Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Hullabaloo

Not turning up to Port Battles

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, z4ys said:

TBH screener are not necessary whats the problem to fight the actually port battle? Or do you want to start to complain that 25 guys sitting in battle  doing nothing in t is more fun? what was different to now then?

So wasting 70-25 = 55 peoples life is your own fault.

Kind of. Whole screening thing favor high populated nation so small ones have low chances even close to PB - means half of people lost interest in any RvR at all. Even old PotBS lobby PB system works more fun than this. Current promote zerg, hiding in battles and all kind of unwanted actions - in result we losing more and more players. Half of PFK went to other game since we can`t do anything against zergs with 15 people. Sad to say but huge part of population in NA just picked "easy win" mode by joining top populated nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few suggested options for discouraging uncontested port battles: 

Option 1. Following an uncontested PB (one where at least 50% [negotiable] of the BR is a no-show) the clan raising pb is barred from raising subsequent hostility on any port for an extended period, say 3 days [negotiable]. If two pb's are uncontested this is extended to a 5 day barring [negotiable] and so on with increasing pb time barring for consecutive infringements.

Option 2. The offending clan loose a port to neutral (nearest) at server reset with a loss of conquest points.

Option 3. All timers for ports of the offending clan are set to open for 7 days [time negotiable]. 

Option 4. The offending clan have a penalty port battle set against their nearest port for the same time as the no-show pb the following day, with the clan attacker/defender roles reversed. There is no-penalty for a no-show for a penalty pb.

Option 5. A sliding scale of penalty using the options above for the level of no-show calculated using BR e.g. 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%. The BR of an attacking captain will be counted even if he does not manage to enter the pb, provided he clicks on pb entry when the pb is active, (in this way he will know that his presence is noted even if he is screened out)

Option 6. None of the above options apply if an Officer of the attacking clan cancels a port battle (which his clan has decided not to attack, mechanic will be needed for this) at least 4 hours [negotiable but I would suggest no less than 2 hours] before the PB is due to start. This option has a cool down timer of 48 hours [negotiable]. i.e. if two PB are set then the attacking clan can only cancel one PB. A cancelled port battle is totally reset.

Buster (puts down quill)

 

Edited by Busterbloodvessel
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Kind of. Whole screening thing favor high populated nation so small ones have low chances even close to PB - means half of people lost interest in any RvR at all. Even old PotBS lobby PB system works more fun than this. Current promote zerg, hiding in battles and all kind of unwanted actions - in result we losing more and more players. Half of PFK went to other game since we can`t do anything against zergs with 15 people.

you could argue that this is where diplomacy needs to come in, small nations have always asked for help IRL and I don't see much difference ingame. This will however cause a lot of whingeing as to why the larger nations get attacked by the others banding together

Share this post


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

TBH screener are not necessary whats the problem to fight the actually port battle? Or do you want to start to complain that 25 guys sitting in battle  doing nothing is more fun? what was different to the current event?

So wasting 70-25 = 55 peoples life is your own fault.

You are asking for fun when its actually all about winning for you.

Well, I really couldn't give a shit about winning. But I take your point about screening. I suppose that if I was in the PB with nothing to do because the attackers were fighting a screening battle outside then even though that would still be boring at least there was a battle going on somewhere and the attackers had turned up, then it wouldn't feel so bad. Its just a bit crap when nobody even bothered to turn up.

Share this post


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

you could argue that this is where diplomacy needs to come in, small nations have always asked for help IRL and I don't see much difference ingame. This will however cause a lot of whingeing as to why the larger nations get attacked by the others banding together

But what is the motivation for a big nation to help a small one?

Share this post


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

you could argue that this is where diplomacy needs to come in, small nations have always asked for help IRL and I don't see much difference ingame. This will however cause a lot of whingeing as to why the larger nations get attacked by the others banding together

Yup but tell me who will still play when your 15 captains fleet will be screened out few times by 50-70 first rates? Nobody. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, z4ys said:

But what is the motivation for a big nation to help a small one?

Zero - why they should risk ships and sacrifice time in the name of what? Game few times was in similar shape - just two side conflict anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

But what is the motivation for a big nation to help a small one?

ask the Spanish... or the Ruskys

why have the Swedes helped other nations from time to time and other nations too ?  France.... GB

 

 

When it's mutualy beneficial normally and many times people like to support the underdog. Have you seriously never asked for help ingame ? or IRL ?

You chose an impossible nation , what part of impossible didn't people understand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The animosity between players is the main problem here. We are ready to accept "system mistakes" or "system abuse" when our guys do it, and are quick to point them out when the other team does it. This is a problem when players are the main content in this game, we expect them to behave and sometimes they just don't. This can only be fixed with a well defined implementation of rules of engagement. Programmers need to do their work, when they are done with the sailing profile, ofcourse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Vizzini said:

ask the Spanish... or the Ruskys

why have the Swedes helped other nations from time to time and other nations too ?  France.... GB

 

 

When it's mutualy beneficial normally and many times people like to support the underdog. Have you seriously never asked for help ingame ? or IRL ?

You chose an impossible nation , what part of impossible didn't people understand

Spain and Russia are working tohether in order to farm VM. But what would be the benefit for any nation to work with prussia for example. Prussia cant offer anything. Therefore help would only be granted when boredom strikes. You already pointing at it by saying "from time to time"

Dont get me wrong I am not complaing that Prussia gets no help. I want it impossible thats why I play prussia. But again there is no reason for other nations to help except boredom and own advantage. Furthermore they are not really engaged. So out of my expericence everytime a nation gets help by an other its only half-ass.

 

Edited by z4ys
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, z4ys said:

But what is the motivation for a big nation to help a small one?

Large Nations like support from smaller ones as they can have advantages of, additional players, aggressive players, added screening flexibility and possible time zone advantages. Small Nations should seek alliances with bigger ones and grow their player base and have resource access/sharing, if you screen for an ally you should expect them to do the same for you. If they don't your on the wrong team.  

The Russian's were a small nation which decided to help the Spanish and assist with their fight with GB, both were and are big Nations.

Russia are still only 5th on the Conquest table (upper mid-table in fact). Despite protestations from other Nations Russia is not large, but it is growing. We were second from bottom not long ago and I would say we are now a mid-sized, with a good turn out most days due to the player base having a good time (usually ;) ).

The four clans above Russia on the conquest table own 190 ports out of a total of 328, well over half.  Russia currently has 38, all of the numbers are incontestable, they are published in game. From reading some of the posts from Russia's adversaries you would think we were the largest Nation in the game, we just have a punch above our size and some of the big fellas don't care for us.

I would add that this is my fair reading of the game. Before you accept any other view on the RvR game look at the  Conquest Competition leader board and make up your own mind. 

 Buster (simples)

Edited by Busterbloodvessel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hullabaloo said:

Not turning up to Port Battles


This has probably been done before but I couldnt find the thread.

I was in a PB the other night, there was a full PB fleet and Screening fleets, probably involved 60 or 70 people.
60 or 70 people who could have been doing something else and in my case probably would not have been playing NA at all.
But I changed my plans (and those of other people too) cos it was an important PB.

The clan that raised hostility didn't turn up. 

That just lacks class and respect for your fellow players and I'm not happy about having my time wasted by a bunch of scrubs and for me that constitutes griefing and some action should be taken against players who deliberately waste people's time.

Most clans have some sense of decency, rivalry but with respect to other clans and nations, fellow players. 

What makes it worse is that the useless scum-sucking clan in question, ran the hostility while we were in a Port Battle, as they would never have dared show themselves otherwise, (they are cowards as well as time wasters).

I can understand that the mechanics of this game allow for diversionary tactics and fighting on many fronts, but if this just results in 60 or 70 players sitting around doing nothing getting bored of the game, then thats a problem. The clan in question were logged into the game and decided to run fleet practice missions instead. That was by far the most de-motivating experience I have had in NA, and made me question whether I want to be involved in RvR anymore.

As it is your opponent that sets the time for the battle, it effectively means that someone has been allowed to actively go out of there way to waste my time and that of 60 or 70 other people, and that can't be good for the game.

There should be some kind of penalty for raising hostility and then not making a reasonable effort to take the port.
eg. clan banned from entering hostility missions for 1 month. Or at least the 'port can't gain hostility' period should be extended so attacking an enemy port and losing the PB at least has a big benefit to the defender.

The Port Battle should be automatically won if no attacking players have entered within x minutes of the start, instead of having to sit there waiting for the points to accumalate. 

It's really Boring. Change it.

suggestion for penalty.

If the clan flipping the port is not in that region with the same or a minimum BR and ship reqs (f.ex not having afk 1st rates in a shallow water port region) as the port has, the port cant be flipped for a whole week

Edited by Wyy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't come with overwhelming numbers? 

There is nothing wrong with what happened. Contest hostility grinds, those are actually in your favor anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Busterbloodvessel said:

...

How often do we see multi nation port flips? Once every month? maybe. Nobody is really interest to help outside of the own nation/clan. Like I said its half-ass. Maybe 5 guys show up because they have nothing else to do (boredom). But how often do you see huge multi nation screening fleets that are really organized? I would say its very very rar.

 

For me screening is a fake feature that do more harm than good. Hostility missions should be extended and improved that they compensate screening and offering a better pvp opportunity. Entrance for pb should be easy for both. (There is no way a fleet would reach a port in time to defend a contested port because of the information flow in that time period. the fleet would have been already there in order to defend.)

So I would like to see a lobby for pb. That would actually solve the problem that when no enemy will show up the pb could end immediately. So nobodys time get wasted.

Furthermore it would help all nation regardless of their size to get access to rvr when they have at least 25 player for the improved hostility.

It would make the game more enjoyable for everyone.

 

But start the flame here. Big nations want to lobby for their number advantage so the will always say its a shitty step to do so. Like I said all what counts is winning at all cost. Typically answer is "you are not into rvr"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand that it‘s an unpleasant experience to wait for a fight that never happens!

But PLEASE: Before realizing any punishments, keep in mind that sometimes fights are not avoided intentionally - real life can be surprisingly unpredictable (e.g. storms, private life, and so on)!

It might be a good idea to at least give clans a chance to cancel pbs, and thus avoiding punishment!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Navalus Magnus said:

I can understand that it‘s an unpleasant experience to wait for a fight that never happens!

But PLEASE: Before realizing any punishments, keep in mind that sometimes fights are not avoided intentionally - real life can be surprisingly unpredictable (e.g. storms, private life, and so on)!

It might be a good idea to at least give clans a chance to cancel pbs, and thus avoiding punishment!

I agree.  I suggested this as Option 6 above which I have duplicated below.

 

Option 6. None of the above options apply if an Officer of the attacking clan cancels a port battle (which his clan has decided not to attack, mechanic will be needed for this) at least 4 hours [negotiable but I would suggest no less than 2 hours] before the PB is due to start. This option has a cool down timer of 48 hours [negotiable]. i.e. if two PB are set then the attacking clan can only cancel one PB. A cancelled port battle is totally reset.

 

Buster (Cut and thrust paste)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I agree.  I suggested this as Option 6 above which I have duplicated below.

 

Option 6. None of the above options apply if an Officer of the attacking clan cancels a port battle (which his clan has decided not to attack, mechanic will be needed for this) at least 4 hours [negotiable but I would suggest no less than 2 hours] before the PB is due to start. This option has a cool down timer of 48 hours [negotiable]. i.e. if two PB are set then the attacking clan can only cancel one PB. A cancelled port battle is totally reset.

 

Buster (Cut and thrust paste)

Sorry, haven‘t noticed it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sure you had people around scouting closest free ports/ attacking nations port reporting to you. So why still sit and wait?

 

Or maybe you were anticipating a fleet hiding in a battle just outside?  (You promote this shitty behaviour with suggested punishment’s to attackers) screened out =/= no show afaik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Otto Kohl said:

Maybe it was fake attack to keep you busy. Valiable tactic.

Next time kill them when they grind hostility.

no no

dutch screeners intercepted a santisima from the danes

 

ad he was not fake 

Edited by Thonys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No showing port battles is a valid strat.  Divide and conquer after all.  The cost of holding carta is that we will always show up to defend it.  The swedes never really felt that pain because no one else had the balls to attack it.   

I would however suggest that the cooldown on unsuccessful attacks be longer than 24hours.  48-72 hours feels more appropriate.    

Edited by Christendom
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be no penalty for no showing a PB. 

If you don't want your ports to be flipped then prevent hostility grinding

If you want to fight the PB but they keep on no showing then stop screening with 40 people. Let them in to the PB and fight it.

If you don't want them to make it in to the PB then stop complaining about them not making it in to the PB.

You can also discover the clan that continuously flips your ports and set your timer to their off time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tactics which make people lose time are destroying this game and should be discouraged. It's not fault of players to use them, it's fault of designers to not go penalize them. 

 

A good way to do this is to get rid of VM's for map win and instead give VM's to nations or clans for fair play and activity which produces content for others. If someone creates an empty PB,  or some other content - preventing tactic, just penalize his VM acquisition to the point that it hurts. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I had a good time. 20 minutes on the way, 20 minutes back, we sang sailor songs, drank rum, told jokes and played pranks to the cabin boy.
Please think that alters can make any "solution"worse.

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

×