First Rates should become rare and very expensive = maintenance, baby!

[Christoph]

56 minutes ago, admin said:

The initial numbers (for testing) to make a first rate were set as follows:
3 players should be able to build a 1st rate in 3 days (collecting resources from buildings and building a ship including all labor hours)
This was enough for the testing to allow everyone experience all the content. 

Some time ago we also reduced the weight for resources to reduce number of trips for hauling. 

These numbers (3 players/3 days) indeed seem kinda low now, especially taking into account the lineships buffs in the final HP rebalance.

wipe all victory marks.
lord protector should no longer exist for neutral pbs.
lord protector must be deleted every 4 weeks.
rvr is then more interesting again and 1st rates are rarer

Edited May 11, 2018 by Christoph

[qw569😳]

What are the quantitative indicators of the rarity of the first rates?

For example.

4% from all ships Is it rarity or not?

15% from all logins on Caribbean server is it rarity or not?

Edited May 11, 2018 by qw569

[vazco]

47 minutes ago, qw569 said:

What are the quantitative indicators of the rarity of the first rates?

I'd say rarity is when 90% of players would capture a 1st rate in a battle, rather than sink one (under current PvP mark distribution)  Right now they're not rare.

Edited May 11, 2018 by vazco

[HachiRoku]

The thing is that they are either not rare enough or so hard to get it becomes a pain in the ass. I don't know... Maybe only give everyone in the port battle 1 victory mark for winning and not on a regular basis. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, Christoph said:

wipe all victory marks.
lord protector should no longer exist for neutral pbs.
lord protector must be deleted every 4 weeks.
rvr is then more interesting again and 1st rates are rarer

Save the wipes for release, if your going to do that than you might as well just reset the whole map.  I'm sure many a clans will not be able to take back ports they took from off flips and empty port battles they have now.  

18 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

The thing is that they are either not rare enough or so hard to get it becomes a pain in the ass. I don't know... Maybe only give everyone in the port battle 1 victory mark for winning and not on a regular basis. 

Again this means only the winners will have them and no one will be able to beat those teams cause no one else would have them.  Not exactly a fair deal for the rest of the game.  I would prefer they up the cost of the permits than to limit the means to get the marks.

[Navalus Magnus]

33 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

The thing is that they are either not rare enough or so hard to get it becomes a pain in the ass. I don't know... Maybe only give everyone in the port battle 1 victory mark for winning and not on a regular basis. 

What about screeners than?

Wouldn‘t be ok imo to just hand over VMs to people inside a PB, when others also contributed to thier success.

[HachiRoku]

12 minutes ago, Navalus Magnus said:

What about screeners than?

Wouldn‘t be ok imo to just hand over VMs to people inside a PB, when others also contributed to thier success.

whats the difference from now? Screeners get no marks right? 

[HachiRoku]

30 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

Again this means only the winners will have them and no one will be able to beat those teams cause no one else would have them.  Not exactly a fair deal for the rest of the game.  I would prefer they up the cost of the permits than to limit the means to get the marks.

Yeah you see this is not an RVR problem, this is a BR issue. 1st rates and especially the La Ocean are far to tanky still. 2nd and 3rd rates are still nothing more than BR fillers.

 

2 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

We had that. Not worked.

of course it doesnt work. If noobs dont get first rates they will cry. This means if 1st rates are hard to get they will have not. You cannot make everyone happy. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

Yeah you see this is not an RVR problem, this is a BR issue. 1st rates and especially the La Ocean are far to tanky still. 2nd and 3rd rates are still nothing more than BR fillers.

1st rates BR's need to be messed with.  The Vict sadly lost it's place in Port battles cause it can't match up with DPS and HP against a L'Ocean any more with the meta, it's basically a support 1st rate.  We did some testing the last few nights with it.   Really wish they had more limits on BR for prots.  So like what been mention you can't bring 1st rates except into capital ports.  This would mean mid range BR port battles will be limit to light ships so you will see a dozen 4th rates and 3rds over a few 1st rates instead.   To many ports are linted to around the 7-10 player mark for port battles that a small squad could own and hold very important ports once they capture them.

[Navalus Magnus]

8 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

whats the difference from now? Screeners get no marks right? 

Haven't said the current mechanics are fine!

[HachiRoku]

3 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

1st rates BR's need to be messed with.  The Vict sadly lost it's place in Port battles cause it can't match up with DPS and HP against a L'Ocean any more with the meta, it's basically a support 1st rate.  We did some testing the last few nights with it.   Really wish they had more limits on BR for prots.  So like what been mention you can't bring 1st rates except into capital ports.  This would mean mid range BR port battles will be limit to light ships so you will see a dozen 4th rates and 3rds over a few 1st rates instead.   To many ports are linted to around the 7-10 player mark for port battles that a small squad could own and hold very important ports once they capture them.

the vic imo is ok the way she is. She is a good ship in proper hands DD broke the vic though. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

6 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

the vic imo is ok the way she is. She is a good ship in proper hands DD broke the vic though. 

No kidding pre-merg I had captured so many US L'Oceans with my Victory with nothing other than Barricades when they would turn and get caught in irons.  I have only board prep on them and just go with it (most of them had no clue how to play the rock paper scissors game.)  I kinda feel it's a support roll though in battles as it can't go brawlign with the other 1st rates.  Honestly think they 36 lbs should be locked to french ships and ships that used them (Bucc, Santi, L'Ocean) and the 42's only to ships that used them too ( Vict and the Pavel) that would give a little more vairation and give the Victory more of it's bite back.  No one uses the 36's cause why when it's 1 sec/damage less than the 42's which have way better pen.

But this is kinda more another topic.  Vic is honestly my fav 1st rate out of all three of them. 

[Fluffy Fishy]

Could this not all be fixed much easier by increasing the repair cost of large ships so 1st rates become much more expensive to repair similar to how they were envisioned to be when they brought in crew recruitment charges. Make frigates profitable in terms of output and repair cost, while the higher rate the ship the more exhorbitant the repair costs, where 3rds are quite managable 2nds get expensive and 1sts are potentially bank breaking.

[John Jacob Astor]

5 hours ago, admin said:

The initial numbers (for testing) to make a first rate were set as follows:
3 players should be able to build a 1st rate in 3 days (collecting resources from buildings and building a ship including all labor hours)
This was enough for the testing to allow everyone experience all the content. 

Some time ago we also reduced the weight for resources to reduce number of trips for hauling. 

These numbers (3 players/3 days) indeed seem kinda low now, especially taking into account the lineships buffs in the final HP rebalance.

Whatever the solution the ship distribution is clearly out of balance.  One of my trade routes is in and out of the Bahamas and I am exclusively in shallow-water ships (T-Lynx / T-Brig). 

Around the deep water ports I have been chased exactly once by something capable of catching a T-Lynx.  Even anything with bow chasers.  That was since moving from PvE around the end of February.  The whole safe zone argument has never been an issue for me.   Doesn't seem to matter whether I am in one or not.  The only place I encounter real risk is in the Bahamas.  No deep water ships.

Regarding the solution.  The notion that a ship could just sit at a dock without costing something to either store for extended periods and/or get into service has never made much sense to me.  Even furled sails would rot if left unattended.  IF this is the solution there ought to be some connection to the size of the ship.

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

Another idea for making First Rates rare and increase the use of anything below maximum size would be:

Introduce a new mission type, which is in fact a mini-campaign each. Not just one mission, but three or so linked together, similar like the tutorial missions but with a storyline.

The game would measure how well you performed in that mini-campaign a.k.a. "Admiralty recognition mission".

Performance brings you 'Admiralty recognition marks' which is measuring your influence within the supreme naval administration of your country [and Pirates should not have it, as they are not organized like a nation]. Certain 2nd rates and 1st rate ships will be only obtainable for a number of 'admirality recognition marks', as the Admirality tends to give expensive top notch battle ships only to proven professionals with some promise to bring back the ship in one piece and to win battles with it. After having obtained the commission (similar to the permits we have), you can build the related ship. Those marks get used up and you need to do new missions of this type for gaining new ones. Which assures it does not happen in the next minute or hour, but takes more time and effort for your next supersized ship. Good against inflation.

OK, here you have another carrot, if you don't like restrictions but ask for carrots to motivate people who are aspiring to reach SOL assignments.

[Raf Van Boom]

The victory is broken because it's so easy to leak even with 1 deg. heel. That needs to be fixed.

[Hethwill]

1 hour ago, Le Raf Boom said:

The victory is broken because it's so easy to leak even with 1 deg. heel. That needs to be fixed.

Thank you for the assessment, even if is not in this thread subject. Can you please record this happening and open a thread about it in here

http://forum.game-labs.net/forum/33-combat-mechanics-discussions/

Thank you.

[The Spud]

These SoL's being too widely available is an issue that has been discussed and many stuff has been tried in the past to limit their availability, (remember the Compass wood and fine woods). The truth is whatever you do the top nations/clans will always be able to field large numbers of SoL's. Whatever you will have them do to get one, they'll get them. In my opinion it has an adverse effect on gameplay.

It will be an everlasting armsrace between nations to get 1st rates out and it'll wear players out, it'll be more grinding more time doing stuff they don't want doing. And it'll make long last players quit. Even for newer players the 1st rates must be somehow reasonably achievable. I think if they would be any more difficult to come by I wouldn't have bought this game in the first place.

Limiting numbes per clan or nation, will cause frustration within a clan or within a nation, who gets the 1st rates? Not the smaller clans, not the average captain, they'll go to the top clans and even the top players within those clans. 

However I do understand that it takes part of the magic away if you only see SoL's.

Why not limit the amount of SoL's that can be owned by one person, one 1st rate, one 2nd rate two 3rd rates? And you pay for the extra ships you have, so you can still cap them but it'll be costly to keep them. People will be carefull with their SoL's then, while they can keep producing them and maybe hand them out to other players who have free slots. Fiddle around with labour hours, so contracts are less easy to come by, or limit the amount of contracts that can be used to 4 a day? Otherwise you can stack LH contracts, and just stack all resources etc, and just keep pumping out a new one whenever you need one. Would be fair, and new players who are less clan oriented can still have one if they want, which I think is a big deal.

 

[Greysteak]

I think implementing a no-sail line-ship timer for the loss of a line-ship might help.   The Admiralty shouldn't let a captain who just lost a line-ship leave port right away in another line-ship should they?  No there should be meetings, investigations and so on.  The better the rate of the lost ship the longer the timer should be.  Ships unrated, 6th and 5th rates, 4th rate frigates should be exempt. This is for line-ships only.  For example: a 30 minute timer for 4th rate line-ships, 2 hours for 3rd rates,  8 hours for a 2nd rate and 32 hours for a 1st rate.  As long as the timer is in effect you can only leave port in a lower rated ship than the one you lost.

[Lovec1990]

I like this idea 1st rate should be a flagship and pride of navy they could be limited 3 per nation plus it would be way more awsome if nations could only craft national ship like GB only victory and french only Locean.

3rd rates should be common SOL while 2nd rate should be rare

[Archaos]

4 hours ago, Lovec1990 said:

I like this idea 1st rate should be a flagship and pride of navy they could be limited 3 per nation plus it would be way more awsome if nations could only craft national ship like GB only victory and french only Locean.

3rd rates should be common SOL while 2nd rate should be rare

That would only work if all nations 1st rates were balanced, so they would all be the same ship but just different names, which would take away the historical context.

Regarding some of the other suggestions to limit 1st rates e.g. like limiting them to 1 per player or only allow a player build one a week or even give the players one a month, these suggestions will only make it more necessary to have alts to gain the advantage.

[Aquillas]

For limiting the number and the use of 1st rates everywhere and for no reason (for instance, in Patrol areas), I would propose that player XP is renamed player Reputation. And this Reputation should be able to increase, just like presently, or to decrease in the case of ship loss.

But not the same cost for any ship class.

• Loosing a 1st rate would remove 1/2 of the Reputation,
• Loosing a 2nd rate would remove 1/3 of the Reputation,
• Loosing a 3rd rate would remove 1/4 of the Reputation,
• Loosing a 4th rate would remove 1/6 of the Reputation,
• Loosing a 5th rate would remove 1/10 of the Reputation,
• Loosing a 6th rate would remove 1/25 of the Reputation,
• Loosing a 7th rate would remove 1/100 of the Reputation, or nothing.

Reputation increase in PvP being 3 or 4 times the PVE gain for the same kill, assist or damage (for not discouraging the PvP).

This would be more historical, this would reduce the number of 1st rates used for no reason, and this would keep back importance of lighter ships.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Eleazar de Damas

[Sento de Benimaclet]

1 hour ago, Eleazar de Damas said:

This would be more historical

Nothing historical, OR EVERYTHING OR NOTHING. Only what interests us personally NO.

 

2 hours ago, Eleazar de Damas said:

Reputation increase in PvP being 3 or 4 times the PVE gain for the same kill

I see, as always thinking about the general interest. Those who do PVP win 3 or 4 times more than the rest of the players.   NO.

When you find out that this attitude of privileging the PvP over the PvE or the RvR does not unite, it separates the community of naval players and therefore WE LOSE ALL. and do not come with the caribean server is exclusive of PvP, because it is not true.

 

 

[Aquillas]

10 minutes ago, Sento de Benimaclet said:

I see, as always thinking about the general interest. Those who do PVP win 3 or 4 times more than the rest of the players.

This adjustment was just proposed because PvP is more risky than PVE. You are not sunk so often in PVE, maybe in one fight over 100. In PvP, the loss rate is very big.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Eleazar de Damas

[Sento de Benimaclet]

1 hour ago, Eleazar de Damas said:

This adjustment was just proposed because PvP is more risky than PVE. You are not sunk so often in PVE, maybe in one fight over 100. In PvP, the loss rate is very big.

Eleazar, it is clear that doing PvP has much more risk. If I told you about my ships that are at the bottom of the sea ... I do not argue with that. But it also has merit the people who spend hours sailing with the traders and also have a great risk, because they usually sink and lose a lot of merchandise apart from ships. And they bring us woods etc to build us boats. And those who do RvR also have a great merit, without the ports that they conquer we could not base the boats that we use in the PvP. So, there is no PvP without traders (if you build your boats), without RvR (it is not the same to base your ship near Belize and attack the enemy, than if you have to leave from Mantua) and the PvE as an alternative source of income and earn XP. All together we give life to the Naval and that is why I always insist that we are ALL more generous with each other and keep the naval action community alive. We will not find there another game of this thematic as beautiful as this, and what remains to come. Do not lose it. A cordial greeting.