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

RvR - Bringing back a better Flag

Recommended Posts

Flag mechanic has to work two ways, as I see it. Meaning - be pulled with intent, and a cost in case it fails.

If cost/bet is too high no one will use it - like today, look at clanwars... hostility cost is maybe too high ? Or clans not interested...

If it doesn't cost anything - like mere gold/resources - it can be trolled.

A hypothetical effect of the Flag would be

- has to be created in a conquerable port owned by the clan that creates the flag.

- Port that creates flag becomes open for PB on the next day during its timer.

- Flag must be planted during the port timer. Battle is the next day.

 

Attack on Neutral ports ( not owned by any nation ) can be crafted in any port without consequence.

Entire responsability of creating flags passes to clans and multiple flags can actually be created. The one planted cancelling all others. PB is guaranteed in any case.

Share this post


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

The problem with the flag is the abuse that is impossible to solve. 
You can either

  • deny the port battle by purchasing the flag and keeping it if flags are exclusive
  • deny the port battle by placing the flag first if flags are not exclusive
     

Long hostility is sometimes not fun especially if no-one comes to defend, but it serves the purpose: to give defender at least some chance to react. The goal is to not have more port battles but to have more full port battles.

Hostility generation will become a bit more bearable once we improve the PB rewards (already in test builds) by 1) dropping a rare item during port battles 2)giving capturable ports a better crafting bonus. 
 

Make hostility missions more appealing too. Give us the chance of better loot than just shitty basic stuff. It is far more risky than fighting an ow fleet and the rewards are incredibily worse.

 

Conquering a port should also give some exclusive ressources directly to the clan warehouse. So even a trading clan would be interested in conquest because they can go and try to conquer ports that drops directly to their warehouse trading goods ready to sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, admin said:

Long hostility is sometimes not fun especially if no-one comes to defend, but it serves the purpose

Please at least make it more bearable by informing enemy that a hostility mission was just created for his port. More time for reaction means more PvP and less PvE. 

You can secure it from fake missions by allowing to take one mission per battlegroup, limit them to only 4-player battlegroups, make them cost a lot if battlegroup doesn't show up to mission and inform enemy of battlegroup disbands. Mission could respawn in the same place after it's done. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Wyy said:

victory marks could be used instead of just having them sitting captains chest collecting spiderwebs and dust. Cost of the "flag" could depend on portsize and if its shallow/deep water

I have myself like 30 victory marks. Think about others who are in the top rvr leaderboard.

Also your proposal have a flaw. How are you going to buy a flag when you have no victory marks at the begining?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, admin said:

We will, but to get that port battle you have to risk your ship in the open world by being in a hostility battle which is open to all. You have to send a fake fleet to a real risk even if you never plan to attend the port battle. 

With a flag you just buy it and wait it out while enemy searches for you wasting time.

Except now most people don't bother countering hostility and they just screen the force out.  And RVR now requires 2 days of effort invested and with timers staying up 2 nights or getting up early 2 days in a row is difficult.  

Since the change in hostility and the port costs RVR has dropped off considerable.  This system does not work

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, admin said:

The problem with the flag is the abuse that is impossible to solve. 
You can either

  • deny the port battle by purchasing the flag and keeping it if flags are exclusive
  • deny the port battle by placing the flag first if flags are not exclusive
     

Long hostility is sometimes not fun especially if no-one comes to defend, but it serves the purpose: to give defender at least some chance to react. The goal is to not have more port battles but to have more full port battles.

Hostility generation will become a bit more bearable once we improve the PB rewards (already in test builds) by 1) dropping a rare item during port battles 2)giving capturable ports a better crafting bonus. 
 

If flags are exclusive then you could publicise who bought the flag (user/clan) that way if the flag is purchased to deny another a port battle then everyone knows who it is - flushes out alts being abused - and if it keeps happening they you could have a tribunal case resulting in a flag purchase ban for a period of time.

Share this post


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

If flags are exclusive then you could publicise who bought the flag (user/clan) that way if the flag is purchased to deny another a port battle then everyone knows who it is - flushes out alts being abused - and if it keeps happening they you could have a tribunal case resulting in a flag purchase ban for a period of time.

I predict many tribunal cases.

A good mechanic is the one who doesnt need any supervision. Look at battle group and PB limited by BR, both system working as charm.

Flags would only promote griefing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long we don`t have ports which are worth being conquered, there is no point changing hostility.

No economy, no campaign, no letter from Europe, all ports in same region produce trading goods which can not be sold anywhere, but in enemy capitals(or you need to sail 3 hours to somewhere), no deeper content but shooting ships or crafting them... Well, no fun, no players, no game :)

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vazco said:

Please at least make it more bearable by informing enemy that a hostility mission was just created for his port. More time for reaction means more PvP and less PvE. 

You can secure it from fake missions by allowing to take one mission per battlegroup, limit them to only 4-player battlegroups, make them cost a lot if battlegroup doesn't show up to mission and inform enemy of battlegroup disbands. Mission could respawn in the same place after it's done. 

I fully agree.

Warning when one hostility mission is active. Give us more time to react. 

Many times we have seen ports going from 0% to 37%. It is impossible to stop the attackers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Christendom said:

Except now most people don't bother countering hostility and they just screen the force out.  And RVR now requires 2 days of effort invested and with timers staying up 2 nights or getting up early 2 days in a row is difficult.  

Since the change in hostility and the port costs RVR has dropped off considerable.  This system does not work

That depends on the nation and their active playerbase. Normally it is too late to stop the enemy making hostility as the warning only get active when 25% is reached. The system should warn us when a hostility mission is active. Fake missions are very easy to check from outside due to BR and number of ships inside.

Port costs is definitely a killer for small and medium clans which are and will be the majority of clan sizes in such as niche game as NA. Port costs and shitty rewards.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Fenris said:

As long we don`t have ports which are worth being conquered, there is no point changing hostility.

No economy, no campaign, no letter from Europe, all ports in same region produce trading goods which can not be sold anywhere, but in enemy capitals(or you need to sail 3 hours to somewhere), no deeper content but shooting ships or crafting them... Well, no fun, no players, no game :)

 

 

 

 

 

There should be more ports like Veracruz, Cartagena, Santo Domingo... Ports that consume trading goods of every type so home capitals cities lose their importance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about making only the region capitals conquerable, the ports in the region go where the capital goes. Cut the number of ports by 3 and make them worth keeping? Maybe there are too many ports for 'fake' pbs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Le Raf Boom said:

How about making only the region capitals conquerable, the ports in the region go where the capital goes. Cut the number of ports by 3 and make them worth keeping? Maybe there are too many ports for 'fake' pbs?

We would miss some quite interesting locations to fight.

Regions should be important to keep and their capitals maybe the place where a bonus for something is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do you guys always want to go back a step (conquest flag mechanic), why not go forward? the conquest flag mechanic was a placeholder for a fully fleshed out conquest mechanic but because the devs decisions on priorities this got mishandled.

I still believe that the devs can create this fully fleshed out mechanic which should bind PVP and RVR together and require real cooperation from clans, a conquest should have coals and objectives and strategies and tactics should be developed by the players to deal with these goals and objectives.

stop requesting old mechanics that were bold boring and as deep as a puddle. request mechanics that bring the game to a higher level, not pull it down.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

The other problem is the missions are so stacked on the defenders side or the better PvPers.   Once you start loosing players in a fight on either side you can go from 97% to 0% in one fight.  We actually had a port to 97% and than lost a good part of our fleet when defenders dropped in and pretty much gave up on the hostility cause it would take to long to sail back out there with new ships.  So unless you flip the port and get it done before you get a defenders reaction than all your work is gone in a flash after a few guys get sunk.   While this is good and bad, I think you take to big a hit on PVP kills compared to how much grinding you have to do one some very big BR ports to flip it.   

Cause of the safezone/capital farming our numbers are even lower cause folks just don't have the moral to fight back when a lost can set you back so big and make all your work be for nothing.  A lot of the other nations don't see it cause they aren't working with so many newer players or casuals but it's something I see every day in US Nation.  Safe zones are not safe zones they are GANK FARM ZONES only.   Capitals honestly need to be true safe zones (I'm not talking about the whole coast line, keep reinforcement zones as is, but capitals need to have a bigger safe zones with the old rules. Where only defenders can attack in the zones and attackers can't.   People need to be able to do there little missions and level up if they want not be constantly farmed over and over by so call elite veterans that refuse to fight any one else.

Every game I have played on that has multi users had safe (true safe zones) around the starting capital regions that no other nations could start a fight in.  We need this in game for certain nations if you want to keep an active healthy growing population.  I say some nations cause yes we can still have the hard core mode nations that don't get either.  It's a players choose to pick those hard core nations, but if they pick an easy nation it should not mean, "Just more easier for them to farm you."

 

I agree with some things you’ve said but to keep using the old excuse ( which you are not the first or the last to use) that US players are new players and that is why they get farmed is just not right. A lot of experienced players in the US that get killed a lot have been playing the game forever. Some of them even from pvp2.

US players in pvp 2 and then in global just weren’t very good for a lot of reasons. That tradition ( let’s call it that) either came to this server with the merge or it might have been here as well. 

The people that hunt the US coast do it because that is where most people are at night time and  it is easier to get kills. 

They keep doing the stupid coast guard thing, trying to avenge one guy by ganking another with 20 guys.

In all honesty in over 2 years I haven’t seen any improvements and it’s not about to change now. 

Like one famous philosopher once said: “You can’t fix stupid”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Intrepido said:

There should be more ports like Veracruz, Cartagena, Santo Domingo... Ports that consume trading goods of every type so home capitals cities lose their importance. 

This won`t help either....

There are many of those actually on the map, but only few are being used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Le Raf Boom said:

How about making only the region capitals conquerable, the ports in the region go where the capital goes. Cut the number of ports by 3 and make them worth keeping? Maybe there are too many ports for 'fake' pbs?

We tested that, there is always more than enough regions or counties to fake PBs or multiflip. I like the single port system better, but dislike the hostility mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said:

We tested that, there is always more than enough regions or counties to fake PBs or multiflip. I like the single port system better, but dislike the hostility mechanic.

My original intention for bringing this suggestion up was due to the amount of "current" players playing the game that said they dislike the PvE Grind that is hostility mechanics.

I'm fully aware that taking and owning a port that is "extremely" unprofitable is dumb and stupid and why would you take that port in the first place, Which is why I made a thread previous about a way to bring Regional Economic bonuses to create an incentive to hold more ports for an overall gain in economy and economic bonuses.

I feel both of my suggestions, if added in the game would help enhance the current experience of players playing right now. Every time I hear someone say "this won't work because we've already done it blah blah blah" (and trust me, I've done that too) I want to point them back to the original post and say "yes it didn't work, that is why I suggest changing it so it does work." It's like they didn't even read the suggestion.

 

Nonetheless people like @Rickard or @Banished Privateer while I don't agree with them on all things, seem to be the ONLY people who have disagreed with suggestion and either offered up an alternative or showed that they brought up other suggestions instead. Maybe those who disagree but don't bring anything to the table should look at these two and understand when you disagree, you bring evidence and a counter offer. Don't cry that it's not good and then do nothing. If you think it's a bad suggestion, I would much prefer you then make your own suggestion or thread so that we can see the thought process here.

I'm sorry to hear that the @admin does not like the proposal, but I understand why. I just hope that there are steps being taken to possibly make hostility more manageable or at least look as to WHY people currently playing the game dislike the PvE Hostility grind so much.  I personally feel the change coming up to make player owned ports better for ship crafting is nice, but I argue we need further economic bonuses to create more incentives to leave the safe zone and I believe we need to make the safe zone ports restricted in crafting and resource gathering, a penalty/increased tax if you will. which is why I brought the regional bonuses thread and the Poll that the thread had was largely in favor of all suggestions:

People talk about no incentives for owning ports - I hope the Admin takes a hard look at my suggestion and I really do hope more of the favored suggestions get placed in. Sorry if it's not "PvP related" but a good econ or econ incentive DRIVES conflict in a game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2018 at 9:45 AM, admin said:

The problem with the flag is the abuse that is impossible to solve. 
You can either

  • deny the port battle by purchasing the flag and keeping it if flags are exclusive
  • deny the port battle by placing the flag first if flags are not exclusive
     

Long hostility is sometimes not fun especially if no-one comes to defend, but it serves the purpose: to give defender at least some chance to react. The goal is to not have more port battles but to have more full port battles.

Hostility generation will become a bit more bearable once we improve the PB rewards (already in test builds) by 1) dropping a rare item during port battles 2)giving capturable ports a better crafting bonus. 
 

and what about buying pb with pvp marks as a secondary option? We need a mark sink and people would be less likely to buy fake flags with hard earned marks imo. Its worth a try and you can always remove it again since its not very time consuming to add methinks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2018 at 7:45 PM, admin said:

The problem with the flag is the abuse that is impossible to solve. 
You can either

  • deny the port battle by purchasing the flag and keeping it if flags are exclusive
  • deny the port battle by placing the flag first if flags are not exclusive
     

Long hostility is sometimes not fun especially if no-one comes to defend, but it serves the purpose: to give defender at least some chance to react. The goal is to not have more port battles but to have more full port battles.

Hostility generation will become a bit more bearable once we improve the PB rewards (already in test builds) by 1) dropping a rare item during port battles 2)giving capturable ports a better crafting bonus. 
 

Howdy,

I think the issue will always be PVE content mixed up with PVP. Flags gave us instant PVP, lots of action, lots of activity, brought life to the game. Taking it away dulled the conquest at once. Had flaws - yes, but the idea was (and always should be) that in RVR as global player vs payer on a larger scale as team work no PVE should be involved. It should strictly be PVP only.

In a game such as this PVE should be just the "filling"content. Something that you would do to pass time, if you want an easy solo play or learn the game or do some missions.

The RVR process should instead be only PVP oriented. I have offered before another look at the conquest. Specifically how hostility is built. Basically marry the best of two together.
I'm not playing much, but keeping my eye on the progress and to be honest still prefer this idea raised exactly a year ago.


With all due respect
 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Howdy,

I think the issue will always be PVE content mixed up with PVP. Flags gave us instant PVP, lots of action, lots of activity, brought life to the game. Taking it away dulled the conquest at once...

 

I wish I could +1 this a dozen times. :) This little tidbit of intangible truth is so lost in all the flag mechanics discussions.  It was this excitement factor that made flags so wonderful, even in spite of abuse.  With flags, I didn't even mind so much being 1-ported because at least it was exciting (it happened twice thru flags).  Why is this fact so overlooked?  It outweighs all mechanics issues IMHO.

  • Like 2

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  

×