr). If I am in a weak nation, I will never be able to play rank 1 again and therefore rvr or simply help my nation.

Thanks for killing NA ...

  • Like 1

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

×