Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sign in to follow this  
EliteDelta

Screening Port Battle Suggestion (Poll)

Sreening Port Battle Suggestion (Poll)  

11 members have voted

  1. 1. Screening in-game.

    • Screening is fine as it is.
      7
    • Screening suggestion (below) should be implemented.
      2
    • Screening should change, but not as suggested (below).
      2


Recommended Posts

Hello Everyone.

I've been thinking about the mechanics of screening in-game at the moment, and I would like to ask the opinion of others. I have put together a suggestion on how to stop screening from ruining RvR (in my opinion), so please tell me what you think by voting or posting below.

Suggestion Overwiew

To avoid the situation where a nation decides to screen a port battle instead of actually fighting, a mechanic could be added where a PB fleet is granted immunity for a short period of time before and after the PB, to allow them to get into and out of the area.

Mechanics

Before the battle, an officer of the clan that scheduled the PB can choose to make a battle group for the specific port battle.

(I imagine something where you can click on your scheduled battles, and there is an option to make a battlegroup for that battle.)

Once started, this battlegroup will behave normally, except that 15 minutes (time could be adjusted) before the PB starts, everyone in the group will become immune to being tagged, but also will not be able to tag other players. This immunity will continue 15 minutes after the PB has ended, and will then expire.

Conditions

-If a player leaves the battlegroup, they lose all immunity.
-If the battle group is disbanded, all immunity is gone. 

Argument

I think defenders have their chance to stop a battle during the hostility generation. Once the battle is scheduled, it seems silly to be able to park a SOL fleet of 50 people outside a port, to stop the 10 enemies trying to get to the battle. 

In my opinion, this will put more importance on attacking enemies while they grind hostility, instead of having the safety net of screening them out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screening is essentially area denial, the objective is to deny an attacking fleet access to the area they need to fight in, namely the port battle area. It holds true for both convoy defence and as part of the defence of a port,  until the enemy PB fleet are either driven off or reach the port battle area.

If an attacking fleet fails to get to a PB then either the prevailing winds hampered them or they failed to adequately plan to get the PB fleet where it needs to be, in  neither case is that the fault of the defender, the wind cannot be overcome, what you see is what you have to work with, inadequate planning however can be overcome, simply deny the defender's screen the ability to deny you the area you need, local superiority is key in attacking ports, and if the defender maintains local superiority  he has fulfilled his task to defend his port, if he fails then the attacker gets in,  and the PB fleets determine the outcome.    

These battles are a test of skill, the fight itself is a part of that test not the whole test, he who has the better plan, the fleet that has the skillsets to carry out that plan, even if they have to change the plan on the fly, will usually win the day.

In regard to preventing the PB from happening at all, I agree stopping hostility is the key, and if a clan or nation is unable to stop hostility then they lose out on the PVP content, and risk losing their port,  granted it is not always possible to find the numbers to break up hostility, even so, the effort itself provides content, just as the screens provide content, and if both sides manage to get their PB fleets into action then it will be because the attacking screen fleets did what they are supposed to do, impose local area superiority providing both OW PVP and RVR simultaneously, surely for both PVP and RVR players it can only be win/win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sir Lancelot Holland said:

Screening is essentially area denial, the objective is to deny an attacking fleet access to the area they need to fight in, namely the port battle area. It holds true for both convoy defence and as part of the defence of a port,  until the enemy PB fleet are either driven off or reach the port battle area.

If an attacking fleet fails to get to a PB then either the prevailing winds hampered them or they failed to adequately plan to get the PB fleet where it needs to be, in  neither case is that the fault of the defender, the wind cannot be overcome, what you see is what you have to work with, inadequate planning however can be overcome, simply deny the defender's screen the ability to deny you the area you need, local superiority is key in attacking ports, and if the defender maintains local superiority  he has fulfilled his task to defend his port, if he fails then the attacker gets in,  and the PB fleets determine the outcome.    

These battles are a test of skill, the fight itself is a part of that test not the whole test, he who has the better plan, the fleet that has the skillsets to carry out that plan, even if they have to change the plan on the fly, will usually win the day.

In regard to preventing the PB from happening at all, I agree stopping hostility is the key, and if a clan or nation is unable to stop hostility then they lose out on the PVP content, and risk losing their port,  granted it is not always possible to find the numbers to break up hostility, even so, the effort itself provides content, just as the screens provide content, and if both sides manage to get their PB fleets into action then it will be because the attacking screen fleets did what they are supposed to do, impose local area superiority providing both OW PVP and RVR simultaneously, surely for both PVP and RVR players it can only be win/win.

Your points are very logical, but you don't address the main thing I was discussing above.
If a PB fleet is made up of around 10 people (as most of them are) then it is too easy to tag the whole fleet outside the port, and deny them the chance to fight the port battle. This isn't happening too often right now, because of the low population numbers, but I think it will become a big issue if we start having 700 - 1000 people online. 

In the past, screening would typically be won by whoever has the most people. I saw this a lot when I was part of GB, we would bring 50-75 screeners and deny entry to the port battle. The new battlegroups mostly solved this issue, because it was hard to tag the combined BR of 25 ships. However we now have PB fleets of 5-12 people, and it is very easy to tag these fleets, especially if you bring a lot of SOL to screen them out. 

Overall I'm saying that large nations will win by screening, and small nations wont be able to screen out the large nations. Maybe people want it to stay like this, but I think a change would be helpful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is very difficult for small nations to prosper, and beat large numbers, I am not unsympathetic to their position, by any means. To be frank there is little need for overwhelming force, and I would agree taking 25 1st rates and up to 75 screeners is overkill against nations or clans that can only muster 8-10 PB ships and a perhaps a dozen screeners.  Indeed, while some battles were lopsided with numbers, (Trafalgar being a case in point) the side with the lesser numbers could still win the battle, there was also an unwritten 'code of honour' between enemies, and within the Navy's that fought each other, which by today's standards are antiquated and little appreciated. 

I would like to think that such a 'code' could be agreed between players, but times were different then and warfare was more civilised, for lack of a better term, to be honest I doubt many would entertain the idea of a 'code of honour' between Clans of the same nation, never mind enemy nations. I think in game the one faction that did have a form of 'code of honour' was the Pirates,  before they were neutered, they at least, had a way to enforce their code.  It is I am afraid, in part, the transference of  21st century culture onto 18th/19th century values, it is sad to see it happen, I fear a workable solution will be difficult to achieve.

One also has to bear in mind that Pax Britannica only worked  in the Post Napoleonic era because the other nations did not band together against a Royal Navy the size of the two biggest foreign  fleets combined,   the very same reason that the big nations keep their superiority, and perhaps, it is that, which ensures that the big nations do not fight each other, the fear that the little nations could get enough assets together to defeat them while fighting the two next biggest nations almost came to pass in the war of 1812, fought by a fledgling navy  with help from one of Great Britain's major enemies of the day. Pax Britannica failed when Great Britain found she could not afford to fight big wars, even with her Empire, the help provided by the United States, and many other countries besides. Could it be that the answer to this problem in game lies within the demise of Pax Britannica?   There is but one way to discover the answer to that question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PBs are a hold over from PotBS.  It is rare that a port was won by a decisive fleet engagement itself but by a sustained campaign of sea control so that troops could land.

If we changed how RvR was done, we could solve any screening issues.  Create a OW 3 day event were patrolling a port zone created contention/points.  Sinking players also creates points.  The group with the most points flips the port.  No screening, no port timers, no arena meta ships and players from all time zones can contribute.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×