PVP MARKS and PLAYER RETENTION

[Licinio Chiavari]

4 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

it will currently PvP mark is worth 100k-150k if that is implemented PvP mark will be in theory worth 10k-15k

If tomorrow all prices goes up x10 but exactly the same all salaries and even the banknotes got an extra 0, economically there'll be no change.

I suggest to x10 prizes and prices go get more room for corrections: how in the hell you can apply reward modifiers to 5 PVP marks?

Edited August 22, 2018 by Licinio Chiavari

[Lovec1990]

Actually blowback it will far more severe:

PvP mark is also used for trading instead of gold after this it will be less intresting perhaps we will trade with coal?

[Licinio Chiavari]

Just now, Lovec1990 said:

Actually blowback it will far more severe:

PvP mark is also used for trading instead of gold after this it will be less intresting perhaps we will trade with coal?

If now I have 100 PVP marks I trade 25 for an Elite Pirate, tomorrow I'll have 1000 and I'd trade 250. Today I got 10 from a Trinco, tomorrow I'll get 100 (before modfiers).

What will change?

[Lovec1990]

Just now, Licinio Chiavari said:

If now I have 100 PVP marks I trade 25 for an Elite Pirate, tomorrow I'll have 1000 and I'd trade 250. Today I got 10 from a Trinco, tomorrow I'll get 100 (before modfiers).

What will change?

not much  but time too get used too new change is needed

[Licinio Chiavari]

Just now, Lovec1990 said:

not much  but time too get used too new change is needed

Mate: value/price goes up x10 not by cuberoot of 17. I think my son can get it without a thought instantly.

[sveno]

How much do we, the players, care about others abusing the system to get more PvP marks?

I do not care about players with 10 alts and 100 billions of gold.
Why should i then care about players with 10 alts and 10k PvP marks?
Why should i let them spoil MY FUN by degrading core features of my beloved game?  

These are questions you should ask yourself.

Open up PvP damage payout, the good part will outweight the bad part.

Edited August 22, 2018 by sveno

[Bluetooth]

17 minutes ago, sveno said:

Why should i then care about players with 10 alts and 10k PvP marks?
Why should i let them spoil MY FUN by degrading core features of my beloved game?  

These are questions you should ask yourself.

Open up PvP damage payout, the good part will outweight the bad part.

This is the point. ^^

It's about retention of players.

How many new players quickly quit after losing everything for the third time with no rewards at all. This is very demoralizing.

It would give options to players and rewards for those who take part in PvP.

It would also give something for the hours of play and inconclusive battles?

The alt operators already rip the game to pieces so why should we worry to much about the bad few who are rich anyway and maybe think of the game and it's growth.

At the moment it's sink him no matter who or how powerful he is because otherwise I wont get my marks!!

Bad for noobs. Bad for growth.

Bad for all of us.

Edited August 22, 2018 by Crow

[Christendom]

Personally I feel PVP has gone downhill since the PVP mark system has been introduced.  Prior to the marks system my aim in PVP was to have some fun, earn a little cash and more importantly, make out with the prize (cargo/ships).  Historically ships fought each other till one surrendered, very rarely did they sink, and a prize of some sort was taken.  I feel like the marks system goes against the spirit of historic naval combat and has just turned everything into a gank/destroy fest for imaginary tokens.  Prior to the marks system I would let players go in a similar manner as the OP described.  I didn't feel the pressure to sink anything/anyone to get marks and show up on the leaderboard.  

Marks are a lazy crutch that is used to incentivize PVP instead of coding in proper content and mechanics that would do a far better job.

[Lovec1990]

1 minute ago, Christendom said:

Personally I feel PVP has gone downhill since the PVP mark system has been introduced.  Prior to the marks system my aim in PVP was to have some fun, earn a little cash and more importantly, make out with the prize (cargo/ships).  Historically ships fought each other till one surrendered, very rarely did they sink, and a prize of some sort was taken.  I feel like the marks system goes against the spirit of historic naval combat and has just turned everything into a gank/destroy fest for imaginary tokens.  Prior to the marks system I would let players go in a similar manner as the OP described.  I didn't feel the pressure to sink anything/anyone to get marks and show up on the leaderboard.  

Marks are a lazy crutch that is used to incentivize PVP instead of coding in proper content and mechanics that would do a far better job.

it was already suggested that returning with prize ship gives more reward than sinking her what if we make that returning with prize ship you get 30 PvP marks for her and only 5 if you sink her?

[Christendom]

5 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

it was already suggested that returning with prize ship gives more reward than sinking her what if we make that returning with prize ship you get 30 PvP marks for her and only 5 if you sink her?

I'd rather do away with PVP marks entirely and have your reward be the ship and it's contents.  Very rarely do we keep ships that we beat, I can probably count on one hand how many 1st rates we've kept and taken back to port since the merge.  I feel like if your system encourages sinking 1st rates for imaginary marks rather than keeping the ship......something is wrong.  The other day I sunk a Spanish trader full of ship building parts on it's way out of Key West towards Habana.  Before the marks system that would be a good score.  After I capped it I looked at the contents...said "meh" and then sunk and moved on.  I'd rather have marks than shipbuilding stuff.  Seems wrong.

Edited August 22, 2018 by Christendom

[Lovec1990]

3 minutes ago, Christendom said:

I'd rather do away with PVP marks entirely and have your reward be the ship and it's contents.  Very rarely do we keep ships that we beat, I can probably count on one hand how many 1st rates we've kept and taken back to port since the merge.  I feel like if your system encourages sinking 1st rates for imaginary marks rather than keeping the ship......something is wrong.  The other day I sunk a Spanish trader full of ship building parts on it's way out of Key West towards Habana.  Before the marks system that would be a good score.  After I capped it I looked at the contents...said "meh" and then sunk and moved on.  I'd rather have marks than shipbuilding stuff.  Seems wrong.

it could work but reward system should still be rewoked so that loser gets reward for doing damage so he will be more willing too do PvP after loss and returning with ship should be far more profitable than sinking her

[Old Crusty]

How many PvP marks awarded for a ship should be based purely on the BR of the ship. Of course for that to work the BR of all ships needs to be re-evaluated. Le Requin at 80 BR is a cruel joke.

After a PvP battle, PvP marks should be distributed with only 2 considerations.

1. The Kill

2. Percentage of damage to ship.

All players involved in the battle should get PvP marks based on percentage of damage done, win or lose the fight. It is a reward for taking part in the game! The better you do, the more damage inflicted, the better the reward. If you actually get the kill on a ship, you get additional rewards.

   As far as being exploited? There are cheaters in every walk of life. People will cheat for many many reasons. ANYTHING THAT IS MADE FOR A GAME, SOMEONE WILL FIND A WAY TO CHEAT IT AND SHARE IT WITH OTHERS. Why do we let these cheaters determine what is right and fair? If cheating or exploits were a non issue, how many people would be against giving rewards for losing a battle but still doing damage to the enemy?

[Hethwill]

That's how it works. All ships are fixed marks.

Example, a Indiaman is 9 marks.

PvP marks ( 9 )  are shared between all that did damage, minimum 10% iirc.

So it can happen a player gets 5, and the other two get 2 each. For a total of 9.

 

I hope it clears some doubts.

[Christendom]

2 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

it could work but reward system should still be rewoked so that loser gets reward for doing damage so he will be more willing too do PvP after loss and returning with ship should be far more profitable than sinking her

It used to be that way, but Admin in his infinite wisdom decided to listen to some of the more hardcore minded players on the forums and got rid of rewards for losers.  The winner get all mindset was idiotic and has since been reworked a bit.....but as you say, it still needs some more love.

 

[Old Crusty]

5 minutes ago, Hethwill the Harmless said:

That's how it works. All ships are fixed marks.

Example, a Indiaman is 9 marks.

PvP marks are shared between all that did damage, minimum 10% iirc.

It doesn’t work for the loser! It doesn’t work for the Indiaman player that got sunk.

[Lovec1990]

Perhaps Reward in PvP should be only damage based

7 minutes ago, Christendom said:

It used to be that way, but Admin in his infinite wisdom decided to listen to some of the more hardcore minded players on the forums and got rid of rewards for losers.  The winner get all mindset was idiotic and has since been reworked a bit.....but as you say, it still needs some more love.

 

what if we do reward system based on damage alone for example:

Player A loses but does 6000dmg he gets 600k gold 600 XP

Player B wins but does 5000dmg he gets 500k gold 500 XP additional reward if he sinks Player A ship he gets 100k reward if he caps her he gets ship alone 

Edited August 22, 2018 by Lovec1990

[Hethwill]

Correct. I answered specifically about how the mechanic is now:

1. The Kill

2. Percentage of damage to ship.

 

The non-winning side only gets XP.

( actually in another game, Escape From Tarkov, is the same. Lose all gear (forget insurance), get only half XP. )

[Thonys]

5 hours ago, Nelsons Barrel said:

Basically that was the way to print money a while ago, get money for damage and keep all ships afloat. 

i and many more don't care about money...  o.0

i settle for 50%

[Barbancourt]

8 hours ago, SeamanStaines said:

If your PVP win average is less than 50/50 why would you make a fight of it.

LOL, 50/50?  You're a PVP star if you can get that high. 

[Barbancourt]

12 hours ago, King of Crowns said:

you fell for the oldest trick in the book...……. the "this is my last ship" trick..... ships are dirt cheap and money grows in ports. for example. 2.8mil for a first rate. 2.8mil = 4missions  or one trade run. but I would wager that yall were fighting in 4th/5th rates which are worth less than 1 mil. never show mercy to a rear admiral. if they have been playing the game long enough to reach max rank and still haven't figured out the economy is broken as crap then your doing them a favor by sinking their last ship. you will force them to rethink how they are playing the game...which needs to happen. because they are doing it wrong.

Nice ships aren't dirt cheap, their mods are even more expensive, and money grows from hours of sailing transporting useless junk from A to B or from hours of PVE battles that are boring because the AI always fights the same way and always dies upwind of you.  Hours that go into a ship that's lost in a few minutes.

 

[Dibbler (Retired)]

 

I let players go if they are low rank, it's sustainable hunting, also it's very very rare to see me hunt in a rienforcement zone. Farming noobs just means less targets in future as guys grow and spread their wings, I find capital hunting distasteful tbh.

 

Last one was a polish guy in a renomee south of La Mona area, had decimated his crew and sails and guy starts raging about only played a couple of weeks etc.

When i said he could go he was surprised lol, but for the sake of a few pvp marks isn't it better to let these guys grow?

Edited August 22, 2018 by Dibbler

[Jack Jones]

13 hours ago, Crow said:

So last night I engaged an Dutch Player in an Endymion near Gibraltar.

Same rank (Rear Admiral).

Good fight ensued and damaged was inflicted by both.

I got the upper hand and was closing for the obligatory kill when the other player politely asked if we could call it a draw, as he was nearly bankrupt.....

I had sailed for 1 hour to reach this spot and fought for 40 mins but because this player had used no salt, I happily agreed because this guy needed a break.

We chatted some more and I went on my way to run back out of the basin into open sea.

 

But I thought about the situation.

1. I felt like a good guy. 😁

2. I got about 900 xp. 😲

3. Neither of us got any rewards for a tough 40 min battle.🤕

4. The incentives in game seemed a bit off.😟

 

So I would like to propose a slight rework of the PVP award system.

For a ship sinking, keep it as it is for the victors, BUT award at least 1/3 to 1/2 pvp marks for the defeated player.

 

But when a ship does not sink:

I would suggest all combatants who inflict damage in a battle are rewarded with PVP marks.

(amount not that important) its about rewarding the players for taking part in pvp.

 

Pros :

More PVP because players will feel that even if they lose a battle, they will get something for their time/effort/cost etc.

Less annoyance at daring escapes after 30 min battle.

Less feeling that your time was wasted, you know, when you fight for an hour until both ships limp away shattered and leaking and get zip.

More chance for sportsman like behavior which will improve player relations and stop players rage leaving the game.

More chance for vets in Uber ships to take a new player to sink limit, and teach him a thing or two without finishing him off, good for everyone.

Reputations would grow, hatted no mercy monster or gentleman of the seas!

Less salt in general.

Cons:

Possible abuse with alts. (however the game is infested with alts and a good idea should not be stopped because of alt abuse. Plus the time and effort vs rewards of such abuse would be minimal and traceable).

 

I believe that this simple idea could improve player relations and player retention and remove the 'need' to sink everything at all costs.

 

 

 

This is a great suggestion and would really help new players and lower rank players and in fact anyone who is not great at PVP.

I love the fact that even if you lose you get a couple of PVP marks for fighting and if you wish to let someone go you can. I hate that I have to sink everything to to get marks, it does not feel correct.

To be able to get some marks even if the enemy escape makes perfect sense.

#admin please look at this it could really make a difference.

[Dibbler (Retired)]

16 minutes ago, Flash Jack said:

This is a great suggestion and would really help new players and lower rank players and in fact anyone who is not great at PVP.

I love the fact that even if you lose you get a couple of PVP marks for fighting and if you wish to let someone go you can. I hate that I have to sink everything to to get marks, it does not feel correct.

To be able to get some marks even if the enemy escape makes perfect sense.

#admin please look at this it could really make a difference.

 

To be honest i don't think it will make a difference,  most of the green zone hunters don't give a rats ass about the game overall. 

All they want to do is club noobs in their OP bullshit DLC ships and pretend to be great PVPers.

Isn't just Naval action though seen it time and again in other games that died a death, and things are kinda bad at moment here.  New players getting hammered all the time means bad reviews, people not staying and a stagnating population.  When global server was merged with the EU server i saw highest amounts online in ages,  and slowly but surely has declined to joke levels of under 500 peaktime. Sure (yet another) sale will lift in game activity for a short time but as we have seen of late it just falls back to pitifully low activity.

 I just hope the devs address current game issues, because there is no point getting new players in current meta. It isn't just about the DLC either it's about in game attitude to new guys from playerbase which kinda sucks  donkey's balls.

 

 

Edited August 22, 2018 by Dibbler

[Jack Jones]

6 minutes ago, Dibbler said:

 

To be honest i don't think it will make a difference,  most of the green zone hunters don't give a rats ass about the game overall. 

All they want to do is club noobs in their OP bullshit DLC ships and pretend to be great PVPers.

Isn't just Naval action though seen it time and again in other games that died a death.

I agree. But you missed what the suggestion was about. It is not about the green zone hunters.

Its about new players and losers so they would benefit. Its about battles with no conclusion, its about good players having a viable option for getting rewards without sinking the seal.

At the moment they get nothing and the seals still get clubbed!

Edited August 22, 2018 by Flash Jack

[speijk]

Crow is right 

 

1. Both parties should always receive combat marks and money for the dmg they have done after a fight occured

 

2. Maybe after 30 minuts consider the fight too been reported by some spectator onbthe shore and give both parties a pvp mark? Lets say at 1 hour 2 

Based on player entrance time and a cm system wil be used too see if u earned so u where not afking i mean x rate need x hull or crew or sail hits to be eligble

Pvp there is a fight  a duel

Respect / motivate both give a pvp time bonus .

Winner takes the pvp marks loser atleast take cm money and the time pvp

More chance people fight it out

3. About Pvp marks price wil fall..

Okay so more pro eclusive mods wil be availble to all hey look u actualy have to be better ure self isnt that wat gaming is about? 

Too the person saying ships cost nothing.

Who says u just didnt invest ure coins.

In a new upgrade newship.

Or maybe someone has a bad streak

Some people also have live outside game too not 24/7 grind.

4. Why not implant option buy back ship after she is boarded. By giving up ure time pvp marks might make it intresting on long far away raids for attackers 

crow i thank you for sportmanship again.